Indeed. I don't have landline connection to my home, so I use a Sony Ericsson K800i 3G dumb-phone to connect my computers to the net. I just got a bluetooth dongle so I don't need to use the USB datacable anymore (it was a real pain: my phone gets a reliable 3G signal only by the living-room window, so I had to arrange the room to suit. But no more). "Tethering" is a simple function that even my ancient nokia 3220 (vintage circa 2002?) could handle. Then I read posts by excited iPhone users describing the various hoops they have to jump through to do the same with their wondrous gadget. Puh-leeeze!!
Incidentally, I've got my phone on a "pay as you go" basis, which gives a week's "unlimited mobile internet use" for a couple of pounds. According to the small print, this is meant to be just internet use by the phone - web browsing with the phone's browser, email via the built-in email client and so on. Use of phone "as modem" is specifically forbidden. Yet I've been engaging in this forbidden behaviour for several years now, often downloading up to a GB of data in a day. I was more cautious in the beginning, fearing that large data transfer would set off the alarms. But I'm now pretty confident that my service provider *can't* easily differentiate between the different types of usage. I've heard that Vodafone UK is more on the ball in this respect. But my provider is either lazy or dumb, or maybe both. Though you'll note I haven't named them here, I don't want to tempt fickle fate too much!
I think questions on other issues are irrelevant. As far as I can tell, PPUK will not be fielding enough candidates to win a majority in the Commons even if all their candidates were elected.
Voting for a PPUK candidate would be similar to voting for a so-called "single issue" independent politician like former MP Martin Bell. For the benefit of those unfamiliar with recent British political history: Martin Bell was a well-known war reporter who resigned from the BBC and stood for election on an anti-"sleaze" platform. Of course it was extremely improbable that Bell might become a member of the government with any real influence on government policy. But enough voters in the Tatton constituency voted for him to become their MP. In effect it was a protest vote to show the government that the electorate was unhappy about "sleaze"; and the government introduced stricter parliamentary rules to try and cut the extent of corruption in Parliament.
So a vote for a PPUK candidate in this year's election would not be an attempt to get a PPUK government installed. But the election of any PPUK candidates would be a clear signal to the next government that there is widespread unhappiness about copyright/intellectual property policies. The more PPUK candidates that win, the bigger the signal. Voting for the PPUK is something we can do to show the government we want the system to change. A vote for the PPUK would not be a wasted vote.
Sure, people make mistakes. But sometimes the "mistakes" are anything but. Look at the British MPs who were found to have fiddled the expenses system. Each and every one of them said their over-claiming was a "mistake".
If you get nicked for fraud and tell the court that it was all a "mistake", the jury or judges will consider your explanation before deciding whether you're guilty or not. We need to have a similar system to deal with parliamentary misconduct. An adjudication panel that listens to an errant MP's explanation, considers it, then makes a ruling of guilt or innocence. If the MP is found to have made an honest mistake, he just repays the money and all is well. If the panel decides that the MP is a lying fraudster, he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. And the law should demand extremely serious punishment. Disqualification from political office in the future should be a given. I don't think that prison should be discounted either. Betraying the trust of the electorate is a heinous act and should be punished accordingly.
Some people claim that such draconian measures would deter would-be politicians from ever standing for election. I disagree: the only ones to be deterred would be those who were planning to defraud the system. Scrupulously honest would-be candidates will have nothing to fear.
Do you own a cellphone? Are you aware it is possible for someone with access to the network to activate your phone's mike, turning it into a listening device? Are you aware that some cellphones can actually be switched on remotely?
Now you know, I assume you'll keep your phone in a sound-proof box when you're not using it.
Whatever. I don't need to know how the "pirates" get round the validation thing. All I need to know is that they get round it.
I remember when WGA was going to stamp out "piracy". But the "pirates" worked around it. And they'll work around this new thing. Most people who get troubled by this will be legit customers.
I wonder if MS has figured out some way to deal with this issue? I wouldn't bet on it.
Why should they, at least from their point of view? Corporate thinking here is just "well, maybe we'll get a few false positives, but gee, we'll have stopped those pirates!"
But it doesn't "stop those pirates" - at least, not for long. No matter what validation hoops they put up, the pirates will quickly work out how to jump through them with ease.
Anyway, I don't think pirates bother much with the illegal software business any more. It's more profitable to kidnap round-the-world yachters these days.
The reason is because its a lot harder to make an illegal copy of a house or a car.
Uh what? It's just as easy for me to make an illegal copy of a house or car as it is for the original manufacturer to make a legal copy. In the same way that it's equally simple to make a legal or illegal copy of an OS disk.
recognises that he must try to delete the images associated with David Lynch's 1984 version of Dune from the public's consciousness
Hell, erase the memories of a fantastic adaptation by a fantastic director and replace it by a freaking 3D toystory?
I'm certainly in agreement that some images from Lynch's film need deleting. Like that one of Sting in his skiddies - Yecchh!
Your comment reminds me of what Johnny Depp said when he was asked to play Charles Manson in a dramatization of Ed Sanders' book The Family. He said that he thought the 1976 TV miniseries Helter Skelter had told the story well enough, and that "there was no point in doing it again." Depp was wrong and so are you: just because a story has been told well in one movie, doesn't mean it shouldn't be told again. Especially when the first movie was made a long time ago.
What, they said Watchmen was unfilmable? But but but how can a comic be unfilmable? A series of images used to tell a story... I've always considered the comic book form to be the literary form most like film.
**it's recognizes, with a z, unless the guy's in britian but i don't see a.uk domain. Sorry for being a grammer nazi when I'm far from perfect, but it's kinda a pain to quote the article and have Chrome tell me I'm misspelling words I didn't write.
That's grammar not "grammer", and Britain not "britian". I don't know about "grammer nazi", but if you want to be a spelling nazi it'd help if you could spell.
As for whether the guy's in Britain or not: I'm in Britain but you'll very rarely, if ever, see a.uk domain connected with my online writings. A.com,.org or.net domain does not necessarily mean the writer thereof is in the USA. And British English is considered correct in a lot more places than is American English.
You naive fool. The desktop isn't dead. "Cloud computing" isn't anywhere near ready. And the mobile phone isn't as important as you seem believe... yet.
Google is a major force in computing, and either you're pretending you don't get it, or you're an idiot.
And what are the likely consequences if someone breaks the law and uses channel 14 in the USA? That they'll have an uncluttered wifi channel. Yeah, that'll learn 'em.
You joke, but this is a strong sign of world leadership in science and engineering moving to India.
So when did a manned space program become a sign of world leadership in anything other than sending money up in smoke? The USA and USSR spent years and billions of dollars trying to outdo each other in space exploration, and where did that get them? The USSR disappeared up its own blowhole, and the USA has become a world leader in cancelling space programs. Which of these fates will befall India?
Browser plugin details are visible only if you allow Javascript. When I allow Javascript, my plugin details are very uncommon at 1 in 12740.5; but if I block Javascript, it goes right down to 1 in 4.76 ("no javascript"). So if you're as "paranoid/security conscious" as you claim, block Javascript. Then the villains won't know what plugins you use.
You don't say! My user-agent string is pretty uncommon at 1 in 6309.5. Lok at the bloody thing: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20091221 Firefox/3.5.7. Why on earth does it have to be so detailed? I think I might start using the User Agent Switcher add-on to make it a bit more usual.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux-based software "just works" on a wider range of hardware than does Mac-based software.
Only the 'Score: 5, Funny' gave any indication that the parent isn't true. And I'm still not so sure: the truth very often is funny.
Indeed. I don't have landline connection to my home, so I use a Sony Ericsson K800i 3G dumb-phone to connect my computers to the net. I just got a bluetooth dongle so I don't need to use the USB datacable anymore (it was a real pain: my phone gets a reliable 3G signal only by the living-room window, so I had to arrange the room to suit. But no more). "Tethering" is a simple function that even my ancient nokia 3220 (vintage circa 2002?) could handle. Then I read posts by excited iPhone users describing the various hoops they have to jump through to do the same with their wondrous gadget. Puh-leeeze!! Incidentally, I've got my phone on a "pay as you go" basis, which gives a week's "unlimited mobile internet use" for a couple of pounds. According to the small print, this is meant to be just internet use by the phone - web browsing with the phone's browser, email via the built-in email client and so on. Use of phone "as modem" is specifically forbidden. Yet I've been engaging in this forbidden behaviour for several years now, often downloading up to a GB of data in a day. I was more cautious in the beginning, fearing that large data transfer would set off the alarms. But I'm now pretty confident that my service provider *can't* easily differentiate between the different types of usage. I've heard that Vodafone UK is more on the ball in this respect. But my provider is either lazy or dumb, or maybe both. Though you'll note I haven't named them here, I don't want to tempt fickle fate too much!
I think questions on other issues are irrelevant. As far as I can tell, PPUK will not be fielding enough candidates to win a majority in the Commons even if all their candidates were elected. Voting for a PPUK candidate would be similar to voting for a so-called "single issue" independent politician like former MP Martin Bell. For the benefit of those unfamiliar with recent British political history: Martin Bell was a well-known war reporter who resigned from the BBC and stood for election on an anti-"sleaze" platform. Of course it was extremely improbable that Bell might become a member of the government with any real influence on government policy. But enough voters in the Tatton constituency voted for him to become their MP. In effect it was a protest vote to show the government that the electorate was unhappy about "sleaze"; and the government introduced stricter parliamentary rules to try and cut the extent of corruption in Parliament. So a vote for a PPUK candidate in this year's election would not be an attempt to get a PPUK government installed. But the election of any PPUK candidates would be a clear signal to the next government that there is widespread unhappiness about copyright/intellectual property policies. The more PPUK candidates that win, the bigger the signal. Voting for the PPUK is something we can do to show the government we want the system to change. A vote for the PPUK would not be a wasted vote.
Sure, people make mistakes. But sometimes the "mistakes" are anything but. Look at the British MPs who were found to have fiddled the expenses system. Each and every one of them said their over-claiming was a "mistake". If you get nicked for fraud and tell the court that it was all a "mistake", the jury or judges will consider your explanation before deciding whether you're guilty or not. We need to have a similar system to deal with parliamentary misconduct. An adjudication panel that listens to an errant MP's explanation, considers it, then makes a ruling of guilt or innocence. If the MP is found to have made an honest mistake, he just repays the money and all is well. If the panel decides that the MP is a lying fraudster, he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. And the law should demand extremely serious punishment. Disqualification from political office in the future should be a given. I don't think that prison should be discounted either. Betraying the trust of the electorate is a heinous act and should be punished accordingly. Some people claim that such draconian measures would deter would-be politicians from ever standing for election. I disagree: the only ones to be deterred would be those who were planning to defraud the system. Scrupulously honest would-be candidates will have nothing to fear.
The candidate with the biggest tits?
The district superintendant's response is available here.
Do you own a cellphone? Are you aware it is possible for someone with access to the network to activate your phone's mike, turning it into a listening device? Are you aware that some cellphones can actually be switched on remotely? Now you know, I assume you'll keep your phone in a sound-proof box when you're not using it.
Whatever. I don't need to know how the "pirates" get round the validation thing. All I need to know is that they get round it. I remember when WGA was going to stamp out "piracy". But the "pirates" worked around it. And they'll work around this new thing. Most people who get troubled by this will be legit customers.
I wonder if MS has figured out some way to deal with this issue? I wouldn't bet on it.
Why should they, at least from their point of view? Corporate thinking here is just "well, maybe we'll get a few false positives, but gee, we'll have stopped those pirates!"
But it doesn't "stop those pirates" - at least, not for long. No matter what validation hoops they put up, the pirates will quickly work out how to jump through them with ease.
Anyway, I don't think pirates bother much with the illegal software business any more. It's more profitable to kidnap round-the-world yachters these days.
The reason is because its a lot harder to make an illegal copy of a house or a car.
Uh what? It's just as easy for me to make an illegal copy of a house or car as it is for the original manufacturer to make a legal copy. In the same way that it's equally simple to make a legal or illegal copy of an OS disk.
recognises that he must try to delete the images associated with David Lynch's 1984 version of Dune from the public's consciousness Hell, erase the memories of a fantastic adaptation by a fantastic director and replace it by a freaking 3D toystory?
I'm certainly in agreement that some images from Lynch's film need deleting. Like that one of Sting in his skiddies - Yecchh!
Your comment reminds me of what Johnny Depp said when he was asked to play Charles Manson in a dramatization of Ed Sanders' book The Family. He said that he thought the 1976 TV miniseries Helter Skelter had told the story well enough, and that "there was no point in doing it again." Depp was wrong and so are you: just because a story has been told well in one movie, doesn't mean it shouldn't be told again. Especially when the first movie was made a long time ago.
What, they said Watchmen was unfilmable? But but but how can a comic be unfilmable? A series of images used to tell a story... I've always considered the comic book form to be the literary form most like film.
**it's recognizes, with a z, unless the guy's in britian but i don't see a .uk domain. Sorry for being a grammer nazi when I'm far from perfect, but it's kinda a pain to quote the article and have Chrome tell me I'm misspelling words I didn't write.
That's grammar not "grammer", and Britain not "britian". I don't know about "grammer nazi", but if you want to be a spelling nazi it'd help if you could spell. As for whether the guy's in Britain or not: I'm in Britain but you'll very rarely, if ever, see a .uk domain connected with my online writings. A .com, .org or .net domain does not necessarily mean the writer thereof is in the USA. And British English is considered correct in a lot more places than is American English.
You naive fool. The desktop isn't dead. "Cloud computing" isn't anywhere near ready. And the mobile phone isn't as important as you seem believe... yet. Google is a major force in computing, and either you're pretending you don't get it, or you're an idiot.
How do these "personal area networks" differ from ad hoc networks?
And what are the likely consequences if someone breaks the law and uses channel 14 in the USA? That they'll have an uncluttered wifi channel. Yeah, that'll learn 'em.
Make that part of a useless ISS. The "I" isn't for "I-merican".
Putting out fires in Mesopotamia? Hmmm. I hate to break it to you, but Iran doesn't just hate the U.S.
That's as maybe. But no one hates Iran as much as the US does. Except for Israel; but at least they have an excuse.
If things made in the developed world were so bad, Americans wouldn't be buying them so readily in place of local products.
So the USA is now a developing world nation? Just checking...
You joke, but this is a strong sign of world leadership in science and engineering moving to India.
So when did a manned space program become a sign of world leadership in anything other than sending money up in smoke? The USA and USSR spent years and billions of dollars trying to outdo each other in space exploration, and where did that get them? The USSR disappeared up its own blowhole, and the USA has become a world leader in cancelling space programs. Which of these fates will befall India?
Browser plugin details are visible only if you allow Javascript. When I allow Javascript, my plugin details are very uncommon at 1 in 12740.5; but if I block Javascript, it goes right down to 1 in 4.76 ("no javascript"). So if you're as "paranoid/security conscious" as you claim, block Javascript. Then the villains won't know what plugins you use.
You don't say! My user-agent string is pretty uncommon at 1 in 6309.5. Lok at the bloody thing: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20091221 Firefox/3.5.7. Why on earth does it have to be so detailed? I think I might start using the User Agent Switcher add-on to make it a bit more usual.
That's odd, there isn't much on /. that makes me want to, uh, "type one-handed"...