You want to sell products in Europe? Play by Europes rules. You want to sell products in China? Play by Chinese rules.
Tell me, how do you feel about it the other way around? Do you think BMW should be "forced" to abide by American safety standards on its cars? Do you think the Airbus should be "forced" to pay attention to the FAA when building its planes? Do you think that French wine manufacturers should be "forced" to agree to FDA labelling requirements?
What about the U.S. "winning" the battle against European subsidies for Airbus. Sounds like 'foreigners' doodling with a European company.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you're going to play on the world market, expect to following the rules of other jurisidictions. Otherwise, pull your products out.
MS doesn't have to pay the EC. They could simply withdraw from Europe, and totally ignore the EU's rules & fines & taxes. It's no one's fault but Microsoft.
On your Mac, as a default admin user, try and delete an application from your Applications directory?
Can you do it without typing in your password?
Nope; The directory is writable, however, the contents are not. Interesting, no? You can create new entries, but you cannot alter/delete existing entries.
Seems like a satisfactory security model to me. I guess it enables "spoofing" issues.
The telecos are an abomination of government subsidy and government sponsorship. Arguing that we should keep regulation away from them is nonsensical.
Even in an Ayn Randian world, the Telecos are a market failure, because they were created by the government. Unleashing the unregulated telecos on the cable market would be akin to release government engineered biological disease weapons on the world ecology to allow "natural selection" to run its course.
The telecos should be repossed by the government, stripped of their cash-assets to the states, and then "privatized" by having their physical assets sold on auction. Lines/Switching stations should become property of localities, with clauses that at minimum they must lease them to telecommunication companies, but with rights to do anything else including privization of these assets.
The teleco market is a heavily government subsided (and government created) market that needs economic shock therapy in order for the free market to even have a chance. Otherwise, the abomination should be kept strictly under regulation.
Let me remind you how AT&T was built. Let me remind you how AT&T was reassembled, much like Dr. Frankestein's Monster, for the portions of a dead monopoly.
And now that localities will loose control over the cable providers, the TV companies (teleco&cable) will no longer be forced to do stupid things like carry community (city) TV, meet local council requirements, or have regulated low-income pricing.
An important part to capitalism is that barriers to entry be fair. If Comcast has to overcome a certain set of legislation to enter a community, so should AT&T. And personally, I'm all for localization of law, not federalization. The more of our legislation that occurs in smaller and smaller governments, the better.
A federalist system is always better at serving constituents than a centralized system. The telecos are huge companies with significant presences (including personnel and offices) in each of these communities. There's nothing wrong with forcing them to go community by community in order to get their licensing.
Matters of national security are exempted from WTO rules: WTO-AGP: Articles XXIII: Exceptions to the Agreement 1. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent any Party from taking any action or not disclosing any information which it considers necessary for the protection of its essential security interests relating to the procurement of arms, ammunition or war materials, or to procurement indispensable for national security or for national defence purposes.
1. Microsoft cannot technically do that. WGA nonwithstanding, they don't have a "kill" switch for Windows. Even WGA doesn't actually "kill" Windows, it just prevents updates. 2. Governments grant copyright licenses, not corporations. The EU can easily say that Office&XP are no longer covered by copyright. Copy at will. Matter of national security. And guess what, in this instance they'd be right; you don't want the entire government to be beholden to a corporation that can pull its product on a whim. This would be the example that proved the theory. 3. You seriously underestimate Europe's capability to build and switch to a standard. GSM is a European invention, is required for mobile phone usage in Europe, and has spread worldwide. Any serious OS "incident" would result in Europe stabilizing on Linux (or something else) within a matter of months. In the short term, Europe would continue to use its legally "pirated" copies of Windows. In the long term? Something homegrown. Europe's good at that.
In short, you seriously overestimate the strength of Microsoft, and seriously underestimate Europe. Don't do that; we do not yet live in the true corporate plutocracy. And most of us don't want to. I'm glad that governments can win this fight.
To me, it makes much more sense to tell them what they must offer.
Microsoft must provide the documentation and APIs associated with programing Win32 applications, file formats, and network protocols. These must be avaliable at a nominal fee.
The Product contains
components that enable and facilitate the use of certain
Internet-based services. You know, like network drivers, a TCP/IP stack, Internet Explorer, and various command line tools.
You acknowledge and agree that
Microsoft may automatically check the version of the
Product and/or its components that you are utilizing
and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that
will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation
Computer.
If you use "teh internets" from your Windows box, Microsoft can install WGA. It's really that simple.
a) I have no idea. I don't use Windows. b & c) Have you read the legally binding contract you agreed to when you installed Windows? Nay; when you opened the shrinkwrap? I'll quote some sections for you: * Reservation of Rights. Microsoft reserves all rights not
expressly granted to you in this EULA....
* Consent to Use of Data. You agree that Microsoft and its
affiliates may collect and use technical information
gathered in any manner as part of the product support
services provided to you, if any, related to the Product.
Microsoft may use this information solely to improve
our products or to provide customized services or
technologies to you. Microsoft may disclose this
information to others, but not in a form that personally
identifies you.
* Internet Gaming/Update Features. If you choose to utilize
the Internet gaming or update features within the
Product, it is necessary to use certain computer system,
hardware, and software information to implement the
features. By using these features, you explicitly
authorize Microsoft or its designated agent to access
and utilize the necessary information for Internet gaming
and/or updating purposes. Microsoft may use this
information solely to improve our products or to provide
customized services or technologies to you. Microsoft
may disclose this information to others, but not in a
form that personally identifies you. * Internet-Based Services Components. The Product contains
components that enable and facilitate the use of certain
Internet-based services. You acknowledge and agree that
Microsoft may automatically check the version of the
Product and/or its components that you are utilizing
and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that
will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation
Computer. * Security Updates. Content providers are using the digital
rights management technology ("Microsoft DRM") contained
in this Product to protect the integrity of their content
("Secure Content") so that their intellectual property,
including copyright, in such content is not misappropriated. Owners of
such Secure Content ("Secure Content Owners") may, from
time to time, request Microsoft to provide security
related updates to the Microsoft DRM components of the
Product ("Security Updates") that may affect your ability
to copy, display and/or play Secure Content through
Microsoft software or third party applications that
utilize Microsoft DRM. You therefore agree that, if
you elect to download a license from the Internet which
enables your use of Secure Content, Microsoft may, in
conjunction with such license, also download onto your
computer such Security Updates that a Secure Content
Owner has requested that Microsoft distribute. Microsoft
will not retrieve any personally identifiable
information, or any other information, from your computer
by downloading such Security Updates.... 6. TERMINATION. Without prejudice to any other rights, Microsoft
may cancel this EULA if you do not abide by the terms and
conditions of this EULA, in which case you must destroy all
copies of the Product and all of its component parts.
In a nutshell, you explicitly authorize Microsoft to phone your PC, and update WGA. Also, you authorize Microsoft to install software on your system, and have it phone home at will. Furthermore, if you do not abide by these terms, Microsoft can cancel your license agreement, and your sole remody is to destroy your copy of Windows.
My parents run Linux now, as do my aunts and uncles. Family members that purchase new systems with XP preloaded do not get support from me. Older systems are grandfathered in.
My GF is happy with her new-ish powerbook, and I'll be having her dump Windows on her Desktop for SuSE; the only game she plays is World of Warcraft, anyways. Oh, and she uses Picassa. Which is on Linux now.
People don't get Windows support from me anymore. I don't help people pirate software anymore, either. I purchase a couple pieces of software for my Mac and Linux, run FOSS when possible, and refuse to subsidize the Microsoft monster with my time in tech support.
Cost of Linux = Cost of Pirated Windows. As such, many, many, many, many home users continue to use Windows.
Bring up the cost of Windows?
Cost of Linux 35 percent of PC software is pirated. I'm guessing that Windows XP is highly represented in that group (of pirated software; i.e. at least 30% of worldwide Windows installs are not legal). If even 10% of that user base decides to switch to Linux rather than pay the Windows tax, it'll be a substantial marketshare boost.
And the remaining 90%? They might decide that the MSRP cost of Windows is too close to the MSRP of a brand new dual core Mac.
I'm thrilled. MS has ridden on piracy marketshare for far too long. I hope they do every thing they possibly can to stamp out software piracy, and I hope they succeed.
Opensource Zealots, take heart; Our strongest licenses are copyright based. Should we wish to see the GPL upheld, we should support upholding MS's copyrights. The beauty of the OpenSource ecosystem is far easier to explain to people when they can't get pirated software free or for a minimal $1. Although Free is about Freedom, not Beer, it's much easier to explain that to the layman when it is Free, as in Freedom AND Beer.
Note: I don't mean to discourage you. But I do feel that eliminating many of the RIAA shenangians like this type of law, eliminating many of the DRM mechanisms out there, and, in general, eliminating the music "superstar" effect will make the music industry more egalitarian.
Us in the small business world are pretty happy being small fry, generally. Sure, every company wants to grow to GE, but the 4 man business in your garage and coffeeshop general doesn't get there. That doesn't mean you can't have a nice life.
Why doesn't the music industry work like this? Why is the music industry extremely segregated into haves and have-nots? I don't know; but I'm sure you can find the solution somewhere in the mechanations of the haves.
Here's a different perspective for you. You say: But I always saw these blank media taxes (along with early forms of DRM like Copy Code) as an unfair burden on musicians and songwriters who are at that difficult early phase of their career arcs. It may be a small percentage of the cost of media, but in the long run it adds up, and it's money that could be better spent on things like more media, guitar strings, drum sticks, software, hardware, and the all important elixirs: coffee and beer.
Let me re-write that for my viewpoint:
But I always saw these blank media taxes (along with early forms of DRM like Copy Code) as an unfair burden on small businesses and artists who are at that difficult early phase of their career arcs. It may be a small percentage of the cost of media, but in the long run it adds up, and it's money that could be better spent on things like more media, designers, thick-stock paper, software, hardware, and the all important elixirs: coffee and beer.
Not all media is used for aural or video works. Some of it is used for software, or even more mundane things like databases. Our lives are hard, too; we work like dogs, and while you're working like a dog out of your garage sweating blood, love, and music, we're working like dogs in our garages sweating blood, love, and .
We pass out CDs/DVDs with information on our products. These taxes make each and every one of these disks more important, even though they'll never touch audio or video works.
Previously, (before-VOIP), the USF was collected on telecom companies, and used by telecom companies to build out rural services.
Now, the FCC has extended the USF to include non-telecom companies, but the money will STILL be used by telecom companies to build out rural services!
It's gone from being a rural telephonification fund, to a subsidize AT&T fund via Vonage/Skype/Whoever revenues.
I think thats atrocious. I'm switching my company off AT&T this week. Sure, we'll still end up sending our USF to them, but at least they won't be getting our standard revenue anymore.
All I know is that this "fee" requires me to dump MY money into paying for telephone service for the boonies, via a telephone company that I hate. How is that capitalistic, again?
You want to live out in the boonies? Pay for your OWN damn wiring. Or use wireless. Or work together with your community.
Why does everyone expect the federal government to pay for their excesses in terms of where they live? Why do people who build houses on sand banks/flood plains expect national flood insurance? Why does New Orleans expect the country to create the worlds largest construction project to protect land that the sea is slowly reclaiming? Why Why Why?
If it doesn't make sense to live where you live, because of financial reasons, don't expect the government to bail you out. Unfortunately, we seem to live in the exact opposite situation; where you receive substantial federal benefits to build your "family" farm out in the middle of Nebraska, 100s of miles from anything, and the government will build your phone lines, and keep the prices of your crops high.
There is no restriction for Development under the OpenSource licenses to be done in secret. It's distribution/sales that requires source code, not development.
I suspect that the ODF doesn't want MS to break whatever APIs they are using for their plugin in Office 2007. Office 2007 is still _beta_ code. We've seen significant changes in the beta in the last few months, and theres nothing to stop these changes from occuring in the near future.
I have no fears whatsoever that ODF will release the plugin under an open-source license. Furthermore, if you feel that you could do the actual development work, the format is avaliable for all to see; there's nothing sketchy going on here.
Novell didn't release the XGL code until it was near-finished, because they a) wanted to WOW the world, b) didn't want to argue about their architectural decisions, and c) wanted to get it done by the SuSE PRO desktop release cycle for 10 (which hasn't occurred yet). There are other projects that operate under similar levels of secrecy; and there's _nothing_ wrong with that.
You're free to develop Open Source code in secret. You're free to use Open Source code in secret (think Google). The only time you need to share the source, is when you distribute the binary. That's the beauty of the GPL. Want to use a heavily modified linux for your cruise missile guidance code?
Fine. The only person you have to distribute it to is your customers, and they don't have to distribute it to anyone they don't want to. The essence of GPL style "freedom" is that when you get a piece of software, you get the guts of it, too; and you can redistribute any and all of it. GPL style "freedom" doesn't mean that the world as a whole gets your development time, or all the crap you strip out before you release your GPL code into the wild. It doesn't mean that a customer can demand all your alpha/beta versions before release, either. It just means that when you get a software "product", you get all the aspects of it, including distribution rights and source code.
That's essentially why the GPL is compatible with capitalism.
Nvidia's OEM drivers are universal. They run on everything.
ATI's OEM drivers are universal for desktops. They will run on laptop if and only if the laptop manufacturer pays them a licensing fee. You can use a third party tool to "unlock" the driver, or you can go in and edit the hardware IDs by hand.
Yet Another Reason to prefer Nvidia. I used to be a big ATI fan, but I've since then learned that Nvidia really has its driver handling down, in comparison. ATI's seen massive improvements, but given how far they still have to go (to compete with Nvidia) I'd say they aren't finished yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Disclaimer: I'm an American.
You're the kind of idiot that makes us look bad.
You want to sell products in Europe? Play by Europes rules.
You want to sell products in China? Play by Chinese rules.
Tell me, how do you feel about it the other way around? Do you think BMW should be "forced" to abide by American safety standards on its cars?
Do you think the Airbus should be "forced" to pay attention to the FAA when building its planes?
Do you think that French wine manufacturers should be "forced" to agree to FDA labelling requirements?
What about the U.S. "winning" the battle against European subsidies for Airbus. Sounds like 'foreigners' doodling with a European company.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you're going to play on the world market, expect to following the rules of other jurisidictions. Otherwise, pull your products out.
MS doesn't have to pay the EC. They could simply withdraw from Europe, and totally ignore the EU's rules & fines & taxes. It's no one's fault but Microsoft.
Required to have a password. Period.
It's more complicated than that.
On your Mac, as a default admin user, try and delete an application from your Applications directory?
Can you do it without typing in your password?
Nope; The directory is writable, however, the contents are not. Interesting, no? You can create new entries, but you cannot alter/delete existing entries.
Seems like a satisfactory security model to me. I guess it enables "spoofing" issues.
Mod parent up.
The telecos are an abomination of government subsidy and government sponsorship. Arguing that we should keep regulation away from them is nonsensical.
Even in an Ayn Randian world, the Telecos are a market failure, because they were created by the government. Unleashing the unregulated telecos on the cable market would be akin to release government engineered biological disease weapons on the world ecology to allow "natural selection" to run its course.
The telecos should be repossed by the government, stripped of their cash-assets to the states, and then "privatized" by having their physical assets sold on auction. Lines/Switching stations should become property of localities, with clauses that at minimum they must lease them to telecommunication companies, but with rights to do anything else including privization of these assets.
The teleco market is a heavily government subsided (and government created) market that needs economic shock therapy in order for the free market to even have a chance. Otherwise, the abomination should be kept strictly under regulation.
Let me remind you how AT&T was built. Let me remind you how AT&T was reassembled, much like Dr. Frankestein's Monster, for the portions of a dead monopoly.
Ah, yes.
And now that localities will loose control over the cable providers, the TV companies (teleco&cable) will no longer be forced to do stupid things like carry community (city) TV, meet local council requirements, or have regulated low-income pricing.
An important part to capitalism is that barriers to entry be fair. If Comcast has to overcome a certain set of legislation to enter a community, so should AT&T. And personally, I'm all for localization of law, not federalization. The more of our legislation that occurs in smaller and smaller governments, the better.
A federalist system is always better at serving constituents than a centralized system. The telecos are huge companies with significant presences (including personnel and offices) in each of these communities. There's nothing wrong with forcing them to go community by community in order to get their licensing.
Matters of national security are exempted from WTO rules:
WTO-AGP: Articles XXIII: Exceptions to the Agreement
1. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent any Party from taking any action or not disclosing any information which it considers necessary for the protection of its essential security interests relating to the procurement of arms, ammunition or war materials, or to procurement indispensable for national security or for national defence purposes.
1. Microsoft cannot technically do that. WGA nonwithstanding, they don't have a "kill" switch for Windows. Even WGA doesn't actually "kill" Windows, it just prevents updates.
2. Governments grant copyright licenses, not corporations. The EU can easily say that Office&XP are no longer covered by copyright. Copy at will. Matter of national security. And guess what, in this instance they'd be right; you don't want the entire government to be beholden to a corporation that can pull its product on a whim. This would be the example that proved the theory.
3. You seriously underestimate Europe's capability to build and switch to a standard. GSM is a European invention, is required for mobile phone usage in Europe, and has spread worldwide. Any serious OS "incident" would result in Europe stabilizing on Linux (or something else) within a matter of months. In the short term, Europe would continue to use its legally "pirated" copies of Windows. In the long term? Something homegrown. Europe's good at that.
In short, you seriously overestimate the strength of Microsoft, and seriously underestimate Europe. Don't do that; we do not yet live in the true corporate plutocracy. And most of us don't want to. I'm glad that governments can win this fight.
Here's another perspective:
To me, it makes much more sense to tell them what they must offer.
Microsoft must provide the documentation and APIs associated with programing Win32 applications, file formats, and network protocols. These must be avaliable at a nominal fee.
Please re-read the next section:
The Product contains
components that enable and facilitate the use of certain
Internet-based services.
You know, like network drivers, a TCP/IP stack, Internet Explorer, and various command line tools.
You acknowledge and agree that
Microsoft may automatically check the version of the
Product and/or its components that you are utilizing
and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that
will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation
Computer.
If you use "teh internets" from your Windows box, Microsoft can install WGA. It's really that simple.
a) I have no idea. I don't use Windows. ...
...
b & c) Have you read the legally binding contract you agreed to when you installed Windows? Nay; when you opened the shrinkwrap? I'll quote some sections for you:
* Reservation of Rights. Microsoft reserves all rights not
expressly granted to you in this EULA.
* Consent to Use of Data. You agree that Microsoft and its
affiliates may collect and use technical information
gathered in any manner as part of the product support
services provided to you, if any, related to the Product.
Microsoft may use this information solely to improve
our products or to provide customized services or
technologies to you. Microsoft may disclose this
information to others, but not in a form that personally
identifies you.
* Internet Gaming/Update Features. If you choose to utilize
the Internet gaming or update features within the
Product, it is necessary to use certain computer system,
hardware, and software information to implement the
features. By using these features, you explicitly
authorize Microsoft or its designated agent to access
and utilize the necessary information for Internet gaming
and/or updating purposes. Microsoft may use this
information solely to improve our products or to provide
customized services or technologies to you. Microsoft
may disclose this information to others, but not in a
form that personally identifies you.
* Internet-Based Services Components. The Product contains
components that enable and facilitate the use of certain
Internet-based services. You acknowledge and agree that
Microsoft may automatically check the version of the
Product and/or its components that you are utilizing
and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that
will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation
Computer.
* Security Updates. Content providers are using the digital
rights management technology ("Microsoft DRM") contained
in this Product to protect the integrity of their content
("Secure Content") so that their intellectual property,
including copyright, in such content is not misappropriated. Owners of
such Secure Content ("Secure Content Owners") may, from
time to time, request Microsoft to provide security
related updates to the Microsoft DRM components of the
Product ("Security Updates") that may affect your ability
to copy, display and/or play Secure Content through
Microsoft software or third party applications that
utilize Microsoft DRM. You therefore agree that, if
you elect to download a license from the Internet which
enables your use of Secure Content, Microsoft may, in
conjunction with such license, also download onto your
computer such Security Updates that a Secure Content
Owner has requested that Microsoft distribute. Microsoft
will not retrieve any personally identifiable
information, or any other information, from your computer
by downloading such Security Updates.
6. TERMINATION. Without prejudice to any other rights, Microsoft
may cancel this EULA if you do not abide by the terms and
conditions of this EULA, in which case you must destroy all
copies of the Product and all of its component parts.
In a nutshell, you explicitly authorize Microsoft to phone your PC, and update WGA. Also, you authorize Microsoft to install software on your system, and have it phone home at will. Furthermore, if you do not abide by these terms, Microsoft can cancel your license agreement, and your sole remody is to destroy your copy of Windows.
I anxiously await the specifications of the various Windows Media formats as they pertain to downloaded media.
After all; I want to be able to play purchased WMV and WMA files on my iPod, as well as my various Linux devices.
Haha. That's great. I'm glad you brought that to my attention.
Yet Another Insight Into Microsoft's Evil Business Model
This is the first time I've heard a company executive admit that they actively take advantage of software piracy for marketshare purposes.
Aye.
My parents run Linux now, as do my aunts and uncles. Family members that purchase new systems with XP preloaded do not get support from me. Older systems are grandfathered in.
My GF is happy with her new-ish powerbook, and I'll be having her dump Windows on her Desktop for SuSE; the only game she plays is World of Warcraft, anyways. Oh, and she uses Picassa. Which is on Linux now.
People don't get Windows support from me anymore. I don't help people pirate software anymore, either. I purchase a couple pieces of software for my Mac and Linux, run FOSS when possible, and refuse to subsidize the Microsoft monster with my time in tech support.
A solution to the Linux pricing problem.
What's that? The Linux pricing problem?
Cost of Linux = Cost of Pirated Windows. As such, many, many, many, many home users continue to use Windows.
Bring up the cost of Windows?
Cost of Linux 35 percent of PC software is pirated. I'm guessing that Windows XP is highly represented in that group (of pirated software; i.e. at least 30% of worldwide Windows installs are not legal). If even 10% of that user base decides to switch to Linux rather than pay the Windows tax, it'll be a substantial marketshare boost.
And the remaining 90%? They might decide that the MSRP cost of Windows is too close to the MSRP of a brand new dual core Mac.
I'm thrilled. MS has ridden on piracy marketshare for far too long. I hope they do every thing they possibly can to stamp out software piracy, and I hope they succeed.
Opensource Zealots, take heart; Our strongest licenses are copyright based. Should we wish to see the GPL upheld, we should support upholding MS's copyrights. The beauty of the OpenSource ecosystem is far easier to explain to people when they can't get pirated software free or for a minimal $1. Although Free is about Freedom, not Beer, it's much easier to explain that to the layman when it is Free, as in Freedom AND Beer.
Note: I don't mean to discourage you. But I do feel that eliminating many of the RIAA shenangians like this type of law, eliminating many of the DRM mechanisms out there, and, in general, eliminating the music "superstar" effect will make the music industry more egalitarian.
Us in the small business world are pretty happy being small fry, generally. Sure, every company wants to grow to GE, but the 4 man business in your garage and coffeeshop general doesn't get there. That doesn't mean you can't have a nice life.
Why doesn't the music industry work like this? Why is the music industry extremely segregated into haves and have-nots? I don't know; but I'm sure you can find the solution somewhere in the mechanations of the haves.
Here's a different perspective for you. You say:
But I always saw these blank media taxes (along with early forms of DRM like Copy Code) as an unfair burden on musicians and songwriters who are at that difficult early phase of their career arcs. It may be a small percentage of the cost of media, but in the long run it adds up, and it's money that could be better spent on things like more media, guitar strings, drum sticks, software, hardware, and the all important elixirs: coffee and beer.
Let me re-write that for my viewpoint:
But I always saw these blank media taxes (along with early forms of DRM like Copy Code) as an unfair burden on small businesses and artists who are at that difficult early phase of their career arcs. It may be a small percentage of the cost of media, but in the long run it adds up, and it's money that could be better spent on things like more media, designers, thick-stock paper, software, hardware, and the all important elixirs: coffee and beer.
Not all media is used for aural or video works. Some of it is used for software, or even more mundane things like databases. Our lives are hard, too; we work like dogs, and while you're working like a dog out of your garage sweating blood, love, and music, we're working like dogs in our garages sweating blood, love, and .
We pass out CDs/DVDs with information on our products. These taxes make each and every one of these disks more important, even though they'll never touch audio or video works.
Why is that fair?
Is that like Xenu's DC-10s with rockets? Are we seeing the second coming of Xenu? Is this Scientologies apocolypse?
Scientology MUST stop this DCX in the courts before it comes to pass!
There are other reasons this is questionable.
Previously, (before-VOIP), the USF was collected on telecom companies, and used by telecom companies to build out rural services.
Now, the FCC has extended the USF to include non-telecom companies, but the money will STILL be used by telecom companies to build out rural services!
It's gone from being a rural telephonification fund, to a subsidize AT&T fund via Vonage/Skype/Whoever revenues.
I think thats atrocious. I'm switching my company off AT&T this week. Sure, we'll still end up sending our USF to them, but at least they won't be getting our standard revenue anymore.
Hear Hear!
The FCC is a waste of space.
Rural telecommunications; rah-rah-rah!!!
All I know is that this "fee" requires me to dump MY money into paying for telephone service for the boonies, via a telephone company that I hate. How is that capitalistic, again?
You want to live out in the boonies? Pay for your OWN damn wiring. Or use wireless. Or work together with your community.
Why does everyone expect the federal government to pay for their excesses in terms of where they live? Why do people who build houses on sand banks/flood plains expect national flood insurance? Why does New Orleans expect the country to create the worlds largest construction project to protect land that the sea is slowly reclaiming? Why Why Why?
If it doesn't make sense to live where you live, because of financial reasons, don't expect the government to bail you out. Unfortunately, we seem to live in the exact opposite situation; where you receive substantial federal benefits to build your "family" farm out in the middle of Nebraska, 100s of miles from anything, and the government will build your phone lines, and keep the prices of your crops high.
Feels good sucking on the government teat, huh?
Acutally, I meant 1999.
There is no restriction for Development under the OpenSource licenses to be done in secret. It's distribution/sales that requires source code, not development.
I suspect that the ODF doesn't want MS to break whatever APIs they are using for their plugin in Office 2007. Office 2007 is still _beta_ code. We've seen significant changes in the beta in the last few months, and theres nothing to stop these changes from occuring in the near future.
I have no fears whatsoever that ODF will release the plugin under an open-source license. Furthermore, if you feel that you could do the actual development work, the format is avaliable for all to see; there's nothing sketchy going on here.
Novell didn't release the XGL code until it was near-finished, because they a) wanted to WOW the world, b) didn't want to argue about their architectural decisions, and c) wanted to get it done by the SuSE PRO desktop release cycle for 10 (which hasn't occurred yet). There are other projects that operate under similar levels of secrecy; and there's _nothing_ wrong with that.
You're free to develop Open Source code in secret. You're free to use Open Source code in secret (think Google). The only time you need to share the source, is when you distribute the binary. That's the beauty of the GPL. Want to use a heavily modified linux for your cruise missile guidance code?
Fine. The only person you have to distribute it to is your customers, and they don't have to distribute it to anyone they don't want to. The essence of GPL style "freedom" is that when you get a piece of software, you get the guts of it, too; and you can redistribute any and all of it. GPL style "freedom" doesn't mean that the world as a whole gets your development time, or all the crap you strip out before you release your GPL code into the wild. It doesn't mean that a customer can demand all your alpha/beta versions before release, either. It just means that when you get a software "product", you get all the aspects of it, including distribution rights and source code.
That's essentially why the GPL is compatible with capitalism.
Open Firmware is no longer an IEEE standard, as of 1994
http://www.openbios.info/docs/1275.html
Nvidia's OEM drivers are universal. They run on everything.
ATI's OEM drivers are universal for desktops. They will run on laptop if and only if the laptop manufacturer pays them a licensing fee. You can use a third party tool to "unlock" the driver, or you can go in and edit the hardware IDs by hand.
Yet Another Reason to prefer Nvidia. I used to be a big ATI fan, but I've since then learned that Nvidia really has its driver handling down, in comparison. ATI's seen massive improvements, but given how far they still have to go (to compete with Nvidia) I'd say they aren't finished yet.
Hear Hear!