So it says: OK, we have an official copy of Windows XP installed. Does this mean that the system is now secure? Hardly. What would something like this, even if it worked flawlessly, protect the user from?
No, you aren't dense...just fooled by the doublespeak that Microsoft and the like use when describing this type of Digital Restriction Mechanisms. You aren't supposed to trust the hardware or software - this system is not being created to protect the user from anything. The intent is to protect developers (of software or media) from the users.
Think of it as a way for Microsoft to write an OS - however buggy and insecure you like - and, supposedly, have the ability to run programs and display media with the knowledge that it is secure from being manipulated or used by the user in a way that Microsoft does not want.
The linked article does not dispute Moore's Law, it merely does the following (from the article):
"The present paper argues that Moore's Law has not been a driver in the development of microelectronics or information technology. "
I guess that depends on what you mean by driver. In the hardware world, engineers and managers - especially at Intel - are acutely aware of the impact Moore's Law. It has become the primary driver for the rapid advancement of processor speed. The paper basically says this same thing.
Whether Moore's Law has accurately described the rate at which processors have advanced is insanely trivial to study: did the number double in x amount of time? To say that Moore's Law is wrong misses the point that it was an estimate that has been adopted by the industry, the press, and the public to express expectations of processor advancement and a simple measure to view that advancement. It isn't a law like gravity, nor is it a law like the speed limit: it is a driver in the development of microprocessor technology, though.
It will be interesting to see how much of an effect this has on sales but, more importantly, what will this do to pricing of the hardcover books?
A lot of computer books are already quite expensive and I can see them becoming even more expensive with this model - the lost sales revenue is going to be made up somewhere, right?
Also, what is the exposure going to be? I highly doubt B&N is going to be placing a link next to these titles saying "Oh, by the way, you can download this $60 book for free right here...but please buy it from us anyway." Will information about obtaining a softcopy be prominent in the books? What format are the books going to be released in - text, Acrobat?
However, they're not going to be making money on the hardware any time in the near future. Therefore, people buying the X-box then not buying any games is pretty devestating.
The reason it may help Microsoft is in quality and number of games created for the XBox. Which will then fuel more platform sales and games bought. People always say that game platforms wars are won or lost through the games, right? If the better games are created for the Xbox - and consquently, the XBox2 - then it will be more of a success in terms of platforms sold and games sold. Which then helps Microsoft.
One major barrier to the adoption of Linux on the desktop is the percieved lack of familiar applications, and Photoshop and Word are high on the list.
This is the most often reason for Linux not being adopted on the desktop that I see. Why does it matter? What would possess someone to switch OS's just to use the same program that has been shoehorned into a different OS? If something is working (i.e. Photoshop running on an Apple) there isn't a compelling reason to switch. The percieved lack of familiar programs is usually just preventing people that already using Linux from using it full time.
If Photoshop or Office was native to a Linux desktop then that may put a dent - but only a very small dent, look at Apple's success - in the desktop world. Why is it so hard for Linux advocates to accept that Linux belongs as a server, for now. Now that it has pretty, user-friendly UI's people want to force it on the desktop for everyone...maybe that isn't right, though.
It would take some killer app (or a significant outside influence) to get the regular Joe-user to switch from a system that works to the point they expect (i.e. Windows, with the occasional crash now in XP) to Linux.
So "Data-mining companies have been among the hardest hit in recent years" is claimed by Time.com, which goes on to use MicroStrategy as a prime example of a company that skyrocketed in value and plummeted in the "tech crash" later. Oh, and by the way, they also overstated earnings. What these articles about the "tech crash" need to do is normalize the comparisions, because these companies that balloned in value so much, then crashed, probably just experienced a slight correction due to the stupid values they attained to begin with!
As for datamining itself: more power to them. The government gaining the ability to mine the data it already have should mean that we don't need more organizations, more intrusive investigations, etc. Every report or credible news item about post-9/11 studies indicates that we already had enough information, so there should be no need to create new laws that allow for more information to be collected. Just use what you have already, kthx.
What would be nice is if this data-mining allowed Muslims living in the U.S. to stop having to wrry whenever they go outside. Look at the information publicly available, that may provide patterns of "nonobvious" connections, and let people live thier lives in peace, regardless of background.
As a consumer, everything I do in public I consider public information. If a business uses this to better serve me, all the better. Maybe this will mean I don't have to watch feminine ads on TV, or the phone gets answered faster when I call. Maybe it just means that the customer rep knows my name and what I bought already.
And people wonder why it is so hard to make money in the computer game industry...how many people, getting paid how much, have worked for so long to make this game? What are the chances it will come even close to breaking even? If every person that owned a computer bought a copy of this game, at the insane price it would have to be, would that even be enough?
It has been said before but bears repeating: the games of yesteryear had something that all these new games, with their fancy graphics and supposedly advanced AIs, still can't seem to replace. Repeat after us Mr. Game developers: it's all the gameplay.
Is this guy for real? Every sysadmin professional I know complains about the users, the hours, the pay and their job security.
That's the complaint almost everyone has about their job if they are in the wrong place. This can mean that their workplace is no good, the person just doesn't "fit", or that person isn't really as good as they would like to think.
When you say marketing, you are thinking about the in your face, look at this ad, by our product type advertising.
Marketing is supposed to be the department that determines who the potential customers are, what they may want to buy, for how much, and let the rest of company (i.e. engineering) know.
Marketing should be determining the future direction of a company. When engineers try to determine if a new product has any merit (will people buy it?) that is marketing - not advertising.
Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 19,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and perhaps only weigh 1.5 tons.
- Popular Mechanics, March 1949.
(Try the laptop version!)
I'm still not sure why Sklyarov is being prosecuted in the U.S. The alleged "crime" took place in Russia where his actions were perfectly legal. Why is an act, which may be in violation of US law, but which took place completely outside US jurisdiction being tried in a US court?
Because he came to the U.S. and distributed the software.
Suppose that the Kingdom of Tuva passes a law making it a crime for any politician to accept a campaign donation from any corporation or individual who receives any benefit from a vote cast by that politician. Can the Kingdom of Tuva then try the entire US Congress? Is this any different than the US trying Dmitry?
If the entire Congress goes to Tuva, accepts a donation and then votes in Tuva: Yes.
This isn't like the U.S. made some crappy law (though they did) and then raided Sklyarov's house in Mother Russia because he wrote this software...He wrote the software, came here, and distrubuted - thus violating the law.
If I go to Singapore and spray paint on cars, you can bet your ass that mine will be quite red if I get caught - even if spray painting cars is legal in the country I came from.
"Of course, there will always be the geek with the 'use-it-my-way-or-f*ck-off'-attitude. For me however, talking to customers and trying to understand what they want (as opposed to what they tell you) was always a big part of what made developing software fun and satisfying."
I think it is always unreasonable for either person to do the other's job: that is why there are two people there. Nothing gets an enduser more upset than not being able to do what he wants - being forced to do something one way because the programmer likes it doesn't cut it.
At the same time, the enduser shouldn't try to write the software! Instead, describing what the user would want to do with the software, discussing it with the programmer, and letting the programmer decide the best way to implement it should be how it is done....I've yet to see it happen well, though. Both sides have egos to protect, it seems. The endusers are dumb and don't know what they want; the programmers don't understand what the enduser wants to do or why he needs it.
The biggest complaint seems to be feature-creep or missed specifications because the enduser wasn't aware of what he wanted. This is where programmers typically need help, it seems. The figuring out what the customer wants and finding out how to implement seems to be a very low priority for most programmers...
A business webpage is analogous to advertising, right? Seems some businesses, and industries, do just fine without it.
It all depends on your target market, to an extent, and how much your business can be helped by getting information out via the web. With the number of people getting "online" increasing, I'm sure we will see more and more companies that don't already have a presence on the 'net, get one.
The other side of this, though, is that the majority of people aren't online yet and this idea that a company couldn't survive without a 'net presence smacks of elitism.
What about the anti-trust decision? How did that affect the Samba team: will they have better access to interoperability specifications? What about security protocols and API - can they get these? Do they need them?
As more and more of Microsoft's efforts start going towards Palladium, how will this affect Samba?
Not trying to create FUD but I'm just curious where things are heading. As it is now, anyone could setup a Samba server - which is great - and anything that makes interoperability between these operating systems is good, good for users of both OS's.
I didn't see the ability to search for Windows MD5 hashes.
Considering its history of vulnerabilities, I'd think that this would be pretty important...
Well, if you realized that those vulnerabilities were in the released and correct versions of the Windows software it wouldn't seem that important. Unless you just wanted to prove that you had an insecure version of some software...
a new domain suffix is NOT a suitable substitute for responsible adult supervision.
No, it isn't. What I don't understand, though, is why people give a shit about this! It does not hurt you. It doesn't limit your rights. It affects you in no way whatsoever! All it does is make a group of internet sites that parents can reasonably assume are kid oriented.
This does not alleviate parents of the task of taking care of their kids, of watching what they do, and keeping an interest in the activities a kid performs - it simply creates a way for parents to limit a child browsing activities if that parent so desires!
This doesn't lock them into a pisspoor subset of the internet unless that parent wants them to be. What happens when a parent isn't around - do you just let them go anywhere? How unreasonable is it to NOT give parents the ability to restrict thier children to a "piss poor subset" when they can't actively monitor what the child is looking at?
I'm available to answer questions this lame at any time in the future...I'm sure they will be just as entertaining answers that/.'ers are welcome to read more into than I really intended...
Wasn't the big benefit that came with ext3 the journaling capacity? Is there some type of journaling that the normal, lay user, isn't aware of?
How can you verify that this option is not enabled? What, if it is enabled, can be done about it now - can you change the filesystem type (e.g. revert to ext2) or is all hope lost?
I use Fandango every now and then, without a hitch. It is actually convenient to be able to buy the tickets and not have to worry about waiting in line at the theatre - just go to the counter, that has almost not line - and get mine. Considering the price for movies now, the $1 per ticket is not that much compared to how much time I can save.
And what of it? When did Microsoft trademark Windows as a term by itself? Is this the extent of the trademark, or is it only when used in reference to software (any software?) or operating system? What do I call these things that pop up on my screen when I doubleclick on icon, if not windows?? I seriously hope they go to court and lose - then they will have to think up better named for their product like Intel did when it found out trademarking a number wasn't such a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you aren't dense...just fooled by the doublespeak that Microsoft and the like use when describing this type of Digital Restriction Mechanisms. You aren't supposed to trust the hardware or software - this system is not being created to protect the user from anything. The intent is to protect developers (of software or media) from the users.
Think of it as a way for Microsoft to write an OS - however buggy and insecure you like - and, supposedly, have the ability to run programs and display media with the knowledge that it is secure from being manipulated or used by the user in a way that Microsoft does not want.
"The present paper argues that Moore's Law has not been a driver in the development of microelectronics or information technology. "
I guess that depends on what you mean by driver. In the hardware world, engineers and managers - especially at Intel - are acutely aware of the impact Moore's Law. It has become the primary driver for the rapid advancement of processor speed. The paper basically says this same thing.
Whether Moore's Law has accurately described the rate at which processors have advanced is insanely trivial to study: did the number double in x amount of time? To say that Moore's Law is wrong misses the point that it was an estimate that has been adopted by the industry, the press, and the public to express expectations of processor advancement and a simple measure to view that advancement. It isn't a law like gravity, nor is it a law like the speed limit: it is a driver in the development of microprocessor technology, though.
A lot of computer books are already quite expensive and I can see them becoming even more expensive with this model - the lost sales revenue is going to be made up somewhere, right?
Also, what is the exposure going to be? I highly doubt B&N is going to be placing a link next to these titles saying "Oh, by the way, you can download this $60 book for free right here...but please buy it from us anyway." Will information about obtaining a softcopy be prominent in the books? What format are the books going to be released in - text, Acrobat?
The reason it may help Microsoft is in quality and number of games created for the XBox. Which will then fuel more platform sales and games bought. People always say that game platforms wars are won or lost through the games, right? If the better games are created for the Xbox - and consquently, the XBox2 - then it will be more of a success in terms of platforms sold and games sold. Which then helps Microsoft.
This is the most often reason for Linux not being adopted on the desktop that I see. Why does it matter? What would possess someone to switch OS's just to use the same program that has been shoehorned into a different OS? If something is working (i.e. Photoshop running on an Apple) there isn't a compelling reason to switch. The percieved lack of familiar programs is usually just preventing people that already using Linux from using it full time.
If Photoshop or Office was native to a Linux desktop then that may put a dent - but only a very small dent, look at Apple's success - in the desktop world. Why is it so hard for Linux advocates to accept that Linux belongs as a server, for now. Now that it has pretty, user-friendly UI's people want to force it on the desktop for everyone...maybe that isn't right, though.
It would take some killer app (or a significant outside influence) to get the regular Joe-user to switch from a system that works to the point they expect (i.e. Windows, with the occasional crash now in XP) to Linux.
As for datamining itself: more power to them. The government gaining the ability to mine the data it already have should mean that we don't need more organizations, more intrusive investigations, etc. Every report or credible news item about post-9/11 studies indicates that we already had enough information, so there should be no need to create new laws that allow for more information to be collected. Just use what you have already, kthx.
What would be nice is if this data-mining allowed Muslims living in the U.S. to stop having to wrry whenever they go outside. Look at the information publicly available, that may provide patterns of "nonobvious" connections, and let people live thier lives in peace, regardless of background.
As a consumer, everything I do in public I consider public information. If a business uses this to better serve me, all the better. Maybe this will mean I don't have to watch feminine ads on TV, or the phone gets answered faster when I call. Maybe it just means that the customer rep knows my name and what I bought already.
It has been said before but bears repeating: the games of yesteryear had something that all these new games, with their fancy graphics and supposedly advanced AIs, still can't seem to replace. Repeat after us Mr. Game developers: it's all the gameplay.
That's the complaint almost everyone has about their job if they are in the wrong place. This can mean that their workplace is no good, the person just doesn't "fit", or that person isn't really as good as they would like to think.
When you say marketing, you are thinking about the in your face, look at this ad, by our product type advertising.
Marketing is supposed to be the department that determines who the potential customers are, what they may want to buy, for how much, and let the rest of company (i.e. engineering) know.
Marketing should be determining the future direction of a company. When engineers try to determine if a new product has any merit (will people buy it?) that is marketing - not advertising.
No Way! That would definitely burn my penis!
It's "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Not "Breaking news from around the world."
Because he came to the U.S. and distributed the software.
Suppose that the Kingdom of Tuva passes a law making it a crime for any politician to accept a campaign donation from any corporation or individual who receives any benefit from a vote cast by that politician. Can the Kingdom of Tuva then try the entire US Congress? Is this any different than the US trying Dmitry?
If the entire Congress goes to Tuva, accepts a donation and then votes in Tuva: Yes.
This isn't like the U.S. made some crappy law (though they did) and then raided Sklyarov's house in Mother Russia because he wrote this software...He wrote the software, came here, and distrubuted - thus violating the law.
If I go to Singapore and spray paint on cars, you can bet your ass that mine will be quite red if I get caught - even if spray painting cars is legal in the country I came from.
I think it is always unreasonable for either person to do the other's job: that is why there are two people there. Nothing gets an enduser more upset than not being able to do what he wants - being forced to do something one way because the programmer likes it doesn't cut it.
At the same time, the enduser shouldn't try to write the software! Instead, describing what the user would want to do with the software, discussing it with the programmer, and letting the programmer decide the best way to implement it should be how it is done....I've yet to see it happen well, though. Both sides have egos to protect, it seems. The endusers are dumb and don't know what they want; the programmers don't understand what the enduser wants to do or why he needs it.
The biggest complaint seems to be feature-creep or missed specifications because the enduser wasn't aware of what he wanted. This is where programmers typically need help, it seems. The figuring out what the customer wants and finding out how to implement seems to be a very low priority for most programmers...
It all depends on your target market, to an extent, and how much your business can be helped by getting information out via the web. With the number of people getting "online" increasing, I'm sure we will see more and more companies that don't already have a presence on the 'net, get one.
The other side of this, though, is that the majority of people aren't online yet and this idea that a company couldn't survive without a 'net presence smacks of elitism.
As Roblimo so elegantly put it earlier:
Whatever... It's a little different from our usual style, but variety is the spice of Slashdot.
As more and more of Microsoft's efforts start going towards Palladium, how will this affect Samba?
Not trying to create FUD but I'm just curious where things are heading. As it is now, anyone could setup a Samba server - which is great - and anything that makes interoperability between these operating systems is good, good for users of both OS's.
And haven't past trojaned programs come with MD5 checksums that matched? (thinking back the OpenSSH here...)
Well, if you realized that those vulnerabilities were in the released and correct versions of the Windows software it wouldn't seem that important. Unless you just wanted to prove that you had an insecure version of some software...
Knowing some off-color uses that people use socks for makes that comment more disturbing than it originally seems...
No, it isn't. What I don't understand, though, is why people give a shit about this! It does not hurt you. It doesn't limit your rights. It affects you in no way whatsoever! All it does is make a group of internet sites that parents can reasonably assume are kid oriented.
This does not alleviate parents of the task of taking care of their kids, of watching what they do, and keeping an interest in the activities a kid performs - it simply creates a way for parents to limit a child browsing activities if that parent so desires!
This doesn't lock them into a pisspoor subset of the internet unless that parent wants them to be. What happens when a parent isn't around - do you just let them go anywhere? How unreasonable is it to NOT give parents the ability to restrict thier children to a "piss poor subset" when they can't actively monitor what the child is looking at?
I'm available to answer questions this lame at any time in the future...I'm sure they will be just as entertaining answers that /.'ers are welcome to read more into than I really intended...
How can you verify that this option is not enabled? What, if it is enabled, can be done about it now - can you change the filesystem type (e.g. revert to ext2) or is all hope lost?
I use Fandango every now and then, without a hitch. It is actually convenient to be able to buy the tickets and not have to worry about waiting in line at the theatre - just go to the counter, that has almost not line - and get mine. Considering the price for movies now, the $1 per ticket is not that much compared to how much time I can save.
And what of it? When did Microsoft trademark Windows as a term by itself? Is this the extent of the trademark, or is it only when used in reference to software (any software?) or operating system? What do I call these things that pop up on my screen when I doubleclick on icon, if not windows?? I seriously hope they go to court and lose - then they will have to think up better named for their product like Intel did when it found out trademarking a number wasn't such a good idea.
Some get Hemos some coffee, please!