I agree with you, but this is the point where I prefer X windows. When you're doing that it's really nice to be able to focus a window WITHOUT bringing it to the top. With the resource kit for NT4 (sorry, haven't used 2k much) you could do the "focus follows mouse" but the focus always raised the window. With X you can have your 3 lines of IRC and be able to type in it without obscuring your other windows. Hard to get used to, but indespensible(sp?) once you do.
I'm not sure what is bad about representing hackers, cryptographers and computer scientists. I guess you have already fallen for the media portrail of hackers, cryptographers and computer scientists as criminals and deviants. To my mind, at least, it would be an accolade to say that someone represented hackers, crypographers and computer scientists. Better that than lawyers, congressmen and fbi agents.
OTOH, locking down HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE makes perfect sense and programmers who use it for user-settings should be shot. Twice.
Great idea... since Office 97 required it to be open (haven't checked the more recent versions) I figure we can wipe out lots of MS programmers...
Details of the "obstruction" charge
on
EU May Fine Microsoft
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Check the Reg -
it has the details
of the obstruction charge. Apparently they were writing letters from various companies in support of themselves and submitting them as evidence. This is misconduct of the grossest nature - here is an excerpt of an email I wrote a friend (I don't want to retype my point)
Look at the very last part. I've talked to you about this before...
Microsoft has now been confirmed to have created misleading commentary and
opinions in the following areas: Letters to congress, state officials
(recently, in support of dropping the antitrust case); Random individuals
writing opinion letters to various local papers (came out in the first
antitrust investigation in the win 3.1 days), creating fony "trade groups"
to lobby and publish opinions, and now they have been caught submitting
false opinions from other companies. It really is the boy who cried wolf,
you can't believe pro Microsoft (even deserved) information in any context
because they have a history of buying reports and opinions in almost every
context. This is a good trick if you can handle it, but it appears that
it is going to backfire on MS.
I'm not argueing at all, I was reporting a prediction, not making one myself. I'm not sure I totally agree that Linux will be the only UNIX. I do see some of the less popular ones dying off. SCO is dead, IRIX is dead, IBM said they would eventually drop AIX for Linux, perhaps HP-UX is next. I agree wholeheartedly that Solaris will not be gone any time soon.
At a presentation I recently attended concerning Linux for zSeries (zSeries is IBM's new 64bit mainframe platform) the comment was made that one of the big research firms (don't remember which...) had said that in seven years there would only be three operating systems: Windows, Linux, and zSeries(also what IBM calls the 64bit replacement for OS/390). Could this be the start of that? I'm not suggesting that Linux will replace HP-UX today or this year, but could they be holding off on the port since Linux already runs on IA-64?
I agree, the pronunciation will be really interesting. Expecially since none of the names sound like you think they sound untill you read the Appendexes. Then you find out that all trailing f's are pronounced as v's (so Gandalf is actually pronouced Gandolv) and all C's are hard - as in they sound like K. I'll be interested to see if they stick with the pronunciation as Tolkien imangined it or if they use what you would find from normal english pronunciation. And to whomever said that Gandolf was British? No, he was Istari. I have no idea what their accent sounds like, though.
True they still support OS/2. I wouldn't say that they NEVER drop support, though. My group is currently migrating a bunch of production management systems from NVDM to Tivoli because IBM is dropping support for NVDM. Supposedly Tivoli replaces NVDM, but anyone who uses the two knows it isn't so.
Basically, though, I agree. I can't see them dropping support for AIX any time soon.
http://www.insecure.org/stf/scoville_unix_as_lit er ature.txt
(for the link paranoid who can't look at the brower status line at the bottom)
Here is the punch line:
Nowhere is this word/image culture tension better represented than in
the contrast between UNIX and NT. When the much-vaunted UNIX-killer
arrived a few years ago, backed by the full faith and credit of the
Redmond juggernaut, I approached it with an open mind. But NT left me
cold. There was something deeply unsatisfying about it. I had that
ineffable feeling (apologies to Gertrude Stein) there was no there
there. Granted, I already knew the major themes of system and network
administration from my UNIX days, and I will admit that registry
hacking did vex me for a few days, but after my short scramble up the
learning curve I looked back at UNIX with the feeling I'd been demoted
from a backhoe to a leaf-blower. NT just didn't offer room to move.
The one-size-fits-all, point-and-click,
we've-already-anticipated-all-your-needs world of NT had me yearning
for those obscure command-line flags and man -k. I wanted to craft my
own solutions from my own toolbox, not have my ideas slammed into the
visually homogenous, prepackaged, Soviet world of Microsoft Foundation
Classes.
NT was definitely much too close to image culture for my comfort:
endless point-and-click graphical dialog boxes, hunting around the
screen with the mouse, pop-up after pop-up demanding my attention. The
experience was almost exclusively reactive. Every task demanded a
GUI-based utility front-end loaded with insidious assumptions about
how to visualize (and thus conceptualize) the operation. I couldn't
think "outside the box" because everything literally was a box. There
was no opportunity for ad hoc consideration of how a task might
alternately be performed.
Ahhh yes. You have indeed sparked my memory. It's been more than 5 years since I've use an AutoDesk product, but (thanks to you) I can still remember what it looked like to watch PharLap load... ah, the memories.
3D Studio is another story. It has a deep history of being rooted in WinNT
3D studio actually has a deep history of being rooted in DOS. Yes, the old Disk Operating System. Autodesk bought (I don't remember from whom, it's been five years since I've used it) a memory manager for DOS that did not work with win95 or NT. It was used untill the 32 bit versions of AutoCAD and 3DStudio came out (shame that they switched- they were getting much better performance from dos than from win). It was similar to Dos/4gw (wasn't that it?) that the old DOS games used.
1) Pick a platform that is difficult to administer remotely
Since most admins administer UNIX via command prompts and vi I'd say that UNIX is much easier to administer remotely. With SSH loaded I can get all the same interface at home through a dial up 14.4k connection that I get at work.
(2) Pick a platform that is insecure
I don't really I have to say anything here. If you have ever in your life looked at the stats available at attrition.org then you know.
3) Pick a platform that can't handle the amount of customers you have
Platform wise this really comes down to hardware, not OS and CERTAINLY not admin, which is what we are discussing here.
4) Pick a platform that costs a tonne of money
Here you might have been right. Depending on the installation, the software cost may be marginalized. Or it may not. Think of buying 1000 file servers. There the OS cost is a signifigant factor. Putting in a large scale distributed application? not so much, fewer servers and most of your cost is in development and implamentation.
5) Pick a platform that requires a person with a dodgy qualification to run it, who doesn't know left from right, and demands more money than they are worth
I can speak with some authority on this one. The MCSE cirriculum, unless they have added it recently, does NOT mention hot fix patches. At all. It tells you how to set up Microsoft's replication service that fails 20% of the time for no reason, but it does not mention the first thing about hot fixes.
6) Pick a platform that is proprietary
NT is about as proprietary as it gets. With the commercial UNIXs you at least get regular published APIs and system calls. With Linux and *BSD, you get the source. Hard to get less proprietary than that.
7) Pick a platform that runs on low-end server hardware or worse only
see my above point about platform
8) Pick a platform that you will have to lease by the year or per billion processor cycles within the next 3 years
AFAIK, MS is the only company to even suggest the rent the OS idea.
9) Pick a platform with a database server that "loses" data given certain queries
This shouldn't have been included. Funny, but off topic.
10) Pick a platform that is forever morphing, changing technology, and has a history of instability
That's NT. It would be an accolade but for the instability part, and the fact that most of the changes don't work and aren't wanted or used by the users.
11) Pick a platform which would get you the sack if management had a clue
I would fire someone for picking a Microsoft solution when an alternative existed. Wouldn't you? What's the good side of picking Microsoft?
I'm failing to see much in this post that indicates that a good admin has a whole lot of control. Yes they can patch servers, but as has been noted, the patch doesn't always work in this case. Also, Microsoft patches are well known to de-stabalize the system, or bring back old bugs, or chrash server applications, or cause any other host of problems. Yes, the admin is important, but you're trying to say that Michael Schumacher could win while driving a stock Yugo, based strictly on his qualifications as a driver. The tool DOES matter.
Re:Typical lifecycle of any industry...
on
The End of Innovation?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
When was the last time you heard about private individuals making major discoveries in the automobile industry?
Well, let's see. Last time I looked at power windows. Oh, and last time I saw a friend's home built sheet metal intake (30% Horsepower jump). Oh, and the college kid I met that fabricated a jig for easily adjusting holley carbs. What about the guy who came up with splitfire spark plugs? Yes, sometimes innovation happens in corperate labs. Sometimes it doesn't. Don't assume that every industry has to turn to corperate labs to get anything done.
Unbreakable encryption is a myth...
Not at all true. There is lots of unbreakable encryption. Aside from 4096 bit keys and the like, just use a one time pad. The problem is that as encryption gets stronger, it becomes inconveniant(sp?). People aren't willing to go that far out of their way, witness Circuit City's DivX. Cheaper (sort of) but too inconveniant. People probably won't be interested in calling the publisher or what have you to get unlock codes for their DVDs. What you wind up with is a balance between what the consumer wants (completely open and free access) and what the copyright holding corperation wants (complete lock down of the work). This balence leads to balence in other areas, including fair use. This is how a free market is supposed to work- the current IP laws are broken and stupid because they upset this balence.
How do we fix it? Personally, I submit that if we make copyright non-transferable most of this goes away. I tend to think that a copyright should only be held by the creator. It cannot be sold and transfered, even if the creator wanted to. Then if Metallica didn't want their music traded, fine. If Offspring did, fine. Sony (Offspring's label IIRC) would NOT be able to block Offspring from sharing their music, because Offspring would still own all of the rights. Sony would only be able to contract for the privelage of distributing The Offspring's fine music, rather than contracting to own it. This would, IMO, shift us back to sanity. Artists would be protected not only from people who wanted to copy and illegally distribute their work, but also from those who would seek to own and control their work. Consumers would be given more choice in the sense that if I didn't like Metallica's restrictions on distributing I could listen to MegaDeath (better than Metallica anyways but I digress...) As it is, If I don't like Sony's restrictions on distributing then I can't listen to a whole load of bands.
it can con citizens into paying for through taxation.
Good point, but god I only WISH it was a con. At least then we'd be able to resist in some way. As it is, it's rammed down our throats whether(sp?) we like it or not.
Oh, and despite what others have said, the drug refs were right on.
I don't usually bother with trolls, but what the hey, this guy is fun.
Sun got an injunction to stop Microsoft distributing Java
Wrong. Sun got an injunction to stop MS from polluting java and calling it java. MS is free to distribute their (sortof J)VM, but they can't attach java to the name
The 'key features' for which Passport is
required are the instant messaging service. It is kind of hard to use an IM without some sort of identity registration and AOL is keeping AIM closed
You might be right here if Microsoft didn't word the signup to say (to someone not used to doctoring their spin) "You need to sign up with (p)assport if you want to use the internet"
Kodak... to get its own way.
Here you are confused. Kodak's bitch was that you couldn't make their software the default even if you wanted to. MS's photo software would re-register itself as the default spontaneously and for no reason.
Code signing has been used in Active-X and Java downloads for five years. Microsoft has never attempted to use the scheme to exclude software vendors and is not actually a CA for code signing certificates.
Here again you are confused. Code signing helps you verify that a given download of, say, and ActiveX control really comes from MS (or whoever), and not from some cracker. In this case they are requireing drivers to be certified before they will work. This gives Microsoft absolute control over what hardware you can use with a WinXP system. Worse than this is the article in the Reg today. It explains how this idea has been extended, and now you can't even run certain applications without Microsoft's express permission.
...Microsoft own the media and negative views of microsoft can never be heard.
They do. How many new stories about the "Red Worm" have you heard that link it directly to Microsoft IIS? Or mention that Microsoft's own servers were hit as well?
I think you're missing the point of the GPL. The GPL exists BECAUSE every other copyright and IP related issue is unreasonable. The GPL is an intentional hack to turn the system on itself. Rather than just sit around and bitch about the way IP and copyright were being used, RMS developed the GPL to directly combat it - it was designed so that in order to get around the GPL you have to deny that copyright works. Either way, the goal is fulfilled. If you believe that you can rebel in both legal ways (protesting) and illegal ways (blowing something up) then yes, you can have it both ways. The GPL is a legal protest against the ideas of IP and copyright and piracy is an illegal protest against the same. I see no reason why we can't have both.
I know that NT isn't a popular topic, but none the less some companies still need NT admins. Here is the one question that allows you to gauge an NT admins ability: What is the difference between regedit.exe and regedt32.exe? The difference is that regedit.exe allows you to search the ENTIRE registry rather than just the keys, but only regedt32.exe allows you to change the ACLs for the registry (it also does a better job of editing registries on remote machines - regedit is buggy in this respect). Anyone who has handled any kind of security on an NT system should know this. Anyone who has done any real optimization or troubleshooting should also know it.
You can also ask them to describe some of the things you can do with the net command.
one caveat: I haven't worked much with Win2k or WinXP. This was accurate for Winnt4 and I suspect still is, but I can't guarantee it.
Plus the laptop we use has a winmodem, so we'd have to go and buy some other external modem.
By this I would assume that you are talking about at least two computers? Remember that XP enters the age of hardware profiling... you are looking at $250 PER COMPUTER that you want to "upgrade" (yes I know it's easily crackable (if you have the correct amount of ram)but lets stay legal, ok?). Might be better to pay that extra ISP. Oh, and many laptop winmodems work in linux these days(if you are feeling gutsy, look yours up on the linux laptops page - do a google sarch) If you are just to scared to run Linux then try Win2k or NT.
and I'm sure many others like me
I'm not sure which others you mean. I don't know anyone who has so little respect for their own family that they would invite them to spend $500 plus (at least two machines, right) on the newest version of windows so they can strangle their own freedoms while the second newest version would be more than enough for their needs. I don't tell my family (or anyone else for that matter) that they have anything other than an imagined need for the newest version of windows. I do tell them about what XP will and won't allow them to do, but I guess that's just me.
No, not in the pr0n sense (although if you had it hooked up to a 31" tv that streaming amsterdam feed would look pretty good) but think for the kids. The may very well already have a TV. If they have a TV they probably have some sort of game system. Now they want their own computer (kids these days, when I was their age we didn't have these PCs at home... blah blah blah) you can spend an extra $200 or whatever and give them a hard drive, keyboard, and mouse to hook to their TV. Load up StarOffice (or whatever flavor you like) and they are set to go. This sounds like a good idea for computer savvy families who's kids already have tv in their rooms.
Besides all that, it would give the rest of us (possibly) a chance to do some programming for the motion engine. That would be fun.
Adobe would be in the right: Elcomsoft has no right to *sell* products whose purpose is to disable Adobe's encryption, esp. when such knowledge was gained through reverse-engineering.
So you are saying that Adobe, who sells a software that is plainly illegal in Russia, is in a position to sue a Russian company full of Russian citizens because they went and reverse engineered an Adobe product so that it would be legal? First, it seems to me that Elcomsoft actually gave Adobe an out - they (possibly) made the software legal in countries where they actually protect their citizens' rights. Second, since when is reverse engineering illegal? I guess I don't know Russian law, but if they actually bother to protect their citizen's right to fair use I'm going to to guess that the haven't sold them up the river when it comes to reverse engineering.
This isn't an issue of changing the password. It's an issue of SQLServer 7.0 having no "Stand alone" security mode. In 6.5 you could use the "Stand alone" or "Mixed" mode. In 7.0, only mixed mode is available. The manner in which the application was designed required that it have "Stand alone" security. Of course Oracle has a password that should be changed, but Oracle is ALWAYS on "Stand alone" security.
It wasn't so long ago that MSN's SQL servers were still set up with no password on the sa account, so apparently it's par for the course for SQL server admins to be incompetent.
In the future, will all UIs have to have start buttons, control panels and taskbars to be considered usable?
Really, I'm not sure if it matters. With GNOME (and KDE, I'm not going to start THAT war) you can pretty much customize to your heart's content. It would be a simple thing to make the expected buttons say "Start" or what have you, but still leave it customizeable. For instance, most GUI's (even in LinuxLand) default to "Click to raise" (of course on MS this is the only option unless you install the resource kit - or is it tweakUI? - doesn't matter) so that they emulate MS's windowing style. Fine, whatever, I accept that something else would be confusing to certain people. Personally, though, if the window manager won't support "Focus strictly follows mouse" I'm not going to use it, because that's the only way I like to work. When it comes down to it I could care less what the defaults are, just as long as it remains configurable enough that I can use it the way I want to. All that said I'm still using WindowMaker without GNOME.
One last thought: this discussion has highlighted how many people have yet to understand that GNOME can use any of several window managers- including AfterStep, WindowMaker, Sawfish, Enlightenment, FVWM, FVWM2, Ice, and a bunch of others I haven't mentioned. Don't get the WM confused with the environment.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you, but this is the point where I prefer X windows. When you're doing that it's really nice to be able to focus a window WITHOUT bringing it to the top. With the resource kit for NT4 (sorry, haven't used 2k much) you could do the "focus follows mouse" but the focus always raised the window. With X you can have your 3 lines of IRC and be able to type in it without obscuring your other windows. Hard to get used to, but indespensible(sp?) once you do.
I'm not sure what is bad about representing hackers, cryptographers and computer scientists. I guess you have already fallen for the media portrail of hackers, cryptographers and computer scientists as criminals and deviants. To my mind, at least, it would be an accolade to say that someone represented hackers, crypographers and computer scientists. Better that than lawyers, congressmen and fbi agents.
OTOH, locking down HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE makes perfect sense and programmers who use it for user-settings should be shot. Twice.
Great idea... since Office 97 required it to be open (haven't checked the more recent versions) I figure we can wipe out lots of MS programmers...
Check the Reg -
it has the details of the obstruction charge. Apparently they were writing letters from various companies in support of themselves and submitting them as evidence. This is misconduct of the grossest nature - here is an excerpt of an email I wrote a friend (I don't want to retype my point)
Look at the very last part. I've talked to you about this before... Microsoft has now been confirmed to have created misleading commentary and opinions in the following areas: Letters to congress, state officials (recently, in support of dropping the antitrust case); Random individuals writing opinion letters to various local papers (came out in the first antitrust investigation in the win 3.1 days), creating fony "trade groups" to lobby and publish opinions, and now they have been caught submitting false opinions from other companies. It really is the boy who cried wolf, you can't believe pro Microsoft (even deserved) information in any context because they have a history of buying reports and opinions in almost every context. This is a good trick if you can handle it, but it appears that it is going to backfire on MS.
I'm not argueing at all, I was reporting a prediction, not making one myself. I'm not sure I totally agree that Linux will be the only UNIX. I do see some of the less popular ones dying off. SCO is dead, IRIX is dead, IBM said they would eventually drop AIX for Linux, perhaps HP-UX is next. I agree wholeheartedly that Solaris will not be gone any time soon.
At a presentation I recently attended concerning Linux for zSeries (zSeries is IBM's new 64bit mainframe platform) the comment was made that one of the big research firms (don't remember which...) had said that in seven years there would only be three operating systems: Windows, Linux, and zSeries(also what IBM calls the 64bit replacement for OS/390). Could this be the start of that? I'm not suggesting that Linux will replace HP-UX today or this year, but could they be holding off on the port since Linux already runs on IA-64?
Just wondering.
I agree, the pronunciation will be really interesting. Expecially since none of the names sound like you think they sound untill you read the Appendexes. Then you find out that all trailing f's are pronounced as v's (so Gandalf is actually pronouced Gandolv) and all C's are hard - as in they sound like K. I'll be interested to see if they stick with the pronunciation as Tolkien imangined it or if they use what you would find from normal english pronunciation. And to whomever said that Gandolf was British? No, he was Istari. I have no idea what their accent sounds like, though.
True they still support OS/2. I wouldn't say that they NEVER drop support, though. My group is currently migrating a bunch of production management systems from NVDM to Tivoli because IBM is dropping support for NVDM. Supposedly Tivoli replaces NVDM, but anyone who uses the two knows it isn't so.
Basically, though, I agree. I can't see them dropping support for AIX any time soon.
http://www.insecure.org/stf/scoville_unix_as_li
(for the link paranoid who can't look at the brower status line at the bottom)
Here is the punch line:
an excellent read, and right along these lines.
Ahhh yes. You have indeed sparked my memory. It's been more than 5 years since I've use an AutoDesk product, but (thanks to you) I can still remember what it looked like to watch PharLap load... ah, the memories.
3D Studio is another story. It has a deep history of being rooted in WinNT
3D studio actually has a deep history of being rooted in DOS. Yes, the old Disk Operating System. Autodesk bought (I don't remember from whom, it's been five years since I've used it) a memory manager for DOS that did not work with win95 or NT. It was used untill the 32 bit versions of AutoCAD and 3DStudio came out (shame that they switched- they were getting much better performance from dos than from win). It was similar to Dos/4gw (wasn't that it?) that the old DOS games used.
Ok, I'll bite. Let's go through the list.:
1) Pick a platform that is difficult to administer remotely
Since most admins administer UNIX via command prompts and vi I'd say that UNIX is much easier to administer remotely. With SSH loaded I can get all the same interface at home through a dial up 14.4k connection that I get at work.
(2) Pick a platform that is insecure
I don't really I have to say anything here. If you have ever in your life looked at the stats available at attrition.org then you know.
3) Pick a platform that can't handle the amount of customers you have
Platform wise this really comes down to hardware, not OS and CERTAINLY not admin, which is what we are discussing here.
4) Pick a platform that costs a tonne of money
Here you might have been right. Depending on the installation, the software cost may be marginalized. Or it may not. Think of buying 1000 file servers. There the OS cost is a signifigant factor. Putting in a large scale distributed application? not so much, fewer servers and most of your cost is in development and implamentation.
5) Pick a platform that requires a person with a dodgy qualification to run it, who doesn't know left from right, and demands more money than they are worth
I can speak with some authority on this one. The MCSE cirriculum, unless they have added it recently, does NOT mention hot fix patches. At all. It tells you how to set up Microsoft's replication service that fails 20% of the time for no reason, but it does not mention the first thing about hot fixes.
6) Pick a platform that is proprietary
NT is about as proprietary as it gets. With the commercial UNIXs you at least get regular published APIs and system calls. With Linux and *BSD, you get the source. Hard to get less proprietary than that.
7) Pick a platform that runs on low-end server hardware or worse only
see my above point about platform
8) Pick a platform that you will have to lease by the year or per billion processor cycles within the next 3 years
AFAIK, MS is the only company to even suggest the rent the OS idea.
9) Pick a platform with a database server that "loses" data given certain queries
This shouldn't have been included. Funny, but off topic.
10) Pick a platform that is forever morphing, changing technology, and has a history of instability
That's NT. It would be an accolade but for the instability part, and the fact that most of the changes don't work and aren't wanted or used by the users.
11) Pick a platform which would get you the sack if management had a clue
I would fire someone for picking a Microsoft solution when an alternative existed. Wouldn't you? What's the good side of picking Microsoft?
I'm failing to see much in this post that indicates that a good admin has a whole lot of control. Yes they can patch servers, but as has been noted, the patch doesn't always work in this case. Also, Microsoft patches are well known to de-stabalize the system, or bring back old bugs, or chrash server applications, or cause any other host of problems. Yes, the admin is important, but you're trying to say that Michael Schumacher could win while driving a stock Yugo, based strictly on his qualifications as a driver. The tool DOES matter.
When was the last time you heard about private individuals making major discoveries in the automobile industry?
Well, let's see. Last time I looked at power windows. Oh, and last time I saw a friend's home built sheet metal intake (30% Horsepower jump). Oh, and the college kid I met that fabricated a jig for easily adjusting holley carbs. What about the guy who came up with splitfire spark plugs? Yes, sometimes innovation happens in corperate labs. Sometimes it doesn't. Don't assume that every industry has to turn to corperate labs to get anything done.
Unbreakable encryption is a myth...
Not at all true. There is lots of unbreakable encryption. Aside from 4096 bit keys and the like, just use a one time pad. The problem is that as encryption gets stronger, it becomes inconveniant(sp?). People aren't willing to go that far out of their way, witness Circuit City's DivX. Cheaper (sort of) but too inconveniant. People probably won't be interested in calling the publisher or what have you to get unlock codes for their DVDs. What you wind up with is a balance between what the consumer wants (completely open and free access) and what the copyright holding corperation wants (complete lock down of the work). This balence leads to balence in other areas, including fair use. This is how a free market is supposed to work- the current IP laws are broken and stupid because they upset this balence.
How do we fix it? Personally, I submit that if we make copyright non-transferable most of this goes away. I tend to think that a copyright should only be held by the creator. It cannot be sold and transfered, even if the creator wanted to. Then if Metallica didn't want their music traded, fine. If Offspring did, fine. Sony (Offspring's label IIRC) would NOT be able to block Offspring from sharing their music, because Offspring would still own all of the rights. Sony would only be able to contract for the privelage of distributing The Offspring's fine music, rather than contracting to own it. This would, IMO, shift us back to sanity. Artists would be protected not only from people who wanted to copy and illegally distribute their work, but also from those who would seek to own and control their work. Consumers would be given more choice in the sense that if I didn't like Metallica's restrictions on distributing I could listen to MegaDeath (better than Metallica anyways but I digress...) As it is, If I don't like Sony's restrictions on distributing then I can't listen to a whole load of bands.
it can con citizens into paying for through taxation.
Good point, but god I only WISH it was a con. At least then we'd be able to resist in some way. As it is, it's rammed down our throats whether(sp?) we like it or not.
Oh, and despite what others have said, the drug refs were right on.
I don't usually bother with trolls, but what the hey, this guy is fun.
... to get its own way.
...Microsoft own the media and negative views of microsoft can never be heard.
Sun got an injunction to stop Microsoft distributing Java
Wrong. Sun got an injunction to stop MS from polluting java and calling it java. MS is free to distribute their (sortof J)VM, but they can't attach java to the name
The 'key features' for which Passport is required are the instant messaging service. It is kind of hard to use an IM without some sort of identity registration and AOL is keeping AIM closed
You might be right here if Microsoft didn't word the signup to say (to someone not used to doctoring their spin) "You need to sign up with (p)assport if you want to use the internet"
Kodak
Here you are confused. Kodak's bitch was that you couldn't make their software the default even if you wanted to. MS's photo software would re-register itself as the default spontaneously and for no reason.
Code signing has been used in Active-X and Java downloads for five years. Microsoft has never attempted to use the scheme to exclude software vendors and is not actually a CA for code signing certificates.
Here again you are confused. Code signing helps you verify that a given download of, say, and ActiveX control really comes from MS (or whoever), and not from some cracker. In this case they are requireing drivers to be certified before they will work. This gives Microsoft absolute control over what hardware you can use with a WinXP system. Worse than this is the article in the Reg today. It explains how this idea has been extended, and now you can't even run certain applications without Microsoft's express permission.
They do. How many new stories about the "Red Worm" have you heard that link it directly to Microsoft IIS? Or mention that Microsoft's own servers were hit as well?
I think you're missing the point of the GPL. The GPL exists BECAUSE every other copyright and IP related issue is unreasonable. The GPL is an intentional hack to turn the system on itself. Rather than just sit around and bitch about the way IP and copyright were being used, RMS developed the GPL to directly combat it - it was designed so that in order to get around the GPL you have to deny that copyright works. Either way, the goal is fulfilled. If you believe that you can rebel in both legal ways (protesting) and illegal ways (blowing something up) then yes, you can have it both ways. The GPL is a legal protest against the ideas of IP and copyright and piracy is an illegal protest against the same. I see no reason why we can't have both.
I know that NT isn't a popular topic, but none the less some companies still need NT admins. Here is the one question that allows you to gauge an NT admins ability: What is the difference between regedit.exe and regedt32.exe? The difference is that regedit.exe allows you to search the ENTIRE registry rather than just the keys, but only regedt32.exe allows you to change the ACLs for the registry (it also does a better job of editing registries on remote machines - regedit is buggy in this respect). Anyone who has handled any kind of security on an NT system should know this. Anyone who has done any real optimization or troubleshooting should also know it.
You can also ask them to describe some of the things you can do with the net command.
one caveat: I haven't worked much with Win2k or WinXP. This was accurate for Winnt4 and I suspect still is, but I can't guarantee it.
Plus the laptop we use has a winmodem, so we'd have to go and buy some other external modem.
By this I would assume that you are talking about at least two computers? Remember that XP enters the age of hardware profiling... you are looking at $250 PER COMPUTER that you want to "upgrade" (yes I know it's easily crackable (if you have the correct amount of ram)but lets stay legal, ok?). Might be better to pay that extra ISP. Oh, and many laptop winmodems work in linux these days(if you are feeling gutsy, look yours up on the linux laptops page - do a google sarch) If you are just to scared to run Linux then try Win2k or NT.
and I'm sure many others like me
I'm not sure which others you mean. I don't know anyone who has so little respect for their own family that they would invite them to spend $500 plus (at least two machines, right) on the newest version of windows so they can strangle their own freedoms while the second newest version would be more than enough for their needs. I don't tell my family (or anyone else for that matter) that they have anything other than an imagined need for the newest version of windows. I do tell them about what XP will and won't allow them to do, but I guess that's just me.
No, not in the pr0n sense (although if you had it hooked up to a 31" tv that streaming amsterdam feed would look pretty good) but think for the kids. The may very well already have a TV. If they have a TV they probably have some sort of game system. Now they want their own computer (kids these days, when I was their age we didn't have these PCs at home... blah blah blah) you can spend an extra $200 or whatever and give them a hard drive, keyboard, and mouse to hook to their TV. Load up StarOffice (or whatever flavor you like) and they are set to go. This sounds like a good idea for computer savvy families who's kids already have tv in their rooms.
Besides all that, it would give the rest of us (possibly) a chance to do some programming for the motion engine. That would be fun.
Adobe would be in the right: Elcomsoft has no right to *sell* products whose purpose is to disable Adobe's encryption, esp. when such knowledge was gained through reverse-engineering.
So you are saying that Adobe, who sells a software that is plainly illegal in Russia, is in a position to sue a Russian company full of Russian citizens because they went and reverse engineered an Adobe product so that it would be legal? First, it seems to me that Elcomsoft actually gave Adobe an out - they (possibly) made the software legal in countries where they actually protect their citizens' rights. Second, since when is reverse engineering illegal? I guess I don't know Russian law, but if they actually bother to protect their citizen's right to fair use I'm going to to guess that the haven't sold them up the river when it comes to reverse engineering.
This isn't an issue of changing the password. It's an issue of SQLServer 7.0 having no "Stand alone" security mode. In 6.5 you could use the "Stand alone" or "Mixed" mode. In 7.0, only mixed mode is available. The manner in which the application was designed required that it have "Stand alone" security. Of course Oracle has a password that should be changed, but Oracle is ALWAYS on "Stand alone" security.
It wasn't so long ago that MSN's SQL servers were still set up with no password on the sa account, so apparently it's par for the course for SQL server admins to be incompetent.
default to "Click to raise"
Sorry, that should have been "click to focus with autoraise".
In the future, will all UIs have to have start buttons, control panels and taskbars to be considered usable?
Really, I'm not sure if it matters. With GNOME (and KDE, I'm not going to start THAT war) you can pretty much customize to your heart's content. It would be a simple thing to make the expected buttons say "Start" or what have you, but still leave it customizeable. For instance, most GUI's (even in LinuxLand) default to "Click to raise" (of course on MS this is the only option unless you install the resource kit - or is it tweakUI? - doesn't matter) so that they emulate MS's windowing style. Fine, whatever, I accept that something else would be confusing to certain people. Personally, though, if the window manager won't support "Focus strictly follows mouse" I'm not going to use it, because that's the only way I like to work. When it comes down to it I could care less what the defaults are, just as long as it remains configurable enough that I can use it the way I want to. All that said I'm still using WindowMaker without GNOME.
One last thought: this discussion has highlighted how many people have yet to understand that GNOME can use any of several window managers- including AfterStep, WindowMaker, Sawfish, Enlightenment, FVWM, FVWM2, Ice, and a bunch of others I haven't mentioned. Don't get the WM confused with the environment.
ROTFLMAO - great reply, good form!
This was something never before seen on slashdot- Myriad used correctly in a sentance and milquetoast spelled correctly!
Will the wonders never cease?
and so I don't sound like a complete idiot, it is also a good point.