Ultimately, if there is enough motivation in the tech community to hack products then they will be hacked. Look at the RIAA and music files, P2P file sharing and hacking is prolific even after years of intense legal battles.
But let's look at what's happening here. Not all hacking is for evil and malicious ends, often times hacking products or developing new programs for them is a way to improve a product. If there is enough interest to crack the iphone and generate a lot of 3rd party apps, then maybe apple isn't doing enough to deliver a product that consumers really want.
Finally, look at a company like Sony. They were very draconian about DRM, proprietary formats, and not letting their devices be tweaked and they've had a lot of lost market share and failed products. Does anyone remember the MiniDisc player? Letting the community be involved in a product, whether through 3rd party apps etc. helps generate users, as well as keeps people interested in the product.
What's ridiculous about this policy is that it's a denial of access based on the principle that children with good grades should be allowed to play computer games, while those with bad grades shouldn't. What's the assumption that is being made here? Games are the cause of bad grades? OR playing games prevents children from getting good grades?
It's true that games can be a huge waste of time, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they should be linked to merit in the educational system. What if my kid isn't that smart and he gets C's whether he plays video games or not. Is this guy at the store going to prevent him from buying a vieo game?
How is a weapon that incinerates everything in its path by deploying a vaporizing gas considered "environmentally friendly?"
Listen to what's being said: "Environmentally friendly...bomb". Typical political red herring. It's like an oxymoron, unless we're talking about those '60s cartoon bombs that explode flowers.
And just because it's not nuclear doesn't mean it's not going to seriously damage the environment. After all, cars aren't nuclear either and look at the damage they can do. Unless their plan is to use that bomb and eliminate the human race, thereby putting an end to automobile usage, and saving the environment from all that nasty carbon monoxide. Oh, okay, now I see where they are going with this one...
Slashdot Mirror
Ultimately, if there is enough motivation in the tech community to hack products then they will be hacked. Look at the RIAA and music files, P2P file sharing and hacking is prolific even after years of intense legal battles. But let's look at what's happening here. Not all hacking is for evil and malicious ends, often times hacking products or developing new programs for them is a way to improve a product. If there is enough interest to crack the iphone and generate a lot of 3rd party apps, then maybe apple isn't doing enough to deliver a product that consumers really want. Finally, look at a company like Sony. They were very draconian about DRM, proprietary formats, and not letting their devices be tweaked and they've had a lot of lost market share and failed products. Does anyone remember the MiniDisc player? Letting the community be involved in a product, whether through 3rd party apps etc. helps generate users, as well as keeps people interested in the product.
What's ridiculous about this policy is that it's a denial of access based on the principle that children with good grades should be allowed to play computer games, while those with bad grades shouldn't. What's the assumption that is being made here? Games are the cause of bad grades? OR playing games prevents children from getting good grades? It's true that games can be a huge waste of time, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they should be linked to merit in the educational system. What if my kid isn't that smart and he gets C's whether he plays video games or not. Is this guy at the store going to prevent him from buying a vieo game?