FTA: "The central problem with the EMV protocol is that it allows the card and the terminal to generate ambiguous data about the verification process, which the bank will accept as valid... while a PIN must be entered, any PIN code would be accepted by the terminal."
That's a serious flaw. You've got to insist on data being valid if you are going to record it as valid.
It's a good thing that we don't rely on ambiguous data in any other part of life.
It probably doesn't run the obscure vertical apps that you've never heard of but everyone seems to need.
Probably depends on that vertical app. According to Apple, "[As] an Open Brand UNIX 03 Registered Product, Mac OS X Server can compile and run all your existing UNIX code. So you can deploy it in environments that demand full conformance, complete with hooks to maintain compatibility with existing software."
Just because you've never heard of it, hardly means it doesn't happen.
Companies in creative industries (e.g. like R/GA) are typically a mix of Macs and PCs, but you probably knew that. But in 30+ years of supporting computers, I've seen plenty of mixed organizations. Usually they'll have 90% PCs with a handful of Macs for either (a) the creative types in the design department, or (b) the people who demanded one because it was "better" in some way. Heck, nearly 20 years ago I came across a lab full of heavily-used Mac IIci's and IIfx's at an IBM research facility, and that was in the old Motorola 680x0 heyday (e.g. before the IBM-Motorola PowerPC developments).
And your estimation of cost is not quite correct. Training and migration, yes. But overall total ownership cost is generally less over a Mac's lifetime than with a Windows computer, even if the original purchase price was significantly more. I have seen this over and over. A university I previously worked at had roughly 600 PCs and employed one full-time computer technician for every 50 PCs... and for their ~100 Macs, they employed one half-time Mac guy. Same level of support.
Hell, the only major software released for OS X has either been (poorly) written by Apple, or has been writen by a company that Apple bought specifically so they wouldn't be able to release a Windows version of the software.
None of you seem pissed that Barbie keeps getting rebooted every generation or would you prefer she stayed in the Kitchen barefoot and pregnate while Ken worked his union job driving a bus and threatening to punch Barbie "To the moon?"
Sir, I salute you in lieu of mod points that I don't have. You captured my sentiments exactly.
Unfortunately, they plan on combining this law with the legal precedent set over here, which means that every subversive in the whole country will have to register with the South Carolina Secretary of State.
I've had caffeine today, and I also found this confusing.
It sounds like one schoolkid bully saying to another, "When I see you after school, I'm going to kick your ass." He hasn't yet done the ass-kicking; in fact, the showdown won't happen until some time in the future. But he's showing off his swagger to prove his bravado, intimidate the opposition, and/or try to impress his buddies.
I think people only support this because of the nature of the videos in the case. From TFA: "The videos featured scenes of vomiting and urination, depicting women being forced to ingest various bodily fluids."
Personally, I think that sounds really disgusting and disturbing, not titillating at all, and I'm pretty liberal in my thinking. A "conservative" American would probably have a apoplectic attack of Biblical proportions at the thought of such videos.
But, I'm more disgusted and disturbed by the ruling in thise case, which we could describe thusly: "The ruling featured scenes of censorship and nanny states, depicting citizens being forced to endure various cruelties to their freedom."
And it's situations like this which make the general public distrust scientists, or even science in general.
The media plays a major role, as well -- it oversimplifies and dramatizes scientific research as if it comes to conclusions that it usually doesn't -- but when it comes to light that a scientist has made a mistake, or that a research paper has had false premises or inaccurate results, then the average Joe Public thinks to himself, "Can't trust those scientists. Shoulda known."
Why is it that people doing what people do naturally -- looking out for their own interests -- is normal and acceptable when you do it, but evil and wrong when somebody else does it?
Natural?! This is a Christian nation. As such, we do not look out for our own interests, but instead follow the Biblical commands to do nothing out of selfish ambition, vanity, or conceit, but in humility consider others better than ourselves. Each of us looks not only to our own interests, but also to the interests of others. We are peace-loving, considerate, full of mercy and good works, impartial and sincere.
As someone who has worked in marketing, technology, and product development... I'd say you summed up the situation pretty well. On a forum for marketing pros, you could reverse most of your points and get a decent picture of how marketing folks view programmers and product devs.
I think the key problem is noted in your #2: "We see marketing staff pulling in 2-3 times what we make (or more) while not actually producing anything of value (according to how we ascribe value)." Everybody has different opinions of value. But it's a chicken-and-egg problem. Which came first, the product, or the demand for the product? A marketer is supposed to deliver demand for a product; a good marketer will do it on a phenomenal level, and possibly even without resorting to deceptive tactics. But, without the product, there is nothing for the marketer to do. They need each other.
Should marketers make 2x or 3x the pay? Depends. A senior, proven marketer should make 3x more than a middling developer. But a senior, proven engineer should have some kind of parity. Also, marketing is inherently riskier: if you fail to produce demand and therefore sales, you're likely to lose the account, if not your job. But engineers, in my experience, tend to be more insulated from sales ebbs. (emphasis on "tend")
I never said anything about the hardware, only the OS powering it.
Quite true. I shouldn't have inserted the hardware comment.
I still think the OS is perfectly capable of multitasking because it DOES multitask very nicely. I guess I was trying to differentiate between "The iPhone OS is incapable of multitasking" and "Apple has simply introduced an artificial limit on multitasking".
can it, say, play a YouTube video in the background while working on something in the foreground?
Actually, I bet it can.
The only reason it doesn't, is because of the OS. It isn't a hardware limitation. Apple apps can background just fine: you can listen to your iTunes library while playing a game, or look up something on Google Maps while you're talking on the phone. Apple simply does not allow non-Apple apps to run in the background.
At least, it doesn't allow it yet. If it becomes an issue for marketing/selling the device, you can be sure that the Almighty Jobs will wave his magic engineering wand and *presto* suddenly the iPhone will be able to multitask. Probably already has it working back in the lab... along with Flash.
Instead of the environment becoming more open it is becoming more closed. Are you deliberately trying to cloud the issue?
No, I'm suggesting there are far more important kinds of lock-in to worry about. Also, by the way, today you have far more choices, as a whole, than ever before... lock-in is only within each choice. If you don't have the means to own health insurance -- or an iPad -- then lock-in is a moot point.
You might notice all the unlicensed cartridge crap went away...
Exactly so. Thank you for answering this little position from the article: "If the first personal computers required permission from the manufacturer for each new program or new feature, the history of computing would be as dismally totalitarian as the milieu in Apple's famous Super Bowl ad."
If people want a choice, they should GET a choice - use the app store, or don't. Instead, Apple's making the choice for you.
Are you serious? Is Steve Jobs now running the government??? You do not need to buy an Apple product. I hear Google has some stuff going on in this area....
Furthermore, none of this is required of any consumer. The government is not handing these out to schoolchildren. They don't come free in the mail. You won't be required to own one in order to buy groceries or flush the toilet. It's a fricking LUXURY ITEM, folks. You buy all its locked-in glory BY CHOICE.
Also, as someone who owned a number of various personal computers in the 70s and 80s, I'd say there was tacit lock-in simply because of incompatibility between all the nascent hardware and OSes. But worse, some home computers (example) actually had hardware that locked out unlicensed cartridges from running.
If the sky is falling right now, then it has been raining sky for a long time. I mean, if you're going to complain about lock-in, how about the current state of American health insurance?
Only last week it was reported that the first file-sharing trial in the UK had ended in acquittal. Alan Ellis, the founder of large-scale pirate music website Oink's Pink Palace, was cleared of defrauding thousands of pounds from record labels and musicians on the grounds that Oink did not host any music itself, but simply indexed the files users had available on their computers. “All I do is really like Google, to really provide a connection between people,” he told police officers.
The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) is now preparing to launch civil proceedings against Ellis, claiming that the verdict was a “terrible disappointment” which shows that “the law is so out of touch with where life is these days”.
If the law is "out of touch with where life is these days," how can we possibly describe the distance of "out of touch" that truly reflects the recording industry?
"The recording industry is practically prehistoric compared with where life is these days."
"The recording industry is like a coprolite from the Mesozaic era compared with where life is these days."
"The recording industry should be called Homo Moronus compared with where life is these days."
"The recording industry is _____________________ compared with where life is these days."
Slashdot Mirror
FTA: "The central problem with the EMV protocol is that it allows the card and the terminal to generate ambiguous data about the verification process, which the bank will accept as valid... while a PIN must be entered, any PIN code would be accepted by the terminal."
That's a serious flaw. You've got to insist on data being valid if you are going to record it as valid.
It's a good thing that we don't rely on ambiguous data in any other part of life.
It probably doesn't run the obscure vertical apps that you've never heard of but everyone seems to need.
Probably depends on that vertical app. According to Apple, "[As] an Open Brand UNIX 03 Registered Product, Mac OS X Server can compile and run all your existing UNIX code. So you can deploy it in environments that demand full conformance, complete with hooks to maintain compatibility with existing software."
Just because you've never heard of it, hardly means it doesn't happen.
Companies in creative industries (e.g. like R/GA) are typically a mix of Macs and PCs, but you probably knew that. But in 30+ years of supporting computers, I've seen plenty of mixed organizations. Usually they'll have 90% PCs with a handful of Macs for either (a) the creative types in the design department, or (b) the people who demanded one because it was "better" in some way. Heck, nearly 20 years ago I came across a lab full of heavily-used Mac IIci's and IIfx's at an IBM research facility, and that was in the old Motorola 680x0 heyday (e.g. before the IBM-Motorola PowerPC developments).
And your estimation of cost is not quite correct. Training and migration, yes. But overall total ownership cost is generally less over a Mac's lifetime than with a Windows computer, even if the original purchase price was significantly more. I have seen this over and over. A university I previously worked at had roughly 600 PCs and employed one full-time computer technician for every 50 PCs... and for their ~100 Macs, they employed one half-time Mac guy. Same level of support.
Is the Xserve their attempt?
Just out of curiosity... what's your take on Xserve with Mac OS X Server?
Hell, the only major software released for OS X has either been (poorly) written by Apple, or has been writen by a company that Apple bought specifically so they wouldn't be able to release a Windows version of the software.
Huh??? What are you talking about?!
None of you seem pissed that Barbie keeps getting rebooted every generation or would you prefer she stayed in the Kitchen barefoot and pregnate while Ken worked his union job driving a bus and threatening to punch Barbie "To the moon?"
Sir, I salute you in lieu of mod points that I don't have. You captured my sentiments exactly.
Unfortunately, they plan on combining this law with the legal precedent set over here, which means that every subversive in the whole country will have to register with the South Carolina Secretary of State.
I've had caffeine today, and I also found this confusing.
It sounds like one schoolkid bully saying to another, "When I see you after school, I'm going to kick your ass." He hasn't yet done the ass-kicking; in fact, the showdown won't happen until some time in the future. But he's showing off his swagger to prove his bravado, intimidate the opposition, and/or try to impress his buddies.
This machine specs out like a lady at my parents' house, and a slut in the bedroom.
Sir, I salute your ability to find a way to add innuendo to common computer specifications.
I think people only support this because of the nature of the videos in the case. From TFA: "The videos featured scenes of vomiting and urination, depicting women being forced to ingest various bodily fluids."
Personally, I think that sounds really disgusting and disturbing, not titillating at all, and I'm pretty liberal in my thinking. A "conservative" American would probably have a apoplectic attack of Biblical proportions at the thought of such videos.
But, I'm more disgusted and disturbed by the ruling in thise case, which we could describe thusly: "The ruling featured scenes of censorship and nanny states, depicting citizens being forced to endure various cruelties to their freedom."
And it's situations like this which make the general public distrust scientists, or even science in general.
The media plays a major role, as well -- it oversimplifies and dramatizes scientific research as if it comes to conclusions that it usually doesn't -- but when it comes to light that a scientist has made a mistake, or that a research paper has had false premises or inaccurate results, then the average Joe Public thinks to himself, "Can't trust those scientists. Shoulda known."
Why is it that people doing what people do naturally -- looking out for their own interests -- is normal and acceptable when you do it, but evil and wrong when somebody else does it?
Natural?! This is a Christian nation. As such, we do not look out for our own interests, but instead follow the Biblical commands to do nothing out of selfish ambition, vanity, or conceit, but in humility consider others better than ourselves. Each of us looks not only to our own interests, but also to the interests of others. We are peace-loving, considerate, full of mercy and good works, impartial and sincere.
Oh wait.
I'm against the idea of an internet license.
However, I'd support the idea of a five-hour safety course for first-time Internet users.
As someone who has worked in marketing, technology, and product development... I'd say you summed up the situation pretty well. On a forum for marketing pros, you could reverse most of your points and get a decent picture of how marketing folks view programmers and product devs.
I think the key problem is noted in your #2: "We see marketing staff pulling in 2-3 times what we make (or more) while not actually producing anything of value (according to how we ascribe value)." Everybody has different opinions of value. But it's a chicken-and-egg problem. Which came first, the product, or the demand for the product? A marketer is supposed to deliver demand for a product; a good marketer will do it on a phenomenal level, and possibly even without resorting to deceptive tactics. But, without the product, there is nothing for the marketer to do. They need each other.
Should marketers make 2x or 3x the pay? Depends. A senior, proven marketer should make 3x more than a middling developer. But a senior, proven engineer should have some kind of parity. Also, marketing is inherently riskier: if you fail to produce demand and therefore sales, you're likely to lose the account, if not your job. But engineers, in my experience, tend to be more insulated from sales ebbs. (emphasis on "tend")
Well, technically, from your link...
"I will immediately after the election move to repeal the law retrospectively."
So, it's in effect until after the election.
It's analogous to reading code for yourself. "What? You want COMMENTED code? Loser."
I never said anything about the hardware, only the OS powering it.
Quite true. I shouldn't have inserted the hardware comment.
I still think the OS is perfectly capable of multitasking because it DOES multitask very nicely. I guess I was trying to differentiate between "The iPhone OS is incapable of multitasking" and "Apple has simply introduced an artificial limit on multitasking".
My apologies if I'm splitting hairs.
can it, say, play a YouTube video in the background while working on something in the foreground?
Actually, I bet it can.
The only reason it doesn't, is because of the OS. It isn't a hardware limitation. Apple apps can background just fine: you can listen to your iTunes library while playing a game, or look up something on Google Maps while you're talking on the phone. Apple simply does not allow non-Apple apps to run in the background.
At least, it doesn't allow it yet. If it becomes an issue for marketing/selling the device, you can be sure that the Almighty Jobs will wave his magic engineering wand and *presto* suddenly the iPhone will be able to multitask. Probably already has it working back in the lab... along with Flash.
Hear, hear.
Instead of the environment becoming more open it is becoming more closed. Are you deliberately trying to cloud the issue?
No, I'm suggesting there are far more important kinds of lock-in to worry about. Also, by the way, today you have far more choices, as a whole, than ever before... lock-in is only within each choice. If you don't have the means to own health insurance -- or an iPad -- then lock-in is a moot point.
You might notice all the unlicensed cartridge crap went away...
Exactly so. Thank you for answering this little position from the article: "If the first personal computers required permission from the manufacturer for each new program or new feature, the history of computing would be as dismally totalitarian as the milieu in Apple's famous Super Bowl ad."
If people want a choice, they should GET a choice - use the app store, or don't. Instead, Apple's making the choice for you.
Are you serious? Is Steve Jobs now running the government??? You do not need to buy an Apple product. I hear Google has some stuff going on in this area....
Furthermore, none of this is required of any consumer. The government is not handing these out to schoolchildren. They don't come free in the mail. You won't be required to own one in order to buy groceries or flush the toilet. It's a fricking LUXURY ITEM, folks. You buy all its locked-in glory BY CHOICE.
Also, as someone who owned a number of various personal computers in the 70s and 80s, I'd say there was tacit lock-in simply because of incompatibility between all the nascent hardware and OSes. But worse, some home computers (example) actually had hardware that locked out unlicensed cartridges from running.
If the sky is falling right now, then it has been raining sky for a long time. I mean, if you're going to complain about lock-in, how about the current state of American health insurance?
You must be new here. We don't diss Firefox.
</obligatory>
FTA:
If the law is "out of touch with where life is these days," how can we possibly describe the distance of "out of touch" that truly reflects the recording industry?
What say you?