Isn't Maya like that now?
I think think that its a very smart move. Provide free software to those who want to learn and use it privately, thereby increasing the user base and making that the defacto standard for the companies that are paying for the software and are faced with a choice as to what to get.
I WAS one of those RAGING pirates in my teens and early twenties. I had 100's of thousands of dollars of pirated software stored and used on my computer. Interesting thing happened, as I played and learned much of that software, once I started working professionally, I got my company to purchase much of the stuff I was pirating at home while learning and playing with it - from upgrading their outdated office suite to purchasing Adobe Master Collection and so forth. So the way I see it, my illegal downloads were actually GAINED sales by the software industry If it wasn't for me pushing the company to get software I needed to do the job they hired me for, which I would have never gotten in a first place if I didn't spend years pirating and learning the aforementioned software they would have never spent thousands of dollars (and continue doing so) on new software now.
I have HTC Dream (G1 in US) and I dropped it, left it in a steaming shower, got it wet in the rain and I am pretty sure, although she is not admitting to it, my wife threw it at our dog once and it still works perfectly...
What if the EULA stated they had the right to harvest your kidneys? Do you think that make it legal? It's still an issue for the courts to decide if that clause is legal and therefore enforceable or not.
If you enter in a legal contract that stipulates that someone has the right to harvest your kidneys, then they have that right. Notice I said Legal contract... meaning it has to satisfy the law, therefore if its a legal to sell your kidneys under the conditions stipulated in the contract, then its invalid and yeah it would ultimately be up to the court to decide, otherwise, yeah they can harvest it
Then there was the kid who sold his marshmallow for a blow job,
theï kid who used it to buy protection from a bully,
the kid who didn't like marshmallows,
the kid who kicked the researcher in the balls and took the marshmallow bag,
the kid who didn't show up for the experiment,
the psychologist's son who hated himself because he wasn't worth a marshmallow
and the kid who stole a marshmallow so it would seem like he hadn't eaten his.
For instance if you had an O/S that will require applications/applets to list out the type of access they require.
Then the O/S can provide a meaningful and TRUE description to the user of what the application might do.
And the O/S can also enforce the limits of the access.
I am sorry, do you honestly think that in about a month or two there wont be a possibility to spoof that information? The whole idea of "hey why don't they make an OS do this or that" is ridiculous. When (and it is a question of when not if) *nix base OSs becomes the dominant force in the desktop and enterprise market, there will be virii that propagate the global network the same way those same virii propagate the "windows world". Lets take the whole proof of concept idea out of the equation. When you write a pice of malware, the idea/goal behind it is to achieve something tangible.... make money, gain bandwidth and gain storage space (I am thinking the old FXP scene here, but mostly make money... so what are you going to target? Most of the desktop market is Windows based PC's mostly used by Joe " I just wanna watch my porn" Blow or James " I wanna buy my chrsitmas presents on line" Doe. So if I wanna build a botnet, I am going to target Billy boy's OS. As simple as that. Because quite frankly, even if I did write something remotley effective for Linux, chances are people that use it, also regularly monitor their network activity and WILL know if a piece of malware is running on their box. It may take them a week or two but they will find it. In contrast, I have known people that had a hacked serv-u running on their box for YEARS serving all sorts of shit before they realized that something wasn't right.
Most people reading/. will be able to reasonably secure their PC, regardless of the OS. Lets not compare apples and oranges. When Linux is on 90% of the desktops, you will see 90% of the virii targeting that OS and at that point we will be seeing articles posted here quoting Symantec about their latest release of some bullshit ass 360 Turbo Plus Protection Linux edition, not articles discussing why is it that we most people havent switched to linux yet since its so much more secure compared to Windows 14:)
I love the interface!
What I don't love, however, are the millions of ads that I forgot existed. I'll move to Chrome the minute it supports plugins and AdBlocker is ported to it. Chrome's plugin API will be finished later this year.
Just use privoxy http://www.privoxy.org/
Works great and you can configure it quite easily to block just what you want blocked. It will do the same for IE if for some strange reason you want to use that POS.
I think this is a pretty warped way of looking at this issue. I think the bottom line is that regardless of how law abiding your behavior may be its the government or/and its agents who get to decide if/when to use this technology. If you inherently trust the government and its motives for collecting this type of data, then I guess you will not see anything wrong with it. If on the other hand you don't believe that the motives are in fact what they are stated to be then you may have a problem with it.
Here is an example that comes to mind. In general why do we have laws that protect our privacy/limit the actions that law enforcement agencies can take during their investigative process? Is it to protect the killer/drug dealers etc or is it to protect the potentially innocent from having their lives and the rights of the potentially innocent (better let 100 guilty men go then to prosecute one innocent... right? Or maybe its also to ensure that the absolute power does not corrupt absolutely? Having said that, lets look at what legislation like Patriot act accomplish.... they take away that layer of protection put in place to protect the innocent, yes those boring innocents who make calls to their grandma and make trips to BK from potential abuses by the governments who may have or may develop in the future some questionable motives. So when Patriot Act is used to bust the drug dealer here not the terrorist "over there" hell yeah I have a problem with that and hell yeah I have a problem with NSA using surveillance techniques as described in the article. Not because I feel that I should not be willing to give up some privacy to help catch murderers and drug dealers but because of the Pandora box such actions can potentially open and such mentality can encourage as we move slowly but surely in the direction of a fascist state.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice try Steve
Just curious how many dropbox referrals did you manage to get off your sig?
LOL that was an entertaining read. Thanks for that
I just cant resist: http://i.imgur.com/wGxlm.jpg
... if its will change the way countries actually behave... oh wait who am I kidding
Although having initially received a sentence of 16 years, Helmsley was required to serve only 19 months in prison and two months under house arrest.
Isn't Maya like that now? I think think that its a very smart move. Provide free software to those who want to learn and use it privately, thereby increasing the user base and making that the defacto standard for the companies that are paying for the software and are faced with a choice as to what to get.
Thats not how it played out on my install, it popped up a windows and gave me an option to uncheck "disable"
I WAS one of those RAGING pirates in my teens and early twenties. I had 100's of thousands of dollars of pirated software stored and used on my computer. Interesting thing happened, as I played and learned much of that software, once I started working professionally, I got my company to purchase much of the stuff I was pirating at home while learning and playing with it - from upgrading their outdated office suite to purchasing Adobe Master Collection and so forth. So the way I see it, my illegal downloads were actually GAINED sales by the software industry If it wasn't for me pushing the company to get software I needed to do the job they hired me for, which I would have never gotten in a first place if I didn't spend years pirating and learning the aforementioned software they would have never spent thousands of dollars (and continue doing so) on new software now.
Maybe its not the market it used to be but it is still a HUGE market for Toyota and it certanly would warrant lost sleep for the boys there.
... I would actually consider something like that if indeed my wife was on board!
I was always partial to por.no myslef
AMEN!
Thanks for the link. I've never heard of this site, but checked it out now and I think its a great Idea. Thanks!
I have HTC Dream (G1 in US) and I dropped it, left it in a steaming shower, got it wet in the rain and I am pretty sure, although she is not admitting to it, my wife threw it at our dog once and it still works perfectly...
What if the EULA stated they had the right to harvest your kidneys? Do you think that make it legal? It's still an issue for the courts to decide if that clause is legal and therefore enforceable or not.
If you enter in a legal contract that stipulates that someone has the right to harvest your kidneys, then they have that right. Notice I said Legal contract... meaning it has to satisfy the law, therefore if its a legal to sell your kidneys under the conditions stipulated in the contract, then its invalid and yeah it would ultimately be up to the court to decide, otherwise, yeah they can harvest it
Then there was the kid who sold his marshmallow for a blow job, theï kid who used it to buy protection from a bully, the kid who didn't like marshmallows, the kid who kicked the researcher in the balls and took the marshmallow bag, the kid who didn't show up for the experiment, the psychologist's son who hated himself because he wasn't worth a marshmallow and the kid who stole a marshmallow so it would seem like he hadn't eaten his.
You've obviously never smoked crack, as doing a job that requires a fast reaction time is the LAST thing you will be fit to do while smoking it.
For instance if you had an O/S that will require applications/applets to list out the type of access they require. Then the O/S can provide a meaningful and TRUE description to the user of what the application might do. And the O/S can also enforce the limits of the access.
I am sorry, do you honestly think that in about a month or two there wont be a possibility to spoof that information? The whole idea of "hey why don't they make an OS do this or that" is ridiculous. When (and it is a question of when not if) *nix base OSs becomes the dominant force in the desktop and enterprise market, there will be virii that propagate the global network the same way those same virii propagate the "windows world". Lets take the whole proof of concept idea out of the equation. When you write a pice of malware, the idea/goal behind it is to achieve something tangible.... make money, gain bandwidth and gain storage space (I am thinking the old FXP scene here, but mostly make money... so what are you going to target? Most of the desktop market is Windows based PC's mostly used by Joe " I just wanna watch my porn" Blow or James " I wanna buy my chrsitmas presents on line" Doe. So if I wanna build a botnet, I am going to target Billy boy's OS. As simple as that. Because quite frankly, even if I did write something remotley effective for Linux, chances are people that use it, also regularly monitor their network activity and WILL know if a piece of malware is running on their box. It may take them a week or two but they will find it. In contrast, I have known people that had a hacked serv-u running on their box for YEARS serving all sorts of shit before they realized that something wasn't right. Most people reading /. will be able to reasonably secure their PC, regardless of the OS. Lets not compare apples and oranges. When Linux is on 90% of the desktops, you will see 90% of the virii targeting that OS and at that point we will be seeing articles posted here quoting Symantec about their latest release of some bullshit ass 360 Turbo Plus Protection Linux edition, not articles discussing why is it that we most people havent switched to linux yet since its so much more secure compared to Windows 14 :)
I'd rather watch you than TV
LOL try this http://www.google.com/squared/search?q=hot+porn apparently google^2 doesnt recognize the existence of the genre
I love the interface! What I don't love, however, are the millions of ads that I forgot existed. I'll move to Chrome the minute it supports plugins and AdBlocker is ported to it. Chrome's plugin API will be finished later this year.
Just use privoxy http://www.privoxy.org/ Works great and you can configure it quite easily to block just what you want blocked. It will do the same for IE if for some strange reason you want to use that POS.
I think this is a pretty warped way of looking at this issue. I think the bottom line is that regardless of how law abiding your behavior may be its the government or/and its agents who get to decide if/when to use this technology. If you inherently trust the government and its motives for collecting this type of data, then I guess you will not see anything wrong with it. If on the other hand you don't believe that the motives are in fact what they are stated to be then you may have a problem with it. Here is an example that comes to mind. In general why do we have laws that protect our privacy/limit the actions that law enforcement agencies can take during their investigative process? Is it to protect the killer/drug dealers etc or is it to protect the potentially innocent from having their lives and the rights of the potentially innocent (better let 100 guilty men go then to prosecute one innocent... right? Or maybe its also to ensure that the absolute power does not corrupt absolutely? Having said that, lets look at what legislation like Patriot act accomplish.... they take away that layer of protection put in place to protect the innocent, yes those boring innocents who make calls to their grandma and make trips to BK from potential abuses by the governments who may have or may develop in the future some questionable motives. So when Patriot Act is used to bust the drug dealer here not the terrorist "over there" hell yeah I have a problem with that and hell yeah I have a problem with NSA using surveillance techniques as described in the article. Not because I feel that I should not be willing to give up some privacy to help catch murderers and drug dealers but because of the Pandora box such actions can potentially open and such mentality can encourage as we move slowly but surely in the direction of a fascist state.