But we can't get to questions like "Is feature X really worth Y dollars to me?" Because Linux does not cost money to install. It's like dividing by zero. It makes criticism of a missing component difficult because it doesn't cost me anything! How can I criticize it?! You will see people like Steve Ballmer have to dig and dig into imaginary costs of retraining, supporting and maintaining Linux to give it a "hidden cost" so that Windows can even begin to contend with Linux in price (you'll notice these concerns were suspiciously left out of advertisements when discussing the switch from XP to Vista).
These hidden costs are hardly imaginary. The time spent tweaking Linux to work on a given hardware setup might be better spent on more profitable things. I understand that with competent IT or competent users (even better), the transition from an "easier" OS to an open-source one can be made much smoother. However, in a business context, time is money. The time it takes to set up Linux and to retrain the employees to use it efficiently can discourage the more conservatively-minded.
If HR6702 is passed, this dangerous course can be reversed.
Sec 2(a)(1) sums it up nicely:
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no search of the digital contents of the device or media may be based on the power of the United States to search a person and that person's possessions upon entry into the United States, unless that search is based on a reasonable suspicion regarding that person.
H.R.6702: To impose requirements with regard to border searches of digital electronic devices and digital storage media, and for other purposes.
Although the text hasn't been sent to the Library of Congress, HR6702 seems to be the kind of bill that would limit the power of the DHS to conduct unreasonable searches. Read the text of the bill in a few days when it becomes available, and write to your representative, etc etc. It's a shame it only has one co-sponsor.
I agree that this runs directly counter to the Constitution. Two problems with trying to assert your Constitutional rights through the courts, though: would you be able to find a court that wouldn't immediately dismiss it, and could you build a good enough case if all your evidence is stolen from you by the government?
(1) IN GENERAL- An individual may not engage in voice communications using a mobile communications device in an aircraft during a flight in scheduled passenger interstate air transportation or scheduled passenger intrastate air transportation.
(2) VOICE COMMUNICATIONS USING A MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE-
`(A) INCLUSIONS- The term `voice communications using a mobile communications device' includes voice communications using--
`(i) a commercial mobile radio service or other wireless communications device;
`(ii) a broadband wireless device or other wireless device that transmits data packets using the Internet Protocol or comparable technical standard; or
`(iii) a device having voice override capability.
`(B) EXCLUSION- Such term does not include voice communications using a phone installed on an aircraft.
Looks like no VoIP, folks. However, the wording of this bill leads me to believe that airlines will soon push in-flight calling through the airplane phones.
I doubt that any of these have reached the popularity or notoriety necessary to trigger the Hasbro Lawyer Machine. Scrabulous was an extremely popular Facebook app, hence why the litigation was directed at that rather than the less important clones.
Parent deserves +5 Insightful. Just goes to show you that without real, defined penalties for default, these agreements can just be ignored. Kinda sad that the press is the only one able to enforce this, though it would be financial suicide to actually carry out their threats.
This is the Department of Justice. It's supposed to be a neutral, non-partisan organization. Any overt partisan involvement should be a cause for alarm.
Spotted Owl Party members are among the most dangerous people to have in the DOJ. If allowed into the DOJ, they will do everything in their power to preserve the environment and wellbeing of this bird, no matter what the financial or human cost.
It all comes down to simple economics. Which is cheaper in the short term: making sure everything is patched, or ignoring the problem? Considering the massive size of telecom networks, seemingly obvious security fixes appear uneconomical until after the fact. Parallels can be made to the possibility of Oracle ignoring software vulnerabilities.
The researchers claimed that if they can achieve a fully collimated laser, it will lower the cost of communications lasers by eliminating the need for lenses while enabling long-range chemical sensing. The latter could be used for homeland security and environmental monitoring applications.
I don't remember laser sensors being a pressing need for defense of the motherland. Am I downplaying the risks here? I can only imagine that cheaper components will make total surveillance even easier.
Slashdot Mirror
What are the odds that MS is somehow involved in that?
If by involvement you mean a majority market share, the odds are very high.
But we can't get to questions like "Is feature X really worth Y dollars to me?" Because Linux does not cost money to install. It's like dividing by zero. It makes criticism of a missing component difficult because it doesn't cost me anything! How can I criticize it?! You will see people like Steve Ballmer have to dig and dig into imaginary costs of retraining, supporting and maintaining Linux to give it a "hidden cost" so that Windows can even begin to contend with Linux in price (you'll notice these concerns were suspiciously left out of advertisements when discussing the switch from XP to Vista).
These hidden costs are hardly imaginary. The time spent tweaking Linux to work on a given hardware setup might be better spent on more profitable things. I understand that with competent IT or competent users (even better), the transition from an "easier" OS to an open-source one can be made much smoother. However, in a business context, time is money. The time it takes to set up Linux and to retrain the employees to use it efficiently can discourage the more conservatively-minded.
ACTRA and SOCAN are Canada's recording industry associations. They parallel the US's MPAA and RIAA.
The majority of business software is compatible with Windows XP.
Sec 2(a)(1) sums it up nicely:
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no search of the digital contents of the device or media may be based on the power of the United States to search a person and that person's possessions upon entry into the United States, unless that search is based on a reasonable suspicion regarding that person.
Hence why these are probably mirrored at many locations.
11:23 A.M. -
On motion to adjourn Agreed to by recorded vote: 213 - 197 (Roll no. 566).
The House adjourned pursuant to H. Con. Res. 398. The next meeting is scheduled for 2:00 p.m. on September 8, 2008.
11:07 A.M. -
Mr. Hoyer moved that the House do now adjourn.
I know they adjourned suddenly, but the lights thing is news to me!
I read the summary, and was just about to suggest this. Couldn't have said it better myself.
Who knew? We forgot to put a password on the CVS and accidentally announced it on the on the front page! Whoops!
H.R.6702: To impose requirements with regard to border searches of digital electronic devices and digital storage media, and for other purposes.
Although the text hasn't been sent to the Library of Congress, HR6702 seems to be the kind of bill that would limit the power of the DHS to conduct unreasonable searches. Read the text of the bill in a few days when it becomes available, and write to your representative, etc etc. It's a shame it only has one co-sponsor.
I agree that this runs directly counter to the Constitution. Two problems with trying to assert your Constitutional rights through the courts, though: would you be able to find a court that wouldn't immediately dismiss it, and could you build a good enough case if all your evidence is stolen from you by the government?
(1) IN GENERAL- An individual may not engage in voice communications using a mobile communications device in an aircraft during a flight in scheduled passenger interstate air transportation or scheduled passenger intrastate air transportation.
(2) VOICE COMMUNICATIONS USING A MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE-
`(A) INCLUSIONS- The term `voice communications using a mobile communications device' includes voice communications using--
`(i) a commercial mobile radio service or other wireless communications device;
`(ii) a broadband wireless device or other wireless device that transmits data packets using the Internet Protocol or comparable technical standard; or
`(iii) a device having voice override capability.
`(B) EXCLUSION- Such term does not include voice communications using a phone installed on an aircraft.
Looks like no VoIP, folks. However, the wording of this bill leads me to believe that airlines will soon push in-flight calling through the airplane phones.
I doubt that any of these have reached the popularity or notoriety necessary to trigger the Hasbro Lawyer Machine. Scrabulous was an extremely popular Facebook app, hence why the litigation was directed at that rather than the less important clones.
...until they start dropping "Rods from God" from these. Anyone know what kind of loophole they could find on the restriction on orbital weapons?
Censorship says that the thought is the action; that the common person can't distinguish between depiction and actuality...
Respect for the individual? He'll never get elected in today's political climate.
Several major lensmakers are forced to declare bankruptcy.
Parent deserves +5 Insightful. Just goes to show you that without real, defined penalties for default, these agreements can just be ignored. Kinda sad that the press is the only one able to enforce this, though it would be financial suicide to actually carry out their threats.
This is the Department of Justice. It's supposed to be a neutral, non-partisan organization. Any overt partisan involvement should be a cause for alarm.
Spotted Owl Party members are among the most dangerous people to have in the DOJ. If allowed into the DOJ, they will do everything in their power to preserve the environment and wellbeing of this bird, no matter what the financial or human cost.
It all comes down to simple economics. Which is cheaper in the short term: making sure everything is patched, or ignoring the problem? Considering the massive size of telecom networks, seemingly obvious security fixes appear uneconomical until after the fact. Parallels can be made to the possibility of Oracle ignoring software vulnerabilities.
If anything, the prank callers should be given less attention. That being said, the videos are hilarious, and I want more of them.
As funny as this is, this is dangerous marginalization of an unpopular social group. Godwin's law can enter this discussion whenever necessary.
How did he stay in office so long if there was already evidence of corruption in 2003 and 2004?
That's Romero you're thinking of, not Carmack.
Children at local high schools use iPhone camera features for photorealistic school murder simulations
The researchers claimed that if they can achieve a fully collimated laser, it will lower the cost of communications lasers by eliminating the need for lenses while enabling long-range chemical sensing. The latter could be used for homeland security and environmental monitoring applications.
I don't remember laser sensors being a pressing need for defense of the motherland. Am I downplaying the risks here? I can only imagine that cheaper components will make total surveillance even easier.