DRM really does stand for Digital RIGHTS Management, how many times do we have to go through this? lol. It does however show exactly who it's designed for.
The content providers have the RIGHTS to restrict the consumers of their products. It's not about users, it's not named from the users perspective, it's maned from the customers perspective. Windows / gadgets / entertainment corporations are the customers, we are only the end users / victims.
By not mentioning the restriction effect on the end users in the name it gives the illusion that the "rights" apply to them, when they were never intended to.
If advertisers weren't so greedy at shoving their shit down our throats for profit we wouldn't need to block them. When subtle adverts start to get ignored, you make them more aggressive. When a new medium appears and has some value, the advertisers are all over it like flies on shit shoving adverts in our faces yet again. It's multi-national corporate greed, nothing else. Advert blocking / skipping in DVRs are just tech karma in effect.
Create a new filter with a copy of the NoScript developer filter, add it below the pre-installed one and make sure both are disabled. Hopefully then if it's re-enabled by an update your manual copy will still be disabled, nullifying the effect....assuming it's read like CSS from top to bottom.
Alternatively, look for another script control addon. Personally I've been getting rather pissed at the opening of new tabs on each update for a while now; not just NoScript either. Depending on whether my thinking will keep the block in place and how much longer I'm willing to accept the tab opening shit, I am close to removing it myself. There is YesScript and Controle De Scripts on the addon pages but I've not yet tried them.
It may help to let the NoScripts people know why their usage numbers are going down on their Mozilla addon feedback page. Perhaps if they see enough people are pissed off, it may change things.
Thanks for pointing this out, I have since done it. I wonder if this trick will backfire on them. I wonder if the list reads like CSS, in that if you make a manual copy of the list and add it as a new filter below the NoScripts one, it will read your manual one AFTER theirs and disable even if they decide to re-enable after an update?
Having their own chips will make it much easier for them to lock consumers out of using their devices in ways that Apple can't monetize.....well, even more than they already do. They do seem hell bent on becoming a designer digital island with strait jackets as mandatory uniforms.
Certainly Microsoft products are more expensive in the EU than the US, even after exchange rates are taken into account. It's EU customers / victims are subsidizing it's US customers / victims.
I wonder if this is how Microsoft are going to respond with new versions of both IE and WMP if they are forced by the EU not to bundle them with Windows. Just ensure that they are included as critical updates to Windows, knowing many users are still stupid enough to have automatic updates on and "accidentally" make them the default browser and media player.
That may happen, and in all likelihood if if does, it'll be a HUGE US corporation, one who has been dominating the market so much that non-US companies struggle to enter the market. So if the big boys don't like having to compete within the rules and decide to leave, it'd open up the market for others to enter. This is not a bad thing. The assumption that the market will be missing something is bogus, it will be simply be filled by some other provider, or in all likelihood, many new providers actually competing against each other for customers......which is exactly what the big US corporations seek to avoid and are getting punished for.
Perhaps the EU should introduce a second tier of punishment for anti-competitive practices. Those who are found guilty have only one chance to change their ways with independent observers allowed to go anywhere in the company, examine any documentation etc. Failure to comply means the second tier kicks in and the company is banned from doing business at all anywhere within the EU for a length of time. You could have the ban in place until observers are satisfied that things have changed, and those responsible at boardroom level have been removed from office. The banning could also be an option for first offenders depending on the seriousness of the offense.
As much as I like to see anti-competitive practices punished, I'd rather the US regulators would do their job on occasion, not just the EU. Many of the companies who have been accused of anti-competitive practices are US companies, so the PR hit of being fined by their own side would perhaps hit home more than outsiders. That aside, is there any point to these huge fines? Guess who it's going to be passed onto? Intel gets fined and I suspect that by some remarkable coincidence the prices of their chips mysteriously increase.
They're quite right in pointing out it's not for everyone, only those who insist on having a malware compatible flashy environment need apply, or those with pointy haired bosses who have already had their arms twisted by a Microsoft sales rep enough to hand over cash.
"in many cases the idea of re-installing a system would be daunting enough to suddenly make the key code seem cheap."
The flaw in your logic is that he would have backed up and installed this version of Windows 7, so having doe it once already I doubt whether having to do it a second time would be anything more than a day's downtime. Besides, why would he go for a lime limited official version when an unlimited cracked version would give more benefits for the same price?
Unless of course that was a funny post and my brain ain't woken up enough to see it yet, lol.
"It's been Final for quite some time. Which doesn't help your credibility much."
My bad, I got lost in the flurry of Microsoft Vaporware & beta range of software. It may be the recent talk of Windows 8 while Windows 7 is still not out that helps enflame the feelings.
This is about Microsoft abusing the concept of "critical" to further their own agenda.....again. They have their mouthpieces on the mainstream media sending the message to "ensure automatic updates are enabled" which will install updates Microsoft mark as "critical" without the user even being asked. They claim this is essential for security of their system, to fix exploits now patched.
New versions of applications like IE, Outlook Express or WMP should be optional upgrades, but given that Microsoft seem to hate the idea of actually enticing customers with a good product when forcing them to install it as part of a backdoor update malware-style is open to them. It's tactics like this, along with the Microsoft press reports that mean you can't take a user install base report seriously. Keep that in mind when you see Gartner or IDG claim a fast uptake of IE8.....the implication being that people CHOSE to install IE8.
On a side point, isn't IE8 still in beta? Or have they upgraded it to RC (Remote Controlled)?
Microsoft's definition of "critical" is not "critical for YOU" it's "critical for THEM". WGA? Now IE8? One to supposedly give you some advantage and some peace of mind for the "millions of users who have been begging Microsoft to tell them they are not theives" and one to hopefully get some market share before more users switch to better browsers. Both ARE critical.....to Microsoft, as far as the user is concerned, their job is to STFU and open their wallets when required. Remember, Microsoft own the OS, you only license it under their conditions.
writes government policy.......this is nothing new, specially in the "civilized world". Surely it'd be more efficient in screwing people over if the role of "ministers" was downsized, as all they do is siphon off bribes from the bottom line.
Yet another example of why the system is broken and needs replacing with a citizen friendly democratic replacement.
So in other words, you can spend lots of money upgrading your XP installation with Vista 7 with XP mode, to get all the features you already have now. Now that's what I call ROI.
This is true as far as it goes, but each different M$ Office has a different undocumented implementation of their formats, it's only been on sale for 14 years too, with about 8 different versions released in that time. What happens 20, 30, 40 years from now? How many different editions of M$ Office will there be then? Will M$ even exist as a corporation by then? The way they are behaving and karma coming back to bite them in the ass it's very unlikely. Even if they are, they use stuff like this to force people to upgrade / pay for the new version. They WANT incompatibilities to "entice" the customer into giving them more money for essentially the same thing they already paid for. When the next edition of M$ Office comes with no support for Word '95.doc can users create it themselves? If it were open source they could, but as it's not, they are reliant on the good will of the people who own the code.
The general point is that as far as we've come so far in computing, open and closed source; we are still at infancy with what is possible. The better tech we get, the more we can build on it and improve it (patent trolls permitting). Services like archive.org are great in theory and motive but is it viable long term? Proprietary stuff certainly makes the task less productive.
The concept of archiving the entire internet is still reasonably new, what capacity will it need to still function the same in 10, 20 or 50 years from now? Given the exponential rate of new content created, a lot of it high bandwidth audio / video there has to be a limit somewhere. From what I understand, it's a US govt funded service, which means it's funding may be under threat at some point in the future, depending on the economic situation and the politicians / lobbyists in charge. At some point do they have to change the rules on what they archive to save capacity or allow one of their campaign donors the chance to make money from offering the same service with the competition crippled?
The other elephant in the room as far as long term archiving is concerned, is proprietary file formats. What good is a file on an archived website if the company who made the only application went bankrupt 10 years ago so the last PC to be able to run it was Windows ME. Compatibility mode / visualization only takes you so far. M$ Office formats are a special note as they are so common. In 20 years are you expected to have a copy of EVERY edition of M$ Office on your PC (including all those M$ no longer fix exploits to) just so you can open a.doc created years ago and now found on an obscure archived website.
Perhaps it was the number of their dead tree version readers who had a PC and access to the internet in a recent poll.
CEO - "In that poll we did recently, how many have access to the internet and a device to subscribe?" Marketing - "50,000" CEO - "Mark that figure as our target for the first month's subscription, you have to be bold in this game." Marketing - "That's a tough ask, perhaps we should aim a bit lower for a while." CEO - "Get personnel in here to dictate a job advert, we may have a vacancy in marketing to fill." Marketing - "On second thoughts 50,000 sounds perfectly achievable." CEO - "I thought you'd see it my way, if I just explained it properly."
Slashdot Mirror
DRM really does stand for Digital RIGHTS Management, how many times do we have to go through this? lol. It does however show exactly who it's designed for.
The content providers have the RIGHTS to restrict the consumers of their products. It's not about users, it's not named from the users perspective, it's maned from the customers perspective. Windows / gadgets / entertainment corporations are the customers, we are only the end users / victims.
By not mentioning the restriction effect on the end users in the name it gives the illusion that the "rights" apply to them, when they were never intended to.
If advertisers weren't so greedy at shoving their shit down our throats for profit we wouldn't need to block them. When subtle adverts start to get ignored, you make them more aggressive. When a new medium appears and has some value, the advertisers are all over it like flies on shit shoving adverts in our faces yet again. It's multi-national corporate greed, nothing else. Advert blocking / skipping in DVRs are just tech karma in effect.
Create a new filter with a copy of the NoScript developer filter, add it below the pre-installed one and make sure both are disabled. Hopefully then if it's re-enabled by an update your manual copy will still be disabled, nullifying the effect....assuming it's read like CSS from top to bottom.
Alternatively, look for another script control addon. Personally I've been getting rather pissed at the opening of new tabs on each update for a while now; not just NoScript either. Depending on whether my thinking will keep the block in place and how much longer I'm willing to accept the tab opening shit, I am close to removing it myself. There is YesScript and Controle De Scripts on the addon pages but I've not yet tried them.
It may help to let the NoScripts people know why their usage numbers are going down on their Mozilla addon feedback page. Perhaps if they see enough people are pissed off, it may change things.
Thanks for pointing this out, I have since done it. I wonder if this trick will backfire on them. I wonder if the list reads like CSS, in that if you make a manual copy of the list and add it as a new filter below the NoScripts one, it will read your manual one AFTER theirs and disable even if they decide to re-enable after an update?
Perhaps they thought it would be as popular as Vista where you could see the virtual tumbleweed bouncing across the inside of the hard drive.
Having their own chips will make it much easier for them to lock consumers out of using their devices in ways that Apple can't monetize.....well, even more than they already do. They do seem hell bent on becoming a designer digital island with strait jackets as mandatory uniforms.
Certainly Microsoft products are more expensive in the EU than the US, even after exchange rates are taken into account. It's EU customers / victims are subsidizing it's US customers / victims.
I wonder if this is how Microsoft are going to respond with new versions of both IE and WMP if they are forced by the EU not to bundle them with Windows. Just ensure that they are included as critical updates to Windows, knowing many users are still stupid enough to have automatic updates on and "accidentally" make them the default browser and media player.
That may happen, and in all likelihood if if does, it'll be a HUGE US corporation, one who has been dominating the market so much that non-US companies struggle to enter the market. So if the big boys don't like having to compete within the rules and decide to leave, it'd open up the market for others to enter. This is not a bad thing. The assumption that the market will be missing something is bogus, it will be simply be filled by some other provider, or in all likelihood, many new providers actually competing against each other for customers......which is exactly what the big US corporations seek to avoid and are getting punished for.
Perhaps the EU should introduce a second tier of punishment for anti-competitive practices. Those who are found guilty have only one chance to change their ways with independent observers allowed to go anywhere in the company, examine any documentation etc. Failure to comply means the second tier kicks in and the company is banned from doing business at all anywhere within the EU for a length of time. You could have the ban in place until observers are satisfied that things have changed, and those responsible at boardroom level have been removed from office. The banning could also be an option for first offenders depending on the seriousness of the offense.
As much as I like to see anti-competitive practices punished, I'd rather the US regulators would do their job on occasion, not just the EU. Many of the companies who have been accused of anti-competitive practices are US companies, so the PR hit of being fined by their own side would perhaps hit home more than outsiders. That aside, is there any point to these huge fines? Guess who it's going to be passed onto? Intel gets fined and I suspect that by some remarkable coincidence the prices of their chips mysteriously increase.
They're quite right in pointing out it's not for everyone, only those who insist on having a malware compatible flashy environment need apply, or those with pointy haired bosses who have already had their arms twisted by a Microsoft sales rep enough to hand over cash.
"in many cases the idea of re-installing a system would be daunting enough to suddenly make the key code seem cheap."
The flaw in your logic is that he would have backed up and installed this version of Windows 7, so having doe it once already I doubt whether having to do it a second time would be anything more than a day's downtime. Besides, why would he go for a lime limited official version when an unlimited cracked version would give more benefits for the same price?
Unless of course that was a funny post and my brain ain't woken up enough to see it yet, lol.
"It's been Final for quite some time. Which doesn't help your credibility much."
My bad, I got lost in the flurry of Microsoft Vaporware & beta range of software. It may be the recent talk of Windows 8 while Windows 7 is still not out that helps enflame the feelings.
This is about Microsoft abusing the concept of "critical" to further their own agenda.....again. They have their mouthpieces on the mainstream media sending the message to "ensure automatic updates are enabled" which will install updates Microsoft mark as "critical" without the user even being asked. They claim this is essential for security of their system, to fix exploits now patched.
New versions of applications like IE, Outlook Express or WMP should be optional upgrades, but given that Microsoft seem to hate the idea of actually enticing customers with a good product when forcing them to install it as part of a backdoor update malware-style is open to them. It's tactics like this, along with the Microsoft press reports that mean you can't take a user install base report seriously. Keep that in mind when you see Gartner or IDG claim a fast uptake of IE8.....the implication being that people CHOSE to install IE8.
On a side point, isn't IE8 still in beta? Or have they upgraded it to RC (Remote Controlled)?
I see the M$ astroturfers are out in force with mod points, from 5 to 2 in a heartbeat. Ya gotta love it. HAHAHA.
Microsoft's definition of "critical" is not "critical for YOU" it's "critical for THEM". WGA? Now IE8? One to supposedly give you some advantage and some peace of mind for the "millions of users who have been begging Microsoft to tell them they are not theives" and one to hopefully get some market share before more users switch to better browsers. Both ARE critical.....to Microsoft, as far as the user is concerned, their job is to STFU and open their wallets when required. Remember, Microsoft own the OS, you only license it under their conditions.
writes government policy.......this is nothing new, specially in the "civilized world". Surely it'd be more efficient in screwing people over if the role of "ministers" was downsized, as all they do is siphon off bribes from the bottom line.
Yet another example of why the system is broken and needs replacing with a citizen friendly democratic replacement.
Yeah I know, I debated using the arguments for a few minutes reasoning it'd be funnier to, so I did, lol.
sudo apt-get remove democratically-elected-but-troublesome-foreign-government
sudo apt-get install us-friendly-dictator
sudo apt-get autoremove reporters-who-ask-the-wrong-questions
So in other words, you can spend lots of money upgrading your XP installation with Vista 7 with XP mode, to get all the features you already have now. Now that's what I call ROI.
This is true as far as it goes, but each different M$ Office has a different undocumented implementation of their formats, it's only been on sale for 14 years too, with about 8 different versions released in that time. What happens 20, 30, 40 years from now? How many different editions of M$ Office will there be then? Will M$ even exist as a corporation by then? The way they are behaving and karma coming back to bite them in the ass it's very unlikely. Even if they are, they use stuff like this to force people to upgrade / pay for the new version. They WANT incompatibilities to "entice" the customer into giving them more money for essentially the same thing they already paid for. When the next edition of M$ Office comes with no support for Word '95 .doc can users create it themselves? If it were open source they could, but as it's not, they are reliant on the good will of the people who own the code.
The general point is that as far as we've come so far in computing, open and closed source; we are still at infancy with what is possible. The better tech we get, the more we can build on it and improve it (patent trolls permitting). Services like archive.org are great in theory and motive but is it viable long term? Proprietary stuff certainly makes the task less productive.
The concept of archiving the entire internet is still reasonably new, what capacity will it need to still function the same in 10, 20 or 50 years from now? Given the exponential rate of new content created, a lot of it high bandwidth audio / video there has to be a limit somewhere. From what I understand, it's a US govt funded service, which means it's funding may be under threat at some point in the future, depending on the economic situation and the politicians / lobbyists in charge. At some point do they have to change the rules on what they archive to save capacity or allow one of their campaign donors the chance to make money from offering the same service with the competition crippled?
.doc created years ago and now found on an obscure archived website.
The other elephant in the room as far as long term archiving is concerned, is proprietary file formats. What good is a file on an archived website if the company who made the only application went bankrupt 10 years ago so the last PC to be able to run it was Windows ME. Compatibility mode / visualization only takes you so far. M$ Office formats are a special note as they are so common. In 20 years are you expected to have a copy of EVERY edition of M$ Office on your PC (including all those M$ no longer fix exploits to) just so you can open a
Perhaps it was the number of their dead tree version readers who had a PC and access to the internet in a recent poll.
CEO - "In that poll we did recently, how many have access to the internet and a device to subscribe?"
Marketing - "50,000"
CEO - "Mark that figure as our target for the first month's subscription, you have to be bold in this game."
Marketing - "That's a tough ask, perhaps we should aim a bit lower for a while."
CEO - "Get personnel in here to dictate a job advert, we may have a vacancy in marketing to fill."
Marketing - "On second thoughts 50,000 sounds perfectly achievable."
CEO - "I thought you'd see it my way, if I just explained it properly."
Governments work perfectly for the people, they just left out a couple of words in the censored version we're fed.
"For the (rich) people, by the (rich) people".