That proves (sort of) that no such person exists (or ever has existed), but not that should a person can't exist.
There may currently be no person in the world whose name is "Ashgroologo Terminixxa", but that does not mean that a person existing with that name is "therefore impossible".
There is no demand for web apps, There never WAS a demand for web apps.
Really? I've worked at several companines that deployed their tools as web apps. If you have thousands of employees which is more cost effective: making them all download the new version of your tool and install in on their desktop (especially when they're not admins on their machines and can't install software), or upgrading the (single) version on your intranet servers, allowing most employees to suddenly have the new version without having to do anything? Just because you don't use them doesn't mean there is "no demand".
MS apparently decided that the BSOD was becoming too much of a symbol of windows failure, so they make XP by default reboot on an error that would otherwise cause a BSOD.
Which was the right thing to do. The average user doesn't know what to do when a BSOD comes up and just finds it scary. So disabling the BSOD unless you know enough about windows to turn it back on makes sense. In general, having all of the things that the average user will find confusing turned off by default makes sense. Let the users who want them turn them on, since they know how; if they were on by default it would be a problem because the users who don't want them are exactly the ones who wouldn't know how to turn them off.
They don't have to have any memory and they don't have any memory. The amount that is paid is an average. For every dollar the machine takes it, it may on average pay off 95 cents, for example. If it paid off twenty cents, that would be illegal. But paying off 95 cents (for example) on average doesn't require memory any more than a roulette wheel does (of course, there are people who also think that they should bet on numbers that have been "hot" recently at roulette, or alternately on numbers that haven't come up recently and are "due"). It just requires that the random number generation and payoffs are such that your expectation is to lose five cents for every dollar you bet.
There is something fundamentally wrong when publically funded, mandatory education is subsidized by private corporations in order to spread their own agendas
I agree with everything you've said. I'd like to also add that this is very similar to what many of us have said for years about the DARE program, in which cops come to public schools to push their political agenda.
Given that the people teaching the classes are "volunteers" and they are at "primarily disadvantaged schools" (probably public schools for which the parents aren't paying tuition), then in a direct sense: no, the kids are not paying for this mpaa-sponsored class.
I know. I was saying more generally that advances in this area are useful as they move us towards a future where biometrics get good enough that people don't need passwords.
Also, I would imagine that the point of password for a system like this is mainly just to make it easier on the system identifying your voice, since it will only have to be able to identify your voice for one given phrase. This means that password in a system like this don't have to be nearly so cryptic and hard to remember as traditional password to be equally secure. You should now be able to safely have a passord like "bosco" rather than "B0sZc110~9*".
If your user account is compromised, you can be tricked into running a different program than you intend. Alternately, if you mess up the permissions on your ~, you can be made to run a different program, compromising the account.
What's the difference? If someone is writing to ~/bin, my account has already been compromised. They can trick me into doing what? Deleting all my files? But they could have just done that themselves if they had write access to my home directory.
Yeah. I feel like I've entered bizarro world where that description only suits prime rather than suiting the first metroid game with its endless identical repetitive hallways.
What made Prime so much better is that it wasn't slow and repetitive like the original, and hopefully echoes will keep that going.
The benefit of biometrics should be that people don't have to remember more password. The fact that people can't (or don't want to) remember passwords is a good reason to be working on technologies where you can be identified by your voice or fingerprint rather than a string of characters.
I'm not sure if you're trolling, since you claim that the hacks in their for Borland are "BS", when they are right there in the code that we all saw. But in case you're just misinformed, I'll point you towards Raymond Chen's blog entry where you can learn quite a bit about why Microsoft needs to make new versions of their OS work with old software, even when it may not be the best thing to do from a pure engineering perspective.
Helpful hint: You would get more responses if you tried moving the US-court-system-is-never-wrong troll to one of the daily threads about music and software piracy. Telling everyone that piracy being wrong "isn't under debate, it's a matter of law" would help put their arguments in perspective. Actually, even better would be informing everyone who wants to discuss how the DMCA might be wrong that it "isn't under debate" because US laws are always right. You could really save them a lot of time. Things work a lot more efficiently when we give up our ability to debate the laws and just trust what the government says is best.
Also, I think the Preview button should exist by itself, as a *default*, the first time you try to post, in order to avoid any or grammar spelling mistkes.
plastic forces you to preview before you can post. They also have a spellchecker when you preview (I think you can even mouseover misspelled words for suggestions). Not sure why those things aren't implemented here (plastic is also running slashcode, although some modified version).
because you blatantly ignore the fact that different rules apply for companies in a monopoly position
Perhaps you should just accept the fact that not everyone agrees with you. Not all of us believe microsoft is a monopoly or that they should have to follow special rules. In fact, if you go read other sections of slashdot like yro, you'll find that many of us think that the US court system (as well as those of other countries), is actually capable sometimes of being wrong about things, especially regarding technical issues. Also, if you go read other sections of slashdot, you will discover that there are many people here who use operating systems other than windows and believe it is very reasonable for individuals or companies to do so. They do not thing that windows ithe only viable operating desktop system and needs special restrictions that equivalent competing systems don't.
I could just as easily turn this back to you and say that it's very tiresome to make me explain the obvious over and over: that linux distros and os x come with media players and web browsers and no one views that as illegal. The only people who think that the same should be illegal-- but only for microsoft-- seem to be either those who hate the company and support anything that harms it, or those who are technically clueless and unaware that other os's exist.
They make tweaks/fixes in the OS code for their non-OS products as revealed by the leaked MS Code.
If the implication is that they are using the OS code to give their other products a competitive advantage, the leaked code showed the exact opposite. It showed that they tweak the OS to make sure that all major products from all companies keep working on the new version. There were hacks in there for Borland and other companies to make thier products work, just like there were hacks for MS software. MS knows that companies won't upgrade to the latest version if the sotware (microsoft or not) that they run doesn't work, which means a lot of lost operating system revenue.
The flaw in your analogy is that the work offered on the network would not be stored on school owned equipment
It's using the school's bandwidth which costs them money, just like keeping a book on a shelf would. The student is paying tuition and paying for the network, but it still belongs to the school. They set the policies as they like, and if the student's disagree, they can complain (or take their money elsewhere, for example by living off-campus), but ultimately the final decision belongs to the school. You may not think their decision is the wisest one possible, but no one's "rights" are being violated.
Why do you assume they wouldn't? If someone downloads an album online, the record company (and music publisher, artist and whoever else), loses: (cost of cd) * (probability that this person would have paid for this cd if they hadn't downloaded it)
I am assuming that that probability is not zero. This is based primarily on personal experience, and I don't have scientific studies to quote to you backing that up. If you genuinely believe it is zero, I'm not going to argue about it, but I disagree.
And the university's network doesn't belong to you. The school is not obligated to let people use their resources to download your song anymore than they would be obligated to carry a book you wrote in their library.
Perhaps that opinion mostly comes from the fact that GPL are mostly violated by people with money to make yet more money without earning it, while copyright infringers (of the most common sort targeted by the music industry) are not looking to make a profit from thier actions.
If a company puts GPL'd code in their (closed) product, they save the money they otherwise would have had to spend to pay programmers to write equivalent code. If you copy music, you save the money you otherwise would have had to spend to buy it at a store. These are more similar than you seem to be willing to acknowledge.
In fact, pretty much anything can be produced in the U.S. We don't have censorship on the order of the European countries. It is being used to illustrate a point
Right now, this is fairly true. But until the Clinton administration, the Justice Department was actually fairly harsh towards the production of pornography. Of course, plenty of porn still got made, but plenty of people also got in trouble. And things may start to move back in that direction.
So who is the United States serving? It can't be the citizens of its country, since the writeup indicates that the US no longer counts as a country: "enforcement from 10 countries and the United States...".
maybe he feels like more of a complete geek now that he's been slashdotted
Why does everybody assume the site was slashdotted? Based on the writeup, it seems much more likely that the server's hard drive was destroyed by a cannon of some kind.
Slashdot Mirror
That proves (sort of) that no such person exists (or ever has existed), but not that should a person can't exist.
There may currently be no person in the world whose name is "Ashgroologo Terminixxa", but that does not mean that a person existing with that name is "therefore impossible".
Really? I've worked at several companines that deployed their tools as web apps. If you have thousands of employees which is more cost effective: making them all download the new version of your tool and install in on their desktop (especially when they're not admins on their machines and can't install software), or upgrading the (single) version on your intranet servers, allowing most employees to suddenly have the new version without having to do anything? Just because you don't use them doesn't mean there is "no demand".
Which was the right thing to do. The average user doesn't know what to do when a BSOD comes up and just finds it scary. So disabling the BSOD unless you know enough about windows to turn it back on makes sense. In general, having all of the things that the average user will find confusing turned off by default makes sense. Let the users who want them turn them on, since they know how; if they were on by default it would be a problem because the users who don't want them are exactly the ones who wouldn't know how to turn them off.
They don't have to have any memory and they don't have any memory. The amount that is paid is an average. For every dollar the machine takes it, it may on average pay off 95 cents, for example. If it paid off twenty cents, that would be illegal. But paying off 95 cents (for example) on average doesn't require memory any more than a roulette wheel does (of course, there are people who also think that they should bet on numbers that have been "hot" recently at roulette, or alternately on numbers that haven't come up recently and are "due"). It just requires that the random number generation and payoffs are such that your expectation is to lose five cents for every dollar you bet.
I agree with everything you've said. I'd like to also add that this is very similar to what many of us have said for years about the DARE program, in which cops come to public schools to push their political agenda.
Given that the people teaching the classes are "volunteers" and they are at "primarily disadvantaged schools" (probably public schools for which the parents aren't paying tuition), then in a direct sense: no, the kids are not paying for this mpaa-sponsored class.
I know. I was saying more generally that advances in this area are useful as they move us towards a future where biometrics get good enough that people don't need passwords.
Also, I would imagine that the point of password for a system like this is mainly just to make it easier on the system identifying your voice, since it will only have to be able to identify your voice for one given phrase. This means that password in a system like this don't have to be nearly so cryptic and hard to remember as traditional password to be equally secure. You should now be able to safely have a passord like "bosco" rather than "B0sZc110~9*".
What's the difference? If someone is writing to ~/bin, my account has already been compromised. They can trick me into doing what? Deleting all my files? But they could have just done that themselves if they had write access to my home directory.
Yeah. I feel like I've entered bizarro world where that description only suits prime rather than suiting the first metroid game with its endless identical repetitive hallways.
What made Prime so much better is that it wasn't slow and repetitive like the original, and hopefully echoes will keep that going.
The benefit of biometrics should be that people don't have to remember more password. The fact that people can't (or don't want to) remember passwords is a good reason to be working on technologies where you can be identified by your voice or fingerprint rather than a string of characters.
I'm not sure if you're trolling, since you claim that the hacks in their for Borland are "BS", when they are right there in the code that we all saw. But in case you're just misinformed, I'll point you towards Raymond Chen's blog entry where you can learn quite a bit about why Microsoft needs to make new versions of their OS work with old software, even when it may not be the best thing to do from a pure engineering perspective.
Helpful hint: You would get more responses if you tried moving the US-court-system-is-never-wrong troll to one of the daily threads about music and software piracy. Telling everyone that piracy being wrong "isn't under debate, it's a matter of law" would help put their arguments in perspective. Actually, even better would be informing everyone who wants to discuss how the DMCA might be wrong that it "isn't under debate" because US laws are always right. You could really save them a lot of time. Things work a lot more efficiently when we give up our ability to debate the laws and just trust what the government says is best.
plastic forces you to preview before you can post. They also have a spellchecker when you preview (I think you can even mouseover misspelled words for suggestions). Not sure why those things aren't implemented here (plastic is also running slashcode, although some modified version).
Perhaps you should just accept the fact that not everyone agrees with you. Not all of us believe microsoft is a monopoly or that they should have to follow special rules. In fact, if you go read other sections of slashdot like yro, you'll find that many of us think that the US court system (as well as those of other countries), is actually capable sometimes of being wrong about things, especially regarding technical issues. Also, if you go read other sections of slashdot, you will discover that there are many people here who use operating systems other than windows and believe it is very reasonable for individuals or companies to do so. They do not thing that windows ithe only viable operating desktop system and needs special restrictions that equivalent competing systems don't.
I could just as easily turn this back to you and say that it's very tiresome to make me explain the obvious over and over: that linux distros and os x come with media players and web browsers and no one views that as illegal. The only people who think that the same should be illegal-- but only for microsoft-- seem to be either those who hate the company and support anything that harms it, or those who are technically clueless and unaware that other os's exist.
If the implication is that they are using the OS code to give their other products a competitive advantage, the leaked code showed the exact opposite. It showed that they tweak the OS to make sure that all major products from all companies keep working on the new version. There were hacks in there for Borland and other companies to make thier products work, just like there were hacks for MS software. MS knows that companies won't upgrade to the latest version if the sotware (microsoft or not) that they run doesn't work, which means a lot of lost operating system revenue.
It's using the school's bandwidth which costs them money, just like keeping a book on a shelf would. The student is paying tuition and paying for the network, but it still belongs to the school. They set the policies as they like, and if the student's disagree, they can complain (or take their money elsewhere, for example by living off-campus), but ultimately the final decision belongs to the school. You may not think their decision is the wisest one possible, but no one's "rights" are being violated.
Why do you assume they wouldn't? If someone downloads an album online, the record company (and music publisher, artist and whoever else), loses:
(cost of cd) * (probability that this person would have paid for this cd if they hadn't downloaded it)
I am assuming that that probability is not zero. This is based primarily on personal experience, and I don't have scientific studies to quote to you backing that up. If you genuinely believe it is zero, I'm not going to argue about it, but I disagree.
And the university's network doesn't belong to you. The school is not obligated to let people use their resources to download your song anymore than they would be obligated to carry a book you wrote in their library.
If a company puts GPL'd code in their (closed) product, they save the money they otherwise would have had to spend to pay programmers to write equivalent code. If you copy music, you save the money you otherwise would have had to spend to buy it at a store. These are more similar than you seem to be willing to acknowledge.
That's not a paradox.
Right now, this is fairly true. But until the Clinton administration, the Justice Department was actually fairly harsh towards the production of pornography. Of course, plenty of porn still got made, but plenty of people also got in trouble. And things may start to move back in that direction.
And yet, this sig is the only sentence on slashdot to use both "to" and "too" correctly, as well as having no typos. Odd.
So who is the United States serving? It can't be the citizens of its country, since the writeup indicates that the US no longer counts as a country: "enforcement from 10 countries and the United States...".
Givn that the company only has 300 employees total, having the top one get 1/80th of their take doesn't seem that unreasonable.
Why does everybody assume the site was slashdotted? Based on the writeup, it seems much more likely that the server's hard drive was destroyed by a cannon of some kind.