Like, this one time, my friend and I used an acoustic coupler MoDem to summon this weird slutty girl named Lisa (though she kind of looked like Kelly LeBrock).
Not at all, and I apologize if I gave that impression. All I am saying is applications/operating systems/etc... should be disigned and set up so that "Joe-Average-user" should need to learn about the applications they are trying to configure before they can sabotage themselves.
Think of it this way: Bob, a "Sys-admin" (at least on paper), buys a computer at retailer-X for his company which he turns into a webserver with some "a-little-too-easy-to-configure-and-set-up" MS software.
Bob has more or less no idea about the underlying technologies and back-end systems that go into making his "server" work and he puts it directly on his 1.5/1.5 SDSL circuit with no protection. (He doesn't know any better, he got his MCSE from the back of a box of Captain Crunch [WAIT!, they did give away that whistle a while back, maybe that is a good place for budding techies to start])
Anyway, OS flame wars aside, to Bob, service packs, bug fixes, and security bulletins mean nothing (patches?! we don't need no stinkin' patches!)
Anyway, so Bob thinks he's the schitt because he set up his "server" all by himself and it works. For now, at least...
Three months later Bob's server contracts a Worm something big time and starts becoming a liability on the Internet and his company's LAN/WAN/etc.
So, if Bob had been forced to RTFM in order to set things up insecurely that might have alerted him to the fact that he was making himself vulnerable! Call me a romantic, but I don't think users make themselves vulnerable on purpose. At the very least, Bob would have ended up setting up his Web server with standard configuration, which I am suggesting should be a highly protected and locked down config by default.
Want to unlock things and make your systems unsecure? Learn the hows and whys of the systems first! It doesn't really effect the REAL techies out there because we know how to, and even enjoy, doing things like READING DOCUMENTATION and learning how to secure our systems. OK, I'm rambling now because I have to go out on a call on Wall Street but, I hopw I got my point across.
I don't want to take away anything from the user, I only want to hand them a box off the shelf that isn't a ticking time-bomb of unsecured services and daemons.
I think, in light of recent events, the default settings for operating systems should be "kid gloved".
Idiot proof everything, like the way the standard RedHat install sets up all basic command line functions to be verbose by default. And then as you learn more about what you're doing you can set these preferences to something else.
Don't forget, people, in general, hate to A) Read and B) Learn
Then, as the user becomes more proficient, s/he can set things up the way they like.
Think about it, if you don't know enough about something to know how to turn it on or off, do you really think you should be able to choose if it's on or off?
I will now announce my plans to create a pair of Khakis which have a pocket for my PDA right in the F-ing crotch. Have you seen the people who work those X-ray machines? I don't want Billy-Joe-Redneck checking out my package. That's just creepy.
Um. The company I work for will be put out of business by this bill, and we've secured the funding to take us to profitability by the end of the year.
And don't forget that while the Telcom act of '96 may not have visibly decreased your phone bill, might I suggest that you may be spending more time one the phone because it's now cheaper?
Also, the Telcom Act of '96 was not primarily to lower the cost of a phone call, it was to make the PSTN infastructure accessible to competing businesses (ie. Covad, who incidently spearheaded the lobying for that bill).
Don't forget that DSL technology is a lot older than the Telcom Act of '96. The phone companies lobying against the Telcom act were claiming all along that DSL and other UNE technologies would never work, and would cause mass confusion across the network, and outages, etc. When all along they were deploting DSLAMS in their COs across the country. The phone companies are now complaining that it's THE DSL PROVIDERS fault that DSL and UNE services are a mess and that they were right all along! And to that, all I have to say is maybe if the didn't keep changing the god damned procedures all the time, we'd know how to work with them to provision it.
SARCASM -But I'm sure that everything will become nice and warm and fuzzy once the Bell's are given back their monopoly. After all, everyone knows that monopoly's foster rapid technological advances, right? It's basic Evil Geniuses in a Nutshell 101.-/SARCASM
In conclusion -- Monopoly's (like the Bell company's and Microsoft) are bad. And Competition (like competetive phone company's and Linux based company's) are good.
So if the PDA/Phone had like a retractable hands free set or something like that? That would be cool, because then you could have the Phone/PDA unit in your hand while you talk to that person on the phone! You could also better utilize the features that are coming with phones nowadays. Like three way calling and wireless internet functions (i.e. web, WAP, email, etc...) Just a thought.
I'm not saying that thing doesn't exist, But certainly doesn't belong in that picture. Just compare the shadows from the iWalk and the box of Cigarettes to the left.
Not to mention that I doubt Apple would make anything with buttons that tiny so close together.
They don't care about what you have to say because that's the way the system is supposed to work. That's why they are called "Representatives". They represent the people who elect them, not the people who aren't in their district. And in an ideal society, they are supposed to be REPRESENTING their constituent's interests, not just their own.
I have sent emails to my Governor before (incidentally about that video game bill in CT) and I, too, immediately received an automated response back, but then a couple of days later I received a personalized email from one of his aides, thanking me and telling me that they passed on my message to the Governor (because he asked to be informed about praise or slander from the younger generation). Then several days later they even sent me a copy of the Governor's veto and ANOTHER personalized letter thanking me for my insight. Nothing too big, but it should at least show that politicians, or at least their aides, read their email.
Now I would bet (trying not to sound like a rant) that email from Joe Schmoe who's not from a politician's district was probably read, but not given the attention that you might have wanted.
Try this: Since your representative is supposed to be REPRESENTING your interests, and you want to speak out against another politician. Why not send a letter to the Rep from YOUR district and urge them to speak out against and/or inform the other politician or perhaps even (what the heck) the whole house?
Who knows? It might just all come together and work the way you'd like it to? Don't send a couple of emails to the wrong person, and then whine about it when they don't call you up personally.
After all, how does it go? "Learn the system and THEN f**k the system?"
Regardless. Lets not forget that no matter what it states in a EULA or any "contract" for that matter, there is no way you can "sign away" your own rights. And unless they are paying you to write software for them, it's HIGHLY unlikely that they could control the distribution of what you write. Think about it. It's a HUGE legal battle for a big corporation to chase after someone with a copy of DeCSS, and that's code that is a direct conflict with what their software is supposed to accomplish. I think even MS would have a hard time beating you up over some little app you code with their tool and then GPL. They'd have a hard time trying to lay any sort of claim to code written with their tools even if it said they were going to on the first line of the EULA in BOLD 24pt font.
I say go ahead and start using the tools they make availible, then GPL your code once the "final" version comes out.
Feeling a little elitist?
You should know, it is possible to state your opinion without adding all sorts of extra background information like that. It just broadcasts your insecurities.
And I think even though the plot was built on basic metaphysical philosophy, it did a good job of communicating a metaphysical plot without boring the average person and left plenty of room for some fabulous fight scenes (just in case there are any of those weirdos out there that still go to the movies just to be entertained and not for spiritual enlightenment).
And I think it should be noted that this movie does make some people think in directions that they wouldn't normally (that's good). And it kept a good balance between action romance and metaphysics (that's also good). So please don't beat down the movie just because it was too simple for your "cultured" taste.
Thx
PS: if you wanted to beat it down, you should have just said they ripped of the story from the Christian Bible... OH WAIT! that describes Star Wars too...
Has anyone been able to check if their filtering service can be circumvented using akamai?
It would be interesting to see just how far they've gone to prevent this 'decadence'.
Slashdot Mirror
Like, this one time, my friend and I used an acoustic coupler MoDem to summon this weird slutty girl named Lisa (though she kind of looked like Kelly LeBrock).
She was cool until the bikers came.
Think of it this way: Bob, a "Sys-admin" (at least on paper), buys a computer at retailer-X for his company which he turns into a webserver with some "a-little-too-easy-to-configure-and-set-up" MS software.
Bob has more or less no idea about the underlying technologies and back-end systems that go into making his "server" work and he puts it directly on his 1.5/1.5 SDSL circuit with no protection. (He doesn't know any better, he got his MCSE from the back of a box of Captain Crunch [WAIT!, they did give away that whistle a while back, maybe that is a good place for budding techies to start])
Anyway, OS flame wars aside, to Bob, service packs, bug fixes, and security bulletins mean nothing (patches?! we don't need no stinkin' patches!)
Anyway, so Bob thinks he's the schitt because he set up his "server" all by himself and it works. For now, at least...
Three months later Bob's server contracts a Worm something big time and starts becoming a liability on the Internet and his company's LAN/WAN/etc.
So, if Bob had been forced to RTFM in order to set things up insecurely that might have alerted him to the fact that he was making himself vulnerable! Call me a romantic, but I don't think users make themselves vulnerable on purpose. At the very least, Bob would have ended up setting up his Web server with standard configuration, which I am suggesting should be a highly protected and locked down config by default.
Want to unlock things and make your systems unsecure? Learn the hows and whys of the systems first! It doesn't really effect the REAL techies out there because we know how to, and even enjoy, doing things like READING DOCUMENTATION and learning how to secure our systems. OK, I'm rambling now because I have to go out on a call on Wall Street but, I hopw I got my point across.
I don't want to take away anything from the user, I only want to hand them a box off the shelf that isn't a ticking time-bomb of unsecured services and daemons.
Cheers!
Erich
Idiot proof everything, like the way the standard RedHat install sets up all basic command line functions to be verbose by default. And then as you learn more about what you're doing you can set these preferences to something else.
Don't forget, people, in general, hate to A) Read and B) Learn
Then, as the user becomes more proficient, s/he can set things up the way they like.
Think about it, if you don't know enough about something to know how to turn it on or off, do you really think you should be able to choose if it's on or off?
I will now announce my plans to create a pair of Khakis which have a pocket for my PDA right in the F-ing crotch. Have you seen the people who work those X-ray machines? I don't want Billy-Joe-Redneck checking out my package. That's just creepy.
And don't forget that while the Telcom act of '96 may not have visibly decreased your phone bill, might I suggest that you may be spending more time one the phone because it's now cheaper?
Also, the Telcom Act of '96 was not primarily to lower the cost of a phone call, it was to make the PSTN infastructure accessible to competing businesses (ie. Covad, who incidently spearheaded the lobying for that bill).
Don't forget that DSL technology is a lot older than the Telcom Act of '96. The phone companies lobying against the Telcom act were claiming all along that DSL and other UNE technologies would never work, and would cause mass confusion across the network, and outages, etc. When all along they were deploting DSLAMS in their COs across the country. The phone companies are now complaining that it's THE DSL PROVIDERS fault that DSL and UNE services are a mess and that they were right all along! And to that, all I have to say is maybe if the didn't keep changing the god damned procedures all the time, we'd know how to work with them to provision it.
SARCASM -But I'm sure that everything will become nice and warm and fuzzy once the Bell's are given back their monopoly. After all, everyone knows that monopoly's foster rapid technological advances, right? It's basic Evil Geniuses in a Nutshell 101.- /SARCASM
In conclusion -- Monopoly's (like the Bell company's and Microsoft) are bad. And Competition (like competetive phone company's and Linux based company's) are good.
You could also better utilize the features that are coming with phones nowadays. Like three way calling and wireless internet functions (i.e. web, WAP, email, etc...)
Just a thought.
Cheers!
Not to mention that I doubt Apple would make anything with buttons that tiny so close together.
Cheers.
I have sent emails to my Governor before (incidentally about that video game bill in CT) and I, too, immediately received an automated response back, but then a couple of days later I received a personalized email from one of his aides, thanking me and telling me that they passed on my message to the Governor (because he asked to be informed about praise or slander from the younger generation).
Then several days later they even sent me a copy of the Governor's veto and ANOTHER personalized letter thanking me for my insight. Nothing too big, but it should at least show that politicians, or at least their aides, read their email.
Now I would bet (trying not to sound like a rant) that email from Joe Schmoe who's not from a politician's district was probably read, but not given the attention that you might have wanted.
Try this:
Since your representative is supposed to be REPRESENTING your interests, and you want to speak out against another politician. Why not send a letter to the Rep from YOUR district and urge them to speak out against and/or inform the other politician or perhaps even (what the heck) the whole house?
Who knows? It might just all come together and work the way you'd like it to?
Don't send a couple of emails to the wrong person, and then whine about it when they don't call you up personally.
After all, how does it go?
"Learn the system and THEN f**k the system?"
That's just my 2%
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Regardless. Lets not forget that no matter what it states in a EULA or any "contract" for that matter, there is no way you can "sign away" your own rights.
And unless they are paying you to write software for them, it's HIGHLY unlikely that they could control the distribution of what you write.
Think about it. It's a HUGE legal battle for a big corporation to chase after someone with a copy of DeCSS, and that's code that is a direct conflict with what their software is supposed to accomplish.
I think even MS would have a hard time beating you up over some little app you code with their tool and then GPL. They'd have a hard time trying to lay any sort of claim to code written with their tools even if it said they were going to on the first line of the EULA in BOLD 24pt font.
I say go ahead and start using the tools they make availible, then GPL your code once the "final" version comes out.
Just my 2%
Yes, let's not forget that according to Microsoft, Linux is the cancer.
I wish this discussion was taking place somewhere that would be read by someone who is directly involved with this.
PLEASE, if anyone here is directly involved with this, take charge and dispell the myths.
Good Point.
Feeling a little elitist?
You should know, it is possible to state your opinion without adding all sorts of extra background information like that. It just broadcasts your insecurities.
And I think even though the plot was built on basic metaphysical philosophy, it did a good job of communicating a metaphysical plot without boring the average person and left plenty of room for some fabulous fight scenes (just in case there are any of those weirdos out there that still go to the movies just to be entertained and not for spiritual enlightenment).
And I think it should be noted that this movie does make some people think in directions that they wouldn't normally (that's good). And it kept a good balance between action romance and metaphysics (that's also good). So please don't beat down the movie just because it was too simple for your "cultured" taste.
Thx
PS: if you wanted to beat it down, you should have just said they ripped of the story from the Christian Bible... OH WAIT! that describes Star Wars too...
Has anyone been able to check if their filtering service can be circumvented using akamai? It would be interesting to see just how far they've gone to prevent this 'decadence'.