You should read Little Brother. The USA PATRIOT Act messed badly with "innocent until proven guilty." In which case, you don't have to be guilty to be treated as a criminal.
So you're one of the (approx) 30% of America that believes Bush & Co. did everything legally? I wasn't aware that there were so many fans of fascism in the US.
I'm not putting a lot of faith in this guys accusations for three reasons: 1) coming out with it now rather than earlier and 2) releasing it to KO and 3) no backup or supporting evidence. It's when KO or other journalists really start digging, calling their contacts on the inside, and get corroboration _or_ when a FOIA or other document surfaces that the likelihood of this being correct goes way up.
I think it goes more like... "Hm, there's this communications tool we could use, but the lawyers say there may be a problem." Then the question is, do they...
a) Demand that a private company give the Federal Government's web-embedding special treatment compared to other sites?
b) Duplicate the functionality of an existing communications mechanism at public expense?
or c) Write up a waiver making it clear that, while you might expect *no* long-term tracking cookies to be saved to your browser when you hit a Federal site, there might be a cookie set by *someone else* who isn't the Federal government, because they used this tool?
They chose (c), which might be the right or wrong answer depending on your philosophies. Those who feel that government shouldn't intervene in private enterprise and shouldn't spend money to duplicate services that private companies already offer would usually choose (c) also... unless they want any excuse possible to rip at the Obama presidency.
My initial reaction was the same. But then it dawns on me that the new Administration is using YouTube like any other agent of the Press. Do we demand that the US Goverment set up its own TV stations and newspapers? No. The President announces a press conference and lets the media do their own thing.
If he was just posting the videos for download and then letting people post them on YouTube, that would be an accurate analogy... but the President invites representatives from many, many news outlets to the press conferences and briefings, rather than always calling this one newspaper when they have something to say.
I still don't see the match. Which federal agency is using persistent cookies to track visitors?
Technically speaking, no Federal agency is using persistent tracking cookies. However, the rule can be broadly interpreted that "no Federal agency's web site may SET such a cookie," and since the video is embedded into the web page, with no inherent option to NOT get the cookie (Flashblock will probably work, but I haven't tested it yet), you browse to a Federal Government website and you get a persistent tracking cookie, which can certainly look like a violation.
They want, for example, a firewall system for their OS. So they write one. Their need sated, they let people have it for free. It costs them nothing to do so (since their need was for a firewall and they paid for it by writing one). It costs no more to let people have it than to keep it secret.
In fact, the Los Angeles traffic signal networking system (ATSAC... don't recall what it stands for) was developed completely in-house, starting with dynamic timing for routes leading into and out of venues in use for the 1984 Olympic games. Today, it is one of the world's leading networked signal systems. Transportation engineers come from all over the world to tour the system... and the City of LA gives them the software for free. (And brags about it, and how much it ticks off proprietary developers.)
I don't know for certain that they give them the source, but I assume they must, since the hardware and specific needs are going to vary wildly from one city to another, so some customization would be required.
The switch to metric worked just fine for the countries that did it. In fact, the only confusion that exists is a result of the fact that some countries have chosen to hold out.
Perhaps that's just because we were taught how to convert it all wrong.
The main problem here is ISV's which have a great deal of influence over solutions and have no incentive to deploy open source. In fact they get a revenue stream from licensing proprietary software.... So any open source solution an ISV may present reduces said ISV's profit margin on the deal unless it is made up on increased service fees.
This sounds like a problem of applying an old model to a new system, somewhat like the issues the RIAA is having with selling music. While an ISV might lose out on that 12% kickback, they can charge 20% of what the MS solution would have cost as a "setup and support fee", save their client a ton of money, and take MORE home.
Why wouldn't you want them using the best tools for the job, rather than choosing ideology or the lowest bidder? I'd rather they spend tens of millions of dollars on programs like ArcGIS that work really well for them, than using open source versions that don't really work nearly as well.
Have you ever used ArcGIS? It doesn't work really well for anyone.
Depending on your hardware you can have a good experience or a bad one. I've not seen an install yet where Suspend or Standby result in everything working when everything wakes back up.
I have yet to have this experience too... on Windows. I honestly haven't tried monkeying with power settings on my Ubuntu desktop, because I'm still terribly gunshy about suspend/standby on Windows machines.
Far from being unfair this is actually socially ideal. In the ideal limit people pay for something exactly what it is worth. depsite the fact that some folks pay more than others, over all nearly everyone, including the people paying the higher price, are paying LESS than they would have to pay if it was sold for a fixed price, because of the increased demand lowers the per capitia fixed costs.
I think you just said that, by offering the product at a lower price, companies enable people to buy their product at a lower price.
Re:All you really need to know
on
Ubuntu Kung Fu
·
· Score: 1
Can we get this a +1 Funny? I lol'd and I barely know how to bring up a terminal window.
Re:So much for free!
on
Ubuntu Kung Fu
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
In Windows, you plug it in, and it works. Or, you put in the CD, install the drivers, and it works. On Linux, sometimes you have to do some really weird things to get this or that printer to work. Even package management can be a real pain, with this or that dependency missing. What's a dependency? Why doesn't it install? Why is this so confusing, why can't they just make it so I download something and install it and it works, like on Windows?
On *Windows* sometimes you have to do some really weird things to make things work. And sometimes it never does. When I was working in IT for a small business unit of Turner Broadcasting during the AOL/TW merger, we got the word we we had to install AOL on all of our computers. This was version 6, so it supported broadband, but just barely.
Even though all our machines were running the same OS (Windows 2000), all standard Dell hardware, etc., there were a few that just didn't want to run AOL. We had one laptop where AOL would only work if you uninstalled the network card driver, and the network card driver would only install if you uninstalled AOL. After two HOURS of troubleshooting this with the special internal Help Desk AOL set up just for this rollout, the tech on the other end said, "Well, it should work." That sentence became an inside joke.
Practically every time I set up a Windows machine, I have to Google for how to get this or that to work right. Because there's a larger install base, there's also more people who have run up against the same problem, and it's easier to find. That doesn't mean that Windows "just works" though.
But having to BUY "documentation" (e.g., a book) because you have no clue about this whole Linux thing, you just got tired of having Windows crash with spyware, adware, and viruses... I don't know.
Hmmmm... I wonder if any of the 432 books Amazon sells about Windows XP (yes, just XP) tell you how to get rid of spyware, adware, and viruses under Windows?
I'm a Linux novice. Yes, I'm pretty tech-savvy, but I don't use the terminal without my husband telling me exactly what to type.;-) Ubuntu "just worked" for me, pretty much like Windows. Installing was easy. My printer was EASIER to install (in Windows, I have to do a whole dance with inserting the CD and running the application that installs a bunch of crap I don't want along with the driver and *then* connect the printer to the computer yadda yadda). Yes, there's stuff that works better in Windows than in Linux, but Ubuntu is pretty darned close to "just working".
I see nothing weird about having books that tell you how to get more out of a piece of software. Heck, there's a book about how to do more stuff with my Kindle, and for things that "just work" I really can't think of a better example than that little white slab. I think your criticism is misapplied.
Re:Nah, everybody knows how this one goes.
on
Ubuntu Kung Fu
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I'd go as far to say that any service that doesn't strongly recommend you keep your own backups shouldn't be trusted.
From the geek perspective, you're right of course... but Joe the Enduser won't usually see it that way. "Well, if they don't think they can hang onto my data, I should probably put it elsewhere!"
Probably the best idea for a site that lives and dies by users' data is to (1) have a great backup policy/procedure in place; (2) make that policy public to the users; (3) seriously consider user feedback on that policy that may point out limitations; and (4) make it easy for users to back up their own data to flat files. An optional (5) would be to write a tool that lets those files be uploaded easily to restore the data after a loss.
It's a good policy even if you never have a disaster to recover from; after all, what if someone's little brother (wow, stream of consciousness time; I JUST NOW got the title of Cory Doctrow's book) gets access to their blog account and (after reading all the private ones) deletes every post? Now it's easy for users to re-upload their own data without even having to contact anyone. (This, in fact, could be the basis for recommending self-backup to end-users; heck, even state that there's a fee for the site to restore data lost due to compromised accounts, and you're golden.)
There are, of course, situations where user backups can't be trusted by the server, such as MMOGs... but for most sites, it's an excellent idea.
Is it? It would be for the common case of state-wide sales tax rates. However, many cities (especially large ones) have their OWN sales tax rates. To make it worse, there are other cases where other geographical areas are covered by a sales-tax zone (transit districts, economic development districts,...) These borders don't always coincide with the zip code map.
Hmmm... I'd like to see an example of this. The types of cases you're talking about (large urban areas with city and county sales taxes, transportation improvement districts, etc.) are also areas with a lot of ZIP code granularity. Places where the entire state is divided into four ZIP codes are also places without complicated local tax structures, generally speaking.
At any rate, someone out there does know how to determine the sales tax rate for a given location. There *must* be a way to automate that process. I think you're right that there needs to be a national clearinghouse guiding the effort, if only to keep that database updated... but the information is available.
His point is that, if you don't watch much TV, that's cheaper than cable. When we had just the lowest end package, our cable bill was $26/month, which costs more than four shows on iTunes. I don't know *when* was the last time I watched more than 2 shows at a time, so the cost comparison makes sense to me.
I don't think you can. Standard analog cable flows through that line no matter what (at least that's my understanding of it).
You can order Internet cable service without *ordering* cable. You get a slight discount over the ala carte charges if you get both, but it would cost us significantly more to add cable TV to our service.
I've been told that if we unplug the line from our cable modem and plug it into our TV, we'll have (basic) cable, but we don't get billed for cable TV, just phone and Internet (and Time Warner is our provider).
Personally, when I see people mispronouncing words and misusing phrases like the one in question, I use them as subtle queues that the person using them is less intelligent and adjust my behavior accordingly.
So how should the above sentence cue me to adjust my behavior with respect to your intelligence?
Slashdot Mirror
Check out the parent of the post you're replying to. You misunderstood the lobster allusion.
You should read Little Brother . The USA PATRIOT Act messed badly with "innocent until proven guilty." In which case, you don't have to be guilty to be treated as a criminal.
So you're one of the (approx) 30% of America that believes Bush & Co. did everything legally? I wasn't aware that there were so many fans of fascism in the US.
No, actually, he's Canadian.
I'm not putting a lot of faith in this guys accusations for three reasons: 1) coming out with it now rather than earlier and 2) releasing it to KO and 3) no backup or supporting evidence. It's when KO or other journalists really start digging, calling their contacts on the inside, and get corroboration _or_ when a FOIA or other document surfaces that the likelihood of this being correct goes way up.
In other words... [citation needed]?
In others, people call it enculturation and view it as a positive thing, denoting online community-building.
I think it goes more like... "Hm, there's this communications tool we could use, but the lawyers say there may be a problem." Then the question is, do they...
a) Demand that a private company give the Federal Government's web-embedding special treatment compared to other sites?
b) Duplicate the functionality of an existing communications mechanism at public expense?
or c) Write up a waiver making it clear that, while you might expect *no* long-term tracking cookies to be saved to your browser when you hit a Federal site, there might be a cookie set by *someone else* who isn't the Federal government, because they used this tool?
They chose (c), which might be the right or wrong answer depending on your philosophies. Those who feel that government shouldn't intervene in private enterprise and shouldn't spend money to duplicate services that private companies already offer would usually choose (c) also... unless they want any excuse possible to rip at the Obama presidency.
My initial reaction was the same. But then it dawns on me that the new Administration is using YouTube like any other agent of the Press. Do we demand that the US Goverment set up its own TV stations and newspapers? No. The President announces a press conference and lets the media do their own thing.
If he was just posting the videos for download and then letting people post them on YouTube, that would be an accurate analogy... but the President invites representatives from many, many news outlets to the press conferences and briefings, rather than always calling this one newspaper when they have something to say.
I still don't see the match. Which federal agency is using persistent cookies to track visitors?
Technically speaking, no Federal agency is using persistent tracking cookies. However, the rule can be broadly interpreted that "no Federal agency's web site may SET such a cookie," and since the video is embedded into the web page, with no inherent option to NOT get the cookie (Flashblock will probably work, but I haven't tested it yet), you browse to a Federal Government website and you get a persistent tracking cookie, which can certainly look like a violation.
"I would MUCH rather they used YouTube for their videos"
Good for you. I would rather be able to save the videos on my hard drive without violating some corporate website's TOS.
Thanks to a special exemption that the Obama team got from YouTube, you can. (RTFA.)
They want, for example, a firewall system for their OS. So they write one. Their need sated, they let people have it for free. It costs them nothing to do so (since their need was for a firewall and they paid for it by writing one). It costs no more to let people have it than to keep it secret.
In fact, the Los Angeles traffic signal networking system (ATSAC... don't recall what it stands for) was developed completely in-house, starting with dynamic timing for routes leading into and out of venues in use for the 1984 Olympic games. Today, it is one of the world's leading networked signal systems. Transportation engineers come from all over the world to tour the system... and the City of LA gives them the software for free. (And brags about it, and how much it ticks off proprietary developers.)
I don't know for certain that they give them the source, but I assume they must, since the hardware and specific needs are going to vary wildly from one city to another, so some customization would be required.
The switch to metric worked just fine for the countries that did it. In fact, the only confusion that exists is a result of the fact that some countries have chosen to hold out.
Perhaps that's just because we were taught how to convert it all wrong.
The main problem here is ISV's which have a great deal of influence over solutions and have no incentive to deploy open source. In fact they get a revenue stream from licensing proprietary software. ...
So any open source solution an ISV may present reduces said ISV's profit margin on the deal unless it is made up on increased service fees.
This sounds like a problem of applying an old model to a new system, somewhat like the issues the RIAA is having with selling music. While an ISV might lose out on that 12% kickback, they can charge 20% of what the MS solution would have cost as a "setup and support fee", save their client a ton of money, and take MORE home.
Why wouldn't you want them using the best tools for the job, rather than choosing ideology or the lowest bidder? I'd rather they spend tens of millions of dollars on programs like ArcGIS that work really well for them, than using open source versions that don't really work nearly as well.
Have you ever used ArcGIS? It doesn't work really well for anyone.
Depending on your hardware you can have a good experience or a bad one. I've not seen an install yet where Suspend or Standby result in everything working when everything wakes back up.
I have yet to have this experience too... on Windows. I honestly haven't tried monkeying with power settings on my Ubuntu desktop, because I'm still terribly gunshy about suspend/standby on Windows machines.
Far from being unfair this is actually socially ideal. In the ideal limit people pay for something exactly what it is worth. depsite the fact that some folks pay more than others, over all nearly everyone, including the people paying the higher price, are paying LESS than they would have to pay if it was sold for a fixed price, because of the increased demand lowers the per capitia fixed costs.
I think you just said that, by offering the product at a lower price, companies enable people to buy their product at a lower price.
Can we get this a +1 Funny? I lol'd and I barely know how to bring up a terminal window.
In Windows, you plug it in, and it works. Or, you put in the CD, install the drivers, and it works. On Linux, sometimes you have to do some really weird things to get this or that printer to work. Even package management can be a real pain, with this or that dependency missing. What's a dependency? Why doesn't it install? Why is this so confusing, why can't they just make it so I download something and install it and it works, like on Windows?
On *Windows* sometimes you have to do some really weird things to make things work. And sometimes it never does. When I was working in IT for a small business unit of Turner Broadcasting during the AOL/TW merger, we got the word we we had to install AOL on all of our computers. This was version 6, so it supported broadband, but just barely.
Even though all our machines were running the same OS (Windows 2000), all standard Dell hardware, etc., there were a few that just didn't want to run AOL. We had one laptop where AOL would only work if you uninstalled the network card driver, and the network card driver would only install if you uninstalled AOL. After two HOURS of troubleshooting this with the special internal Help Desk AOL set up just for this rollout, the tech on the other end said, "Well, it should work." That sentence became an inside joke.
Practically every time I set up a Windows machine, I have to Google for how to get this or that to work right. Because there's a larger install base, there's also more people who have run up against the same problem, and it's easier to find. That doesn't mean that Windows "just works" though.
But having to BUY "documentation" (e.g., a book) because you have no clue about this whole Linux thing, you just got tired of having Windows crash with spyware, adware, and viruses... I don't know.
Hmmmm... I wonder if any of the 432 books Amazon sells about Windows XP (yes, just XP) tell you how to get rid of spyware, adware, and viruses under Windows?
I'm a Linux novice. Yes, I'm pretty tech-savvy, but I don't use the terminal without my husband telling me exactly what to type. ;-) Ubuntu "just worked" for me, pretty much like Windows. Installing was easy. My printer was EASIER to install (in Windows, I have to do a whole dance with inserting the CD and running the application that installs a bunch of crap I don't want along with the driver and *then* connect the printer to the computer yadda yadda). Yes, there's stuff that works better in Windows than in Linux, but Ubuntu is pretty darned close to "just working".
I see nothing weird about having books that tell you how to get more out of a piece of software. Heck, there's a book about how to do more stuff with my Kindle, and for things that "just work" I really can't think of a better example than that little white slab. I think your criticism is misapplied.
Strangely, your post reads like an xkcd strip.
If they kept the backup after the new server was up, that is.
I'd go as far to say that any service that doesn't strongly recommend you keep your own backups shouldn't be trusted.
From the geek perspective, you're right of course... but Joe the Enduser won't usually see it that way. "Well, if they don't think they can hang onto my data, I should probably put it elsewhere!"
Probably the best idea for a site that lives and dies by users' data is to (1) have a great backup policy/procedure in place; (2) make that policy public to the users; (3) seriously consider user feedback on that policy that may point out limitations; and (4) make it easy for users to back up their own data to flat files. An optional (5) would be to write a tool that lets those files be uploaded easily to restore the data after a loss.
It's a good policy even if you never have a disaster to recover from; after all, what if someone's little brother (wow, stream of consciousness time; I JUST NOW got the title of Cory Doctrow's book) gets access to their blog account and (after reading all the private ones) deletes every post? Now it's easy for users to re-upload their own data without even having to contact anyone. (This, in fact, could be the basis for recommending self-backup to end-users; heck, even state that there's a fee for the site to restore data lost due to compromised accounts, and you're golden.)
There are, of course, situations where user backups can't be trusted by the server, such as MMOGs... but for most sites, it's an excellent idea.
Is it? It would be for the common case of state-wide sales tax rates. However, many cities (especially large ones) have their OWN sales tax rates. To make it worse, there are other cases where other geographical areas are covered by a sales-tax zone (transit districts, economic development districts, ...) These borders don't always coincide with the zip code map.
Hmmm... I'd like to see an example of this. The types of cases you're talking about (large urban areas with city and county sales taxes, transportation improvement districts, etc.) are also areas with a lot of ZIP code granularity. Places where the entire state is divided into four ZIP codes are also places without complicated local tax structures, generally speaking.
At any rate, someone out there does know how to determine the sales tax rate for a given location. There *must* be a way to automate that process. I think you're right that there needs to be a national clearinghouse guiding the effort, if only to keep that database updated... but the information is available.
Of course, math is hard... more than THREE shows, I should have said.
His point is that, if you don't watch much TV, that's cheaper than cable. When we had just the lowest end package, our cable bill was $26/month, which costs more than four shows on iTunes. I don't know *when* was the last time I watched more than 2 shows at a time, so the cost comparison makes sense to me.
I don't think you can. Standard analog cable flows through that line no matter what (at least that's my understanding of it).
You can order Internet cable service without *ordering* cable. You get a slight discount over the ala carte charges if you get both, but it would cost us significantly more to add cable TV to our service.
I've been told that if we unplug the line from our cable modem and plug it into our TV, we'll have (basic) cable, but we don't get billed for cable TV, just phone and Internet (and Time Warner is our provider).
Personally, when I see people mispronouncing words and misusing phrases like the one in question, I use them as subtle queues that the person using them is less intelligent and adjust my behavior accordingly.
So how should the above sentence cue me to adjust my behavior with respect to your intelligence?