Unless MS promises to monitor and try and prevent people from sharing copyrighted material. Something pirate bay does not do. There are many applications, sites, etc that allow you to store/share files on remote systems but it all depends on how they are setup to be used. I don't think MS is going to open up the file sharing like torrents, you will need to log in via your.Net passport - so unlike pirate bay where thousands of people will hit a torrent, this will be limited to a few people. I am also willing to bet MS will put in system flags, for example if your files are being accessed by more then 5 people it alerts them.
So you can't read the terms of service without downloading (and installling?) the software.
Uninstall
Is the system HIPPA compliant?
They have no more responsibility to protect your medical records then Google does if you use gmail to send your medical records. HIPPA is for patient, doctor, medical facilities. Now if MS started to advertise and offer services of medical data storage then they would have to follow HIPPA laws.
Apple would've called it "iShare" or something else friendly and inviting. Who does MS hire to come up with those horrid, unwieldy names?
Two different philosophies:
1) Less descriptive, but sounds cool - may leave the person saying "I have no clue what this does"
2) MOre descriptive, sounds something NASA would use but gives more description
All depends how you want to go about it. Though this is pre-release, by release date they may very well change the name to say "Windows Live ID Sign-In Assistant" and drop the versioning
I don't think so:
Go to the links below and look at the max trends
NASDAQ Composite: http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ
MSFT: http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NASDAQ:MSFT
If you notice MS has been following the same pattern as NASDAQ - yes down right now, but that is not because MS is failing it is because there is a tighter crunch in the market. This tighter crunch means companies are spending less, and they will hold onto their old infrastructure as long as possible (banks are notorious for having legacy products). It also means they are not converting to other infrastructure (contrary to popular belief it is not as easy/cheap to switch)
MS has a 159 billion market cap. Total revenue 2008 = 60,420 (million). Total revenue 2007 = 51,122 (million). Their total revenue went up. So did their net income.
No they don't have a failing product (dollar-wise) though what you say seems to fail.
channel use to use a point for the local temperature until they built a Dunin Donuts next to it, and heat escaping the building or cars or something (it was a long time ago) raised the temperature 5 or 6 degrees warmer then the actual weather.
How freaking close was this dunkin donuts to the sensor? Cities, typically, are only 1-2 degrees higher then their respective suburbs. So for one building to raise the temp by 5-6 degrees would mean the dunkin donuts was built right next to the sensor...particularly the part that had the exhaust system from the heaters/ovens.
This is true. But just because you look at a EULA doesn't mean you agree to it. So like you start the installer, and while you're waiting for it to do all the crap it does when it's starting, you get a drink. Then it automatically shows the EULA. Your cat then proceeds to walk over the keyboard and accepts it, getting you to the screen that asks you where you want to install the program. You then come back and continue the installation. Oh, and to make it a bit more believable, you _can_ do everything with a keyboard, and the space bar (which is the key that would check the checkbox) _is_ fairly big.
So the cat moves the mouse to the EULA, clicks the "I accept" radio button, then moves the mouse to the NEXT? These days most of the EULAs I see (big name products like MS, Adobe, etc) are set to decline or no answer by default, so hitting "Enter" will either result in nothing happening or you cancel the job. Now while this is not all of the software products - the argument is flimsy at best. Even if all is done with they keyboard the cat would have had to know what to click...it's not just click any button in any order, it is click multiple buttons in a specific order (tab, space, enter).
The prosecution would say "Your honor, the defendent expects you to believe that he went to the site, filled out [if there was] the registration form, put the mouse exactly on the I accept button of the eula and the cat JUST happened to have hit it?" The circumstances for this to have happened are so nil that if this were a criminal court the prosection would have bypassed this defense.
Clicking a EULA requires getting to the EULA, something that a cat is not capable of doing - or if your cat is capable of browsing a computer you should be making millions being on tv shows.
Cat had a choice of following the lure, so yes. Cats are notorious for ignoring lures - not many people would argue that cats aren't willfull. Actually they are satanic beings.
But the person did something to get to the EULA (went to a website, put the registration info, installed the software), then the person put the mouse clicker right over the "YES" and held it in place (so it wouldn't move) then waited for the cat.
This screams to me about the case, years ago, where someone utilized someone elses AOL account and did malicious things. That someone being a family member who lived in the same house. forget how it turned out.
If they say 'the person is not responsible, it's the cat' then that argument would be used by a lot of people and a lot more people would start to own cats.
Actually, I work as a Business analyst/project manager for software/hardware development and there are times where the lawyers need to know information before a product/plan is chosen. There are high level meetings where the group will "ball-park" what is needed. They will guess-ti-mate the size of the project before any actual research. This will involve things like "we know of about 5-6 programs we plan to use, the kind of hardware we may need, and rougly ## to ## man hours". And even if none of that happened - the lawyer asked for information; a team player would have say "hey, let me help direct you to the correct information - which will save you time and effort and allow you to make an informed decision". That would have been a team-player move.
They also have a clause that allows them to change their TOS without notice to registered or non registered members. http://www.facebook.com/terms.php
By accessing or using our web site at www.facebook.com or the mobile version thereof (together the "Site") or by posting a Share Button on your site, you (the "User") signify that you have read, understand and agree to be bound by these Terms of Use ("Terms of Use" or "Agreement"), whether or not you are a registered member of Facebook. We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change, modify, add, or delete portions of these Terms of Use at any time without further notice. If we do this, we will post the changes to these Terms of Use on this page and will indicate at the top of this page the date these terms were last revised. Your continued use of the Service or the Site after any such changes constitutes your acceptance of the new Terms of Use. If you do not agree to abide by these or any future Terms of Use, do not use or access (or continue to use or access) the Service or the Site. It is your responsibility to regularly check the Site to determine if there have been changes to these Terms of Use and to review such changes.
So you can sue them all you like, you will lose because their TOS covers them. Their back-peddeling is due to media (don't/.'ers hate the media?) pressure, not legal pressure.
No it hasn't. This isn't the first time a company changed their terms of service and people moaned and cry. Stuff like that has been happening since before the net. The amount of people they will lose is a drop in the bucket. They may change it for now, but they will get what they want.
Then again, there is always the chance that they are doing this because they got feedback from some users requesting this. You know the users who get annoyed their friends messagse got deleted when their friends quit.
I won't even tell you about the lawyers I've had to battle (in 2 different corporations) because they wanted a complete list of all of the Open Source libraries and associated copyrights, BEFORE we even started the project.
The nice thing, though, was that we picked every POSSIBLE library that we could find and submitted them and their copyrights for their analysis/aproval.
So wait, you are saying that a lawyer, who is not technically savvy, wanted information to help ensure the company was protected (maybe from a TOS that says something "use of this OSS for personal use is OK but for business use requires you to....."). And he wanted this information BEFORE you started installing/using the software? Gee, I wonder why a lawyer would want to read a contract before someone, who is not a lawyer, agreed to use the product and thusly enter the company into the contract. So then you guys go overboard, because you act like this lawyer is evil; and according to you this is why the lawyer gets fired. So far the only thing I have read is: "blah blah blah....we are jerks...blah blah blah"
Not all lawyers are evil...I would wager the amount of evil lawyers to good lawyers is about the same ratio as the amount of evil programmers to good programmers - actually probably less since lawyers could be disbarred if they get caught breaking the law. He was doing his job - protecting the company. You may think you know everything about OSS TOS, though I doubt you have read every single TOS out there for all the software that you use, but you are no lawyer.
Next time try and be a team player. If I ever ran into a person like you and was in a position to give them a job it would never happen. I would rather give the job to someone who appreciates and believes in using the best product for the job (be it closed source or open source) and would help the legal team go through the TOS (and to let them know the information they REALLY need) to make sure the company does not get put into a detrimental contract.
I didn't know this. That is criminal. Incarcerated criminals should be given:
Education materials
Access to only education/news tv (e.g. MSNBC, CNN, Discovery...not Fox or NBC or HBO), NEWSpapers
Clothing/cleaning material
Medical care
Food
Facilities to keep healthy (we don't need more fatties as that increases healthcare)
Ability to speak with family (come on, it does us no good if they can't have some kind of positive reinforcement)
Religious services (if finding spirituality helps them reform then I am down for this)
Access to lawyer/anon complaint line to report abuse in jail
I have never been, nor do I have family in prison so I have no sympathetic bias towards inmates. But I am a human and I do not believe in torture
Prisons should be run by gov't, not private owner.
Really the above is my opinion, if someone is looking for a debate (e.g. capital punishment is torture) then don't bother - I don't care and won't respond to that - it's an opinion.
How is the above moded Interesting? Come on. Nobody here realizes the inherrent issues with this? First - You are letting a criminal get off scott free. Yea nothing but clothes on their back - they will find a way to survive (mug someone from another country). Second - what country will take them? Even if we managed to keep it a secret at the start of the program other countries would eventually realize what we are doing and would shut down their borders to us for any passenger.
The above should be modded/funny, not/insightful. Hmm...maybe I should mug someone and then ask to be deported to some exotic country of my choice...I hear spain is gorgeous, so is Micronesia. Ok SIGN ME UP!
In grade-school there was a school aid (Mrs. Moses). Her son was on death row. I found this out watching the news. After sitting in jail for about 5 or so years the person who comitted the crime came forth. Mrs. Moses son was in jail, wrongly. It's a shame he had 5 years of his life taken away (the gov't just says "sorry pal, goodluck" and kicks you out of prison). It would have been a greater shame if they killed him. Honestly I am for capital punishment...but they better be 110% sure the person did the crimes (e.g. video).
The judge was looking to support the economy. Our jails aren't full enough so we need to increase the population to offer more spending. Also, sending a 17 year old to juvi - where violent offenders reside - is a sure way to rehab her into a responsible citizen. It will also help her get into a good college and a wonderful job. I hear McDonalds isn't hiring anymore, but I am sure she can get paid as a prostitute..a skill she may pick up in juvi. See the judge cares and you are all callous.
And if you are smart enough to resequence genes to become deadly you are probably trying to resequence genes to be useful...because making a crapload of money and being hailed a hero (note: benefit of being a hero = sleeping with babes) is better then killing a lot of people (including people you may know...like yourself...and babes), being hailed a murderer, and instead of making a crapload of money - lots of people are putting bounties on your head to make a lot of money by killing you (assuming you didn't blunder up and kill yourself).
The thing is, he is president right now, he could say "Thanks for the donations...SUCKERS" and then vote for the people. A popular president not getting re-elected is highly unlikely - even if he doesn't have a huge donation base...he has the WH megaphone for free (or at least free for him).
And Blackjack is one of the worst games for a casino - the odds are very low.
Just be careful of the picture painted. Odds and casino hold can be very different. The odds are based on if people play exactly by the book. Most people do not so this modifies the casino hold.
So the casino hold (how much money the casino makes off every $100) comes to 1.22% blackjack. As a reference point the casino hold on your average slot machine is 8.5%.
I have a fundamental problem with the phrase "defraud a casino". Isn't that like saying "rob a thief"?
No, not really or at all. You go to the casino, willingly, and put money down on a game of chance to win. The casino, by law, states the odds of you winning. You have a willing decision to make. Play or not play. A thief robs you, you have no chance to win, and you have no willing choice to make.
Casino's are a legitimate business model. If you don't like the odds then don't play the game.
You are a fucktard. You make false statements with absolutely no backing, far worse that jenny mcarthy who actually cites researchers and studies.
There is no way for you to know:
"The percentage of kids who gets these vaccines and develop autism is the same percentage of kids who get autism just because it happens."
There is no proof one way or the other and to say such a thing as fact is irresponsible and moronic.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless MS promises to monitor and try and prevent people from sharing copyrighted material. Something pirate bay does not do. There are many applications, sites, etc that allow you to store/share files on remote systems but it all depends on how they are setup to be used. I don't think MS is going to open up the file sharing like torrents, you will need to log in via your .Net passport - so unlike pirate bay where thousands of people will hit a torrent, this will be limited to a few people. I am also willing to bet MS will put in system flags, for example if your files are being accessed by more then 5 people it alerts them.
So you can't read the terms of service without downloading (and installling?) the software.
Uninstall
Is the system HIPPA compliant?
They have no more responsibility to protect your medical records then Google does if you use gmail to send your medical records. HIPPA is for patient, doctor, medical facilities. Now if MS started to advertise and offer services of medical data storage then they would have to follow HIPPA laws.
Apple would've called it "iShare" or something else friendly and inviting. Who does MS hire to come up with those horrid, unwieldy names?
Two different philosophies: 1) Less descriptive, but sounds cool - may leave the person saying "I have no clue what this does"
2) MOre descriptive, sounds something NASA would use but gives more description
All depends how you want to go about it. Though this is pre-release, by release date they may very well change the name to say "Windows Live ID Sign-In Assistant" and drop the versioning
Microsoft is a company in trouble
I don't think so: Go to the links below and look at the max trends NASDAQ Composite: http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ
MSFT: http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NASDAQ:MSFT
If you notice MS has been following the same pattern as NASDAQ - yes down right now, but that is not because MS is failing it is because there is a tighter crunch in the market. This tighter crunch means companies are spending less, and they will hold onto their old infrastructure as long as possible (banks are notorious for having legacy products). It also means they are not converting to other infrastructure (contrary to popular belief it is not as easy/cheap to switch)
MS has a 159 billion market cap. Total revenue 2008 = 60,420 (million). Total revenue 2007 = 51,122 (million). Their total revenue went up. So did their net income.
No they don't have a failing product (dollar-wise) though what you say seems to fail.
channel use to use a point for the local temperature until they built a Dunin Donuts next to it, and heat escaping the building or cars or something (it was a long time ago) raised the temperature 5 or 6 degrees warmer then the actual weather.
How freaking close was this dunkin donuts to the sensor? Cities, typically, are only 1-2 degrees higher then their respective suburbs. So for one building to raise the temp by 5-6 degrees would mean the dunkin donuts was built right next to the sensor...particularly the part that had the exhaust system from the heaters/ovens.
This is true. But just because you look at a EULA doesn't mean you agree to it. So like you start the installer, and while you're waiting for it to do all the crap it does when it's starting, you get a drink. Then it automatically shows the EULA. Your cat then proceeds to walk over the keyboard and accepts it, getting you to the screen that asks you where you want to install the program. You then come back and continue the installation. Oh, and to make it a bit more believable, you _can_ do everything with a keyboard, and the space bar (which is the key that would check the checkbox) _is_ fairly big.
So the cat moves the mouse to the EULA, clicks the "I accept" radio button, then moves the mouse to the NEXT? These days most of the EULAs I see (big name products like MS, Adobe, etc) are set to decline or no answer by default, so hitting "Enter" will either result in nothing happening or you cancel the job. Now while this is not all of the software products - the argument is flimsy at best. Even if all is done with they keyboard the cat would have had to know what to click...it's not just click any button in any order, it is click multiple buttons in a specific order (tab, space, enter).
The prosecution would say "Your honor, the defendent expects you to believe that he went to the site, filled out [if there was] the registration form, put the mouse exactly on the I accept button of the eula and the cat JUST happened to have hit it?" The circumstances for this to have happened are so nil that if this were a criminal court the prosection would have bypassed this defense.
Clicking a EULA requires getting to the EULA, something that a cat is not capable of doing - or if your cat is capable of browsing a computer you should be making millions being on tv shows.
Lookup attorney don shekely. He has some articles about it.
Cat had a choice of following the lure, so yes. Cats are notorious for ignoring lures - not many people would argue that cats aren't willfull. Actually they are satanic beings.
But the person did something to get to the EULA (went to a website, put the registration info, installed the software), then the person put the mouse clicker right over the "YES" and held it in place (so it wouldn't move) then waited for the cat.
I agree THIS IS MADNESS!
This screams to me about the case, years ago, where someone utilized someone elses AOL account and did malicious things. That someone being a family member who lived in the same house. forget how it turned out.
If they say 'the person is not responsible, it's the cat' then that argument would be used by a lot of people and a lot more people would start to own cats.
This is silly topic.
Actually, I work as a Business analyst/project manager for software/hardware development and there are times where the lawyers need to know information before a product/plan is chosen. There are high level meetings where the group will "ball-park" what is needed. They will guess-ti-mate the size of the project before any actual research. This will involve things like "we know of about 5-6 programs we plan to use, the kind of hardware we may need, and rougly ## to ## man hours". And even if none of that happened - the lawyer asked for information; a team player would have say "hey, let me help direct you to the correct information - which will save you time and effort and allow you to make an informed decision". That would have been a team-player move.
http://www.facebook.com/terms.php
By accessing or using our web site at www.facebook.com or the mobile version thereof (together the "Site") or by posting a Share Button on your site, you (the "User") signify that you have read, understand and agree to be bound by these Terms of Use ("Terms of Use" or "Agreement"), whether or not you are a registered member of Facebook. We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change, modify, add, or delete portions of these Terms of Use at any time without further notice. If we do this, we will post the changes to these Terms of Use on this page and will indicate at the top of this page the date these terms were last revised. Your continued use of the Service or the Site after any such changes constitutes your acceptance of the new Terms of Use. If you do not agree to abide by these or any future Terms of Use, do not use or access (or continue to use or access) the Service or the Site. It is your responsibility to regularly check the Site to determine if there have been changes to these Terms of Use and to review such changes.
So you can sue them all you like, you will lose because their TOS covers them. Their back-peddeling is due to media (don't /.'ers hate the media?) pressure, not legal pressure.
No it hasn't. This isn't the first time a company changed their terms of service and people moaned and cry. Stuff like that has been happening since before the net. The amount of people they will lose is a drop in the bucket. They may change it for now, but they will get what they want.
Then again, there is always the chance that they are doing this because they got feedback from some users requesting this. You know the users who get annoyed their friends messagse got deleted when their friends quit.
I won't even tell you about the lawyers I've had to battle (in 2 different corporations) because they wanted a complete list of all of the Open Source libraries and associated copyrights, BEFORE we even started the project.
The nice thing, though, was that we picked every POSSIBLE library that we could find and submitted them and their copyrights for their analysis/aproval.
So wait, you are saying that a lawyer, who is not technically savvy, wanted information to help ensure the company was protected (maybe from a TOS that says something "use of this OSS for personal use is OK but for business use requires you to ....."). And he wanted this information BEFORE you started installing/using the software? Gee, I wonder why a lawyer would want to read a contract before someone, who is not a lawyer, agreed to use the product and thusly enter the company into the contract. So then you guys go overboard, because you act like this lawyer is evil; and according to you this is why the lawyer gets fired. So far the only thing I have read is: "blah blah blah....we are jerks...blah blah blah"
Not all lawyers are evil...I would wager the amount of evil lawyers to good lawyers is about the same ratio as the amount of evil programmers to good programmers - actually probably less since lawyers could be disbarred if they get caught breaking the law. He was doing his job - protecting the company. You may think you know everything about OSS TOS, though I doubt you have read every single TOS out there for all the software that you use, but you are no lawyer.
Next time try and be a team player. If I ever ran into a person like you and was in a position to give them a job it would never happen. I would rather give the job to someone who appreciates and believes in using the best product for the job (be it closed source or open source) and would help the legal team go through the TOS (and to let them know the information they REALLY need) to make sure the company does not get put into a detrimental contract.
I didn't know this. That is criminal. Incarcerated criminals should be given:
Education materials
Access to only education/news tv (e.g. MSNBC, CNN, Discovery...not Fox or NBC or HBO), NEWSpapers
Clothing/cleaning material
Medical care
Food
Facilities to keep healthy (we don't need more fatties as that increases healthcare)
Ability to speak with family (come on, it does us no good if they can't have some kind of positive reinforcement)
Religious services (if finding spirituality helps them reform then I am down for this)
Access to lawyer/anon complaint line to report abuse in jail
I have never been, nor do I have family in prison so I have no sympathetic bias towards inmates. But I am a human and I do not believe in torture
Prisons should be run by gov't, not private owner.
Really the above is my opinion, if someone is looking for a debate (e.g. capital punishment is torture) then don't bother - I don't care and won't respond to that - it's an opinion.
How is the above moded Interesting? Come on. Nobody here realizes the inherrent issues with this? First - You are letting a criminal get off scott free. Yea nothing but clothes on their back - they will find a way to survive (mug someone from another country). Second - what country will take them? Even if we managed to keep it a secret at the start of the program other countries would eventually realize what we are doing and would shut down their borders to us for any passenger.
/funny, not /insightful. Hmm...maybe I should mug someone and then ask to be deported to some exotic country of my choice...I hear spain is gorgeous, so is Micronesia. Ok SIGN ME UP!
The above should be modded
In grade-school there was a school aid (Mrs. Moses). Her son was on death row. I found this out watching the news. After sitting in jail for about 5 or so years the person who comitted the crime came forth. Mrs. Moses son was in jail, wrongly. It's a shame he had 5 years of his life taken away (the gov't just says "sorry pal, goodluck" and kicks you out of prison). It would have been a greater shame if they killed him. Honestly I am for capital punishment...but they better be 110% sure the person did the crimes (e.g. video).
The judge was looking to support the economy. Our jails aren't full enough so we need to increase the population to offer more spending. Also, sending a 17 year old to juvi - where violent offenders reside - is a sure way to rehab her into a responsible citizen. It will also help her get into a good college and a wonderful job. I hear McDonalds isn't hiring anymore, but I am sure she can get paid as a prostitute..a skill she may pick up in juvi. See the judge cares and you are all callous.
Oh and when that happens I am pretty sure you will get the "warm fuzzies"..right before you die in orgasmic pain.
And if you are smart enough to resequence genes to become deadly you are probably trying to resequence genes to be useful...because making a crapload of money and being hailed a hero (note: benefit of being a hero = sleeping with babes) is better then killing a lot of people (including people you may know...like yourself...and babes), being hailed a murderer, and instead of making a crapload of money - lots of people are putting bounties on your head to make a lot of money by killing you (assuming you didn't blunder up and kill yourself).
And I think this site is maintained by our /. editor overlords. It has bill 234 listed twice as promises broken.
The thing is, he is president right now, he could say "Thanks for the donations...SUCKERS" and then vote for the people. A popular president not getting re-elected is highly unlikely - even if he doesn't have a huge donation base...he has the WH megaphone for free (or at least free for him).
And Blackjack is one of the worst games for a casino - the odds are very low.
Just be careful of the picture painted. Odds and casino hold can be very different. The odds are based on if people play exactly by the book. Most people do not so this modifies the casino hold.
So the casino hold (how much money the casino makes off every $100) comes to 1.22% blackjack. As a reference point the casino hold on your average slot machine is 8.5%.
I have a fundamental problem with the phrase "defraud a casino". Isn't that like saying "rob a thief"?
No, not really or at all. You go to the casino, willingly, and put money down on a game of chance to win. The casino, by law, states the odds of you winning. You have a willing decision to make. Play or not play. A thief robs you, you have no chance to win, and you have no willing choice to make.
Casino's are a legitimate business model. If you don't like the odds then don't play the game.
You are a fucktard. You make false statements with absolutely no backing, far worse that jenny mcarthy who actually cites researchers and studies. There is no way for you to know: "The percentage of kids who gets these vaccines and develop autism is the same percentage of kids who get autism just because it happens." There is no proof one way or the other and to say such a thing as fact is irresponsible and moronic.
Yes, there is: http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/01/california-stud.html
Google knows everything, you know nothing. DIAF - kthxbye