It's sort of like drugs, or for that matter software/music/movie piracy. There's no way to completely stop it, short of a police state. Turnitin.com seems to me to be a good example of that 1984-esque state. I'd prefer freedom with a side of poor ethics, thank you very much.
That, and college is about what you learn. Or at least I'd like to think it is. In fact, dare I say that's what I think life is all about. Maybe I'm just crazy. But despite the fact that it sounds like an after school special, it is very true that when you cheat the only person you're really hurting is yourself.
So yes, plagiarism is bad, cheating is bad, and we should take steps to prevent it. But we should be realistic, realize that we'll never stop it completely unless we're willing to give up freedoms that I at least like having around, and let the cheaters screw themselves over in the long run.
I can't help but think "so what?". This seems to me to be very standard political spin. A politician uses spam to try to further his campaign, and then defends it as "innovative" just because email spam *is* new in the domains of campaigning. Obviously anybody with a brain can say "it's not innovative unless the concept is new, not the application". By his logic I could spam for saving purple elephants and be "innovative".
It's just playing with words and being a political spin doctor. I, for one, am only surprised that email spam has not been used for campaigning earlier.
Don't get me wrong. I'm a huge fan of open source, bnetd, yada yada, and I agree that the official Bnet has tons of issues (ranging from lag to dealing with people whom I'd at least rather not deal with).
However, to my understanding they're doing this largely as a reaction to the WC3 beta. It was cracked within days of release, using bnetd and other "fake" bnet networks that don't check cd keys. This is allowing many people who shouldn't be playing the beta to play the beta.
"Big deal" you say. And part of me is inclined to agree, as it doesn't hurt Blizzard to have a few extra thousand people playing the beta.
Well, I'm a beta tester, and I can tell you that the "official" beta network is sorely underused. Of the 5000 beta testers there are probably only 30-60 games going at any given time. I know, you might think that is a lot, but it's basically the same people over and over. From the buzz I've heard, a lot of legit beta testers have even been going to the bnetd networks, just because there are more people there (easier to find big 3v3 and 4v4 games, etc.).
So yes, DMCA bad. Making reverse engineering bad. Open source good, bnetd good. But Blizzard still does have a point, and perhaps some sort of compromise needs to be reached...
You are right in the sense that doing that would be the best for Windows, especially in the long run. However, that scenario terrifies me more then anything.
My box has a Linux partition and a Win2k partition. I keep Windows for games, and because in all honesty 2k isn't that bad. It's got all the stability and such of XP, but none of the Big Brother. 2k is also quite secure if you know what you're doing. And I like playing games. I have vowed to not update to XP however, as the whole embedded passport thing and such really scares me.
However, if say, 2 years from now Windows RG (Really Good edition) comes out and is NOT backwards compatible, now new games only come out for it. I'd presume that if anything this hypothetical WinRG will be worse then WinXP in terms of Big Brother-ness, ergo I'd be even more hesitant to upgrade. That and it'll be even more eye-candy and more dumbed-down and all that stuff. But if I want my games, I'll have to upgrade.
So that's why it's scaring me. I hope they keep their backwards compatibility, as I would personally like to just keep running 2k for as long as I can. Or at least if they do lose the backwards compatibility, wait until Linux gets enough market for games to be more available for it.
And yes I realize the irony in talking about Linux games in the wake of the death of Loki.
When I saw "CS" cheaters on the little blurb describing the article on the frontpage, my mind went to "Counterstrike cheaters" and not computer science.
Yes, they are correct in saying that having the hard drive being somehow subservient to the desktop is confusing and well, wrong.
However, in the end it doesn't really matter. Why? Because there are either people who understand why this is wrong and therefore it doesn't matter to them, or there are people whose understanding of a computer is one that it would require more then changing the hard drive icon to make them undestand.
That, and I'm willing to bet that neither of these sorts of people really care one way or the other.
Well, it's just my opinion I suppose, and you have the right to disagree. But I've always thought the recursiveness of the desktop didn't really matter.
In fact, if users did turn smart, both you and me might find it a lot harder to get jobs.
You see, computer geeks get jobs because we're supposed to be the ones who think about things like this. Hell, we're perverted enough to *enjoy* doing this nitty-gritty computer stuff. Joe Q. User just wants things to work. The user doesn't want to have to deal with anything. After all, the computer isn't their job, the computer is a tool to help them with their job.
So yes, I agree that in an ideal world people wouldn't be stupid and would know not to open unexpected attachments (and always scan everything anyway, and all that stuff). But the reality of it is that will never happened, and it just takes one person screwing up to let the worm wreak some degree of havoc.
It seems to me like the Gamecube is an attempt by Nintendo to get at a new domain of customers that they traditionally don't aim at.
Nintendo has been a console of the children. I would say ballpark 6 to 15 years of age is Nintendo time. After that, Playstation and the now-defunct Sega take over for the most part. N64 was still a very much "little kiddy" console, compared with the Playstation and Dreamcast. X-Box I'm not even going to factor in at this point, as I don't expect them to meet with tremendous success this go-around. Likely Microsoft wouldn't mind having the whole console gaming market, but that's not the issue.
Essentially it seems to me like Gamecube not only aims at the kids who are now 6-15 years old, but at those who were 6-15 years old and played on NES or SNES. Nintendo seems to be broadening their market.
This will play out pretty interestingly. I'd like to see a nice comparison of the Gamecube and the PS2. Sony is no lightweight and will not let go of their market easily.
In fact, I just had a revelation, albeit an obvious one. This is capitalism at work. Three strong companies duking it out. And since for once the sides are relatively balanced this might actually be at the benefit of the consumer. Who'd of thunk it?
I'm a long term mudder. I started in the 7th grade, did it a lot 9th-11th, and dropped off more in the 12th. I'm now a college freshman and don't mud at all.
Here's what I can say. First off, Everquest and all the assorted rip offs just seem to me like muds with a few pretty pictures and a monthly fee. No thanks, I'll keep the text. Secondly, yes muds are extremely addictive. Yes, you can lose your life to them. But it is possible to mud "healthily" so to speak. I probably bordered on unhealthy for a period, but I never neglected my "real life" committments. I did half-ass jobs a lot, but I think I likely would have done that with or without muds.
Essentially, I don't think muds are the addictive life-killers some people make them out to be. They *are*, but only to some people. As the insightful post up towards the top of this article said, "people with addictive personalities can be addicted to anything". The reason it didn't destroy my life is because I always have a drive to complete things I finish and do all that is required of me. I never miss assignments or exams. I procrastinate to no end and finish them at 4am, but I *finish* them.
So yes, muds are addictive. But as long as you "mud responsibly", you should be fine.
I'd like to pipe up with a seconding of what you said essentially. I think that bit at the end about how people can't make custom maps or rulesets any more is either blatant exaggeration or just simply confusion and misinformation.
Seriously now, the game *comes* with an editor that is quite flexible. The one thing that bothers me is you can't tie down people to their starting locations (i.e. with say the world map, you might play the American civ and end up in the Japanese starting place). But it allows for completely new maps and changes to all the units and and even more sweeping gameplay changes if I recall correctly.
I'm willing to bet this means if you go out and do stuff that actually requires messing with the main executable, you'll likely get a lawsuit knocking at your door. Making a map will not trigger that same reaction.
I'm a freshman comp sci major, taking both a comp sci and calculus class. The reason I mention the calc class is because it's upper level and basically entirely proofs, which are surprisingly like computer programs. Both of these classes take essentially the same attitude towards cheating: if the person grading your code/proof sees that it looks suspiciously like somebody elses then you might get talked to.
However, the two are different in this aspect. Comp sci basically says "don't work together". Math, however, encourages teamwork. Here's what they suggest. Get together with other people. Get a bunch of scratch paper, or even better, a blackboard. Solve a bunch of the problems together, but then break up, go home, and do your final draft alone. This means it will be your work. It will look like you, and be slightly different from everybody else, especially if you did most of the group work on a blackboard and therefore don't have it to copy straight.
So when in doubt, don't copy word-for-word other peoples code or proofs or homework in general. However, working together in the name of generating ideas that nobody individually can get is a good thing, at least in my book.
The school I'm going to (University of Rochester) is very light on specific required courses. You have to take one writing course freshman year, under the logic that no matter what you do with your life you should be able to write. Besides, that, you have your major and minor (or double major or double minor), and then you must satisfy a "cluster" (which is sort of like a mini-minor) in the area(s) that your major/minor are not in. If you major in something that is a liberal art, you must have a more technical cluster. You still get to choose which one though. It allows you to diversify and such, but not have your entire schedule dictated to you (unless you're one of those silly premeds).
The problem with online chess, and online games in general, is people with nothing better to do sometimes give themselves ego boosts by using computer programs to trounce their opponents. While I'm not saying somebody out there has a BobbyBot, it is true that many of the "badass" players out there are cheating. Sad, but true.
I've seen a lot of ones like this, but the one I liked the most was AT-Robots. It was based on Assembler, and it was entertaining enough that even though assembler is hard to learn I actually learned *some* of it by playing this. The address: http://www.necrobones.com/atrobots/
Just to let you know, in addition to being a liberal Jew-agnostic, I was also educated in public schools. You yourself said that your catholic upbringing and education was what gave you good morals. That may be true. But that doesn't mean it's the only method. I'm glad that you have had success in that path, but that doesn't mean that everyone that goes to public school is a sheepizen.
Heh couldn't help but notice your heavy religious leanings in the post, I'm not sure if you're joking or exaggerating or just flaming (or perhaps just telling the honest truth as you see it), but I just decided "hey, why not, I'll let ya know", I'm a cultural Jew spiritual Agnostic. So while morals are certainly important, being labeled with one religion or another certainly doesn't define "good" morals.
However, I remember hearing when this was all breaking out in the first place something about Dmitry being held here in the US without proper legal something-or-another for being a foreigner.
And even if it is legal for him to be held here, it sure as hell isn't moral, and I care more for one man to not be screwed over then for the DMCA to be challenged, unless that one man is a willing martyr (which I don't think Dmitry is).
Stupid? Yes. Not looking at the big picture? Almost certainly. But it's not a rational decision, it's an emotional one, and it's mine and my right to make it. I can't be wrong, but at the same time I can't be right (the reason being of course there is no greater wrong or right) and you're also allowed to feel about it in any way you want. That's the beauty of morals, they're all relative anyway.
Dmitry didn't plan on being a martyr for an anti-DMCA crusade. Yes, the DMCA is a bad law. Yes, it would be good to challenge it.
But at this point, this has nothing in my mind to do with the DMCA. It was to do with a foreigner, the "breadwinner" of his family, who was detained wrongly in this nation.
Give him back to his family. Worry about the DMCA after you worry about humanity. Intellectual property will wait.
We do the right thing.... sooner or later.... heh.
Oh well, I guess I'm just an eternal cyncic. Still, I'm very glad this happened, and hopefully he'll be able to get on with his life ASAP. Props to his employer for raising the cash. Somehow I doubt Adobe would ever do the right thing and reimburse them. I must say this whole experience has left me with a very bad taste in my mouth regarding Adobe.... I'll make sure never to purchase any of their products, and reccomend the same to any of my employers/employees/anyone.
From the article: "Pornographic files are widely available on these networks and children can be unexpectedly inundated by files containing explicit content for simple searches like 'Britney Spears.'"
Hahahahahahahaha..... ummm and her normal productions aren't sexual or "explicit" at all are they? Hit me one more time indeed...
They'll enforce it like they enforce the "education-friendly" material of.edu sites. Now I haven't spent a lot of time looking, but I'm pretty sure there aren't any sex.edu sites. Basically they'll only give out.kids domains to organizations that prove themselves worthy of it. Now of course this worthy is subjective, and will be basically the stereotypical US view of "what is good for kids", but I can guarantee that they will likely stop smut quite quickly. Even if a group manages to get a facade to register the domain and then turns it into a sex site, they'll likely be cracked down on quickly.
Ameri-centric. Then again the whole internet is, but that's hardly the point. A.kids tld would be tough to enforce, but possible (after all,.gov,.edu, etc. are all enforced quite well I'd say). Only give it out to "trusted" companies and organizations. That means of course US companies. ToysRUs.kids, etc. I very much doubt kids who run around nude in third-world countries would have the internet acccess in the first place, much less the clout they would need to get a.kids domain. Even if it isn't viewed as smut where they come from, the internet is americentric,.kids sounds like it will be quite americentric, and pen pals who send photos of themselves that are illegitimate to us will be stopped just like kiddie porn would obviously be.
I wonder if this has anything at all to do with the Microsoft ruling? Probably not, I'm probably just being paranoid, but still the timing is quite a coincidence. But hey, it can't hurt to have Sun open up Solaris Sourecode, so I'm definitely not complaining. Viva la open source! (even though it looks like the license they put this under isn't exactly GPL or BSD).
Relatively simple really. Pick two words that are related, but unrelated to you. For example, I'm not into fishing. I could pick the words "bait" and "tackle". Now that you have those words, stick them together. But wait, there is more....
Okay, now you have baittackle. Here are the other things you can do to it. Capitalize the first letter of each word. You have BaitTackle. Capitalize the last letter too if you like, for BaiTTacklE. Or just the last letter, or whatever. But then, the real cincher is add some sort of unusual symbol between the two words, such as + or = or - or / or whatever. Not all systems allow all symbols, but chances are you can figure out at least a few good unusual symbols your system allows.
The end result could be something like BaiT+TacklE. Easy to remember, hard to crack.
Very valid point. Also if you really look at music history, you'll see that the big bands faded away into small combos (bebop, avant garde, etc. - e.g. John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Thelonious Monk, etc.) in the 40s and 50s, before amps were in big use (and the small combos didn't use amps anyway - Trane don't need no stinkin amp). In fact, as a musician I can tell you that while guitars obviously need amps, I despise having to amplify anything else ever. Everything else is so much better just straight..... not to mention a little understood fact of wind instruments is despite them having a "bell", that's not *really* where the sound comes out: the whole thing resonates, and sound waves are emitted from the whole thing.
But yes, very valid point. Don't forget bebop though. I guess bebop isn't that huge of a deal, but it's one of my personal faves so I had to point it out.
Slashdot Mirror
Cheating will always happen.
It's sort of like drugs, or for that matter software/music/movie piracy. There's no way to completely stop it, short of a police state. Turnitin.com seems to me to be a good example of that 1984-esque state. I'd prefer freedom with a side of poor ethics, thank you very much.
That, and college is about what you learn. Or at least I'd like to think it is. In fact, dare I say that's what I think life is all about. Maybe I'm just crazy. But despite the fact that it sounds like an after school special, it is very true that when you cheat the only person you're really hurting is yourself.
So yes, plagiarism is bad, cheating is bad, and we should take steps to prevent it. But we should be realistic, realize that we'll never stop it completely unless we're willing to give up freedoms that I at least like having around, and let the cheaters screw themselves over in the long run.
I can't help but think "so what?". This seems to me to be very standard political spin. A politician uses spam to try to further his campaign, and then defends it as "innovative" just because email spam *is* new in the domains of campaigning. Obviously anybody with a brain can say "it's not innovative unless the concept is new, not the application". By his logic I could spam for saving purple elephants and be "innovative".
It's just playing with words and being a political spin doctor. I, for one, am only surprised that email spam has not been used for campaigning earlier.
Don't get me wrong. I'm a huge fan of open source, bnetd, yada yada, and I agree that the official Bnet has tons of issues (ranging from lag to dealing with people whom I'd at least rather not deal with).
However, to my understanding they're doing this largely as a reaction to the WC3 beta. It was cracked within days of release, using bnetd and other "fake" bnet networks that don't check cd keys. This is allowing many people who shouldn't be playing the beta to play the beta.
"Big deal" you say. And part of me is inclined to agree, as it doesn't hurt Blizzard to have a few extra thousand people playing the beta.
Well, I'm a beta tester, and I can tell you that the "official" beta network is sorely underused. Of the 5000 beta testers there are probably only 30-60 games going at any given time. I know, you might think that is a lot, but it's basically the same people over and over. From the buzz I've heard, a lot of legit beta testers have even been going to the bnetd networks, just because there are more people there (easier to find big 3v3 and 4v4 games, etc.).
So yes, DMCA bad. Making reverse engineering bad. Open source good, bnetd good. But Blizzard still does have a point, and perhaps some sort of compromise needs to be reached...
You are right in the sense that doing that would be the best for Windows, especially in the long run. However, that scenario terrifies me more then anything.
My box has a Linux partition and a Win2k partition. I keep Windows for games, and because in all honesty 2k isn't that bad. It's got all the stability and such of XP, but none of the Big Brother. 2k is also quite secure if you know what you're doing. And I like playing games. I have vowed to not update to XP however, as the whole embedded passport thing and such really scares me.
However, if say, 2 years from now Windows RG (Really Good edition) comes out and is NOT backwards compatible, now new games only come out for it. I'd presume that if anything this hypothetical WinRG will be worse then WinXP in terms of Big Brother-ness, ergo I'd be even more hesitant to upgrade. That and it'll be even more eye-candy and more dumbed-down and all that stuff. But if I want my games, I'll have to upgrade.
So that's why it's scaring me. I hope they keep their backwards compatibility, as I would personally like to just keep running 2k for as long as I can. Or at least if they do lose the backwards compatibility, wait until Linux gets enough market for games to be more available for it.
And yes I realize the irony in talking about Linux games in the wake of the death of Loki.
When I saw "CS" cheaters on the little blurb describing the article on the frontpage, my mind went to "Counterstrike cheaters" and not computer science.
I'm addicted, man, and it's not healthy. Heh.
Yes, they are correct in saying that having the hard drive being somehow subservient to the desktop is confusing and well, wrong.
However, in the end it doesn't really matter. Why? Because there are either people who understand why this is wrong and therefore it doesn't matter to them, or there are people whose understanding of a computer is one that it would require more then changing the hard drive icon to make them undestand.
That, and I'm willing to bet that neither of these sorts of people really care one way or the other.
Well, it's just my opinion I suppose, and you have the right to disagree. But I've always thought the recursiveness of the desktop didn't really matter.
I agree with you, but the world doesn't.
In fact, if users did turn smart, both you and me might find it a lot harder to get jobs.
You see, computer geeks get jobs because we're supposed to be the ones who think about things like this. Hell, we're perverted enough to *enjoy* doing this nitty-gritty computer stuff. Joe Q. User just wants things to work. The user doesn't want to have to deal with anything. After all, the computer isn't their job, the computer is a tool to help them with their job.
So yes, I agree that in an ideal world people wouldn't be stupid and would know not to open unexpected attachments (and always scan everything anyway, and all that stuff). But the reality of it is that will never happened, and it just takes one person screwing up to let the worm wreak some degree of havoc.
It seems to me like the Gamecube is an attempt by Nintendo to get at a new domain of customers that they traditionally don't aim at.
Nintendo has been a console of the children. I would say ballpark 6 to 15 years of age is Nintendo time. After that, Playstation and the now-defunct Sega take over for the most part. N64 was still a very much "little kiddy" console, compared with the Playstation and Dreamcast. X-Box I'm not even going to factor in at this point, as I don't expect them to meet with tremendous success this go-around. Likely Microsoft wouldn't mind having the whole console gaming market, but that's not the issue.
Essentially it seems to me like Gamecube not only aims at the kids who are now 6-15 years old, but at those who were 6-15 years old and played on NES or SNES. Nintendo seems to be broadening their market.
This will play out pretty interestingly. I'd like to see a nice comparison of the Gamecube and the PS2. Sony is no lightweight and will not let go of their market easily.
In fact, I just had a revelation, albeit an obvious one. This is capitalism at work. Three strong companies duking it out. And since for once the sides are relatively balanced this might actually be at the benefit of the consumer. Who'd of thunk it?
I'm a long term mudder. I started in the 7th grade, did it a lot 9th-11th, and dropped off more in the 12th. I'm now a college freshman and don't mud at all.
Here's what I can say. First off, Everquest and all the assorted rip offs just seem to me like muds with a few pretty pictures and a monthly fee. No thanks, I'll keep the text. Secondly, yes muds are extremely addictive. Yes, you can lose your life to them. But it is possible to mud "healthily" so to speak. I probably bordered on unhealthy for a period, but I never neglected my "real life" committments. I did half-ass jobs a lot, but I think I likely would have done that with or without muds.
Essentially, I don't think muds are the addictive life-killers some people make them out to be. They *are*, but only to some people. As the insightful post up towards the top of this article said, "people with addictive personalities can be addicted to anything". The reason it didn't destroy my life is because I always have a drive to complete things I finish and do all that is required of me. I never miss assignments or exams. I procrastinate to no end and finish them at 4am, but I *finish* them.
So yes, muds are addictive. But as long as you "mud responsibly", you should be fine.
I'd like to pipe up with a seconding of what you said essentially. I think that bit at the end about how people can't make custom maps or rulesets any more is either blatant exaggeration or just simply confusion and misinformation.
Seriously now, the game *comes* with an editor that is quite flexible. The one thing that bothers me is you can't tie down people to their starting locations (i.e. with say the world map, you might play the American civ and end up in the Japanese starting place). But it allows for completely new maps and changes to all the units and and even more sweeping gameplay changes if I recall correctly.
I'm willing to bet this means if you go out and do stuff that actually requires messing with the main executable, you'll likely get a lawsuit knocking at your door. Making a map will not trigger that same reaction.
I'm a freshman comp sci major, taking both a comp sci and calculus class. The reason I mention the calc class is because it's upper level and basically entirely proofs, which are surprisingly like computer programs. Both of these classes take essentially the same attitude towards cheating: if the person grading your code/proof sees that it looks suspiciously like somebody elses then you might get talked to.
However, the two are different in this aspect. Comp sci basically says "don't work together". Math, however, encourages teamwork. Here's what they suggest. Get together with other people. Get a bunch of scratch paper, or even better, a blackboard. Solve a bunch of the problems together, but then break up, go home, and do your final draft alone. This means it will be your work. It will look like you, and be slightly different from everybody else, especially if you did most of the group work on a blackboard and therefore don't have it to copy straight.
So when in doubt, don't copy word-for-word other peoples code or proofs or homework in general. However, working together in the name of generating ideas that nobody individually can get is a good thing, at least in my book.
The school I'm going to (University of Rochester) is very light on specific required courses. You have to take one writing course freshman year, under the logic that no matter what you do with your life you should be able to write. Besides, that, you have your major and minor (or double major or double minor), and then you must satisfy a "cluster" (which is sort of like a mini-minor) in the area(s) that your major/minor are not in. If you major in something that is a liberal art, you must have a more technical cluster. You still get to choose which one though. It allows you to diversify and such, but not have your entire schedule dictated to you (unless you're one of those silly premeds).
And maybe it was somebody using a computer...
The problem with online chess, and online games in general, is people with nothing better to do sometimes give themselves ego boosts by using computer programs to trounce their opponents. While I'm not saying somebody out there has a BobbyBot, it is true that many of the "badass" players out there are cheating. Sad, but true.
I've seen a lot of ones like this, but the one I liked the most was AT-Robots. It was based on Assembler, and it was entertaining enough that even though assembler is hard to learn I actually learned *some* of it by playing this. The address: http://www.necrobones.com/atrobots/
Entertaining stuff.
Just to let you know, in addition to being a liberal Jew-agnostic, I was also educated in public schools. You yourself said that your catholic upbringing and education was what gave you good morals. That may be true. But that doesn't mean it's the only method. I'm glad that you have had success in that path, but that doesn't mean that everyone that goes to public school is a sheepizen.
Heh couldn't help but notice your heavy religious leanings in the post, I'm not sure if you're joking or exaggerating or just flaming (or perhaps just telling the honest truth as you see it), but I just decided "hey, why not, I'll let ya know", I'm a cultural Jew spiritual Agnostic. So while morals are certainly important, being labeled with one religion or another certainly doesn't define "good" morals.
IANAL
However, I remember hearing when this was all breaking out in the first place something about Dmitry being held here in the US without proper legal something-or-another for being a foreigner.
And even if it is legal for him to be held here, it sure as hell isn't moral, and I care more for one man to not be screwed over then for the DMCA to be challenged, unless that one man is a willing martyr (which I don't think Dmitry is).
Stupid? Yes. Not looking at the big picture? Almost certainly. But it's not a rational decision, it's an emotional one, and it's mine and my right to make it. I can't be wrong, but at the same time I can't be right (the reason being of course there is no greater wrong or right) and you're also allowed to feel about it in any way you want. That's the beauty of morals, they're all relative anyway.
But you forget....
Dmitry didn't plan on being a martyr for an anti-DMCA crusade. Yes, the DMCA is a bad law. Yes, it would be good to challenge it.
But at this point, this has nothing in my mind to do with the DMCA. It was to do with a foreigner, the "breadwinner" of his family, who was detained wrongly in this nation.
Give him back to his family. Worry about the DMCA after you worry about humanity. Intellectual property will wait.
We do the right thing.... sooner or later.... heh.
Oh well, I guess I'm just an eternal cyncic. Still, I'm very glad this happened, and hopefully he'll be able to get on with his life ASAP. Props to his employer for raising the cash. Somehow I doubt Adobe would ever do the right thing and reimburse them. I must say this whole experience has left me with a very bad taste in my mouth regarding Adobe.... I'll make sure never to purchase any of their products, and reccomend the same to any of my employers/employees/anyone.
From the article: "Pornographic files are widely available on these networks and children can be unexpectedly inundated by files containing explicit content for simple searches like 'Britney Spears.'"
Hahahahahahahaha..... ummm and her normal productions aren't sexual or "explicit" at all are they? Hit me one more time indeed...
They'll enforce it like they enforce the "education-friendly" material of .edu sites. Now I haven't spent a lot of time looking, but I'm pretty sure there aren't any sex.edu sites. Basically they'll only give out .kids domains to organizations that prove themselves worthy of it. Now of course this worthy is subjective, and will be basically the stereotypical US view of "what is good for kids", but I can guarantee that they will likely stop smut quite quickly. Even if a group manages to get a facade to register the domain and then turns it into a sex site, they'll likely be cracked down on quickly.
Ameri-centric. Then again the whole internet is, but that's hardly the point. A .kids tld would be tough to enforce, but possible (after all, .gov, .edu, etc. are all enforced quite well I'd say). Only give it out to "trusted" companies and organizations. That means of course US companies. ToysRUs.kids, etc. I very much doubt kids who run around nude in third-world countries would have the internet acccess in the first place, much less the clout they would need to get a .kids domain. Even if it isn't viewed as smut where they come from, the internet is americentric, .kids sounds like it will be quite americentric, and pen pals who send photos of themselves that are illegitimate to us will be stopped just like kiddie porn would obviously be.
Of course, just my 1/50$.
I wonder if this has anything at all to do with the Microsoft ruling? Probably not, I'm probably just being paranoid, but still the timing is quite a coincidence. But hey, it can't hurt to have Sun open up Solaris Sourecode, so I'm definitely not complaining. Viva la open source! (even though it looks like the license they put this under isn't exactly GPL or BSD).
Relatively simple really. Pick two words that are related, but unrelated to you. For example, I'm not into fishing. I could pick the words "bait" and "tackle". Now that you have those words, stick them together. But wait, there is more....
Okay, now you have baittackle. Here are the other things you can do to it. Capitalize the first letter of each word. You have BaitTackle. Capitalize the last letter too if you like, for BaiTTacklE. Or just the last letter, or whatever. But then, the real cincher is add some sort of unusual symbol between the two words, such as + or = or - or / or whatever. Not all systems allow all symbols, but chances are you can figure out at least a few good unusual symbols your system allows.
The end result could be something like BaiT+TacklE. Easy to remember, hard to crack.
Very valid point. Also if you really look at music history, you'll see that the big bands faded away into small combos (bebop, avant garde, etc. - e.g. John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Thelonious Monk, etc.) in the 40s and 50s, before amps were in big use (and the small combos didn't use amps anyway - Trane don't need no stinkin amp). In fact, as a musician I can tell you that while guitars obviously need amps, I despise having to amplify anything else ever. Everything else is so much better just straight..... not to mention a little understood fact of wind instruments is despite them having a "bell", that's not *really* where the sound comes out: the whole thing resonates, and sound waves are emitted from the whole thing.
But yes, very valid point. Don't forget bebop though. I guess bebop isn't that huge of a deal, but it's one of my personal faves so I had to point it out.