I would tend to agree with you that concerns about the security of ECC are overblown, and tend to come from the common wisdom that old-and-proven is better than new-and-unproven.
There's a general uneasiness in much of the cryptographic community regarding ECC that comes from the thought that with a new and elegant cryptographic algorithm or methodology there is often a new and elegant attack that renders it worthless in practical applications. As I'm sure you realize (but others may not) the ability of a methodology to withstand conventional attacks is no indicator of long-term viability; algorithms may only be proven unsafe, not safe (except perhaps for one-time pads under certain circumstances).
I happen to hold out hope for this technique, but it takes time in the field for confidence to be built. This contest may help, but by no means is it absolute proof of the security of the technique (although one would be hard pressed to make a million dollars hoarding a working attack on ECC to themselves).
But unfortunately, the extensibility of a product once it is in the hands of the consumer has been realized by corporate culture to be something that is better controlled than given away.
There were any number of hobbyist platforms in the 70s and 80s. They're not around anymore. The people that control the industry today got their start on programming and hardware on these machines and are all too happy to remove that opportunity for the next generation. Some might think it's a bit hypocritical, but it's really about cutting out the competition.
Besides, if just anyone can write for or modify these things, that cuts out the revenue stream from licensing. The future will be in renting, not buying. And really, they've got every right to control the product if we keep buying it.
As I understand it, booting these sort of things without paying royalties/licensing a devkit usually involves some form of copyright or trademark violation as a result of the measures required to get something to boot (the Gameboy, for example, had a requirement for a logo to be stored on the cartridge that was trademarked by Nintendo.)
As cool as these things are to play around with, they aren't worth sullying the GNU/Linux name... especially with the SCO situation looming. Does anybody know if this sort of concern is present with this code?
Isn't this going to start a trend where hardware companies stop releasing ROM updates for their products?
90% of my stuff wouldn't even work right if I couldn't update the firmware, and there are a number of people that patch ROMs to extend hardware capabilities unofficially. Maybe the companies will get around it by encrypting their updates, but that doesn't sound like a win for anybody else.
If the game is worth playing, I'd say allowing the player the freedom to try new things or take multiple paths to win is an excellent way to increase the replay value.
Now, there are some games are long enough where replay value really doesn't make a difference (Chrono Chross?) because it is physically impossible to play them through more than twice in your lifetime, but for shorter games it's almost a must to avoid complaints of the game being far too short. From what I've heard, GTA3/Vice City offer enough to do to allow a person to spend almost a little too much time in its environment.
There is a reason that The Book Of Four Rings and The Art Of War are recommended reading for any entrepeneur: the fundamentals never change.
You need a solid plan, a solid product, and a company that can be successfully run by idiots (because sooner or later it will be). And you can't discount the role of serendipity -- for it was she that made successes out of the unlikeliest things. Take chopsticks, for example; who would have thought that a pair of wooden twigs would have caught on here in the U.S. mining colonies in 1800s (where they were invented by immigrants seeking to differentiate their new and tasty cuisine) to the point where they've actually spread across Asia and now account for 3% of our lumber exports! Or the success of the Post-It note: once thought to be entirely useless outside of the labs in which it was developed, it created a whole new 'need' in society for these notes that could be attached to things without paperclips.
At the end of the day, sometimes you just can't predict what'll be wildly successful and what will fall by the wayside. But I think if you find something unique and stick with it you've got a good shot.
I'd like it if the Linux community could be a bit more persuasive with companies releasing Linux-related things to make them, well, more Linux friendly.
Linux, for me, peaked in usability/reliability in 1999. It's still quite useful, but I began experiencing many more compatibility problems since that point.
I have a video card whose driver is closed. I've got multiple peripherals that are only partially implemented because manufacturers for some reason are reluctant to release information to developers. It's great as-is, don't get me wrong, but participating on the Internet has gotten much harder as everybody decides to go proprietary and tug in different directions.
For example, Flash runs slower on Linux; so slow that it causes the sound to go out of sync (related bug that also seems to bite some Windows installs: this applet and those coded like it have audio that is too quiet). Java is still a real pain to get working right. Maybe the greatest thing that's happened this year is Mozilla/Firebird, but I'm running it without add-ons!
I believe only great things are to come, what with Linux having reached 2.6.0, and greatly appreciate all the developers have done for it. Now, I think it'd be nice if others began to support it.
If you look around, you might be able to find a business that's upgrading its rackmount systems. Given the timing of these things being unleashed on the secondhand market, this should be quite a boon to those of us that manage to snap them up.
I've got a three-system (used) computer rack that cost in total around $350. It helps to know somebody in the computer department of a large business when it comes time for them to unload their stock, especially when the alternative is for them to pay to dump the stuff.
Normally, I try to make ethical decisions about where and what I buy. I pick up stuff made in the U.S. when I can (and it's not easy anymore), I avoid patronizing businesses that have practices I don't agree with, and I try to support businesses that benefit our community with our presence.
Case in point for why being a responsible consumer can actually pay off for the person doing it. The average computer repair shop has a regimen of
troubleshooting/burn-in tools that while effective for diagnosing many simple
problems is simply not representative of the actual uses and requirements
of their customers. At the place I pick up my systems from, the process is
tailored to the uses the consumer has for the equipment -- they start with
the standard toolkit (POST card, power supply checker, RAM tester,
troubleshooting diskette, virus scan, 3D benchmarking suite), but will also
try some of the latest games, office software, and any of the stuff you
bring in for them to test (basic hourly fee applies if testing goes beyond
two hours.) They even run some stuff past the web browser; apparently,
certain web
features demonstrate sound or display problems even among the same versions
of a web browser on different systems due to often overlooked plugin
incompatibilities, and some OEM systems come without certain "webfonts" that
these guys will put on to make web pages look more like the designer
intended. One has to pay a little more for this level of service, but the
result is a finely-tuned system without the weeks of learning PC/Windows
fundamentals.
Service varies a great deal depending on where you go. Some businesses are
just skimming along without a good deal of regard to the customer, but others
are more than eager to throw in everything but the kitchen sink for something
like 120%-150% of what the skimmers charge. Local businesses competing
against chain stores realize that every edge is important in remaining
viable, and their owners/employees tend to be pretty cool people.
Unfortunately, what we're talking about here is the consumer's choice being limited to two giants: SDRAM and Rambus. This isn't to the benefit of the customer, and I feel strongly that we need to request another standard of memory that is truly Open and Free so that anybody can manufacture it without a patent submarine or limiting consumer freedoms. The playing field is so restricted right now that we're pretty much beholden to pay what they charge if we want the product, and whether or not they're taking unfair advantage of it this isn't a situation that is to our longterm benefit.
We've already established that moderate proficiency in a high-level language with a good optimizing compiler is worth far more than mastery of assembly in today's environment, what with the size and scope of most programming tasks nowadays. Creating an intermediate language seems to couple the worst inefficiencies of high-level programming and assembly micromanagement: something akin to writing 'machine code' directly for a Java VM to optimize your application instead of just writing the darn thing in C, compiling it to the three platforms it's going to run on, and getting a 300% speed boost.
What's wrong with making a good compiler that writes directly to machine code? I would think Cray and IBM would be even more inclined to do so, given their control over the hardware their software will run on.
I like that they're committed enough to their consumers that they're willing to make new-feature changes to the firmware rather than release a new version and charge for it. That does say something for the company.
One thing to note, though, is that if you encode your Ogg to reasonable quality (500Kbps) this patch isn't going to support you, so you will have to use a converter (they will soon provide for free) to actually downsample the music. I guess it's portable, so it isn't like I'm listening to the stuff through expensive high-quality speakers, but it is an extra step.
That's the thing: the easiest answer isn't always the right answer, and people are always willing to believe the worst. If a volcano puts out a decade's worth of our contribution to greenhouse gas every time it blows, we can't be tipping the scales that much.
Of course, even the best of us only use 10% of our brains. But I'd hope that looking at that simple fact most people would realize the junk science that's being put forward here (and hurting more legitimate environmental causes like increasing biodegradability and lowering air pollution by converting to nuclear/solar power).
Windows 2000 is a quantum leap beyond either the 9X/ME or NT lines. I couldn't imagine going back, although I don't see enough benefit to XP to move up just yet.
I'd bet the reasons users retain the older operating systems have more to do with familiarity and the difficulty of upgrading than with the pricing (which was my first reaction) -- although Windows 2000 and XP offer a stunning level of compatibility with older hardware and a greatly enhanced user experience, the ability to migrate applications from an old system to a new system leaves something to be desired when compared to the DOS days where one could simply copy an application over.
Microsoft may do well to adopt practices that increase the ability for users to upgrade painlessly, such as by doing away with their authentication system and promoting a means of moving a software package (with its associated configuration and data files) to a new Windows installation or to a different computer.
Obviously, as you point out, a more meaningful ethical debate would be about what happens with or to clones than about whether cloning itself is unethical.
As things stand right now, however, the success rate of clones is quite low. Depending on how you feel about the creation of a number of partially developed but nonviable fetuses, this may bother you (especially if you believe the "Life begins at conception." viewpoint). Human clones that are successfully born may very well face a significantly decreased lifespan if the results of other animal cloning are any indication and are also likely to be more susceptible to illness.
I feel these are all pragmatic concerns even for individuals not guided by religion. Perhaps not reason enough to cut ourselves off from the medical potential of cloning althogether, but I think certainly enough to question the vanity applications of cloning. Hopefully, most people would rather adopt than pass down to a child (and perhaps their bloodline!) the deficiencies that are currently likely to accompany human clones.
On the one hand, obviously spam is a problem to some people and the effort to reduce or eliminate many kinds of it should be applauded.
However, this provides more interference with the operation of the Internet while offering very little in the way of actual benefit. Already some people have experienced problems with overzealous realtime blackhole lists, others (me) have problems with ISPs implementing incoming filters without letting anybody know, silently dropping legitimate mail along with the illegitimate. And legal solutions rarely are -- it's just a matter of time before a loophole is found in this one (besides the obvious: since the empire has waned in recent years only the U.K. really trembles at U.K. law). Additionally, this may impede legitimate unsolicited commercial e-mail as well as that of the "Free Vitamins 7538" variety.
At the end of the day, we've really yet to mount a good defense to spam. And I still don't think laws are the way to do it.
I've found that people are more likely to encounter these sort of things via e-mail, and that they lend themselves quite easily to fraud/theft. Hopefully, Microsoft will release a patch for this even though it's December, because this will no doubt find its way into (illegitimate) spammers' arsenals.
I used to be somewhat aggravated about the perceived flood of jobs leaving our country.
However, this (in addition to a weakening dollar) will eventually lead to equilibrium and a return of jobs as manufacturing is able to afford more workers locally. Additionally, it's somewhat symbolic that India has worked on a project that will ultimately allow other disadvantaged countries to develop their own technology resources off of information, hopefully returning to the pool of public knowledge rather then proprietary.
And MIT students get a lesson in economics as well.
The more Earth-type planets we find in our tiny observable radius of the Universe, the greater the statistical probability that others exist where we can't see them.
The likelihood of other meaningful life in the Universe just got better. And I for one welcome the possibility.
It's obvious that with the gradual acceptance of Linux by the business community, it's time for a stricter security model to be adopted. While OpenBSD has not shared in the commercial success of Linux, it does have one area of technical superiority: its security review process has yet to permit a remote root compromise in a standard install.
Linux is a compelling choice in the Free Software world because of its pace of development and wide availability of software. However, it is this strength that is becoming a weakness. Perhaps it is time to slow down and review with more vigor to mimic the accomplishment of OpenBSD.
Every so often, we've got to reevaluate where we are and where we're going in science (even computer science!) It's important to keep in mind that none of this is gospel, and that we're continuing to learn and revise our pool of knowledge.
With this in mind, there's another crazy idea I've been reading up on lately. Intelligent Design, a recent theory that has gained enough
respect from the scientific community that it is being taught alongside
evolution in many schools and colleges, explains that to even reach the stage
at which we exist there are no fewer than twenty-six variables
necessary for our universe to even consider permitting life and a further
sixty-six within our galaxy and Earth itself that allowed the multitude
of living beings not only to come into being but to flourish (this
whitepaper that was in My Favorites breaks these criteria into
probabilities -- great read if you prefer to see the evidence of this
hypothesis); in a nutshell, this concept is summed up
in Asimov's fantastic quote "In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you
must first create the universe."
Some perhaps are content with chaos theory, but I'm glad there's another
scientific viewpoint that can rationalize the concept that free will is
the only variable that yet seems unaccounted for... and with all likelihood,
scientific viewpoint that can rationalize the concept that free will is
the only variable that yet seems unaccounted for... and with all likelihood,
that too was carefully strewn into the universe to keep a perpetual working
model. Although I suppose we have to keep in mind that this too is only a
theory, and while it's possible everything was made to work smoothly from
the beginning (on the whole) I'm more comfortable with the idea that
somebody's looking in from time to time. One has to start somewhere to
reconcile observation with history in order to get closer to the
truth.
When I was going through high school, we had probably fifty computers available to the students in theory; they'd never actually let us use the things, of course, and they didn't have any connection to our schoolwork (this was in pre-Internet days).
What I think is going on is that we've got all these funds for technology/connectivity for schools, thanks to a bunch of wasteful spending by the Democrats, and we don't have the funding for teachers or books because they're not the latest or greatest thing. Oh, and they don't benefit big business either.
My recommendation is to curtail this sort of thing in your own community unless there is a clear plan for the actual implementation of all this technology. There rarely is. 'Training' is another area that seems to be minimally effective...
I know what you're thinking...
on
20 Years of Virii
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
'Virii' is not a word.
However, while it is an improper Latin conjugation of 'virum', it is the proper term for a collection of computer malware (recognized since 1996.)
There has to be some limit to the scope of this, doesn't there?
How much litigation can you have on your plate at a time? I think their strategy is good, keeping everybody on the defensive, but at some point they're taking the risk of overextending themselves. I used to think a business could only handle one substantial lawsuit at a time, but I suppose that's a myth akin to the one about chopsticks originating in Asia, when the recently
uncovered truth of the matter is that they were designed by immigrants cooking
in American mining communities in the 1800s and later returned to Asia, when in actual fact you can run as many suits as you've got lawyers to handle them (and staff resources to produce what the lawyers need). I don't know how wise the current strategy is, but I suppose that's why I'm not running a corporation.
Still, I'm surprised investors are still in at this point. If I had some extra cash I'd put some in just to see what happens, but I wouldn't be serious about it.
I know that if I was producing an indie film, I'd gladly welcome the ban as a way of allowing me to further differentiate my product by continuing to offer screeners. The process has been dominated by big studios for too long.
What's the issue here? If anything, I'd expect a big studio to be upset.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a general uneasiness in much of the cryptographic community regarding ECC that comes from the thought that with a new and elegant cryptographic algorithm or methodology there is often a new and elegant attack that renders it worthless in practical applications. As I'm sure you realize (but others may not) the ability of a methodology to withstand conventional attacks is no indicator of long-term viability; algorithms may only be proven unsafe, not safe (except perhaps for one-time pads under certain circumstances).
I happen to hold out hope for this technique, but it takes time in the field for confidence to be built. This contest may help, but by no means is it absolute proof of the security of the technique (although one would be hard pressed to make a million dollars hoarding a working attack on ECC to themselves).
There were any number of hobbyist platforms in the 70s and 80s. They're not around anymore. The people that control the industry today got their start on programming and hardware on these machines and are all too happy to remove that opportunity for the next generation. Some might think it's a bit hypocritical, but it's really about cutting out the competition.
Besides, if just anyone can write for or modify these things, that cuts out the revenue stream from licensing. The future will be in renting, not buying. And really, they've got every right to control the product if we keep buying it.
As cool as these things are to play around with, they aren't worth sullying the GNU/Linux name... especially with the SCO situation looming. Does anybody know if this sort of concern is present with this code?
90% of my stuff wouldn't even work right if I couldn't update the firmware, and there are a number of people that patch ROMs to extend hardware capabilities unofficially. Maybe the companies will get around it by encrypting their updates, but that doesn't sound like a win for anybody else.
Now, there are some games are long enough where replay value really doesn't make a difference (Chrono Chross?) because it is physically impossible to play them through more than twice in your lifetime, but for shorter games it's almost a must to avoid complaints of the game being far too short. From what I've heard, GTA3/Vice City offer enough to do to allow a person to spend almost a little too much time in its environment.
Advertising, market penetration, competitive pricing and attrition.
You need a solid plan, a solid product, and a company that can be successfully run by idiots (because sooner or later it will be). And you can't discount the role of serendipity -- for it was she that made successes out of the unlikeliest things. Take chopsticks, for example; who would have thought that a pair of wooden twigs would have caught on here in the U.S. mining colonies in 1800s (where they were invented by immigrants seeking to differentiate their new and tasty cuisine) to the point where they've actually spread across Asia and now account for 3% of our lumber exports! Or the success of the Post-It note: once thought to be entirely useless outside of the labs in which it was developed, it created a whole new 'need' in society for these notes that could be attached to things without paperclips.
At the end of the day, sometimes you just can't predict what'll be wildly successful and what will fall by the wayside. But I think if you find something unique and stick with it you've got a good shot.
Linux, for me, peaked in usability/reliability in 1999. It's still quite useful, but I began experiencing many more compatibility problems since that point.
I have a video card whose driver is closed. I've got multiple peripherals that are only partially implemented because manufacturers for some reason are reluctant to release information to developers. It's great as-is, don't get me wrong, but participating on the Internet has gotten much harder as everybody decides to go proprietary and tug in different directions.
For example, Flash runs slower on Linux; so slow that it causes the sound to go out of sync (related bug that also seems to bite some Windows installs: this applet and those coded like it have audio that is too quiet). Java is still a real pain to get working right. Maybe the greatest thing that's happened this year is Mozilla/Firebird, but I'm running it without add-ons!
I believe only great things are to come, what with Linux having reached 2.6.0, and greatly appreciate all the developers have done for it. Now, I think it'd be nice if others began to support it.
I've got a three-system (used) computer rack that cost in total around $350. It helps to know somebody in the computer department of a large business when it comes time for them to unload their stock, especially when the alternative is for them to pay to dump the stuff.
Case in point for why being a responsible consumer can actually pay off for the person doing it. The average computer repair shop has a regimen of troubleshooting/burn-in tools that while effective for diagnosing many simple problems is simply not representative of the actual uses and requirements of their customers. At the place I pick up my systems from, the process is tailored to the uses the consumer has for the equipment -- they start with the standard toolkit (POST card, power supply checker, RAM tester, troubleshooting diskette, virus scan, 3D benchmarking suite), but will also try some of the latest games, office software, and any of the stuff you bring in for them to test (basic hourly fee applies if testing goes beyond two hours.) They even run some stuff past the web browser; apparently, certain web features demonstrate sound or display problems even among the same versions of a web browser on different systems due to often overlooked plugin incompatibilities, and some OEM systems come without certain "webfonts" that these guys will put on to make web pages look more like the designer intended. One has to pay a little more for this level of service, but the result is a finely-tuned system without the weeks of learning PC/Windows fundamentals.
Service varies a great deal depending on where you go. Some businesses are just skimming along without a good deal of regard to the customer, but others are more than eager to throw in everything but the kitchen sink for something like 120%-150% of what the skimmers charge. Local businesses competing against chain stores realize that every edge is important in remaining viable, and their owners/employees tend to be pretty cool people.
Unfortunately, what we're talking about here is the consumer's choice being limited to two giants: SDRAM and Rambus. This isn't to the benefit of the customer, and I feel strongly that we need to request another standard of memory that is truly Open and Free so that anybody can manufacture it without a patent submarine or limiting consumer freedoms. The playing field is so restricted right now that we're pretty much beholden to pay what they charge if we want the product, and whether or not they're taking unfair advantage of it this isn't a situation that is to our longterm benefit.
What's wrong with making a good compiler that writes directly to machine code? I would think Cray and IBM would be even more inclined to do so, given their control over the hardware their software will run on.
One thing to note, though, is that if you encode your Ogg to reasonable quality (500Kbps) this patch isn't going to support you, so you will have to use a converter (they will soon provide for free) to actually downsample the music. I guess it's portable, so it isn't like I'm listening to the stuff through expensive high-quality speakers, but it is an extra step.
Of course, even the best of us only use 10% of our brains. But I'd hope that looking at that simple fact most people would realize the junk science that's being put forward here (and hurting more legitimate environmental causes like increasing biodegradability and lowering air pollution by converting to nuclear/solar power).
I'd bet the reasons users retain the older operating systems have more to do with familiarity and the difficulty of upgrading than with the pricing (which was my first reaction) -- although Windows 2000 and XP offer a stunning level of compatibility with older hardware and a greatly enhanced user experience, the ability to migrate applications from an old system to a new system leaves something to be desired when compared to the DOS days where one could simply copy an application over.
Microsoft may do well to adopt practices that increase the ability for users to upgrade painlessly, such as by doing away with their authentication system and promoting a means of moving a software package (with its associated configuration and data files) to a new Windows installation or to a different computer.
As things stand right now, however, the success rate of clones is quite low. Depending on how you feel about the creation of a number of partially developed but nonviable fetuses, this may bother you (especially if you believe the "Life begins at conception." viewpoint). Human clones that are successfully born may very well face a significantly decreased lifespan if the results of other animal cloning are any indication and are also likely to be more susceptible to illness.
I feel these are all pragmatic concerns even for individuals not guided by religion. Perhaps not reason enough to cut ourselves off from the medical potential of cloning althogether, but I think certainly enough to question the vanity applications of cloning. Hopefully, most people would rather adopt than pass down to a child (and perhaps their bloodline!) the deficiencies that are currently likely to accompany human clones.
However, this provides more interference with the operation of the Internet while offering very little in the way of actual benefit. Already some people have experienced problems with overzealous realtime blackhole lists, others (me) have problems with ISPs implementing incoming filters without letting anybody know, silently dropping legitimate mail along with the illegitimate. And legal solutions rarely are -- it's just a matter of time before a loophole is found in this one (besides the obvious: since the empire has waned in recent years only the U.K. really trembles at U.K. law). Additionally, this may impede legitimate unsolicited commercial e-mail as well as that of the "Free Vitamins 7538" variety.
At the end of the day, we've really yet to mount a good defense to spam. And I still don't think laws are the way to do it.
I've found that people are more likely to encounter these sort of things via e-mail, and that they lend themselves quite easily to fraud/theft. Hopefully, Microsoft will release a patch for this even though it's December, because this will no doubt find its way into (illegitimate) spammers' arsenals.
However, this (in addition to a weakening dollar) will eventually lead to equilibrium and a return of jobs as manufacturing is able to afford more workers locally. Additionally, it's somewhat symbolic that India has worked on a project that will ultimately allow other disadvantaged countries to develop their own technology resources off of information, hopefully returning to the pool of public knowledge rather then proprietary.
And MIT students get a lesson in economics as well.
The likelihood of other meaningful life in the Universe just got better. And I for one welcome the possibility.
Linux is a compelling choice in the Free Software world because of its pace of development and wide availability of software. However, it is this strength that is becoming a weakness. Perhaps it is time to slow down and review with more vigor to mimic the accomplishment of OpenBSD.
With this in mind, there's another crazy idea I've been reading up on lately. Intelligent Design, a recent theory that has gained enough respect from the scientific community that it is being taught alongside evolution in many schools and colleges, explains that to even reach the stage at which we exist there are no fewer than twenty-six variables necessary for our universe to even consider permitting life and a further sixty-six within our galaxy and Earth itself that allowed the multitude of living beings not only to come into being but to flourish (this whitepaper that was in My Favorites breaks these criteria into probabilities -- great read if you prefer to see the evidence of this hypothesis); in a nutshell, this concept is summed up in Asimov's fantastic quote "In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe."
Some perhaps are content with chaos theory, but I'm glad there's another scientific viewpoint that can rationalize the concept that free will is the only variable that yet seems unaccounted for... and with all likelihood, scientific viewpoint that can rationalize the concept that free will is the only variable that yet seems unaccounted for... and with all likelihood, that too was carefully strewn into the universe to keep a perpetual working model. Although I suppose we have to keep in mind that this too is only a theory, and while it's possible everything was made to work smoothly from the beginning (on the whole) I'm more comfortable with the idea that somebody's looking in from time to time. One has to start somewhere to reconcile observation with history in order to get closer to the truth.
What I think is going on is that we've got all these funds for technology/connectivity for schools, thanks to a bunch of wasteful spending by the Democrats, and we don't have the funding for teachers or books because they're not the latest or greatest thing. Oh, and they don't benefit big business either.
My recommendation is to curtail this sort of thing in your own community unless there is a clear plan for the actual implementation of all this technology. There rarely is. 'Training' is another area that seems to be minimally effective...
However, while it is an improper Latin conjugation of 'virum', it is the proper term for a collection of computer malware (recognized since 1996.)
How much litigation can you have on your plate at a time? I think their strategy is good, keeping everybody on the defensive, but at some point they're taking the risk of overextending themselves. I used to think a business could only handle one substantial lawsuit at a time, but I suppose that's a myth akin to the one about chopsticks originating in Asia, when the recently uncovered truth of the matter is that they were designed by immigrants cooking in American mining communities in the 1800s and later returned to Asia, when in actual fact you can run as many suits as you've got lawyers to handle them (and staff resources to produce what the lawyers need). I don't know how wise the current strategy is, but I suppose that's why I'm not running a corporation.
Still, I'm surprised investors are still in at this point. If I had some extra cash I'd put some in just to see what happens, but I wouldn't be serious about it.
What's the issue here? If anything, I'd expect a big studio to be upset.