The software itself may not wear out, but the hardware might. Already older versions of Windows won't run stable with newer CPUs and motherboards. Even if it works it becomes obsolete - how many people are still running their TRS-80 stuff now days? Computers have a shorter lifespan then most consumer products, but software companies want to force you to upgrade on their timetable - not yours. Would you want to buy a TV that became illegal to use after a year or two?
I don't care if software becomes "unsupported" - that's fine, but pulling the license is unfair. Should a person be subject to *legal* action just because they didn't want to upgrade software they already paid for?
I thought in a free economy market was governed by supply and demand, but now companies just buy laws like the DMCA to create legally enforced demand (kind of demanded demand;-).
Actually I used to think this way too, but I've had really bad results (had to return three Sony monitors in a row before giving up once). Maybe it depends on the company, but if the original problem was intermittent or in some way non-obvious, they're apt to just turn it on, see that it works for a bit, then slap a "refurbished" sticker on it. Had a similar problems with a printer, car stereo and VCR too.
Ack! the "screenshots"...
on
MAME On Xbox
·
· Score: 1
After reading the article, It would be nice to see what MAME actually looked like on the X-Box, but egads - the glare! Just who the heck uses a FLASH to take pictures of a TV screen!? Does he think he'll light up the electrons as they hit the picture tube?
I think the original article is wrong about it being POP3 (probably written by a PR rep who assumed email=POP3).
Outlook actually uses a special WevDAV based protocol when talking to hotmail (although in fine MS tradition, even the WebDAV part of it isn't quite standard).
It has little in common with POP3 - it's an extension of HTTP actually (and has caused me no end of troubles because it doesn't like proxies much). MSN recently started forcing new users to use this instead of traditional POP3, forcing MSN users to use Outlook for email. Eventually POP3 (and competing email clients) will be phased out entirely.
What worries me is how long will it be until all connections (especially broadband) are either AOL or MSN? Will any "real" ISPs even exist in a few years?
VBS isn't the only danger - older versions are still vunerable to several buffer overflow expoilts and lack even the minor restrictions on reading the address book the current version have.
I know Gnucleus, for one, already has settings for minimum download rates. Also most peers can limit the number of downloads from a single IP.
Actually, this idea is probably a good thing. It reflects badly on the RIAA making them look like the criminals. Even lawmakers with no net sense can make a "hacker=bad" connection.
In the end it'll benefit swappers by encouraging better designed peers that are less vunerable to all types of abuse.;-)
Here's my favorite telemarketer trick: when they first ask for someone say something like "hold on, I get them..." then just leave the phone off the hook. Check back 15 minutes later or so. If by some miracle they're still on the line, repeat.
Hey, let 'em call back if they like - see how much of their time you can waste!
I hope these folks keep in mind not everyone *has* ten good fingers. If used widely, it could create a whole new catagory of "disabled" people who could function perfectly fine the old way. (for example, how will all those poor shop teachers use their cell phones ?;-)
This stikes a chord. Is it just me or are we moving into a kind of digital serfdom and an age of modern feudalism? It seems big corporations want do do away with private ownership altogether. Just like the pesants of old were tied to the land the aristocrats allowed them to use, we're held prisioner to software licenses that strip us of all rights and subject us to any corporate whim.
As long as we "know our place", pay our Microsoft tax, and don't speak against our lord and masters, they'll graciously allow us to use their software. However, anyone who dares speak out risks loosing everything.
With no real competition, large corporations can make demands that would have been unthinkable a few years ago - all we can do is accept. In the digital age, software is no longer a luxury, and it becomes increasingly difficult to function without it. Those who control that software and can dictate the terms will have more power than any government - and who do they answer to?
Even a land-owning aristocrat could take pity on his peasants now and again, but a corporation is a soulless entity who's only concern is maximizing profit.
IE and active-X use the object tag which works *exactly* the same way. Active-X as it's currently used would fall under this patent too, yet you don't see MS removing that tag.;-)
SirCam has its own SMTP routines and mails itself directly. It won't use the ISP's mailer regardless of how Outlook is set up, so you should see the PC's actual IP address (or the address of the firewall it was behind) in the email's headers. Still traceable though.
People who used to buy patent medicine from snake-oil salesmen believed it was useful too. The problem is folks are all too willing to believe someone they think is an "expert".
With all reasonable limits gone from what an EULA can demand of a user, I'm sure this is just the beginning. Next I expect to see MS forbid development of Free Software using their compilers or tools, and finally I expect to see a EULA forbidding even the *use* of such software on whatever the latest flavor of Windows is.
Don't think it could happen? Why not? They can effectively outlaw Open Source Software on 95% of all PC's without ever having to buy off a single Congressman. Expecting everyone to jump to Linux is simply not going to happen - They know full well most people will behave like quiet little sheep, snuggle up to their little passport, and and stay where it's warm and safe.
One thing about Flash has always bothered me
(well, actually a whole lot about Flash bothers me
but this is one issue I've never seen mentioned).
At this point it's almost a full fledged p-code
based language like Java (I've seen mention here
that Flash 5 is even able to open sockets!).
I wonder if anyone's really thought about its
security? Is there even any? Now that's it's
becoming easier to dynamically create, can Flash
exploits be far behind?
Slashdot Mirror
Parsec you say? I used to play that on my TI-99/4A.
The software itself may not wear out, but the hardware might. Already older versions of Windows won't run stable with newer CPUs and motherboards. Even if it works it becomes obsolete - how many people are still running their TRS-80 stuff now days? Computers have a shorter lifespan then most consumer products, but software companies want to force you to upgrade on their timetable - not yours. Would you want to buy a TV that became illegal to use after a year or two?
;-).
I don't care if software becomes "unsupported" - that's fine, but pulling the license is unfair. Should a person be subject to *legal* action just because they didn't want to upgrade software they already paid for?
I thought in a free economy market was governed by supply and demand, but now companies just buy laws like the DMCA to create legally enforced demand (kind of demanded demand
Actually I used to think this way too, but I've had really bad results (had to return three Sony monitors in a row before giving up once). Maybe it depends on the company, but if the original problem was intermittent or in some way non-obvious, they're apt to just turn it on, see that it works for a bit, then slap a "refurbished" sticker on it. Had a similar problems with a printer, car stereo and VCR too.
After reading the article, It would be nice to see what MAME actually looked like on the X-Box, but egads - the glare! Just who the heck uses a FLASH to take pictures of a TV screen!? Does he think he'll light up the electrons as they hit the picture tube?
I think the original article is wrong about it being POP3 (probably written by a PR rep who assumed email=POP3).
Outlook actually uses a special WevDAV based protocol when talking to hotmail (although in fine MS tradition, even the WebDAV part of it isn't quite standard).
It has little in common with POP3 - it's an extension of HTTP actually (and has caused me no end of troubles because it doesn't like proxies much). MSN recently started forcing new users to use this instead of traditional POP3, forcing MSN users to use Outlook for email. Eventually POP3 (and competing email clients) will be phased out entirely.
What worries me is how long will it be until all connections (especially broadband) are either AOL or MSN? Will any "real" ISPs even exist in a few years?
VBS isn't the only danger - older versions are still vunerable to several buffer overflow expoilts and lack even the minor restrictions on reading the address book the current version have.
I know Gnucleus, for one, already has settings for minimum download rates. Also most peers can limit the number of downloads from a single IP.
;-)
Actually, this idea is probably a good thing. It reflects badly on the RIAA making them look like the criminals. Even lawmakers with no net sense can make a "hacker=bad" connection.
In the end it'll benefit swappers by encouraging better designed peers that are less vunerable to all types of abuse.
Here's my favorite telemarketer trick: when they first ask for someone say something like "hold on, I get them..." then just leave the phone off the hook. Check back 15 minutes later or so. If by some miracle they're still on the line, repeat.
Hey, let 'em call back if they like - see how much of their time you can waste!
I hope these folks keep in mind not everyone *has* ten good fingers. If used widely, it could create a whole new catagory of "disabled" people who could function perfectly fine the old way. (for example, how will all those poor shop teachers use their cell phones ? ;-)
This stikes a chord. Is it just me or are we moving into a kind of digital serfdom and an age of modern feudalism? It seems big corporations want do do away with private ownership altogether. Just like the pesants of old were tied to the land the aristocrats allowed them to use, we're held prisioner to software licenses that strip us of all rights and subject us to any corporate whim.
As long as we "know our place", pay our Microsoft tax, and don't speak against our lord and masters, they'll graciously allow us to use their software. However, anyone who dares speak out risks loosing everything.
With no real competition, large corporations can make demands that would have been unthinkable a few years ago - all we can do is accept. In the digital age, software is no longer a luxury, and it becomes increasingly difficult to function without it. Those who control that software and can dictate the terms will have more power than any government - and who do they answer to?
Even a land-owning aristocrat could take pity on his peasants now and again, but a corporation is a soulless entity who's only concern is maximizing profit.
IE and active-X use the object tag which works *exactly* the same way. Active-X as it's currently used would fall under this patent too, yet you don't see MS removing that tag. ;-)
SirCam has its own SMTP routines and mails itself directly. It won't use the ISP's mailer regardless of how Outlook is set up, so you should see the PC's actual IP address (or the address of the firewall it was behind) in the email's headers. Still traceable though.
People who used to buy patent medicine from snake-oil salesmen believed it was useful too. The problem is folks are all too willing to believe someone they think is an "expert".
Hey, why not set up a PayPal account for 'em! ^_^
With all reasonable limits gone from what an EULA can demand of a user, I'm sure this is just the beginning. Next I expect to see MS forbid development of Free Software using their compilers or tools, and finally I expect to see a EULA forbidding even the *use* of such software on whatever the latest flavor of Windows is. Don't think it could happen? Why not? They can effectively outlaw Open Source Software on 95% of all PC's without ever having to buy off a single Congressman. Expecting everyone to jump to Linux is simply not going to happen - They know full well most people will behave like quiet little sheep, snuggle up to their little passport, and and stay where it's warm and safe.
I wonder if anyone's really thought about its security? Is there even any? Now that's it's becoming easier to dynamically create, can Flash exploits be far behind?