I think he meant exactly what he wrote, and I agree with him.
While there are those (possibly yourself) who would probably play a game called "Escape from the World Trade Center" it would be in extremely bad taste for a company to make a game like this because of it being in poor taste.
I'd wager a bet that you don't have any loved ones in harm's way right now.
Corporate responsibility...there's nothing wrong with it and I'm glad to see EA showing good sense here.
If it bothers you that they removed the name "Taliban" from the game menu, then go buy some white out and write it on your own TV screen.
There were only two reasons that the USA reached the moon:
1) the president that announced the initiative had been popular and was assasinated. That happening made him a national hero and they did it for his legacy. Saying anything negative about JF Kennedy was politically unpopular in the 1960's, and no politician wanted to be the one accused of causing NASA to not reach the moon by 1970. 2) the "space race" against the Russians. Once the race had been "won", there wasn't any emphasis on continuing...no matter how valuable the science and research was.
The public lost interest. If it hadn't been for the drama of Apollo 13, the project would never have made it to 17 missions. It's a shame the program ended since those astronauts are/were among the bravest and smartest people alive.
They aren't intending to change the software...at least not initially.
From LibreOffice's FAQ:
Q: So is this a breakaway project? A: Not at all. The Document Foundation will continue to be focused on developing, supporting, and promoting the same software, and it's very much business as usual. We are simply moving to a new and more appropriate organisational model for the next decade - a logical development from Sun's inspirational launch a decade ago.
*** I think this is the community's way of trying to push Oracle into releasing the name to them.
I doubt very much that Larry Ellison will let go of it due to name recognition (name recognition is worth $$$ from a marketing standpoint).
Yahoo resells itself as a web-based email host for other online services and schools.
I was recently FORCED to start using Yahoo (which I despise) for web-based email through my ISP.
My ISP did have a web-based email host, which was ad-free and a nice clean interface. They then inexplicably forced all their customers to start using Yahoo for their email (leaving users no choice) with all the stupid headlines, chat programs, ads, pop ups, and all the useless crap that Yahoo makes money off of.
I called my ISP to complain and their take on it was "if you don't like it, use someone else".
Reminds me of the old AT&T days...wait...what's my ISP again?
There are many bad adaptations, even with King himself directing...remember the horrendous "Maximum Overdrive"?
However...the two television adaptations of his works that were excellent were "The Shining" (the one starring Steven Weber as John Torrance, not Jack Nicholson) and "The Stand".
"The Stand" was brilliantly done, and while there were a few creative licenses taken, stuck extremely close to the brilliant novel he had written.
It took me three tries to read "The Stand" when I was a teenager. Every time I started to read it, I caught a cold and had to stop. (not much of a spoiler there...)
Your comment can be taken several ways since you didn't clarify what you conside to be the real problem.
The argument that Linux and Apple did this and it made it more secure isn't exactly true. It's that, traditionally, more tech savvy users were using Linux and Apple and less cautious users were using Windows. Now that Apple and Linux is becoming more commonplace, the same issues will start applying to those OSes.
Users are still not very cautious, so you can blame Microsoft for users clicking OK or YES on every window that pops up just so they can go back to playing their web based game, or email, or whatever. I would guess that >90% of users out there don't bother reading pop up messages.
You can't blame Microsoft, Apple, or the Linux community for that any more than you can blame the Department of Transportation when someone runs a stop sign and gets in an accident.
Microsoft did good catching up with the other prevalent OSes security. You can't blame the OS creator when users blow right through all the warnings.
Agreed. They serve different purposes with overlap in abilities.
I like tablets, but I use a netbook on service calls. I can get a lot more freeware apps for troubleshooting networks for my netbook than I can for the tablet (think iPad). I'm also have a lot more freedom to tweak the netbook than I do the iPad and can run pretty much anything I want on the netbook.
The iPad is really nice to sit down with and just have it be a nice interface without worrying about much.
Think bottle of beer versus glass of wine. There are times you want one over the other, but both will get you plastered in the end.
It can also be hard for folks to understand that you need layered security and that sometimes what worked at one time should be replaced.
We recently migrated from one solution (McAfee) to another (Sophos). Company management eventually bought in, but the question has been asked "Why were we running inferior stuff to begin with?" McAfee wasn't inferior when we went to it (eight years ago)...they just simply didn't keep up with the times.
Threat vectors change over time and it is necessary to make yourself essentially a "moving target" by not relying on a single (or even the same) solution over time. If you do an audit and find something lacking...replace it.
"Non-compete agreements are enforceable for partnerships and when someone is selling their ownership interest in a company. A related topic is the protection of trade secrets. A company can prevent the use of its trade secrets, but it cannot prevent fair competition"
Looks like they are trying to use the "trade secrets" protection part.
You are correct in that it should be interesting to see how it plays out.
A lot of folks seem to be missing two key points here:
1) Some people really have a passion for figuring out how to make things work in ways that they weren't made to. This is a perfect example of tweaking the OS settings to make a classic (and excellent) game work on a system that is nearly 20 years newer than what it was intended to run on....very, very cool. 2) Some people prefer to use "tried and true" methods (e.g. DOSBox, VMWare, XP Mode, etc...) and build on the excellent work of others who have already done the footwork. Getting good response and use of this type of solution is what keeps outstanding software and communities together...DOSBox is an excellent emulator which is a true "Labor of Love" for gamers who want to play classic games, but hate fiddling.
For myself...it truly depends on what mood I'm in and whether or not I want to dig into technical stuff.
If all I want to do is hop into the ol' starfighter and fry some Kilrathi furry butt, then DOSBox is the way to go. If I'm feeling particularly geeky and have a free weekend (and looking for some bragging rights), the technical fiddling is that way to go. Either way, you get a great sense of satisfaction.
Please stop bashing the crap out of each other and just recognize that there's two really good solutions here. This actually makes us fortunate where this is concerned since Origin Systems is now pretty much gone and Sierra Online (who bought Origin Systems) was disbanding back in '03 or '04. We will probably never seen another chapter of this extremely nice game...so we have to get our kicks where we can.
Win7 Applocker is a great idea, but it's not very dynamic at this point. You have to add programs and file names specifically to a blacklist manually including path name and file name, although I think you can use other thing like file hashes with a little more work in configuring it.
As it was explained to me, there's pretty simple ways around it and it's not smart enough to recognize new version of programs. An example of this would be a new version of Mozilla would run until it was explicitly blocked. Renaming executables could also be a way around it. As with everything else, the results you get from using it would be dependant upon the amount of work you're willing to put into configuring it. It's not just an "on switch" to make it happen.
Your best bet is to find something that has a pre-built whitelist/blacklist of known applications, then watches other things for suspicious behavior. There are a lot of these out there, but we use Sophos Application Control. Their pre-made list of applications you can either block or allow was pretty extensive and gets updated all the time. Saves us a ton of work. The network management tool is also pretty intuitive. Beats the crap out of anything McAfee had to offer. I'm not sure how well Microsoft's MOM server works in this area...I've had very little experience with it. I'm sure there's tons of other applications of varying quality that do this same thing.
Google loves this. They can say "it wasn't us...we honored the privacy request" while allowing some butthead to then fill in the holes for them (at no cost to them) in the name of "protecting rights" (regardless of the rights of those people who requested privacy).
People, please...we can deal with Google being evil, but please don't be enablers to them.
One has to wonder what Intel was thinking. The *only* thing McAfee had of any worth was name recognition, and due to their total frak up back in April, their name gets recognized for the wrong reason.
We recently moved our corporate network away from McAfee due to lack of decent support.
Well put. If something is on a company's computer, then it's subject to the company's scrutiny. Period.
Truecrypt is your best bet. Create a Truecrypt partition on a large thumb drive and keep your stuff there. If you configure it correctly, hardly anyone will ever be able to tell there's a hidden partion there. The folks that could tell (and possibly access it, which would be doubtful) would be high-dollar folks that "ye average person" wouldn't be willing to pay without a good reason.
This is merely Google again trying to appear that they are the good guys.
They simply want folks to continue to be reliant on them.
I've said it before and I will say it again. Google has totally lost their moral compass and will continue to make choices based upon greed and deceitful practices.
I just found out that if you say anything negative about this that you'll get modded down pretty quickly.
Evidently, most readers here on/. don't think about the potential problems that something like this can cause because this is fun (and will mod anyone down who disagrees with them).
I personally have no problem with playing, but my rule is "first work, then play". You can then play harder with no guilt of having to stop playing to do the stuff you put off so you could play.
Slashdot Mirror
to greet our new rat overlords.
You can talk about ESPN3 all you want...but I want "The Ocho"!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50jVa25gmWs
-JJS
I think he meant exactly what he wrote, and I agree with him.
While there are those (possibly yourself) who would probably play a game called "Escape from the World Trade Center" it would be in extremely bad taste for a company to make a game like this because of it being in poor taste.
I'd wager a bet that you don't have any loved ones in harm's way right now.
Corporate responsibility...there's nothing wrong with it and I'm glad to see EA showing good sense here.
If it bothers you that they removed the name "Taliban" from the game menu, then go buy some white out and write it on your own TV screen.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
There were only two reasons that the USA reached the moon:
1) the president that announced the initiative had been popular and was assasinated. That happening made him a national hero and they did it for his legacy. Saying anything negative about JF Kennedy was politically unpopular in the 1960's, and no politician wanted to be the one accused of causing NASA to not reach the moon by 1970.
2) the "space race" against the Russians. Once the race had been "won", there wasn't any emphasis on continuing...no matter how valuable the science and research was.
The public lost interest. If it hadn't been for the drama of Apollo 13, the project would never have made it to 17 missions. It's a shame the program ended since those astronauts are/were among the bravest and smartest people alive.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
They aren't intending to change the software...at least not initially.
From LibreOffice's FAQ:
Q: So is this a breakaway project?
A: Not at all. The Document Foundation will continue to be focused on developing, supporting, and promoting the same software, and it's very much business as usual. We are simply moving to a new and more appropriate organisational model for the next decade - a logical development from Sun's inspirational launch a decade ago.
***
I think this is the community's way of trying to push Oracle into releasing the name to them.
I doubt very much that Larry Ellison will let go of it due to name recognition (name recognition is worth $$$ from a marketing standpoint).
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
It was based on a short story which was much creepier and less in the "jump in surprise" type of thing.
If he hadn't said it was based on that particular story and just said it was an original movie, it would have been better received.
-JJS
Yahoo resells itself as a web-based email host for other online services and schools.
I was recently FORCED to start using Yahoo (which I despise) for web-based email through my ISP.
My ISP did have a web-based email host, which was ad-free and a nice clean interface. They then inexplicably forced all their customers to start using Yahoo for their email (leaving users no choice) with all the stupid headlines, chat programs, ads, pop ups, and all the useless crap that Yahoo makes money off of.
I called my ISP to complain and their take on it was "if you don't like it, use someone else".
Reminds me of the old AT&T days...wait...what's my ISP again?
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
Any bets on how long it will be before Google tries to purchase Facebook?
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
There are many bad adaptations, even with King himself directing...remember the horrendous "Maximum Overdrive"?
However...the two television adaptations of his works that were excellent were "The Shining" (the one starring Steven Weber as John Torrance, not Jack Nicholson) and "The Stand".
"The Stand" was brilliantly done, and while there were a few creative licenses taken, stuck extremely close to the brilliant novel he had written.
It took me three tries to read "The Stand" when I was a teenager. Every time I started to read it, I caught a cold and had to stop. (not much of a spoiler there...)
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
Oops...
Third paragraph should have read "can't blame Microsoft".
Your comment can be taken several ways since you didn't clarify what you conside to be the real problem.
The argument that Linux and Apple did this and it made it more secure isn't exactly true. It's that, traditionally, more tech savvy users were using Linux and Apple and less cautious users were using Windows. Now that Apple and Linux is becoming more commonplace, the same issues will start applying to those OSes.
Users are still not very cautious, so you can blame Microsoft for users clicking OK or YES on every window that pops up just so they can go back to playing their web based game, or email, or whatever. I would guess that >90% of users out there don't bother reading pop up messages.
You can't blame Microsoft, Apple, or the Linux community for that any more than you can blame the Department of Transportation when someone runs a stop sign and gets in an accident.
Microsoft did good catching up with the other prevalent OSes security. You can't blame the OS creator when users blow right through all the warnings.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
I can't see that ever having any negative side effects in the long term.
-JJS
Agreed. They serve different purposes with overlap in abilities.
I like tablets, but I use a netbook on service calls. I can get a lot more freeware apps for troubleshooting networks for my netbook than I can for the tablet (think iPad). I'm also have a lot more freedom to tweak the netbook than I do the iPad and can run pretty much anything I want on the netbook.
The iPad is really nice to sit down with and just have it be a nice interface without worrying about much.
Think bottle of beer versus glass of wine. There are times you want one over the other, but both will get you plastered in the end.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
It can also be hard for folks to understand that you need layered security and that sometimes what worked at one time should be replaced.
We recently migrated from one solution (McAfee) to another (Sophos). Company management eventually bought in, but the question has been asked "Why were we running inferior stuff to begin with?" McAfee wasn't inferior when we went to it (eight years ago)...they just simply didn't keep up with the times.
Threat vectors change over time and it is necessary to make yourself essentially a "moving target" by not relying on a single (or even the same) solution over time. If you do an audit and find something lacking...replace it.
Just my $0.02
-JJS
From your link:
"Non-compete agreements are enforceable for partnerships and when someone is selling their ownership interest in a company. A related topic is the protection of trade secrets. A company can prevent the use of its trade secrets, but it cannot prevent fair competition"
Looks like they are trying to use the "trade secrets" protection part.
You are correct in that it should be interesting to see how it plays out.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
That's pretty much it.
Unless there's a signed "non-compete" document from Hurd, HP will just have to live with their mess up.
I'd be surprised if Mr. Hurd signed such a document.
Just my $0.02
-JJS
A lot of folks seem to be missing two key points here:
1) Some people really have a passion for figuring out how to make things work in ways that they weren't made to. This is a perfect example of tweaking the OS settings to make a classic (and excellent) game work on a system that is nearly 20 years newer than what it was intended to run on....very, very cool.
2) Some people prefer to use "tried and true" methods (e.g. DOSBox, VMWare, XP Mode, etc...) and build on the excellent work of others who have already done the footwork. Getting good response and use of this type of solution is what keeps outstanding software and communities together...DOSBox is an excellent emulator which is a true "Labor of Love" for gamers who want to play classic games, but hate fiddling.
For myself...it truly depends on what mood I'm in and whether or not I want to dig into technical stuff.
If all I want to do is hop into the ol' starfighter and fry some Kilrathi furry butt, then DOSBox is the way to go. If I'm feeling particularly geeky and have a free weekend (and looking for some bragging rights), the technical fiddling is that way to go. Either way, you get a great sense of satisfaction.
Please stop bashing the crap out of each other and just recognize that there's two really good solutions here. This actually makes us fortunate where this is concerned since Origin Systems is now pretty much gone and Sierra Online (who bought Origin Systems) was disbanding back in '03 or '04. We will probably never seen another chapter of this extremely nice game...so we have to get our kicks where we can.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
Wow...all two of you posting in the same thread?
What are the odds?
-JJS
Win7 Applocker is a great idea, but it's not very dynamic at this point. You have to add programs and file names specifically to a blacklist manually including path name and file name, although I think you can use other thing like file hashes with a little more work in configuring it.
As it was explained to me, there's pretty simple ways around it and it's not smart enough to recognize new version of programs. An example of this would be a new version of Mozilla would run until it was explicitly blocked. Renaming executables could also be a way around it. As with everything else, the results you get from using it would be dependant upon the amount of work you're willing to put into configuring it. It's not just an "on switch" to make it happen.
Your best bet is to find something that has a pre-built whitelist/blacklist of known applications, then watches other things for suspicious behavior. There are a lot of these out there, but we use Sophos Application Control. Their pre-made list of applications you can either block or allow was pretty extensive and gets updated all the time. Saves us a ton of work. The network management tool is also pretty intuitive. Beats the crap out of anything McAfee had to offer. I'm not sure how well Microsoft's MOM server works in this area...I've had very little experience with it. I'm sure there's tons of other applications of varying quality that do this same thing.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
Google loves this. They can say "it wasn't us...we honored the privacy request" while allowing some butthead to then fill in the holes for them (at no cost to them) in the name of "protecting rights" (regardless of the rights of those people who requested privacy).
People, please...we can deal with Google being evil, but please don't be enablers to them.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
One has to wonder what Intel was thinking. The *only* thing McAfee had of any worth was name recognition, and due to their total frak up back in April, their name gets recognized for the wrong reason.
We recently moved our corporate network away from McAfee due to lack of decent support.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
Well put. If something is on a company's computer, then it's subject to the company's scrutiny. Period.
Truecrypt is your best bet. Create a Truecrypt partition on a large thumb drive and keep your stuff there. If you configure it correctly, hardly anyone will ever be able to tell there's a hidden partion there. The folks that could tell (and possibly access it, which would be doubtful) would be high-dollar folks that "ye average person" wouldn't be willing to pay without a good reason.
Just my $0.02
-JJS
I hadn't been this annoyed with Google since PacMan Day. At least this one didn't have animations and unexpected loud noises going off in the office.
Stop screwing around with it, Google. While it's nice to have options, stop forcing them on us.
Just my $0.02.
-JJS
This is merely Google again trying to appear that they are the good guys.
They simply want folks to continue to be reliant on them.
I've said it before and I will say it again. Google has totally lost their moral compass and will continue to make choices based upon greed and deceitful practices.
Just my $0.02
-JJS
Be careful here, MrJones...
I just found out that if you say anything negative about this that you'll get modded down pretty quickly.
Evidently, most readers here on /. don't think about the potential problems that something like this can cause because this is fun (and will mod anyone down who disagrees with them).
I personally have no problem with playing, but my rule is "first work, then play". You can then play harder with no guilt of having to stop playing to do the stuff you put off so you could play.
Just my $0.02
-JJS