For those running Windoze, (More realistically for those running windoze as well) try the www.shockwave.com site to play fun classics like Rampage, Joust, and my favorite, Spy-Hunter.
Lots of fun time wasting activities available as long as you install the shockwave software.
Anything you put out in public is then available for people to see. If you don't want someone to see it, dont place/post it in a public medium. The origional concept of the internet was to be used for open sharing of information. If you want to keep something private, then the internet is not a good place to put it.
Using a pseudonym or handle or username that does not identify you can help, as long as you change it often enough. (read each time you log into napster)
Connecting to napster is akin to advertising in a specialty music trader magazine that you have a copy of song X by band Y and are willing to give copies away for free to anyone that expresses an interest. You are putting this information into the public domain, and it is concievable that the owners of the copyright on song X might call you up and ask you to stop.
it has become clear that the terms of the license agreement should be compared in the same way as price when making an informed buying decision.
Great insight!
Many programs are available for download for free (as in free beer), but there is still a cost. People are not charging money for the product, but that does not mean that they are not making a profit from your use of the product.
Free email accounts on the web, free dialup accounts, free streaming media software... You don't pay any money for these products and services, but what do you give up in exchange? Often you are asked for information such as an email address, and other contact information. If they are particularaly cheeky they might ask you for your age and education/occupation and annual salary.
The software might be free, but if the EULA includes a statemant like Each use of our product constitutes agreement to pay a $1 fee billed to you through your ISP after stripping your IP. coupled with the now standard statement at the end Any part of this EULA may be changed without notice then there is a cost, but it is in a place where we traditionally do not look for a cost.
The price or cost of using a piece of software is agreeing to the terms and conditions of the EULA. We are used to the others not knowing what is happening on our computers. However, with dedicated connections to the internet and software that reports back to the owner about what is happening on your computer, we are no longer able to disregard the EULA with by thinking "what they don't know won't hurt me".
Several others have made the comparisson to a trojan horse. What I am waiting to see is what will be the first piece of software to report back to it's owner about other software on your computer. When will a program relate all of your keystrokes back to the owner while the program is running? All the software on our computer? The contents of the files?
Many people (probably not on/.) would be more than happy to know that someone else was running their computer as long as it continued to work. Many of us here on/. are the people that keep those computers running for our co-workers, friends and families. To have a company monitoring and fixing their computers over the internet would be a godsend for many people who encounter problems that they can't solve. But when does a product feature built in to help us cross the line and become an invasion of privacy?
Is it ok (legaly or ethically) for software to do anything it wants to simply because you agreed to let it in some obscutre clause of non-standard licensing agreement?
For now I don't see any solution other than to read the EULA very carefully before using the software. As LaNMaN2000 said in the above post, the EULA thould be looked at like a price tag. Know all of the hidden costs of a product before you agree to use it, as enforcement of these terms is becoming easier and easier for the owners.
And as one last piece of advice for those creating software that they want people to use: Use of a standardized EULA will greatly increase the ease and comfort of agreeing to your license. When I see that the EULA says GPL, I know in three letters what that license entails. Create a license that is basic enough that you can use it on all of your products with minimal additions. (doesn't have to be the GPL, but stick to a standard) If I see that the EULA for a piece of "ripicheep Corp" software is their standard license with the addition of the following terms, then once I know what that standard license is, I don't have to search through the fine print to determine if I am willing to agree to the EULA.
Encryption has been an issue recently in our office. One of our less tech workers has been to a seminar or something where he learned that encryption is not 100% unbreakable. This article is a good grounding in some of the princilples of encryption with enough math to help the techies understand what to explain.
This is following a somewhat disturbing trend of mainstream media trying to have their cake and eat it too with respect to the internet and digital formats.
Music, television, and print media companies are realizing that there is a demand and a market for their works in a digital format. These companies want to offer their products to us the consumers over a digital medium, but they don't want us to be able to take advantage of any of the benefits that come with digital media, such as ability to copy, edit and distribute at will.
The same reasons that digital distribution appeal to the media, are a concern to them once the product has left their clutches. The e-book industry wants a format that they can send to you over the internet, that gives high quality text, and that costs little or nothing for them to produce and reproduce. But they don't want the format to be readily coppiable or distibutable by the end user. An appropriate solution has not yet been found.
So, as a solution that shows little chance of being effective, laws such as the DMCA are being passed to try to limit the technology in stead of developing technology that works. Laws that limit the legal use of technology are unconscienable. If coppying a friends CD is illegal, then it is illegal whether I do it with a computer, or by taping it onto a cassette, or a DAT copy off of the radio. Making it illegal to use a computer to do something that is already illegal makes no sense. Especially when these laws are written so broadly as to limit legal as well as illegal activities.
The Media companies are realizing that networks are no longer comprised of retail outlets connected by roads. It's about time.
I just wish that they would bite the bullet and develop their own network in stead of trying to adapt the internet. The internet was not developed for security or identifiability or even really high speed, high bandwidth applications. We are seeing a move away from the telephone networks to cable and high fibre optics for data transmissions. So too should we be seeing other networks and protocols developed for things like e commerce and protected streaming media.
I guess I'm talking about a larger network with different tiers for different purposes. -A tier for e commerce with protocol oriented towards better security and encryption/decryption of credit card numbers and personnal information. No need for amazing download/upload speeds if all you're doing is loading a sales page. -A tier for digital streaming media with encryption. Higher upload/download speeds needed here. -A tier for the financial sector, banks and brokers and what not. No need for amazing connection speeds here, but very strong encryption and security measures. -And finally, a tier for the internet as it was only 3 or 4 years ago: a free and accessible medium for individuals and groups to share ideas, art, gaming... a network where individuals can form communities.
Much of the animosity between us geeks who have had the net to ourselves and the companies who are adapting technology to suit their needs is because the net is not suited to business applications, and the measures being introduced to protect business are changing the use of the net for all users, not just those involved in business.
A more effective solution for business would be to meet their needs through the use of new technology and protocols in stead of using restrictive laws to limit the potential for legal as well as illegal activities.
I too use tera term pro with the ssh add on and it's great. the only problem I find with it is I can't use the ^c ^v cut and paste, you have to use the menus, but that's a minor quibble. Overall I find ttermpro to be very useful.
Open source is the realization of the great potential that communications technology has brought to us. What product/idea is not made better by peer review?
My friends and I play team chess. Each team (colour) has two (or more) players, and within a team, you reach consensus about a move. The other team can however hear your strategies as well. It makes for excellent games, and entertaining debates.
Open source is a method, a means not an end. open source can be applied to software, to law, to chess, to cooking... to anything in fact that involves making informed descisions.
In open sourceit is critical that high standards be maintained and that project focus is enforced by a guiding group or individual.
Debating merit with, and bouncing ideas off of peers has long been a method of honing ideas. Thanks to the ability to communicate our ideas to milions of people in a very short time and recieve their thoughts back, it is now a much more effective process.
Does Slashdot's red star for the mozilla org denote the communistic flavour of open source projects?
The red star being a particularly famous emblem representing communism is slashdot's symbol for mozilla. Given, there's a dinosaur inside to shed a little more light on the meaning of Mozilla's symbol, but why the red star.
The concept of sharing code and everyone contributing what they are able for the greater good of the community is what makes open source such an appealing option. This is also a fundamental principle of communism (theoretical communism as opposed to communistic styled dictatorships) Is the web fertile new ground for communism to re-emerge via open source?
Anyways... I like the Idea of a set wage. We are professionals, and like professionals who work for a single company, an annual salary is standard.
It also makes things a heck of a lot easier for me to deal with finances if I earn a set amount each month. Also that way the companys expectations for me remain fairly constant.
If my responsability and workload changes, then I'll re-negotiate the wages I'm earning. (usually with someones balls in the vice I just took mine out of =)
Slashdot Mirror
For those running Windoze, (More realistically for those running windoze as well) try the www.shockwave.com site to play fun classics like Rampage, Joust, and my favorite, Spy-Hunter.
Lots of fun time wasting activities available as long as you install the shockwave software.
Anything you put out in public is then available for people to see. If you don't want someone to see it, dont place/post it in a public medium. The origional concept of the internet was to be used for open sharing of information. If you want to keep something private, then the internet is not a good place to put it.
Using a pseudonym or handle or username that does not identify you can help, as long as you change it often enough. (read each time you log into napster)
Connecting to napster is akin to advertising in a specialty music trader magazine that you have a copy of song X by band Y and are willing to give copies away for free to anyone that expresses an interest. You are putting this information into the public domain, and it is concievable that the owners of the copyright on song X might call you up and ask you to stop.
it has become clear that the terms of the license agreement should be compared in the same way as price when making an informed buying decision.
Great insight!
Many programs are available for download for free (as in free beer), but there is still a cost. People are not charging money for the product, but that does not mean that they are not making a profit from your use of the product.
Free email accounts on the web, free dialup accounts, free streaming media software... You don't pay any money for these products and services, but what do you give up in exchange?
Often you are asked for information such as an email address, and other contact information. If they are particularaly cheeky they might ask you for your age and education/occupation and annual salary.
The software might be free, but if the EULA includes a statemant like Each use of our product constitutes agreement to pay a $1 fee billed to you through your ISP after stripping your IP. coupled with the now standard statement at the end Any part of this EULA may be changed without notice then there is a cost, but it is in a place where we traditionally do not look for a cost.
The price or cost of using a piece of software is agreeing to the terms and conditions of the EULA. We are used to the others not knowing what is happening on our computers. However, with dedicated connections to the internet and software that reports back to the owner about what is happening on your computer, we are no longer able to disregard the EULA with by thinking "what they don't know won't hurt me".
Several others have made the comparisson to a trojan horse. What I am waiting to see is what will be the first piece of software to report back to it's owner about other software on your computer. When will a program relate all of your keystrokes back to the owner while the program is running? All the software on our computer? The contents of the files?
Many people (probably not on
Is it ok (legaly or ethically) for software to do anything it wants to simply because you agreed to let it in some obscutre clause of non-standard licensing agreement?
For now I don't see any solution other than to read the EULA very carefully before using the software. As LaNMaN2000 said in the above post, the EULA thould be looked at like a price tag. Know all of the hidden costs of a product before you agree to use it, as enforcement of these terms is becoming easier and easier for the owners.
And as one last piece of advice for those creating software that they want people to use: Use of a standardized EULA will greatly increase the ease and comfort of agreeing to your license. When I see that the EULA says GPL, I know in three letters what that license entails. Create a license that is basic enough that you can use it on all of your products with minimal additions. (doesn't have to be the GPL, but stick to a standard) If I see that the EULA for a piece of "ripicheep Corp" software is their standard license with the addition of the following terms, then once I know what that standard license is, I don't have to search through the fine print to determine if I am willing to agree to the EULA.
Encryption has been an issue recently in our office. One of our less tech workers has been to a seminar or something where he learned that encryption is not 100% unbreakable. This article is a good grounding in some of the princilples of encryption with enough math to help the techies understand what to explain.
Thanks to kuro5hin for the article.
This is following a somewhat disturbing trend of mainstream media trying to have their cake and eat it too with respect to the internet and digital formats.
Music, television, and print media companies are realizing that there is a demand and a market for their works in a digital format. These companies want to offer their products to us the consumers over a digital medium, but they don't want us to be able to take advantage of any of the benefits that come with digital media, such as ability to copy, edit and distribute at will.
The same reasons that digital distribution appeal to the media, are a concern to them once the product has left their clutches.
The e-book industry wants a format that they can send to you over the internet, that gives high quality text, and that costs little or nothing for them to produce and reproduce. But they don't want the format to be readily coppiable or distibutable by the end user. An appropriate solution has not yet been found.
So, as a solution that shows little chance of being effective, laws such as the DMCA are being passed to try to limit the technology in stead of developing technology that works.
Laws that limit the legal use of technology are unconscienable. If coppying a friends CD is illegal, then it is illegal whether I do it with a computer, or by taping it onto a cassette, or a DAT copy off of the radio. Making it illegal to use a computer to do something that is already illegal makes no sense. Especially when these laws are written so broadly as to limit legal as well as illegal activities.
The Media companies are realizing that networks are no longer comprised of retail outlets connected by roads.
It's about time.
I just wish that they would bite the bullet and develop their own network in stead of trying to adapt the internet.
The internet was not developed for security or identifiability or even really high speed, high bandwidth applications. We are seeing a move away from the telephone networks to cable and high fibre optics for data transmissions. So too should we be seeing other networks and protocols developed for things like e commerce and protected streaming media.
I guess I'm talking about a larger network with different tiers for different purposes.
-A tier for e commerce with protocol oriented towards better security and encryption/decryption of credit card numbers and personnal information. No need for amazing download/upload speeds if all you're doing is loading a sales page.
-A tier for digital streaming media with encryption. Higher upload/download speeds needed here.
-A tier for the financial sector, banks and brokers and what not. No need for amazing connection speeds here, but very strong encryption and security measures.
-And finally, a tier for the internet as it was only 3 or 4 years ago: a free and accessible medium for individuals and groups to share ideas, art, gaming... a network where individuals can form communities.
Much of the animosity between us geeks who have had the net to ourselves and the companies who are adapting technology to suit their needs is because the net is not suited to business applications, and the measures being introduced to protect business are changing the use of the net for all users, not just those involved in business.
A more effective solution for business would be to meet their needs through the use of new technology and protocols in stead of using restrictive laws to limit the potential for legal as well as illegal activities.
I believe the first time was tron.
am I too old?
I too use tera term pro with the ssh add on and it's great. the only problem I find with it is I can't use the ^c ^v cut and paste, you have to use the menus, but that's a minor quibble. Overall I find ttermpro to be very useful.
Open source is the realization of the great potential that communications technology has brought to us. What product/idea is not made better by peer review?
My friends and I play team chess. Each team (colour) has two (or more) players, and within a team, you reach consensus about a move. The other team can however hear your strategies as well. It makes for excellent games, and entertaining debates.
Open source is a method, a means not an end. open source can be applied to software, to law, to chess, to cooking... to anything in fact that involves making informed descisions.
In open sourceit is critical that high standards be maintained and that project focus is enforced by a guiding group or individual.
Debating merit with, and bouncing ideas off of peers has long been a method of honing ideas. Thanks to the ability to communicate our ideas to milions of people in a very short time and recieve their thoughts back, it is now a much more effective process.
Does Slashdot's red star for the mozilla org denote the communistic flavour of open source projects?
The red star being a particularly famous emblem representing communism is slashdot's symbol for mozilla. Given, there's a dinosaur inside to shed a little more light on the meaning of Mozilla's symbol, but why the red star.
The concept of sharing code and everyone contributing what they are able for the greater good of the community is what makes open source such an appealing option. This is also a fundamental principle of communism (theoretical communism as opposed to communistic styled dictatorships) Is the web fertile new ground for communism to re-emerge via open source?
Anyways... I like the Idea of a set wage. We are professionals, and like professionals who work for a single company, an annual salary is standard.
It also makes things a heck of a lot easier for me to deal with finances if I earn a set amount each month. Also that way the companys expectations for me remain fairly constant.
If my responsability and workload changes, then I'll re-negotiate the wages I'm earning. (usually with someones balls in the vice I just took mine out of =)