To be fair, the DRM on iTunes songs isn't even in the same league as the DRM on the Sony CD in question, let alone the same ballpark - at least it only affects the affected song, and doesn't open the entire PC up to compromise.
My virus software performs a full scan daily at 8am. Weekdays at that time I'm on my way to work; weekends, I'm either still in bed or busy with something other than my PC. I rarely run full spyware scans, but when I do they take a few minutes and are always negative (other than the odd cookie).
Of course, I know what I'm doing, which is more than can be said for most PC users...
This is a well known point that MS has dismissed with the 'If linux was as popular...' FUD.
If Linux was as popular, you'd have just as many naive and clueless Linux users as you now have Windows users. They'd mostly either run as root, or happily type in the root password (or use sudo, or whatever) when prompted, and would still hose their systems by installing trojans.
The single biggest security threat to any system is the user. It doesn't matter how much you patch the OS if you never educate the user.
DRM? I know what you mean (ie purposeful incompatibilities between brands protected by patents and the like), but you don't really mean Digital Rights Management...
So what you're saying is that it would be inherently wrong for a government to decide policy based on the popular opinion of millions, but correct for it to decide policy based on the financial interests of a few? (Hint: my employer most certainly does not represent me or have my best interests at heart)
Surely *you* can't be serious?
Besides which, governments and other similar bodies make policy based on popular opinion *all the time*. How many laws have been passed ostensibly to protect the children or combat terrorism or whatever purely because a couple of newspapers chose to kick up a fuss and drummed up a bit of support in their readership with carefully crafted stories and opinion polls?
In any case, it's not up to the individual governments. If the EU were to force MS to cease trading within Europe, any government that ignored the order and allowed them to continue would itself be breaking the law. What government would do that, just in order to help a foreign business?
The main thing that bothers me is, what if I delete some JPGs that were stored on the computer? I may have a good reason for not wanting anyone to see them, and since they were mine
They may have been yours, although that will depend on your contract - mine specifically allows me control of anything I create on my own time. My previous conract, however, essentially laid claim to my every thought and creation. In either case, the computer isn't yours, and so it could certainly be argued that while the information in the file was yours, the file itself was not, and neither was the tool you used to delete it, the hard drive that was affected by the operation, etc.
Bottom line - don't store personal data on work computers. (Or vice versa, for that matter)
It's even easier than that, surely - when he resigned, he no longer had authorisation to use the laptop. There's no need for anything to have been violated.
Ok, there's the thought that work on the laptop would be of value (a project of some sort or list of contacts and estimates valueable to the next to occupy the position) to the employer and the employee violated some work ethic, by destroying company property
Actually, if he destroyed company property, then he didn't just violate a "work ethic", he broke the law - unauthorised destruction of property is a crime.
All you have to do is prove that the property was destroyed, by the defendent, without the owner's permission. (In a case like this, you'd possibly also have to prove that it was property in the first place...)
Do you really think that we need Microsoft half as much as they need us?
So say it happened, and no-one in Europe could buy Windows or Office.
So what? We'd all just copy them. How could it be copyright infringement? They're not available for sale, after all, so what money would they be losing? Yes, I realise that that's not quite how it works, but in such a situation how many EU governments would care?
Once the people get angry, I'm sure the officials would change their minds real quick.
Yes, because that worked so well for the Iraq war. A million people marched in London, yet our troops are still there.
Besides, people wouldn't get angry about this. Oh sure, they'd moan and they'd grumble, but *everyone* knows *someone* who'd be able to get their hands on a cracked copy of Windows and Office. Most people don't bother because there's no need - most people get Windows preinstalled on new PCs and never need a new copy. Were that to change, there'd just be a whole lot more pirated copies in use.
The GPL (as do most other F.O.S.S. licenses) prohibits selling the actual software. You can sell support for the software, and charge for the cost of the media or distribution, and you can sell the hardware the software runs on. But you can't sell the software itself.
What you can't do is take GPLed software, and sell it under terms that strip the receiver of their rights under the GPL.
Now in practice that means that it would be very difficult to run a profitable business selling GPLed software, as you can't prevent your customers from starting their own, rival businesses and undercutting you. In that, you're right - every successful open source company sells related services as well - or instead of - software. However, you are wrong in saying that you are not allowed to seel GPL software. You most certainly are, there just isn't a lot of scope for making money doing it.
This group respects and admires good thought processes.
A lot of this group respects and admires good thought processes. There is a very sizable - and often very vocal - minority who wouldn't know a good thought process if it smashed them in the face, and instead admires and respects anything that confirms their own prejudices, and belittles and derides anything that does not.
Witness the countless tired old arguments that haven't been valid for years, accusations of being a shill or a troll, etc - on both sides of every "debate".
There is a lot that is very good about slashdot, but there is also a lot that is very bad about it, too.
No, the argument is just as invalid, even if the prediction is true.
For example, I could predict that when you drop something, it will fall to the ground because the magic weight pixies will grab it and drag it there. If I then drop it and it does indeed fall to the ground, it doesn't mean that my reasoning was correct, just that I coincidentally reached the right conclusion.
Yeah, that's not a bad point, actually. I'd been tempted by X3 until I tried the demo and realised that it used StarForce.
As for it being non-refundable, while you're probably right, I'd be tempted to try trading standards on them. I guess there's no real proof that StarForce can cause actual physical damage, but there's plenty of anecdotal evidence.
It also elevates access priviledges for user-level applications, although I can't imagine why the hell it does that.
Most likely, it's for direct access to hardware, eg to the CD drive. The Sims (the first one) failed to run under a normal user account because of the copy protection, which required admin privileges for just that reason.
I suspect that StarForce is just taking the easy way round that.
That's fine - he's not saying "here's how to get a free game", he's saying "here's how to get your money back when the shop refuses to accept your return".
No, because if the story were right, then the ravening hordes of zealously anti-M$ slashbots wouldn't be able to have their mass flamefest.
This sort of thing actually really, really annoys me. God knows there are enough reasons to flame MS without making up more; doing so merely detracts from those things that we *should* be complaining about, meaning they get less attention and so there's less chance of them being addressed.
The hypocrisy is also sickening (and no, it's not ok just because MS has a habit of spreading FUD, we're supposed to be better than that!)
That's true, but my limited experince of the Quadro cards (I have one in my work PC) is that they suck for gaming. It's just not what they're made for.
So, it seems to me that flashing the BIOS of a GeForce with that from a Quadro would just give you the worst of both worlds - a card with the pro features of a gaming card, but the gaming power of a pro card...
I am most definitely sympathetic to FOSS - I think the whole thing is a superb idea, with many great qualities and much to recommend it.
However.
Richard Stallman correctly predicted many of the ways in which Big Corporations and Big Brother will use DRM (also known as Digital Restrictions Management, Treacherous Computing, or Handcuffware) to enslave people.
You lost me right there. Please explain to me - in words of one syllable if necessary - how DRM will turn me into a slave. For reference, this is the definition of slave that I'm using.
I am jealous of all that time off, but I don't understand why EVERYONE has to use it in August.
Here in the UK, it's because that's the best time to go on holiday, partly because the weather is good, but also because taking children out of school during term time is very much frowned upon (and in fact recent reports suggest that it's about to become illegal).
That said I've never noticed any holiday-related problems at any time of the year, but then the UK has always leaned more towards the American, "work at (almost) any cost" ethos, than the more European "there's more to life than work" one.
Slashdot Mirror
If I get a Windows CD, I cannot resell it, because there is no way of "disabling" my Windows license.
Well, apart from being crap, what's that got to do with music, which is what we were actually discussing?
To be fair, the DRM on iTunes songs isn't even in the same league as the DRM on the Sony CD in question, let alone the same ballpark - at least it only affects the affected song, and doesn't open the entire PC up to compromise.
time consuming virus/spyware checks
My virus software performs a full scan daily at 8am. Weekdays at that time I'm on my way to work; weekends, I'm either still in bed or busy with something other than my PC. I rarely run full spyware scans, but when I do they take a few minutes and are always negative (other than the odd cookie).
Of course, I know what I'm doing, which is more than can be said for most PC users...
This is a well known point that MS has dismissed with the 'If linux was as popular...' FUD.
If Linux was as popular, you'd have just as many naive and clueless Linux users as you now have Windows users. They'd mostly either run as root, or happily type in the root password (or use sudo, or whatever) when prompted, and would still hose their systems by installing trojans.
The single biggest security threat to any system is the user. It doesn't matter how much you patch the OS if you never educate the user.
DRM? I know what you mean (ie purposeful incompatibilities between brands protected by patents and the like), but you don't really mean Digital Rights Management...
Computers aren't exactly free either, and while you can get small form factor ones (eg laptops), my desk is fairly large...
Seriously? All the geeks I know work 70+ hour work weeks...
And how many of them are in unions, or otherwise do something about it?
Precisely.
Well, if 72 million is too high, it's not going to be 720 million...
(But yeah, if 72 is within an order of magnitude, then you're looking for something roughly in that range)
So what you're saying is that it would be inherently wrong for a government to decide policy based on the popular opinion of millions, but correct for it to decide policy based on the financial interests of a few? (Hint: my employer most certainly does not represent me or have my best interests at heart)
Surely *you* can't be serious?
Besides which, governments and other similar bodies make policy based on popular opinion *all the time*. How many laws have been passed ostensibly to protect the children or combat terrorism or whatever purely because a couple of newspapers chose to kick up a fuss and drummed up a bit of support in their readership with carefully crafted stories and opinion polls?
In any case, it's not up to the individual governments. If the EU were to force MS to cease trading within Europe, any government that ignored the order and allowed them to continue would itself be breaking the law. What government would do that, just in order to help a foreign business?
Yes, just like all the other subscription fees they're charging at the moment...
The main thing that bothers me is, what if I delete some JPGs that were stored on the computer? I may have a good reason for not wanting anyone to see them, and since they were mine
They may have been yours, although that will depend on your contract - mine specifically allows me control of anything I create on my own time. My previous conract, however, essentially laid claim to my every thought and creation. In either case, the computer isn't yours, and so it could certainly be argued that while the information in the file was yours, the file itself was not, and neither was the tool you used to delete it, the hard drive that was affected by the operation, etc.
Bottom line - don't store personal data on work computers. (Or vice versa, for that matter)
It's even easier than that, surely - when he resigned, he no longer had authorisation to use the laptop. There's no need for anything to have been violated.
Ok, there's the thought that work on the laptop would be of value (a project of some sort or list of contacts and estimates valueable to the next to occupy the position) to the employer and the employee violated some work ethic, by destroying company property
Actually, if he destroyed company property, then he didn't just violate a "work ethic", he broke the law - unauthorised destruction of property is a crime.
All you have to do is prove that the property was destroyed, by the defendent, without the owner's permission. (In a case like this, you'd possibly also have to prove that it was property in the first place...)
Do you really think that we need Microsoft half as much as they need us?
So say it happened, and no-one in Europe could buy Windows or Office.
So what? We'd all just copy them. How could it be copyright infringement? They're not available for sale, after all, so what money would they be losing? Yes, I realise that that's not quite how it works, but in such a situation how many EU governments would care?
Once the people get angry, I'm sure the officials would change their minds real quick.
Yes, because that worked so well for the Iraq war. A million people marched in London, yet our troops are still there.
Besides, people wouldn't get angry about this. Oh sure, they'd moan and they'd grumble, but *everyone* knows *someone* who'd be able to get their hands on a cracked copy of Windows and Office. Most people don't bother because there's no need - most people get Windows preinstalled on new PCs and never need a new copy. Were that to change, there'd just be a whole lot more pirated copies in use.
The GPL (as do most other F.O.S.S. licenses) prohibits selling the actual software. You can sell support for the software, and charge for the cost of the media or distribution, and you can sell the hardware the software runs on. But you can't sell the software itself.
Have you actually read the GPL? You must definitely are allowed to sell the software. You're even allowed to charge a reasonable fee for the source, to cover media and postage, etc.
What you can't do is take GPLed software, and sell it under terms that strip the receiver of their rights under the GPL.
Now in practice that means that it would be very difficult to run a profitable business selling GPLed software, as you can't prevent your customers from starting their own, rival businesses and undercutting you. In that, you're right - every successful open source company sells related services as well - or instead of - software. However, you are wrong in saying that you are not allowed to seel GPL software. You most certainly are, there just isn't a lot of scope for making money doing it.
This group respects and admires good thought processes.
A lot of this group respects and admires good thought processes. There is a very sizable - and often very vocal - minority who wouldn't know a good thought process if it smashed them in the face, and instead admires and respects anything that confirms their own prejudices, and belittles and derides anything that does not.
Witness the countless tired old arguments that haven't been valid for years, accusations of being a shill or a troll, etc - on both sides of every "debate".
There is a lot that is very good about slashdot, but there is also a lot that is very bad about it, too.
No, the argument is just as invalid, even if the prediction is true.
For example, I could predict that when you drop something, it will fall to the ground because the magic weight pixies will grab it and drag it there. If I then drop it and it does indeed fall to the ground, it doesn't mean that my reasoning was correct, just that I coincidentally reached the right conclusion.
Yeah, that's not a bad point, actually. I'd been tempted by X3 until I tried the demo and realised that it used StarForce.
As for it being non-refundable, while you're probably right, I'd be tempted to try trading standards on them. I guess there's no real proof that StarForce can cause actual physical damage, but there's plenty of anecdotal evidence.
It also elevates access priviledges for user-level applications, although I can't imagine why the hell it does that.
Most likely, it's for direct access to hardware, eg to the CD drive. The Sims (the first one) failed to run under a normal user account because of the copy protection, which required admin privileges for just that reason.
I suspect that StarForce is just taking the easy way round that.
That's fine - he's not saying "here's how to get a free game", he's saying "here's how to get your money back when the shop refuses to accept your return".
No, because if the story were right, then the ravening hordes of zealously anti-M$ slashbots wouldn't be able to have their mass flamefest.
This sort of thing actually really, really annoys me. God knows there are enough reasons to flame MS without making up more; doing so merely detracts from those things that we *should* be complaining about, meaning they get less attention and so there's less chance of them being addressed.
The hypocrisy is also sickening (and no, it's not ok just because MS has a habit of spreading FUD, we're supposed to be better than that!)
Ah, so that's why the X3 demo installs that Starforce shit! I was wonderingf why on earth they bothered to copy prevent a freely-downloadable demo...
All they've actually done, of course, is to convince me not to bother with X3. A shame really, as X2 wasn't too bad.
That's true, but my limited experince of the Quadro cards (I have one in my work PC) is that they suck for gaming. It's just not what they're made for.
So, it seems to me that flashing the BIOS of a GeForce with that from a Quadro would just give you the worst of both worlds - a card with the pro features of a gaming card, but the gaming power of a pro card...
I am most definitely sympathetic to FOSS - I think the whole thing is a superb idea, with many great qualities and much to recommend it.
However.
Richard Stallman correctly predicted many of the ways in which Big Corporations and Big Brother will use DRM (also known as Digital Restrictions Management, Treacherous Computing, or Handcuffware) to enslave people.
You lost me right there. Please explain to me - in words of one syllable if necessary - how DRM will turn me into a slave. For reference, this is the definition of slave that I'm using.
I am jealous of all that time off, but I don't understand why EVERYONE has to use it in August.
Here in the UK, it's because that's the best time to go on holiday, partly because the weather is good, but also because taking children out of school during term time is very much frowned upon (and in fact recent reports suggest that it's about to become illegal).
That said I've never noticed any holiday-related problems at any time of the year, but then the UK has always leaned more towards the American, "work at (almost) any cost" ethos, than the more European "there's more to life than work" one.
As a small company owner, there are people that I cannot afford to promote because nobody could fill their shoes.
So you agree with him then - if you are indispensible, you will never be promoted (because no-one else could do your job).