That's the point of censorship, isn't it, to crush dissenting opinion and economic competition. The only mistake is thinking this is about anything else.
The bad reviews are already out so what is left to gain? Distributing SP1 to developers will confirm the reviews but they are the type that has read about it anyway. Keeping it will not prove the reviews wrong but it will irritate developers who expect things to be bad and expect that much more work before the public gets it.
If you don't already know who I am, either I know your client better than you think I do or interdepartmental cooperation is as bad as it always was and will be.
Are there more Vista developers than there are Vista users?
Cue demented inner dialog for Softies:
"Precious Software, Precious, Must HAVE!!!!"
"Master is bad for not letting me have. Must STEAL, must KILL!!!!"
"No, Master is gooooD. Master is looking out for pitiful consumers and me."
"But Precious, must have the PRECIOUS!!!"
and so on and so forth without clarity, self help or sense of reality.
The part about filtering P2P is disturbing but there's are plenty of good legal alternatives to RIAA crap. I'd love to see every university mirror the Internet Archive, Creative Commons and promote work from people in their community. Let's take that part of this stupid law and make something cool that will continue to bleed the RIAA out of existence.
A subscription model can be a form of lock in, when you don't tell the subscribers how to halt their subscription. TW/AOHell did that to a lot of people. People were reluctant to spend twice the nominal cost of gettin on line each month, so making it difficult to leave was effectively a way to keep them on AOL. The difficulty involved in terminating any subscription acts as a form of lock in.
Inversely, the myriad of lock in mechanisms employed by M$ and partners are virtual subscriptions. You don't really own the software, only a vague right to use that can be terminated without cause. The interlocking nature of the many lock in mechanisms both keep the victim from leaving and make sure the victim will need to replace everything every three years and the subscription model is complete. Windows, like a newspaper, only has value in context and for a limited time. Your old copy of MSDOS is worthless today as are most of every copy of software you have released before 2001. It only had value in context and the sooner you lose that context the better off you are.
If they did that, it would lower their income and cut into their profits.
How? There's no competition in cable. Think of all the bandwith they would save and all the work it would create for local computer stores. There's plenty of profit waiting for everyone in a move like that.
You must believe that there's something wrong with sharing. You can talk about money and laws the industry has made up, but you are ultimately recommending control and censorship of the internet. Freedom for all should trump the ability of a few to make money through obsolete publication models. Really, how impressed should I be that fifty year old media is available on the internet? The case would be laughable if it did not have the potential to do so much harm.
Microsoft does not believe any of it, they just want to throw mud. They did the same thing, with some success in state legislatures but that was before they were caught handing out bribes. One of Microsoft's tactics has always been to cast all of their flaws onto opponents and claim all of their opponent's good qualities for themselves. The goal is to convince people that ODF is no better than OOXML so that they will stick with M$ Office and step into the next generation lock in, Vista and all that. It's hard for them to do that honestly because they know it's a lie.
The only interesting thing about this story is that anyone still listens to them.
Run a utility that makes the Registry changes for you. Where are you going to find that? [or] Edit the Registry by hand. At least the option is there.
Wow, thanks Microsfot for the great options. Somehow Apple, KDE, Gnome, BeOS, Windows pre registry all manage to provide a way for users to change settings on their computer without typing Hex into some crummy database manager that might brick the computer. I'll take a well commented text file over that mess. Text configuration files are the reasonable third option that's sadly missing in Windows.
I don't understand how this book would really annoy a fanboy because it tells them how to fix their broken toy. They will either be happy and follow the books recommendations or give up and go back to XP. Normal people are going to ignore Vista until it gets better reviews than "Worst Product of the Year" and "Just use Ubuntu". Anyone still suffering Vista must be a fanboy, this little book will do good things for their blood pressure. They will thank you.
Of course, by the time you finish reading it yourself you might say, "I am going to do all I can to make sure that no family or friends buy a machine with Vista if possible. Service Pack 1 will address just a few of the issues that Vista brings to the table." That's just a hunch and has nothing to do with what you said.
You can say the same thing about murder and rape. At some point, society has to take steps to defend itself from fraud. Everyone involved should be ashamed and punished.
The ambiguities of the English language provide ample motivation to English speakers to read articles. Four word headlines are often misinterpreted but those misconceptions can be corrected by doing what you did. Thanks for the good hard work.
It's funny that you would defend Snopes. Now, you might be a little put off if you try to read the Zango license. That's good because it will cause you and many people to turn away from the disreputable advertiser. Just the same, a naive user might just take the advertiser at their word and click through the little "I agree" button. Surely, you don't have people like that at your company that you might wish to warn? They will listen to your warning so that you don't have to put in rules to block Snopes, I'm sure. After all, Snopes is such a valuable workplace reference that no company could live without their least technically sophisticated employees having constant access to it.
I'm more worried about independent artists not getting their fair share than I am about uncompensated sharing offline. Not even Google can guard against advertising fraud, so even an honest count can be stuffed and the money directed to established publishers. That might be the purpose and this proposal has nothing to do with artists at all.
The general idea is great, but implementation details matter. I doubt the average Canadian house spends $60/year on music, so the $5/month is excessive. The other thing that caught my eye was this:
Virtually all sharing on the internet and wireless devices would be tracked. Companies who currently do this type of tracking have prepared themselves and are waiting in the wings. Creators and rights holders will be paid with a level of speed and accuracy never before possible.
Who are these mysterious people waiting in the wings that have been spying on everyone? Media Sentry? The same clowns who would tell you that 98% of all online music is "theft"? Most artists should say, loud and clear, "no thanks" unless they can trust the monitoring company to honestly report listening. The industry has that has so long given artists the shaft should be discarded. Everyone else should say, "no thanks" to having all of their internet traffic monitored.
The obvious choice between earning a living by song and dance and personal entertainment or liberty is liberty. Today they want to listen, tomorrow they will censor. The trade off is not worth while.
the H1B situation. It's temporary, and in keeping with very long American tradition.
The H1B program grants employers the power to terminate an immigrant's stay and can be abused. The government is the propper decider if anyone is. The only propper criteria for entry should be a well founded belief in the wording and principles of the US constitution.
a country's wealth influence and power come from fortunate mineral rights.
If that were true, Russia and parts of Africa would be very rich and powerful. Wealth and power come when citizens lawfully protect each other's freedom.
this law was suggested by officials within the Department of Homeland Security. "There are no consistent standards for the type of detectors used, no requirement that they be reported to the police departmentor anyone else, for that matterand no mechanism for coordinating these devices. . . . Our mutual goal is to prevent false alarms . . . by making sure we know where these detectors are located, and that they conform to standards of quality and reliability."
All of these problems, which have yet to evidence themselves in any real way, could be met head on for less money than a registration and enforcement program. Once upon a time, the US government published standards to follow and encouraged people to know how to protect themselves. Cheap equipment was made and distributed and people were trained to use it. The Government of the day called it Civil Defense. It was cheap compared to Homeland Defense.
Now we think it would be better to waste money keeping people from having equipment and knowing how to use it. We have a very different government today. The difference is as stark as freedom and slavery.
The program stinks of incompetence as well as contempt. There are some very simple ways of telling a credible radiation threat over the phone. One of the easiest is to ask the person what the background radiation rate is and if it changes with position. This tells you quickly if the person can read a meter. You still have to investigate if they can't but you know you have a real problem and help if you are talking to someone who knows what they are doing. Squandering resources like that is foolish.
At least we would get a democratic filter between McMobileDisneySoft and questions of war and peace. As it is, the corporate world drafts a Project for the New American Century and it gets implemented regardless of public opinion. Romney's answers gave no indication of any departure from that scheme. Instead all the worst of the Bush administration would go on at top speed: H1Bs slavery instead of real immigration help, "Open" markets that are bound by US Patent and Copyright ownership, corporate bail outs and other predatory policies designed to make the US "Powerful" instead of Free.
Wealth, influence and power come from freedom and justice not the other way around. Countries that waste their efforts on raw power end up like North Korea.
this is about speculation about the possibility of a service pack being released by Microsoft.this is about speculation about the possibility of a service pack being released by Microsoft.
for an OS no one is using. Microsoft promissed to release SP1 some time first quarter of 2008, so there's no real news here. SP1 itself only of interest to those poor deluded people who think SP1 is going to make a difference in Vista performance. You can feel the cognitive dissidence radiating from people like this but they are few and far between. The rest of the world has written Vista off.
Why am I even reading these comments? Microsoft story comments are mega-Gauss troll magnets.
I will challenge you to produce an HD-DVD or Blueray disc that is a dramatic improvement over an upscaling DVD player on a 42" TV. Unless you have a 60" or bigger TV you will simply not notice an improvement.
It's real and you can see it at any electronics store that has HD media playing. There's a lot of confusion because most "HD" media is still SD encoded. When you see the rare real thing you notice the difference in details for screens larger than 14".
SD really is a relic of broadcasting that should have died 15 years ago but it will live on. The slow pace of HD adoption and the onerous conditions of use prove the legislative and market power of broadcast companies. Independent producers have been putting out movies of better technical quality for years. The recall ability of "mainstream" media and devices still make HD equipment a risky purchase. Companies have been rude enough to their customers while trying to establish this shit. Just imagine what they will do once they have some sort of majority of the market.
Independent producers will have a field day, as long as they are not cut off by network filtering... oops Expect high costs for everything, broadband stagnation and all sorts of other ills to support the status quo.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the point of censorship, isn't it, to crush dissenting opinion and economic competition. The only mistake is thinking this is about anything else.
The bad reviews are already out so what is left to gain? Distributing SP1 to developers will confirm the reviews but they are the type that has read about it anyway. Keeping it will not prove the reviews wrong but it will irritate developers who expect things to be bad and expect that much more work before the public gets it.
If you don't already know who I am, either I know your client better than you think I do or interdepartmental cooperation is as bad as it always was and will be.
Are there more Vista developers than there are Vista users?
Cue demented inner dialog for Softies:
"Precious Software, Precious, Must HAVE!!!!"
"Master is bad for not letting me have. Must STEAL, must KILL!!!!"
"No, Master is gooooD. Master is looking out for pitiful consumers and me."
"But Precious, must have the PRECIOUS!!!"
and so on and so forth without clarity, self help or sense of reality.
The part about filtering P2P is disturbing but there's are plenty of good legal alternatives to RIAA crap. I'd love to see every university mirror the Internet Archive, Creative Commons and promote work from people in their community. Let's take that part of this stupid law and make something cool that will continue to bleed the RIAA out of existence.
I would just like to know, what could the FBI do to make it's spy ware different from anything else out there in the wild?
Features
It's not really funny.
A subscription model can be a form of lock in, when you don't tell the subscribers how to halt their subscription. TW/AOHell did that to a lot of people. People were reluctant to spend twice the nominal cost of gettin on line each month, so making it difficult to leave was effectively a way to keep them on AOL. The difficulty involved in terminating any subscription acts as a form of lock in.
Inversely, the myriad of lock in mechanisms employed by M$ and partners are virtual subscriptions. You don't really own the software, only a vague right to use that can be terminated without cause. The interlocking nature of the many lock in mechanisms both keep the victim from leaving and make sure the victim will need to replace everything every three years and the subscription model is complete. Windows, like a newspaper, only has value in context and for a limited time. Your old copy of MSDOS is worthless today as are most of every copy of software you have released before 2001. It only had value in context and the sooner you lose that context the better off you are.
The MAFIAA are their customers. You are what they sell.
If they did that, it would lower their income and cut into their profits.
How? There's no competition in cable. Think of all the bandwith they would save and all the work it would create for local computer stores. There's plenty of profit waiting for everyone in a move like that.
You must believe that there's something wrong with sharing. You can talk about money and laws the industry has made up, but you are ultimately recommending control and censorship of the internet. Freedom for all should trump the ability of a few to make money through obsolete publication models. Really, how impressed should I be that fifty year old media is available on the internet? The case would be laughable if it did not have the potential to do so much harm.
Sounds better than FREAX, but will Linus agree?
Microsoft does not believe any of it, they just want to throw mud. They did the same thing, with some success in state legislatures but that was before they were caught handing out bribes. One of Microsoft's tactics has always been to cast all of their flaws onto opponents and claim all of their opponent's good qualities for themselves. The goal is to convince people that ODF is no better than OOXML so that they will stick with M$ Office and step into the next generation lock in, Vista and all that. It's hard for them to do that honestly because they know it's a lie.
The only interesting thing about this story is that anyone still listens to them.
Run a utility that makes the Registry changes for you. Where are you going to find that? [or] Edit the Registry by hand. At least the option is there.
Wow, thanks Microsfot for the great options. Somehow Apple, KDE, Gnome, BeOS, Windows pre registry all manage to provide a way for users to change settings on their computer without typing Hex into some crummy database manager that might brick the computer. I'll take a well commented text file over that mess. Text configuration files are the reasonable third option that's sadly missing in Windows.
I don't understand how this book would really annoy a fanboy because it tells them how to fix their broken toy. They will either be happy and follow the books recommendations or give up and go back to XP. Normal people are going to ignore Vista until it gets better reviews than "Worst Product of the Year" and "Just use Ubuntu". Anyone still suffering Vista must be a fanboy, this little book will do good things for their blood pressure. They will thank you.
Of course, by the time you finish reading it yourself you might say, "I am going to do all I can to make sure that no family or friends buy a machine with Vista if possible. Service Pack 1 will address just a few of the issues that Vista brings to the table." That's just a hunch and has nothing to do with what you said.
You can say the same thing about murder and rape. At some point, society has to take steps to defend itself from fraud. Everyone involved should be ashamed and punished.
What is the most tiring is that the media outlet continue to eat what the MPAA/RIAA are feeding them
They are one and the same industry. When you turn on a radio or TV, you open a channel from their ass to your mind.
The ambiguities of the English language provide ample motivation to English speakers to read articles. Four word headlines are often misinterpreted but those misconceptions can be corrected by doing what you did. Thanks for the good hard work.
It's funny that you would defend Snopes. Now, you might be a little put off if you try to read the Zango license. That's good because it will cause you and many people to turn away from the disreputable advertiser. Just the same, a naive user might just take the advertiser at their word and click through the little "I agree" button. Surely, you don't have people like that at your company that you might wish to warn? They will listen to your warning so that you don't have to put in rules to block Snopes, I'm sure. After all, Snopes is such a valuable workplace reference that no company could live without their least technically sophisticated employees having constant access to it.
I'm more worried about independent artists not getting their fair share than I am about uncompensated sharing offline. Not even Google can guard against advertising fraud, so even an honest count can be stuffed and the money directed to established publishers. That might be the purpose and this proposal has nothing to do with artists at all.
The general idea is great, but implementation details matter. I doubt the average Canadian house spends $60/year on music, so the $5/month is excessive. The other thing that caught my eye was this:
Who are these mysterious people waiting in the wings that have been spying on everyone? Media Sentry? The same clowns who would tell you that 98% of all online music is "theft"? Most artists should say, loud and clear, "no thanks" unless they can trust the monitoring company to honestly report listening. The industry has that has so long given artists the shaft should be discarded. Everyone else should say, "no thanks" to having all of their internet traffic monitored.
The obvious choice between earning a living by song and dance and personal entertainment or liberty is liberty. Today they want to listen, tomorrow they will censor. The trade off is not worth while.
the H1B situation. It's temporary, and in keeping with very long American tradition.
The H1B program grants employers the power to terminate an immigrant's stay and can be abused. The government is the propper decider if anyone is. The only propper criteria for entry should be a well founded belief in the wording and principles of the US constitution.
a country's wealth influence and power come from fortunate mineral rights.
If that were true, Russia and parts of Africa would be very rich and powerful. Wealth and power come when citizens lawfully protect each other's freedom.
Let's look at the justification again:
All of these problems, which have yet to evidence themselves in any real way, could be met head on for less money than a registration and enforcement program. Once upon a time, the US government published standards to follow and encouraged people to know how to protect themselves. Cheap equipment was made and distributed and people were trained to use it. The Government of the day called it Civil Defense. It was cheap compared to Homeland Defense.
Now we think it would be better to waste money keeping people from having equipment and knowing how to use it. We have a very different government today. The difference is as stark as freedom and slavery.
The program stinks of incompetence as well as contempt. There are some very simple ways of telling a credible radiation threat over the phone. One of the easiest is to ask the person what the background radiation rate is and if it changes with position. This tells you quickly if the person can read a meter. You still have to investigate if they can't but you know you have a real problem and help if you are talking to someone who knows what they are doing. Squandering resources like that is foolish.
At least we would get a democratic filter between McMobileDisneySoft and questions of war and peace. As it is, the corporate world drafts a Project for the New American Century and it gets implemented regardless of public opinion. Romney's answers gave no indication of any departure from that scheme. Instead all the worst of the Bush administration would go on at top speed: H1Bs slavery instead of real immigration help, "Open" markets that are bound by US Patent and Copyright ownership, corporate bail outs and other predatory policies designed to make the US "Powerful" instead of Free.
Wealth, influence and power come from freedom and justice not the other way around. Countries that waste their efforts on raw power end up like North Korea.
this is about speculation about the possibility of a service pack being released by Microsoft.this is about speculation about the possibility of a service pack being released by Microsoft.
for an OS no one is using. Microsoft promissed to release SP1 some time first quarter of 2008, so there's no real news here. SP1 itself only of interest to those poor deluded people who think SP1 is going to make a difference in Vista performance. You can feel the cognitive dissidence radiating from people like this but they are few and far between. The rest of the world has written Vista off.
Why am I even reading these comments? Microsoft story comments are mega-Gauss troll magnets.
17Gb of pictures of other peoples cats
There might be one or two pussies you like. Wait for the filtered version.
I will challenge you to produce an HD-DVD or Blueray disc that is a dramatic improvement over an upscaling DVD player on a 42" TV. Unless you have a 60" or bigger TV you will simply not notice an improvement.
It's real and you can see it at any electronics store that has HD media playing. There's a lot of confusion because most "HD" media is still SD encoded. When you see the rare real thing you notice the difference in details for screens larger than 14".
SD really is a relic of broadcasting that should have died 15 years ago but it will live on. The slow pace of HD adoption and the onerous conditions of use prove the legislative and market power of broadcast companies. Independent producers have been putting out movies of better technical quality for years. The recall ability of "mainstream" media and devices still make HD equipment a risky purchase. Companies have been rude enough to their customers while trying to establish this shit. Just imagine what they will do once they have some sort of majority of the market.
Independent producers will have a field day, as long as they are not cut off by network filtering... oops Expect high costs for everything, broadband stagnation and all sorts of other ills to support the status quo.