Can these guys sell me one of those funky shielded power cables for my stereo too? I have a lazy grand that I'd like to blow on stuff that will make absolutely no difference to my life.
For them to *remove* the User ID they must have been tracking it in the first place! It's one thing to have various search terms aggregated - most people over time will search for something that at least approximately identifies them (ie their name, address, etc.), but at least if you're using Google et al your name, billing address, credit card number, etc. aren't associated by way of a username to each and every search query you conduct!
The first step in the process is to sign up for an AdSense account. Should the visitor deploy this and actually make over $100 the creator(s) of explorerdestroyer.com get $20.
Slashdot really should be more careful about posting this sort of stuff - fine if the money goes somewhere like the Mozilla Foundation, FSF, etc. but otherwise assisting this profiteering by sending millions of hits over to their site is wrong.
Drop a few tests in for non-compliance and complain about them using a 'non-compliant' browser rather than 'IE' - at least that way they won't feel like you're being racist:)
Since you can apparently sign your life away with a EULA, why not say in the T&C's for your NTP server(s) that any requests users cause that do not follow certain conditions will cost $1 each or something.
> I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
We're not about restricting use by field of endeavour - I see this as proof that Linux is quite capable of even the most challenging of real time tasks.
Like what you see? Want to see more of it? You can. Join EFF.
Interesting implications of a security focus...
on
Buy Vista or Else
·
· Score: 1
So Microsoft have to get people thinking about security to sell their next version of Windows, yet you can be sure it will remain insecure and people will start considering alternatives. And I'm not just talking about Linux/BSD/etc in their current form; I'm talking about multi-level secure systems on home computers, with browsers/email/etc in one virtualised environment, and productivity software with access to data in another, and very little interaction between the two. People will start to care about their data (if not their privacy) and they'll be competing in an area that they are currently not in any way competitive in (security).
Rebates are cons, pure and simple. They're counting on a (potentially large) percentage of them not being honoured, and for each one that isn't someone has paid more for the item than planned/budgeted. I'm surprised they get away with it - it's like expiring gift certificates (what's that all about anyway - if I cash it a year later it's worth less anyway!).
There are times when DRM is actually a good thing. For example, when restricting distribution of personal information, confidential documents, etc. Also when used sensibly to prevent blatant abuse of reasonably priced copyrighted content, thereby keeping media available and affordable for those of us doing the RightThing[tm]. And then there's non-free software for which there is not (yet) any competitive free equivalent - if it's protected then it's also more likely to be affordable.
Given that there are situations where it can be useful, why should a free software license restrict my freedom to use this technology? So long as we're going to be force fed it anyway, why not *encourage* free software implementations?
On the other hand, the DMCA is pure evil. 'Effective technical prevention measures' I can deal with as I am confident that freedom will prevail. Criminalising the bypassing of 'ineffective technical prevention mechanisms' is insane. However this is something to be solved by lobbying and educating users, not by adding short-lived, jurisdiction-specific terms to a long-lived, globally significant license.
What is most amusing about these clauses is that I'm not convinced they have teeth - who in their right mind is going to write an open source 'technical prevention measure' anyway. In fact they're more likely to bite us - consider issues like the implementation of the broadcast flag in open source software for example. Plus existing software that matters is unlikely to be relicensed anyway (eg Linux).
Anyway, the last version has served us well for 15 years. The new version references specific laws that may very well be repealed in the next few years, and more than likely will end up being a small sample of a large arsenal of consumer-hostile legislation.
I'll be interested to see how the feedback received shapes the license, that's for sure.
is that it will be relied on, and then it will break and you will lose something important (eg your entire life in photos, all of your music and your wedding video). Then you will want to kill yourself, and if you don't then someone else (eg your wife) surely will.
RAID is not backup. In fact in my experience it adds moving parts which (when not done properly) can actually impair stability/security. You need remote, incremental, automated and regular backups. If only duplicity were ready - then you could just backup to some untrusted third party like a neighbour over wireless or a friend over DSL (by untrusted I mean someone you would rather not have trawling through your stuff).
Ok, so it's fine for the big fish but the little guy cops it?
Were they charging royalties from day 1 someone else would have written a slightly different trivial filesystem and we'd be using that instead. This is about as inventive as ruling up a page before you write on it.
Why would they bother with building a Google Cube when they could just take over the application layer of the existing almost-ubiquitous operating system - if it doesn't matter what kernel you're running (NT/Linux/Darwin/etc.) then why not use what's already there? Perhaps this is 'GooOS'? The most important component is the Google Updater and it should come as no surprise that this 'will display notifications when there are updates or new software available' (emphasis mine). It's not so much a question of what's in the Google Pack now (most of which is just fluff to get the unwashed masses interested), but what will be slipstreamed in the future - add OpenOffice.org and you've got everything your average user needs.
I've only OS X and Linux at home and I'm told 'Google Pack is only available for Windows XP' where I imagine the download would be, but I'll be sure to check this out at work next week.
The music industry sucks enough already without WMA. Sounds like the EU antitrust action isn't far off the mark (although it probably won't make much difference - the download hasn't slowed down iTunes).
"Defeating even a dubious patent can take tremendous resources. After Storage Technology Corp. (MSFT) sued Cisco for patent infringement, it took Cisco six years and $10 million to get a jury to declare last June that StorageTek's patent was invalid. (StorageTek was purchased by Sun Microsystems Inc. (SUNW) a week before the verdict.)"
the thing with the M$ monopoly is that it has traditionally been that what's right for M$ is (quite deliberately) what's right for Dell, so that's what they've done. With that monopoly weakening every day we'll see more and more of this, particularly as the cost of the hardware continues to drop while the cost of the M$ tax is reasonably static (if not on the rise). Bear in mind also that given that Internet Explorer Sucks (with only 7 days in 2004 without an unpatched, public security hole), this reflects badly on Dell and is likely to be one of their major support costs (imagine how many 'my machine runs 10 times slower now than it did when we got it and i'm constantly harassed by popups' calls they get!). In contrast, Firefox on Windows was 7% unsafe (still a ridiculously high number - this should be very close to zero) - it's a no brainer.
Slashdot Mirror
While this book is probably fairly interesting, this is yet another slashvertisement. Notice the similarity between the two URLs?
y our_gui.html
/ >/
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/10/23/getting_out_
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0976082276
Can these guys sell me one of those funky shielded power cables for my stereo too? I have a lazy grand that I'd like to blow on stuff that will make absolutely no difference to my life.
For them to *remove* the User ID they must have been tracking it in the first place! It's one thing to have various search terms aggregated - most people over time will search for something that at least approximately identifies them (ie their name, address, etc.), but at least if you're using Google et al your name, billing address, credit card number, etc. aren't associated by way of a username to each and every search query you conduct!
1. Ask Slashdot for financial advice
2. ???
3. Profit!
This ad appeared in the article section, what's with that?
The first step in the process is to sign up for an AdSense account. Should the visitor deploy this and actually make over $100 the creator(s) of explorerdestroyer.com get $20.
Slashdot really should be more careful about posting this sort of stuff - fine if the money goes somewhere like the Mozilla Foundation, FSF, etc. but otherwise assisting this profiteering by sending millions of hits over to their site is wrong.
Drop a few tests in for non-compliance and complain about them using a 'non-compliant' browser rather than 'IE' - at least that way they won't feel like you're being racist :)
and though I like the 'style' (how the fsck can you copyright a 'style' anyway!?!?) I'll remember this whenever I see it now.
Convince Netcraft that parked domains are irrelevant and have them identify the bulk of the parked domains and remove them from the statistics.
Since you can apparently sign your life away with a EULA, why not say in the T&C's for your NTP server(s) that any requests users cause that do not follow certain conditions will cost $1 each or something.
> I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
We're not about restricting use by field of endeavour - I see this as proof that Linux is quite capable of even the most challenging of real time tasks.
> Believe me. Out of any demographic, College students probably represent the biggest portion of firefox's userbase.
And given college students are the future, things are looking up for the Mozilla suite in the longer term.
Like what you see? Want to see more of it? You can. Join EFF.
So Microsoft have to get people thinking about security to sell their next version of Windows, yet you can be sure it will remain insecure and people will start considering alternatives. And I'm not just talking about Linux/BSD/etc in their current form; I'm talking about multi-level secure systems on home computers, with browsers/email/etc in one virtualised environment, and productivity software with access to data in another, and very little interaction between the two. People will start to care about their data (if not their privacy) and they'll be competing in an area that they are currently not in any way competitive in (security).
Rebates are cons, pure and simple. They're counting on a (potentially large) percentage of them not being honoured, and for each one that isn't someone has paid more for the item than planned/budgeted. I'm surprised they get away with it - it's like expiring gift certificates (what's that all about anyway - if I cash it a year later it's worth less anyway!).
There are times when DRM is actually a good thing. For example, when restricting distribution of personal information, confidential documents, etc. Also when used sensibly to prevent blatant abuse of reasonably priced copyrighted content, thereby keeping media available and affordable for those of us doing the RightThing[tm]. And then there's non-free software for which there is not (yet) any competitive free equivalent - if it's protected then it's also more likely to be affordable.
Given that there are situations where it can be useful, why should a free software license restrict my freedom to use this technology? So long as we're going to be force fed it anyway, why not *encourage* free software implementations?
On the other hand, the DMCA is pure evil. 'Effective technical prevention measures' I can deal with as I am confident that freedom will prevail. Criminalising the bypassing of 'ineffective technical prevention mechanisms' is insane. However this is something to be solved by lobbying and educating users, not by adding short-lived, jurisdiction-specific terms to a long-lived, globally significant license.
What is most amusing about these clauses is that I'm not convinced they have teeth - who in their right mind is going to write an open source 'technical prevention measure' anyway. In fact they're more likely to bite us - consider issues like the implementation of the broadcast flag in open source software for example. Plus existing software that matters is unlikely to be relicensed anyway (eg Linux).
Anyway, the last version has served us well for 15 years. The new version references specific laws that may very well be repealed in the next few years, and more than likely will end up being a small sample of a large arsenal of consumer-hostile legislation.
I'll be interested to see how the feedback received shapes the license, that's for sure.
is that it will be relied on, and then it will break and you will lose something important (eg your entire life in photos, all of your music and your wedding video). Then you will want to kill yourself, and if you don't then someone else (eg your wife) surely will.
RAID is not backup. In fact in my experience it adds moving parts which (when not done properly) can actually impair stability/security. You need remote, incremental, automated and regular backups. If only duplicity were ready - then you could just backup to some untrusted third party like a neighbour over wireless or a friend over DSL (by untrusted I mean someone you would rather not have trawling through your stuff).
Ok, so it's fine for the big fish but the little guy cops it?
Were they charging royalties from day 1 someone else would have written a slightly different trivial filesystem and we'd be using that instead. This is about as inventive as ruling up a page before you write on it.
You should be. Put your money where your mouth is and go join the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), as they're doing some good work regarding patents.
Why would they bother with building a Google Cube when they could just take over the application layer of the existing almost-ubiquitous operating system - if it doesn't matter what kernel you're running (NT/Linux/Darwin/etc.) then why not use what's already there? Perhaps this is 'GooOS'? The most important component is the Google Updater and it should come as no surprise that this 'will display notifications when there are updates or new software available' (emphasis mine). It's not so much a question of what's in the Google Pack now (most of which is just fluff to get the unwashed masses interested), but what will be slipstreamed in the future - add OpenOffice.org and you've got everything your average user needs.
I've only OS X and Linux at home and I'm told 'Google Pack is only available for Windows XP' where I imagine the download would be, but I'll be sure to check this out at work next week.
The music industry sucks enough already without WMA. Sounds like the EU antitrust action isn't far off the mark (although it probably won't make much difference - the download hasn't slowed down iTunes).
Ahem. That's GNU/GNUgle to you.
Nice [mis]use of stock ticker codes there:
"Defeating even a dubious patent can take tremendous resources. After Storage Technology Corp. (MSFT) sued Cisco for patent infringement, it took Cisco six years and $10 million to get a jury to declare last June that StorageTek's patent was invalid. (StorageTek was purchased by Sun Microsystems Inc. (SUNW) a week before the verdict.)"
WTF are you trying to say:
"They want you to trust that the unofficial patch for the Windows Metafile Volunerability that is currently being exploited by an IM worm."
Possibly the worst story ever.
the thing with the M$ monopoly is that it has traditionally been that what's right for M$ is (quite deliberately) what's right for Dell, so that's what they've done. With that monopoly weakening every day we'll see more and more of this, particularly as the cost of the hardware continues to drop while the cost of the M$ tax is reasonably static (if not on the rise). Bear in mind also that given that Internet Explorer Sucks (with only 7 days in 2004 without an unpatched, public security hole), this reflects badly on Dell and is likely to be one of their major support costs (imagine how many 'my machine runs 10 times slower now than it did when we got it and i'm constantly harassed by popups' calls they get!). In contrast, Firefox on Windows was 7% unsafe (still a ridiculously high number - this should be very close to zero) - it's a no brainer.