Not to mention that Facebook really aren't going to have the slightest interest in the average user, nor in using their content if and when they leave the site.
If Facebook really doesn't care, then why did they omit the old clause from the ToS? Seems like it would not be worth the effort if there was no reason for doing so.
Before these services (and I would assume still today), you could subscribe to receive several CDs through the mail every month for a regular fee. Yet, your ability to listen to the CDs you already received was not dependent on your continued subscription.
A "subscription service" that depends upon membership to continue to enjoy existing benefits is not a subscription service at all. It's a rental service.
Back in the old days this was what cheat codes were for.
Now the Action Replays and Game Sharks of our generation have been killed off by the game companies. Even PC mods are going to die off, thanks to the WoW Glider case.
Another 30% will say "don't bother, because the kids will just go around your blockages."(thinking that all school kids are as adept as the ubergeeks here are)
They don't have to know how to bypass it. They just have to know someone who does.
So then how do you propose having effective restrictions on a machine that the school can't even supervise while off-campus? All it takes is a LiveCD and a screwdriver set to bypass all restrictions.
I disagree. The question was not about whether or not to engage in the program (that is the part that should be discussed with parents and other taxpayers) but how much to restrict the machines. Most parents are very poorly educated when it comes to computers, and would therefore be horrible at making sound technology policy decisions. Many are inclined to want the strongest restrictions imaginable, thinking that there's some sort of magic bulletproof software that prevents anything non-educational from ever seeing the light of day on these machines, and will be in uproar when the restrictions inevitably fail. It's better to not promise too much than to say that you will lock down the machines and then have irate parents storming the school because Junior somehow got past the filters.
The executives at Big Gaming are fully aware of this, but they would rather make crappy products and just blame their failures on something else while taking all of the credit for their successes. These are exactly the same kind of people who spend their entire first semester of college at frat parties and then complain about bad teachers when they fail their classes.
I must say that I really do feel sorry for you Brits. Your currency is worth almost twice as mush as the US, and yet you guys pay exactly the same quantity.
Of course, this just brings up another greedy practice of the gaming companies: region locks.
I am fortunate enough to not have to worry about student loans, however the issue of making money with free software has been addressedbefore on Slashdot. There are ways to earn money other than trying to sell something which is not inherently scarce and never will be.
I too am perusing an IT degree in a college that has a love affair with Microsoft, despite my complete abhorrence for the company and proprietary software in general.
Mono has to play catch-up with Microsoft's.NET framework, and is usually a full version number behind. There are also some patent concerns with parts of.NET, especially the non-standardized parts like Windows Forms. The free Java implementations had the same problem until Sun's release of the official Java under the GPL.
So yes, you can develop for Mono if you wish, but be prepared to always have to use an older version of C# and everything else related to.NET if you want full compliance.
Please don't use the term "PC" when you mean to say "Windows." It's bad enough that Apple continues to push this belief that PCs inherently run Windows in their marketing (as well as being inherently different from a hardware standpoint, something that was one true but stopped being so after 2006), but on Slashdot?
How the US managed to pass a law that retroactively (and, therefore, unconstitutionally) extended copyright terms 10 years ago is beyond me, but it happened.
It just seems like the population doesn't get to participate in democracy anymore. Other than record companies, who could possibly think this makes sense? Or demand that such a law should be passed?
I believe you are confusing apathy with disenfranchisement.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean the "privacy controls" that can be circumvented with nothing more than Wireshark and a laptop?
I want online tools that SAVE time, not CONSUME more and more of it.
So then why are you on Slashdot?
Facebook's servers are not in the UK, so UK law does not apply to Facebook.
Not to mention that Facebook really aren't going to have the slightest interest in the average user, nor in using their content if and when they leave the site.
If Facebook really doesn't care, then why did they omit the old clause from the ToS? Seems like it would not be worth the effort if there was no reason for doing so.
Before these services (and I would assume still today), you could subscribe to receive several CDs through the mail every month for a regular fee. Yet, your ability to listen to the CDs you already received was not dependent on your continued subscription.
A "subscription service" that depends upon membership to continue to enjoy existing benefits is not a subscription service at all. It's a rental service.
He's not talking about the music.
Back in the old days this was what cheat codes were for.
Now the Action Replays and Game Sharks of our generation have been killed off by the game companies. Even PC mods are going to die off, thanks to the WoW Glider case.
If your stepson can play games in class, that sounds like its the teacher who's not doing his or her job, not the IT department.
Another 30% will say "don't bother, because the kids will just go around your blockages."(thinking that all school kids are as adept as the ubergeeks here are)
They don't have to know how to bypass it. They just have to know someone who does.
So then how do you propose having effective restrictions on a machine that the school can't even supervise while off-campus? All it takes is a LiveCD and a screwdriver set to bypass all restrictions.
I disagree. The question was not about whether or not to engage in the program (that is the part that should be discussed with parents and other taxpayers) but how much to restrict the machines. Most parents are very poorly educated when it comes to computers, and would therefore be horrible at making sound technology policy decisions. Many are inclined to want the strongest restrictions imaginable, thinking that there's some sort of magic bulletproof software that prevents anything non-educational from ever seeing the light of day on these machines, and will be in uproar when the restrictions inevitably fail. It's better to not promise too much than to say that you will lock down the machines and then have irate parents storming the school because Junior somehow got past the filters.
I suggest you read up on Tinker v. Des Moines.
Even simpler way to defeat censorship attempts:
1. Boot MacBook with an Ubuntu CD in the drive while holding down the "C" key.
2. Use Ubuntu LiveCD for all your non-restrictive computing needs.
The executives at Big Gaming are fully aware of this, but they would rather make crappy products and just blame their failures on something else while taking all of the credit for their successes. These are exactly the same kind of people who spend their entire first semester of college at frat parties and then complain about bad teachers when they fail their classes.
I must say that I really do feel sorry for you Brits. Your currency is worth almost twice as mush as the US, and yet you guys pay exactly the same quantity.
Of course, this just brings up another greedy practice of the gaming companies: region locks.
I am fortunate enough to not have to worry about student loans, however the issue of making money with free software has been addressed before on Slashdot. There are ways to earn money other than trying to sell something which is not inherently scarce and never will be.
I too am perusing an IT degree in a college that has a love affair with Microsoft, despite my complete abhorrence for the company and proprietary software in general.
import antigravity
Enough said.
Mono has to play catch-up with Microsoft's .NET framework, and is usually a full version number behind. There are also some patent concerns with parts of .NET, especially the non-standardized parts like Windows Forms. The free Java implementations had the same problem until Sun's release of the official Java under the GPL.
So yes, you can develop for Mono if you wish, but be prepared to always have to use an older version of C# and everything else related to .NET if you want full compliance.
Please don't use the term "PC" when you mean to say "Windows." It's bad enough that Apple continues to push this belief that PCs inherently run Windows in their marketing (as well as being inherently different from a hardware standpoint, something that was one true but stopped being so after 2006), but on Slashdot?
How the US managed to pass a law that retroactively (and, therefore, unconstitutionally) extended copyright terms 10 years ago is beyond me, but it happened.
It just seems like the population doesn't get to participate in democracy anymore. Other than record companies, who could possibly think this makes sense? Or demand that such a law should be passed?
I believe you are confusing apathy with disenfranchisement.
Radiohead did not authorize the sharing of their music tracks. Nine Inch Nails would have been a better example.
If it runs in safe mode, then chances are that an extension is causing the problem and not Firefox itself.
Even so, it is poor practice to end support for one of your products when its successor hasn't even been released yet.