"If they can trust the programs on your computer to do what they want, then those programs can also be trusted to control your behavior and actions. "
Wrong. Palladium doesn't control my actions. It just limits my options with respect to a particular piece of someone else's data.
I can do whatever I want - I can even turn off the Palladium machine and walk out into the sunshine, far away from my computer. However, if I want to listen to someone else's copyrighted music, or watch someone else's copyrighted movie, I have to do it on their terms. Why? Because they're the ones selling it. If you don't like it, buy from someone who doesn't protect their content.
How about some sort of long, unique global identifier for each page? That way, as a page is updated, moved, etc. a search engine could follow it.
Wouldn't be too hard to slip into the meta tags, and it would allow pages to be followed from host to host, with the latest changes intact.
A very long hash of the initial contents oughta do it, though then you run the risk of people updating the hash with each version, thereby creating "new" documents.
Why don't you go do a little research... start with Dave Cutler.
As for whether MS has innovated... of course they have. The problem with computers is, things are often conceived of long before the hardware exists to bring them to market (look at Apple and MS' increasing interest in vector-based GUIs, along with the rise of GPUs.)
You know, when you first use WMP to rip music, it asks you if you want to use content protection. When you first buy music with WMP, it informs you that you have to get a unique identifier for your computer.
So, you knew you were using DRM content. Don't blame MS.
It's not just MS. I've seen it elsewhere - ever worked at a company in the midst of an accounting scandal? It's amazing how much gallows humor it takes on.
Isn't there some sort of law against mentioning FrontPage and Dreamweaver in the same sentence? If not, there damn well should be.
Hell, I'm about as pro-MS as you can get on Slashdot, and even I think FrontPage is rancid. It's great for cranking out sites according to its template kits, but for anything heavier-duty than a personal page, it's time for Dreamweaver. Even Visual InterDev was better than FrontPage.
Is there really any need to lie or play dumb? What Dell sold you was defective. What LG sold Dell was defective. Dell should be heading to LG's headquarters with torches and pitchforks right about now, demanding that they fix the problem they created for Dell's customers.
To be honest, this is more like a car with a syringe of alcohol embedded in the seat. It's not Microsoft or Mandrake's fault that the driver was drunk - blame the auto manufacturer.
LG screwed up, it appears, and they need to fix it. Now, why in the hell anyone is setting up a read-only drive for packet writing is anyone's guess, but doing something dumb shouldn't destroy hardware, and I'm sure someone has a good reason why they did it this way (I'm a programmer, but no kernel hacker, so I'm not quite in a position to judge their code.)
I still fail to see what's such a big deal about product activation. I mean, hasn't it been required for ages in AutoCAD? Didn't 3ds max start using activation a long time ago? Hasn't Adobe picked it up? Where's the outcry from all of their customers?
Developers have a right to protect their products from unauthorized copying.
The best thing developers could do to alleviate fears over this, in my opinion, would be to patch the activation out at end-of-life. That way, consumers would be able to use extremely old products as needed.
I doubt it. While the actions depicted in GTA3 would certainly be considered criminal in most locales, something tells me the actual Mafia doesn't exert its dominance in the same way as some of the missions Tommy Vercetti goes on. Actual crime is fairly pedestrian compared to the game.
To be honest, I'm in favor of allowing people to run Linux on the Xbox - but I completely understand why Microsoft is taking any measures possible to prevent unsigned code from running on the Xbox.
Imagine if someone got SDL up and running on the Xbox, wich full acceleration. All of a sudden, MS' business plan is screwed, because you don't need to license dev kits and pay royalties. Understandably, they need to do anything they can to prevent that.
MS should have the right to make their console harder to hack. (In return, I think it's only fair that people have the right to try anyway.)
Yes. There's an EULA you have to agree to that appears when you first power on your Xbox.
I suppose if you modded it beforehand, so that the dashboard never ran, you'd be in the clear legally, but then you'd have no legal license to the firmware.
Look at Intertrust. Buying a company for peanuts with a suit against MS is like a corporate lottery ticket. Better to just pay up now and get rid of them.
There's no way you could put any of the extended cuts on one disc. Even to fit the theatrical cuts, you have to use extreme compression and drop the DTS track.
I'd rather they split it up and get to see and hear it closer to the way it's supposed to be.
Blame the thousands of douchebags out there who were too lazy to patch their systems.
I swear, the irresponsibility of these people... they link up to global networks which we all share without thinking of what their machine can do to others on the network. They're like 5-year-olds who've just found their father's handgun.
But, God forbid anyone be held accountable anymore....
Slashdot Mirror
Go work for the company that labeled you as the security risk.
If they saw you as being good enough to be a threat to their outsourcing sales, then you're talented enough to get in with them, right?
And yeah, your boss is stupid for taking the advice of a biased company.
How would the camera read it then, if they hadn't paid the license?
"If they can trust the programs on your computer to do what they want, then those programs can also be trusted to control your behavior and actions. "
Wrong. Palladium doesn't control my actions. It just limits my options with respect to a particular piece of someone else's data.
I can do whatever I want - I can even turn off the Palladium machine and walk out into the sunshine, far away from my computer. However, if I want to listen to someone else's copyrighted music, or watch someone else's copyrighted movie, I have to do it on their terms. Why? Because they're the ones selling it. If you don't like it, buy from someone who doesn't protect their content.
How about some sort of long, unique global identifier for each page? That way, as a page is updated, moved, etc. a search engine could follow it.
Wouldn't be too hard to slip into the meta tags, and it would allow pages to be followed from host to host, with the latest changes intact.
A very long hash of the initial contents oughta do it, though then you run the risk of people updating the hash with each version, thereby creating "new" documents.
Economies of scale.
There's a lot of variable costs here - but if someone can really attract a lot of customers, they can start making some money.
Similarly, once it proves to be a success, some contract renegotiation is probably in order.
When everyone's buying music online, it'll be very profitable. Right now, in its infancy, it's impressive that they're making it break even
You're kidding, right?
Why don't you go do a little research... start with Dave Cutler.
As for whether MS has innovated... of course they have. The problem with computers is, things are often conceived of long before the hardware exists to bring them to market (look at Apple and MS' increasing interest in vector-based GUIs, along with the rise of GPUs.)
You know, when you first use WMP to rip music, it asks you if you want to use content protection. When you first buy music with WMP, it informs you that you have to get a unique identifier for your computer.
So, you knew you were using DRM content. Don't blame MS.
And exactly who supports this free/at-cost copy of Linux?
It's not just MS. I've seen it elsewhere - ever worked at a company in the midst of an accounting scandal? It's amazing how much gallows humor it takes on.
As a Greek, let me assure you that they extort even more money out of us. Don't worry, we're all getting fucked just the same.
Of course, that's just here at Purdue, so maybe your Greeks get a free ride. However, I somehow doubt it.
Isn't there some sort of law against mentioning FrontPage and Dreamweaver in the same sentence? If not, there damn well should be.
Hell, I'm about as pro-MS as you can get on Slashdot, and even I think FrontPage is rancid. It's great for cranking out sites according to its template kits, but for anything heavier-duty than a personal page, it's time for Dreamweaver. Even Visual InterDev was better than FrontPage.
Is there really any need to lie or play dumb? What Dell sold you was defective. What LG sold Dell was defective. Dell should be heading to LG's headquarters with torches and pitchforks right about now, demanding that they fix the problem they created for Dell's customers.
To be honest, this is more like a car with a syringe of alcohol embedded in the seat. It's not Microsoft or Mandrake's fault that the driver was drunk - blame the auto manufacturer.
LG screwed up, it appears, and they need to fix it. Now, why in the hell anyone is setting up a read-only drive for packet writing is anyone's guess, but doing something dumb shouldn't destroy hardware, and I'm sure someone has a good reason why they did it this way (I'm a programmer, but no kernel hacker, so I'm not quite in a position to judge their code.)
I still fail to see what's such a big deal about product activation. I mean, hasn't it been required for ages in AutoCAD? Didn't 3ds max start using activation a long time ago? Hasn't Adobe picked it up? Where's the outcry from all of their customers?
Developers have a right to protect their products from unauthorized copying.
The best thing developers could do to alleviate fears over this, in my opinion, would be to patch the activation out at end-of-life. That way, consumers would be able to use extremely old products as needed.
I doubt it. While the actions depicted in GTA3 would certainly be considered criminal in most locales, something tells me the actual Mafia doesn't exert its dominance in the same way as some of the missions Tommy Vercetti goes on. Actual crime is fairly pedestrian compared to the game.
That makes me kinda curious...
Is there any precedent for a rapist attempting to blame his crimes on pornography? If so, that might apply equally well to this case.
To be honest, I'm in favor of allowing people to run Linux on the Xbox - but I completely understand why Microsoft is taking any measures possible to prevent unsigned code from running on the Xbox.
Imagine if someone got SDL up and running on the Xbox, wich full acceleration. All of a sudden, MS' business plan is screwed, because you don't need to license dev kits and pay royalties. Understandably, they need to do anything they can to prevent that.
MS should have the right to make their console harder to hack. (In return, I think it's only fair that people have the right to try anyway.)
The software on it's not your property. It's MS'. You simply have a license to use it.
What you own is several pounds of plastic, metal, and semiconductor. Do what you want with it.
Yes. There's an EULA you have to agree to that appears when you first power on your Xbox.
I suppose if you modded it beforehand, so that the dashboard never ran, you'd be in the clear legally, but then you'd have no legal license to the firmware.
Look at Intertrust. Buying a company for peanuts with a suit against MS is like a corporate lottery ticket. Better to just pay up now and get rid of them.
That place seems to have an anti-Microsoft hardon... I wonder who's paying the bills?
This looks like just another lobbying attempt by MS' competitors. They do it, MS does it, everyone does it, so move along - nothing to see here.
And for a moment, before I realized what you meant, I had this mental image of a guy trying to carve wood with the corner of a Cisco router....
I gotta get out in the real world more.
Why hire only Unix fanatics? Why not just hire people who have the skills you need and let them worry about the particulars of the platform?
One shouldn't let personal bias affect management decisions. If Windows is the best tool for the job, use it. If Linux is, use that instead.
There's no way you could put any of the extended cuts on one disc. Even to fit the theatrical cuts, you have to use extreme compression and drop the DTS track.
I'd rather they split it up and get to see and hear it closer to the way it's supposed to be.
Blame the thousands of douchebags out there who were too lazy to patch their systems.
I swear, the irresponsibility of these people... they link up to global networks which we all share without thinking of what their machine can do to others on the network. They're like 5-year-olds who've just found their father's handgun.
But, God forbid anyone be held accountable anymore....