Microsoft was found to be a criminal organization, in violation of anti-trust laws here in the US. I reckon they -do- sell software both retail and direct.
An advertisement (wherever placed) is legally considered an "invitation to make an offer" - and is not considered an enforceable contract.
It's bad press, but errors in advertising are not legally enforceable.
As for having the guy arrested, we really don't know how this fellow was behaving.
If it were my store, and he was creating a disturbance and acting threatening, I'd imagine that I'd call the police too.
Of course, if it were my store, I'd honor the offer for fear of bad publicity, and charge it back to corporate headquarters or whatever. The price difference cannot be worth the bad blood that this is going to generate.
Re:Article read better with special hat
on
On Hacktivism
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Losing your rights (and especially your right to privacy) is not going to happen in one fell swoop.
Rather, it's more like the oft-spoken-of boiling frog - if privacy is taken away in tiny little increments, then before long it will be compromised in a big way without any substantial opposition.
I'm not saying that we should all wear tinfoil hats - but constantly recognizing (and opposing, where necessary) the gradual erosion of our right to privacy and governmental abuse of information is our only defense against being... boiled alive.
The government wants to know more and more about us these days - the excuse du jour is homeland security and counter-terrorism. Throw in stopping child-porn and just about any legislator will support any bill that enables more monitoring of citizens.
Better to be watchful and vocal - without screaming that the sky is falling - than to sit quietly, watching the privacy we enjoy now disappear for our children.
This is very much the case in the programming crowd I deal with too.
I was a biology major, but ended up doing programming because I had been doing it since I could get my hands on a computer (they used to be -really- expensive).
These days, most programmers I meet are only in it because it was the best-paying option when they chose their majors.
Not saying that my experience applies to programmers in general (in fact, open source programming seems to fly in the face of this) - but out here in corporate-land, it's all about the cash, it seems.
But the students at CalTech are (honestly undeniably) of a higher caliber than at most schools. They're there because they have a track record of over-achieving, and the overwhelming majority want to learn.
Compare this to some lesser schools, where lesser students are looking for some way (-any- way) to get that parchment and get that first job.
Hard to compare students at CalTech (or MIT, or any top-flight school) with Podunk State U's students.
Not to add a me-too, but anything I did in college became property of the school, to do with as they pleased.
That is absolutely the most common arrangement (I've never seen it any other way) - I'm sure there are lots of good reasons schools would do this... not the least of which is to cover their butts if a paper ended up leaking to somewhere else, with or without attribution.
Re:Virtual Shoplifting
on
iWarez
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Even more interesting is the question of whether or not the iPod, or the binary data contained on the device, is subject to confiscation or seizure if they believe that you downloaded a copy of Office onto it.
Nothing's missing . . . do they have the right to seize all those 1's and 0's?
You could make decent arguments for both sides . ..
It's very possible to change state law, especially where it's obvious nonsense
It isn't -obvious- nonsense. Spreadsheets can contain all sorts of internal programming macros to do all kinds of things.
Personally, I feel that an.xls file isn't software. But fair, well-informed, well-meaning people can disagree.
And getting your senator to go against something that brings the gaming commission revenue requires optimism in the political system that I've long since lost.
Hmm... you're secure (from prosecution and audit) because you're obscure?
Security through obscurity? We know where that leads.
Practically speaking, perhaps you're correct. But that doesn't mean that they couldn't, or wouldn't, make an example out of some poor soul.
Yes, it's only one person. But it'd suck to be that one obscure little developer who found the software police on his doorstep, his rights to a jury trial preemptively waived.
Damn. And I -love- Delphi. What the hell is Borland thinking?
If you've figured out exactly what every button and form and screen looks like, how they fit together, and how the program will work before you've written a line of code, chances are the coding will go very smoothly.
Prototype the GUI to create the screen shots, and write the documentation. It'll force you to think the entire application through before you start building.
This isn't the first time I've heard of this methodology, and it's not as crazy as it sounds.
In a way, it's kind of like UML - writing all those nine different kinds of diagrams before you start coding - by the time you get to the code, it's all pretty much filling in the blanks - all figured out.
UML is the better way to go, in my experience - you architect the system in advance on a much deeper level than writing user documentation.
This is true - states can choose to play ball, or not to.
For example, the Feds decided that they'd like the national speed limit to be 55 mph back in the seventies(?).
They couldn't mandate the speed limit on the interstates, but -could- withhold federal highway funds from states that elected not to enact the limits.
So you're correct when you say that the Feds don't have the power to mandate this - but they carry a pretty big financial stick to persuade states to play ball.
Given the continuous stream of security holes found in Microsoft software, how can they honestly believe that they will be able to securely protect -any- digital content for long?
Granted, it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but throwing the gauntlet to the community like this is only begging for the system to be torn apart - DMCA be damned.
Actually, another reason they might choose to ignore cost would be that the cost of the software may be insignificant when compared with the value that the software provides.
If package A costs $10, and package B is free - and support costs were equal... the cost of deploying A versus B on a 100-person network is... $1000.
If A works better than B, the thousand dollars is an inconsequential amount.
With greater and greater differences in the utilities of A versus B, the original purchase price becomes meaningless. If A is far better than B, -ANY- cost difference can be ignored because it is dwarfed by the increases in productivity achieved by using A versus B.
Simply put, smart businesses use the best, most productive tool for the job - software or otherwise. Over time, any (reasonable) cost difference will be more than made up for by the increase in productivity.
This may be a wee bit offtopic, but I think this is another example of those self-serving misuses of statistics.
You know - like the wildly overstated incidence of spousal abuse on Super Bowl Sunday.
50 Million disabled Americans? Assume (generously) that there are 300 million people in the U.S. - does this mean that one in six people could benefit from accessibility technology?
Don't get me wrong - I believe that the ADA was an excellent law, and am all for accessibility enhancements for software. But grossly exaggerating the (statistical) need seems to weaken the argument more than strengthen it.
If you're really 100% serious about getting someone to contact you, you might reconsider posting anonymously.
Just a suggestion . . .
Re:What happens when someone steals the basket wit
on
Passport's Pocket Picked
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Interestingly, this is exactly what will happen.
Only the discoverer of the hole will be forced to announce it anonymously, and publish it only in dark little places where the lawyerly eyes of Microsoft won't find it. And unscrupulous eyes will.
I can see it happening already. And Microsoft would not even hear of the hole until it's far, far too late. It will be a very, very dark day if information is compromised on this scale.
The DMCA in this case would directly contribute to the destruction of the integrity of the Passport system.
Simply put - if only outlaws find security holes, then only (genuine) outlaws will have access to them.
Given that the people most likely to participate in an open-source project are also users of the application being worked on, what would happen if the customers for a software product actually participated in its design and creation?
While this may be true of many open-source projects (I'm not completely convinced even now), the argument falls apart when you start getting into really popular (widely-used) projects.
How many users of Apache (on a percentage basis) have participated in its development/design? StarOffice/OpenOffice? The Linux kernel?
Imagine the whole world suddenly using . . . GNUCash for example. The customers, on a per capita basis, largely would *not* participate in its design and creation.
As open-source projects get more widely used (as the revolution progresses, as the article suggests), most users will be just that . ..users. They will have no significant input as far as the design of the project goes.
We'll have lots of customers using the system, but relatively few designers/managers/developers. Very much like any other successful non-open software development model out there now.
Open-source is no panacea when it comes to usability and design.
Actually, student tuition is probably the -last- place the money is going to come from.
MIT ranks right up there with Harvard and other Ivy League schools when it comes to endowments. Basically, alumni give the school lots of money, which gets reinvested in all sorts of things - including projects of strategic importance like this.
Interestingly, MIT also derives significant revenue from the pseudo-business ventures and inventions created there. Inventions that turn out to be revenue-generators, created on-campus using their facilities, must pay a percentage of those revenues right back to the school.
I remember this causing quite a flap with a guy whose last name was Bose - son of the guy of Bose audio fame - who had an invention and was fighting with MIT over these fees.
At big-name schools like MIT, and Ivy League schools, student tuition is just one tiny piece of the financial machine.
Re:All the interesting positions in Linux are take
on
Tridge Speaks Out
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think the problem is a little different than the project being "fun" or not.
Me? My team and I built and maintain a homegrown oracle-based solution that stitches together contact management, accounting, and production management for a little manufacturing firm here in Chicago.
I find these things... fun.
The problem is - it takes a lot of expertise and insight (garnered only through painful experience) to build applications heavy in accounting and business-logic functions . . . expertise that goes beyond what is normally taught in a CS program in school.
And recruiting people with expertise outside the computer science realm into open source development (without paying them - your point is well taken here) can be really difficult.
There just aren't that many people with cross-disciplinary expertise who aren't buried in paying-job-type work and who are willing to donate to the cause.
Slashdot Mirror
Hehe. Criminal organizations . . .
Microsoft was found to be a criminal organization, in violation of anti-trust laws here in the US. I reckon they -do- sell software both retail and direct.
An advertisement (wherever placed) is legally considered an "invitation to make an offer" - and is not considered an enforceable contract.
It's bad press, but errors in advertising are not legally enforceable.
As for having the guy arrested, we really don't know how this fellow was behaving.
If it were my store, and he was creating a disturbance and acting threatening, I'd imagine that I'd call the police too.
Of course, if it were my store, I'd honor the offer for fear of bad publicity, and charge it back to corporate headquarters or whatever. The price difference cannot be worth the bad blood that this is going to generate.
Losing your rights (and especially your right to privacy) is not going to happen in one fell swoop.
Rather, it's more like the oft-spoken-of boiling frog - if privacy is taken away in tiny little increments, then before long it will be compromised in a big way without any substantial opposition.
I'm not saying that we should all wear tinfoil hats - but constantly recognizing (and opposing, where necessary) the gradual erosion of our right to privacy and governmental abuse of information is our only defense against being... boiled alive.
The government wants to know more and more about us these days - the excuse du jour is homeland security and counter-terrorism. Throw in stopping child-porn and just about any legislator will support any bill that enables more monitoring of citizens.
Better to be watchful and vocal - without screaming that the sky is falling - than to sit quietly, watching the privacy we enjoy now disappear for our children.
This is very much the case in the programming crowd I deal with too.
I was a biology major, but ended up doing programming because I had been doing it since I could get my hands on a computer (they used to be -really- expensive).
These days, most programmers I meet are only in it because it was the best-paying option when they chose their majors.
Not saying that my experience applies to programmers in general (in fact, open source programming seems to fly in the face of this) - but out here in corporate-land, it's all about the cash, it seems.
Pity, no?
Hehe... see? Now I'm gonna have to go over the site carefully, lookin for stuff like this.
There goes an hour or two.
Hilarious.
How about this fellow? Equally scary, yet interesting . . .
The Brick Testament
Very funny, if a bit irreverent . . .
The little ones - the ones that go for 320 bux - are suggested for younger players.
If you're 12 yrs old, getting started, and a star wars fan - you might not mind getting one of these for Christmas.
Plus the market for American iconography is a lot greater in Japan than it is here.
I'll bet these sell quite nicely. Really.
But the students at CalTech are (honestly undeniably) of a higher caliber than at most schools. They're there because they have a track record of over-achieving, and the overwhelming majority want to learn.
Compare this to some lesser schools, where lesser students are looking for some way (-any- way) to get that parchment and get that first job.
Hard to compare students at CalTech (or MIT, or any top-flight school) with Podunk State U's students.
Not to add a me-too, but anything I did in college became property of the school, to do with as they pleased.
That is absolutely the most common arrangement (I've never seen it any other way) - I'm sure there are lots of good reasons schools would do this... not the least of which is to cover their butts if a paper ended up leaking to somewhere else, with or without attribution.
Even more interesting is the question of whether or not the iPod, or the binary data contained on the device, is subject to confiscation or seizure if they believe that you downloaded a copy of Office onto it.
.
Nothing's missing . . . do they have the right to seize all those 1's and 0's?
You could make decent arguments for both sides . .
It's very possible to change state law, especially where it's obvious nonsense
.xls file isn't software. But fair, well-informed, well-meaning people can disagree.
It isn't -obvious- nonsense. Spreadsheets can contain all sorts of internal programming macros to do all kinds of things.
Personally, I feel that an
And getting your senator to go against something that brings the gaming commission revenue requires optimism in the political system that I've long since lost.
A steady birthrate, long term, could still be problematic as our lifespan increases.
No?
Hmm... you're secure (from prosecution and audit) because you're obscure?
Security through obscurity? We know where that leads.
Practically speaking, perhaps you're correct. But that doesn't mean that they couldn't, or wouldn't, make an example out of some poor soul.
Yes, it's only one person. But it'd suck to be that one obscure little developer who found the software police on his doorstep, his rights to a jury trial preemptively waived.
Damn. And I -love- Delphi. What the hell is Borland thinking?
It sounds excessive, until you think about it.
If you've figured out exactly what every button and form and screen looks like, how they fit together, and how the program will work before you've written a line of code, chances are the coding will go very smoothly.
Prototype the GUI to create the screen shots, and write the documentation. It'll force you to think the entire application through before you start building.
This isn't the first time I've heard of this methodology, and it's not as crazy as it sounds.
In a way, it's kind of like UML - writing all those nine different kinds of diagrams before you start coding - by the time you get to the code, it's all pretty much filling in the blanks - all figured out.
UML is the better way to go, in my experience - you architect the system in advance on a much deeper level than writing user documentation.
This is true - states can choose to play ball, or not to.
For example, the Feds decided that they'd like the national speed limit to be 55 mph back in the seventies(?).
They couldn't mandate the speed limit on the interstates, but -could- withhold federal highway funds from states that elected not to enact the limits.
So you're correct when you say that the Feds don't have the power to mandate this - but they carry a pretty big financial stick to persuade states to play ball.
Couldn't agree more. It's a small gaffe, but . . .
Makes you kind of wish they kept a windows box around to do spell checking, doesn't it? *ducks*
Honestly ...
Given the continuous stream of security holes found in Microsoft software, how can they honestly believe that they will be able to securely protect -any- digital content for long?
Granted, it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but throwing the gauntlet to the community like this is only begging for the system to be torn apart - DMCA be damned.
Got to give them points for hubris, though.
Actually, another reason they might choose to ignore cost would be that the cost of the software may be insignificant when compared with the value that the software provides.
If package A costs $10, and package B is free - and support costs were equal... the cost of deploying A versus B on a 100-person network is... $1000.
If A works better than B, the thousand dollars is an inconsequential amount.
With greater and greater differences in the utilities of A versus B, the original purchase price becomes meaningless. If A is far better than B, -ANY- cost difference can be ignored because it is dwarfed by the increases in productivity achieved by using A versus B.
Simply put, smart businesses use the best, most productive tool for the job - software or otherwise. Over time, any (reasonable) cost difference will be more than made up for by the increase in productivity.
This may be a wee bit offtopic, but I think this is another example of those self-serving misuses of statistics.
You know - like the wildly overstated incidence of spousal abuse on Super Bowl Sunday.
50 Million disabled Americans? Assume (generously) that there are 300 million people in the U.S. - does this mean that one in six people could benefit from accessibility technology?
Don't get me wrong - I believe that the ADA was an excellent law, and am all for accessibility enhancements for software. But grossly exaggerating the (statistical) need seems to weaken the argument more than strengthen it.
If you're really 100% serious about getting someone to contact you, you might reconsider posting anonymously.
Just a suggestion . . .
Interestingly, this is exactly what will happen.
Only the discoverer of the hole will be forced to announce it anonymously, and publish it only in dark little places where the lawyerly eyes of Microsoft won't find it. And unscrupulous eyes will.
I can see it happening already. And Microsoft would not even hear of the hole until it's far, far too late. It will be a very, very dark day if information is compromised on this scale.
The DMCA in this case would directly contribute to the destruction of the integrity of the Passport system.
Simply put - if only outlaws find security holes, then only (genuine) outlaws will have access to them.
Given that the people most likely to participate in an open-source project are also users of the application being worked on, what would happen if the customers for a software product actually participated in its design and creation?
While this may be true of many open-source projects (I'm not completely convinced even now), the argument falls apart when you start getting into really popular (widely-used) projects.
How many users of Apache (on a percentage basis) have participated in its development/design? StarOffice/OpenOffice? The Linux kernel?
Imagine the whole world suddenly using . . . GNUCash for example. The customers, on a per capita basis, largely would *not* participate in its design and creation.
As open-source projects get more widely used (as the revolution progresses, as the article suggests), most users will be just that . .
We'll have lots of customers using the system, but relatively few designers/managers/developers. Very much like any other successful non-open software development model out there now.
Open-source is no panacea when it comes to usability and design.
Hate to correct a nitpick... but...
Effect is both a noun -and- a verb.
From Dictionary.com:
tr.v. effected, effecting, effects
1. To bring into existence.
2. To produce as a result.
3. To bring about.
There's also a usage note that's somewhat illustrative:
Affect and effect have no senses in common.
As a verb affect is most commonly used in the sense of "to influence" (how smoking affects health).
Effect means "to bring about or execute": layoffs designed to effect savings.
Actually, student tuition is probably the -last- place the money is going to come from.
MIT ranks right up there with Harvard and other Ivy League schools when it comes to endowments. Basically, alumni give the school lots of money, which gets reinvested in all sorts of things - including projects of strategic importance like this.
Interestingly, MIT also derives significant revenue from the pseudo-business ventures and inventions created there. Inventions that turn out to be revenue-generators, created on-campus using their facilities, must pay a percentage of those revenues right back to the school.
I remember this causing quite a flap with a guy whose last name was Bose - son of the guy of Bose audio fame - who had an invention and was fighting with MIT over these fees.
At big-name schools like MIT, and Ivy League schools, student tuition is just one tiny piece of the financial machine.
I think the problem is a little different than the project being "fun" or not.
Me? My team and I built and maintain a homegrown oracle-based solution that stitches together contact management, accounting, and production management for a little manufacturing firm here in Chicago.
I find these things... fun.
The problem is - it takes a lot of expertise and insight (garnered only through painful experience) to build applications heavy in accounting and business-logic functions . . . expertise that goes beyond what is normally taught in a CS program in school.
And recruiting people with expertise outside the computer science realm into open source development (without paying them - your point is well taken here) can be really difficult.
There just aren't that many people with cross-disciplinary expertise who aren't buried in paying-job-type work and who are willing to donate to the cause.