>Look, the reason there's so many hardware options available for x86-based PCs is because people have been hacking it for so long.
Nope. Here's the reasons:
Mac started its life with a proprietary bus (NuBus). The PC industry has shown what happens to proprietary busses -- remember MCA, or MFM, or RLL?
Apple then decided 5 Volts was the one and only true voltage. Both for DIMMs and their advanced-but-silly RS-422 ports.
And then there's localtalk and serial printers, and SCSI (proprietary, slow, and expensive for a personal computer, in that order). I almost forgot 3.5" disks...
Yes, I know Macs use PCI and IDE now, and have for a long time. The damage was done by then, though. Same thing for printers and modems.
But wait -- Apple decided to continue their proprietary-is-as-proprietary-does lunacy even after they (halfheartedly) realised being different isn't always the best thing. Firewire comes to mind. Lets confuse consumers by making sure every company uses a different name.
Gahh... even though I know that Macs aren't like this anymore, I can't look at one without remembering these silly Macisms.
>While I love the products of the Kraft division of Phillip Morris
Now that I didn't know.
It puts a whole new spin on Kraft Dinner, it's Canadian name. I guess I learn something new everyday. Like that smarties aren't always smarties (but even when they're called Rockets they still taste damn good).
>and that topical gel stuff they put on your gums before the injection? That actually CAUSES me pain.
Five bucks says it feels like your mouth is on fire wherever they apply it. I find it useless, too. Can't they find a better way to inject than to go an inch into the joint in my gums? I can't imagine there's anywhere else it could hurt more... And they make sure your muscles are as as stretched as possible for maximum pain (ok, they don't do it on purpose, and I could always lay off the candy).:-/
"Don't worry, it just feels like a mosquito bite". Yeah, like a mosquito bite on my crotch, maybe.
Carbocaine sounds great, but with previous experiences with other prescription pain killers, I'm wary to try it.
Last major dental surgery was having wisdom teeth removed. After waking up, I puked lots of blood (I'm told I was a real winner for the amount -- and the first in the last while) and was given Toradol for the pain.
After two Toradols I sat in a seat for a while trying to catch my breath while my heart was racing (probably a stupid thing to do -- next time I'll get my ass to the hospital instead). So again, I lived with the pain, and used that super-duper tylenol they prescribe you instead.
Maybe I'm just an over-sensitive, over-complaining loser, though. Or it could be the fact I haven't been in hospital for anything serious for a couple of decades. No, the first one sounds more realistic.
Thanks for the suggestion anyways. I'll ask about it...
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
It doesn't say what you said at all -- I'm assuming you are trying to quote the constitution. I might be wrong. Perhaps you are quoting the NRA instead?
>Pretty much says it all. When guns are finally outlawed by the left wingers, do you think the criminals will turn theirs in?
Guns are outlawed unless you are part of a well regulated Militia. Notice Militia is in capitals, and that it must be well regulated. An individual is not a militia.
Oh, and I don't care if criminals turn theirs in. I don't care about the entire gun argument at all in the US. I just stand in awe that people can misquote their OWN most basic founding laws.
Actually, the constitution only allows militias to own guns. It doesn't allow individuals who aren't part of a militia to own a gun (by which the mere use of the word requires a group of more than one, or it is a vigilante).
God only knows why the NRA keeps force feeding such inane lies.
Query: Ontario, Canada is swamped with Wal-Mart stores, but local laws prohibit (or so it appears) Wal-Mart from selling them. Knowing this, would you shop at a Wal-Mart there?
Just a for fun, what-if question. Not to be taken any more seriously than the NRA takes the 2nd amendment.:-)
Why, even after a double dose of Novocain, I always feel some pain when the dentist works on my cavities (black/grey hair here)? Is it worth it to ask for another hit?:-)
Last time I told the dentist the drill was hurting he told me "I'll get it done quicker then"... ARGH! Quicker hurts more! (You're better just not to say anything).
>You've missed the point. You should have said "imagine a Microsoft EULA that says: if you don't contribute to Linux you can use Windows for free". Not such an issue anymore, is it?
Let's rewrite that so it's a factual statement.
Imagine a Microsoft EULA that says: "if you don't include Netscape with your OS, you can use IE for free".
A much larger issue now, isn't it?
Saying you can't make product B if you use product A for free stinks of market monopolization.
>Also, it would be nice if you would get your facts straight. Bitkeeper (the gratis version, anyway) only restricts you from using it to develop a competing project, not from using one.
Yeah, because this is so normal in everyday life we should just accept it.
Fortunately, I'm not a professional software developer (yet), so I don't care which of these the linux kernel uses.
I just know that if I buy a TV/Fridge/Car and feel like ripping it apart and building one identical with my own two hands (minus the trademarks, of course, and any patented parts) I damn well should be able to. It's disgusting when software licenses say things like this to me. It's a direct attack at your freedoms.
Next thing you know my Citizen clock radio will come with a EULA that tells me I can't buy the generic clock chip they used and hook it up according to their simple PCB design. Pffft... Like hell this is ok.
It doesn't surprise me, though. Linus has always said he just wants to make an OS he likes, that he didn't have to buy. He never really seemed to care past that...
Try to visit a site that's made for IE. Go to the store and buy a game. (I'll give you these -- VmWare and other solutions are a serious bitch to setup, and don't work well except in certain Distros)
Your network card doesn't work, find somebody you know willing to come over and fix it. (Huh? If the card is broken, even your God(s) ain't/aren't gonna fix it.)
>The steps to do any of the above in Windows are very easy
Uhhh, sure... I mean, I mean, if you want to have every two or three DVDs come out as coasters (happens with Prassi Primo DVD for me) sure. Or if you want to use crappy outdated camera software that just lets you easily download one picture at a time through a slow ass serial connection, great (Fuji MX-1200). I've never done DV, but Kino doesn't look too hard. Or you can try Cinerella, which seems more full featured and easier.
>When a DVD-Burner manufacturer is swamped with "Uhh where's the Linux Drivers?"
DVD-R in linux doesn't use "drivers", unless you count the built in generic SCSI support built in linux (since well before DVD was available for most PCs) as a "driver". Try saying that about windows. Especially windows 9x...
HTH. And take it from me, there's NO software in windows that lets you use a Celeron 300 to burn DVD-R at 2x and surf the 'net at the same time.
Linux's motto should be "Spend some time now -- Then do more, quicker".
>I purchased a travel insurance contract in about 15 minutes online with no difficulty.
15 minutes is the keyword. It takes 10 minutes to drive down to the store. Now the Best Buy agent explains, point by point, the contract, and has you sign it. In the end, when you return home, 40 minutes have passed instead of 25.
Now, travel insurance is pretty much a necessity (if you don't have it you're going to look sick) and is part of the entire "preparing for a vacation" deal.
Many software purchases are convenience purchases. Those aren't going to happen if it takes too long.
Not to mention that unlike your online site, buying at a store will hold up the guys at Best Buy for 15 minutes. This will translate into a $10 or $20 price increase on all EULAized software, after administration. That will not be popular with Best Buy, and they won't carry software that makes them so uncompetitive to online sites. No EULAized software on their shelves means no exposure. No exposure brings the EULA software on par with non-EULA software. And bingo! GPL (et al.) software has a fighting chance.
North America has already shown everyone that a lack of convenience will always kill a product. Look at Divx for example.
>That is, if the industry heavyweights don't collude to standardize on a set of restrictive terms, to the disadvantage of customers. That's what has happened in many other areas, e.g., banking, mortgages, etc.
All these still require an extensive amount of paperwork, discussion of the contract point by point with the customer, and a signature. It takes far longer to get a mortgage than it does to buy windows XP. I think I can safely say I could even install XP before you'd have the mortgage sorted out.
>Furthermore, many EULAs are only available after purchasing and opening the products.
Which, fortunately, invalidates the EULA unless it allows you to return the software. Infact, in many cases, most EULAs are rendered invalid in court by other causes as well...
>It would really make a lot of sense for the government to define standard terms of sale for computer software.
They did. It's called copyright, and it extends very well to software. You can run the software for yourself, and can't copy it for others. What more should a home user, or a small business need to worry about?
>If companies want different terms, they should be required to present a written contract prior to purchase and have it signed by both parties.
Totally agreed. Buying software with complicated EULAs that specifies things like how many backup copies you are allowed to make should take as long as signing a mortgage. But it ain't gonna happen as long as the governments of the world are mostly running the offending software...:-(
>so by the "it's OK because X didn't lose money" argument, incorporating od code is OK as well.
Maybe so. But that's not my argument at all.
>Sure, but I'm willing to accept the argument that someone who uses a copy of a piece of software just long enough to see if it meets their needs, and then either deletes or buys it, is different from some one who simply pirate s the software and continues to use it for their benefit while rationalizing it by claiming " I would bnever buy it."
No problem. You'll notice I didn't say it was very immoral to "steal" in this manner... Maybe it is just a little. Maybe not at all.
>You think that the end of EULAs won't affect GPL software? >Really?
Very much a wholehearted NO. GPL software will be a stronger market presence as an effect. It will effect it in a good way, very strongly.
>There are EULA's for the major Linux distros
One word: DEBIAN.
>Actually read one.
I run slackware. It's EULA seems fine to me. Of course, it really doesn't seem to have one past the GPL.
>This will help, since for the Select/Enterprise their is a contract, signed and sealed, before entering the program.
First, companies are only using MS trash because people at home use it and companies are notoriously lazy at training people, prefering the free training that people get at home on crapware instead of quality training on decent software.
Second, if this were the end of EULAs, people at home would be running GPL software, and MS would be run into the ground. You would choose the licensing method -- you could choose per computer, per user, or per machine that is on. Basically, a company manned 24/7 could probably purchase less than 1/4 of the licenses they use, legally.
>RedHat on the other hand may have trouble selling even a $40 copy of RH because of the required hassle of signing a contract
Then RedHat will go out of business. It's about time, too. Their distro sucks. Blech. Stick with proper GPL software, like Debian, or really loose contracts, like Slackware, and life is so much easier in this regard.
>Unless you have a really nice TV, it's only displaying 352x240 NTSC or 352x288 PAL.
Ohhh boy that's not right.
First of off, there's no horizontal resolution at all on TVs.
Next of all, you are talking about the resolution of the field rate (1 per 60 Hz). But TVs are doublescanning. They mix an even and an odd field by drawing them alternately fast enough that the glowing phosphor for one field mix into the glowing phosphor of the other.
The full (30 Hz) frame rate delivers 525 lines of resolution (for NTSC, slightly higher lines and lower rate for PAL).
Any TV that only displays one frame is going to make "mice text" (lawyer notes for commercials) unreadable. And it will cost a lot more to ignore those extra frames -- why bother?
Now, if your TV is out of focus or otherwise broken, I believe you. But most TVs aren't.
And it doesn't take much to see these lines. I can usually see them on any TV larger than 35".
No, sign the apology, don't do it again, and make sure you get a copy of the apology.
Make the public aware of the idiocy going on at the university. The only way you, the accused, can win in a situation like this is to disarm your attackers. When you are clearly in the right (like this student) you don't even have to plead a case -- just make it public.
The admins will look like fools faster than you can believe. I can see their answers now -- I know one, because I've been in a similar situation. "Looking through open shares is like breaking into lockers and rifling through them". Uhhh, yeah. It doesn't take a two digit IQ to realize the problem with that sentence.
Of course, an admin would never want anyone to think about this course of action...
Now, eating in the labs, that's a little different. Especially when the policy is clear (which isn't the case for the file browser software) and it's unlikely that anyone with half a brain would disagree with you.
But file browsing? I don't doubt you could get one of those nicely worded "Don't talk about this issue to the student newspaper" letters from the boss for deciding to prevent it.
Of course, that's just me. Defiant to the end. Goes with the territory of being opressed by shitty admins for so long.:-)
Not that you're a shitty admin. Just my experience has been so.
In the real world you can't "fire" your customers because they're poking around your store.
Nor can you get another worker fired without proving some kind of violation (and there's no way you can prove to a judge that looking at the list of files available on open shared counts, unless you have a signed agreement to that affect). If you did, expect a hefty lawsuit for an illicit firing.
A student is nothing more than a customer to a college/university. You can't go round getting them into trouble until you draw some lines. This is no different than those outdoor booths that happen to have the cash register in plain view to the customer (usually right beside the products that are being sold). The customer is free to bend over and take note of the pretty buttons on the cash register. It isn't until the customer crosses the line (ie: steps inside the booth) that you have a say.
I've been persecuted for exactly the same thing, a long time ago, at my high school. I was accused of hacking for poking around public directories in File Manager. I had my access taken away. I didn't give in. In the end, probably after pressure from the principals (I decided to be a squeaky wheel and waste a LOT of their time) the admin (whose name I won't mention here) told me I didn't have to admit any wrongdoing, just explain that I won't do it again. Which I was willing to do.
Never admit you are wrong unless you are. Otherwise you give in to control freaks. Nothing pleases assholes like that more than having people give in to them.
Really, this all comes down to B&E laws that the cops have to follow. If they think someone is a robber, they don't bother going after the tresspassing charge (since that'll never stick -- you have to be informed prior to the "crime" to commit trespassing), they don't even go after the B&E when you break down the front door. They'd rather catch you with something in your hands when you walk out.
This guy did nothing more than walk on land that wasn't labelled private property, never mind marked "No Trespassing".
>Instead you'll have a bare minimum sit down with a sales negoiator. You and he will talka bout the contract you will be shortly signing.
That's the idea. If it becomes a major PITA (and this is) to buy products that require a EULA, then people won't. They will prefer to buy products covered by basic copyright law (like GPLd products) and will be happy that they didn't waste their time buying products that take _forever_ to buy.
This is simple. Jean Chretien is straining to leave a "legacy" behind in this country after 3 terms of heavy-handed rule. He doesn't like what his opposition paints as his legacy -- A liar on the GST "The GST is history!", a thug with his shawinigan handshake, a bumbling moron infront of cameras, a person who can't even keep himself safe from break-ins no matter how much security he can pay for, a man who puts the lives of the Canadian military in jeopardy without them even being on a mission, a man who can't handle being wrong, a man who doesn't believe in your chartered right to free speech, a man who wrongfully invests your money, a man who supports things by doing nothing, such as the CD-Levy that assumes all Canadians are criminals, and the anti-piracy laws that leave at least 3 million Canadians with the inability to be multicultural in their television watching.
The chances that you don't own a car and that you can't catch a ride with either of your neighbours is really tiny. I suppose you do exist, but we're talking like 0.01% of Canadians are in your situation.
Driving a car is a virtual necessity in Canada, even in certain big cities. Whether this is good or not is a separate issue, but most Canadians I talk to live 10-30 minute drives away from work. And these are drives at 80 km/h. Not the sort of thing you can bike, and no way you can run there in rime.
Not to mention that if you phone up the political party for whom you wish to vote, they will give you a free ride to the booth. Or lie and phone up the party you wouldn't vote for. Either way you still get a free ride.
>What if the 12 year-old has upper middle class parents who can afford the software?
Smart parents from any class wouldn't spoil the child by giving them $1000 pieces of software. Or one would hope (mine didn't, and they probably fit in that range).
>What if the the 12 year old is 16 and has a job and can save up for JASC's software instead, or he can use GIMP.
Unless he shows an intent to purchase, no stealing can be proven. If only Minority Report had covered this topic... It's a good movie that deals with an issue similar to this.
I suppose he could use GIMP, but then he can't deal with his friends, most all of whom will have the pirated PhotoShop. I would suggest a child's development comes above software.
>If the textbook came on CD I assume you'd think its okay that he pirate that too, huh?
Again, is there an intent to purchase? I think in the case of the textbook on CD, there would be, assuming he wants to pass the class. So this is stealing.
But in this case I would consider it moral stealing, because if the CD textbook costs $110, the publisher is ripping people off in the name of education.
Unless you can prove the software was supposed to be purchased, it isn't stealing, IMHO, and also in the court's opinion. There are isolated cases that can prove the intent to purchase the software (such as buying fraudulently pirated boxed copy look-alike software at full price), but otherwise it's very difficult.
Now, don't get me wrong. Most piracy is immoral, but I just separate immoral from stealing, since they are different. One's an emotion, and the other is an act. Stealing just doesn't cover piracy well at all, since most of the time there's always huge holes in the "all piracy is stealing" argument that can't be covered up, unless you want to water down the english language.
>So is it OK to use open source code in closed source projects, because no one loses any money as a result?
No, this is a different crime. This is the crime of fraud. You are defrauding the author by putting your name on their work.
This is the equivalent to pirating software, and then finding every reference to the company in it, and replacing it with a reference to your warez group.
This would bear no difference to copying someone's paper, and sticking your name on it. It's fraud, and now it is stealing, because you're now profiting from their work because your name is on it, and therefore any benefits from that work will be received by you and not the author.
In the world of piracy this is similar to pirating a piece of software (let's say MS Office, since this happened not so long ago), making an official box for it, faking a certificate of authenticity, and getting the CDs professionally stamped. Every time someone pays you $300 for that package, they expected to be paying MS. Literally, you stole that $300 from MS, because that consumer expected to pay MS. It's all fraud...
>How is that different from a company spending money to figure out who are the most serious pirates on Kazza?
That is optional. Downloading spam isn't if you want to continue your normal mail reading habits. Pressing charges / finding pirates is not going to net you more sales, and, more importantly, is optional. Your business will still continue without this optional "service".
You cannot count optional/ethereal costs, just like you can't say the guy who has 5 pirated CD copies of MS Office at home cost the company 5 copies of MS Office.
>Quite frankly, I don't have a problem with someone pirating a copy of software, checking to see if it meets their needs, and then either buying it or deleting it.
But that is stealing! Why?
The consumer plans to shell out the cost of the software. So now, instead of shelling it out, they test it first. What if it doesn't meet their needs? They don't buy it.
But wait a minute, without pirating it first, they would have infact bought it to find out if it met their needs. And with today's EULAs, he would have no hope of returning the software.
In this case, the consumer did steal the software.
>instead of rationalizing theft by saying it didn't hurt anyone
I don't rationalize it, I simply separate theft from copyright violation. I don't say it doesn't hurt anyone (it can, in VAST quantities), I don't say it's moral (piracy often isn't), but it just isn't stealing. It might just be semantics, but with the BSA/RIAA attempting to force feed consumers the misnomer that all piracy is stealing people have to be vigilant. Otherwise, next day, you'll see everything is stealing.
You'd be surprised how you can use the word stealing if you believe the BSAs line on it:
- Murder is stealing someone's life.
- A car accident is stealing the quality of someone's car, and possibly life.
- Vandalism is stealing the usefullness of what you vandalize.
- Farting in an elevator full of midgets is stealing their air.
- Picking up a quarter from the ground is stealing from a bum.
- Using your friend's phone without asking to call a local number (free in my country) is stealing their phone service from them.
- Watching TV through your neighbour's window is stealing their TV service.
- Making a 3 point turn in someone's driveway is stealing their use of the driveway.
- Using a pun from TV in your own joke is stealing their joke from them.
The list can go on and on. Fortunately, none of these are actually stealing. But the minute the dictionary gets redefined by anti-pirate vigilantes like the BSA, watch out the next time you do anything with something that is someone else's. You may just be stealing.
>By that argument, it's ok for Kazza or other companies to put sypware on your machine to serve up ads or use unused cpu cycles - which, for flat rate bandwidth pricing, costs you no money - and the cpu only works when you've already decided to turn the PC on.
No, because the CPU takes my power. Which I pay for.
This is a poor attempt to derail the issue.
>Of course, you may say that their is some infitesimal cost associated with cpu use
I do. And don't derail the issue. We're talking copyright violation, not fraud.
>the copyright holder alos spends money on copy protection and anti-piracy efforts as well
First, this is their option. Nothing forces them to do this.
Second, anti-piracy efforts are wasted money and don't prevent piracy. They never have and never will.
Third, media without anti-piracy methods still sells VERY well. For example, DVDs, which, in their current form are virtually free of any anti-piracy measures since DeCSS came out years ago. Yet their sales steadily climb, and I see more DVD players and DVD media for sale in Wal-Mart than VHS. Not to mention VHS has been easy to pirate, even with the release of Macrovision anti-pirate technology (which was broken decades BEFORE it was released), but it still makes the studios BIG money despite the fact that the anti-piracy features are useless.
Fourth, anti-piracy technology eats into the (varporous) right of Fair use. Anything that attempts to take away from something the consumer should have the right to do (even if it isn't written down on the law books specifically) is wrong, and I'm very glad if it costs the company money. I hope it costs them so much they go out of business. They deserve to be if they sell a product for $xxx and don't let me do with it as I please (apart from violating copyright, that is). If I want to copy a PS2 game so I don't destroy the $80 original, I damn well should be able to without a mod-chip.
Fifth, anti-piracy technology actually makes the pirates money. Hacked satellite cards, hacked consoles, and DVD copying hacks are all things that can be, and are, bought. Why companies are so stupid as to actually fuel and create the black market by causing consumers who will pirate to pay someone for it beats the hell out of me. It just gets the new protections broken faster when a pirate knows there's money in it for them.
Anti-piracy is a non-argument. It does nothing but hinder the legitimate consumer, and infact can increase piracy when a legitimate consumer can no longer use the media the way they want to (look at how the new anti-piracy CDs are destroying the sales of CDs), plus it causes a profitable black market.
>By that arguement, spam is OK because you may buy something
Spam uses MY network resources, and therefore costs me money. Another attempt to derail the issue that isn't so.
>Of course, they could just as easily use Linux and some free alternative instead of pirating a copy
Agreed, but up to now, Linux has yet to provide a viable alternative for certain important niche programs. Unless you are a programmer, there is no good Photoshop alternative in Linux (GIMP ain't bad, but it isn't there). There is no illustrator alternative in Linux (kIllustrator, or whatever they called it since adobe threatened them, sucks ass). I can come up with more if you want...
A 1/2 track would be a purposely misformatted track on a disk. Normal copying would result in corrupted data because the track is out of alignment.
Since the 1541 (commodore disk drive) could be reprogrammed to misalign itself (it had it's own computer), a coder could (and often did) make a custom formatted disk with only some 1/2 tracks, and some normal ones, and would program the 1541 disk drive to compensate. It would often screw up and thats when you would hear the horrible brrrrt-clunk! noise come from the drive (it would hit the stop, which had no sensor, and just keep trying until the software gave up). Of course, it was just RAM memory in the drive, which is erased immediately when the C64 is reset (or so I am told), so you couldn't just reset and hope to copy the disk.
Hackers would need to read the code for the software and find which tracks were 1/2 tracks, copy them off with a special utility like DiSector or Hack 'em Fast, and remove the "protection" code, leaving you with a normal disk that loads faster!
Or game companies would just laser out a bit of a disk (always the same part) and the game would try to write to that section. If it's the original, it won't read back the same data, since there's no disk to write to there. If it's a copy, it'll read back the data correctly.
Slashdot Mirror
What happens when you have more than one printer on a Mac?
It doesn't sound like there's a way to combat the question of which printer gets chosen by what programs to me.
Not to mention I'm having trouble finding the centronics interface on a Mac (especially one running OS X)...
Oh, right. I forgot. Macs use USB because it's slower for printing.
Yay. Chalk another one up for the costs for simplicity of design.
>Look, the reason there's so many hardware options available for x86-based PCs is because people have been hacking it for so long.
Nope. Here's the reasons:
Mac started its life with a proprietary bus (NuBus). The PC industry has shown what happens to proprietary busses -- remember MCA, or MFM, or RLL?
Apple then decided 5 Volts was the one and only true voltage. Both for DIMMs and their advanced-but-silly RS-422 ports.
And then there's localtalk and serial printers, and SCSI (proprietary, slow, and expensive for a personal computer, in that order). I almost forgot 3.5" disks...
Yes, I know Macs use PCI and IDE now, and have for a long time. The damage was done by then, though. Same thing for printers and modems.
But wait -- Apple decided to continue their proprietary-is-as-proprietary-does lunacy even after they (halfheartedly) realised being different isn't always the best thing. Firewire comes to mind. Lets confuse consumers by making sure every company uses a different name.
Gahh... even though I know that Macs aren't like this anymore, I can't look at one without remembering these silly Macisms.
>While I love the products of the Kraft division of Phillip Morris
Now that I didn't know.
It puts a whole new spin on Kraft Dinner, it's Canadian name. I guess I learn something new everyday. Like that smarties aren't always smarties (but even when they're called Rockets they still taste damn good).
>and that topical gel stuff they put on your gums before the injection? That actually CAUSES me pain.
:-/
Five bucks says it feels like your mouth is on fire wherever they apply it. I find it useless, too. Can't they find a better way to inject than to go an inch into the joint in my gums? I can't imagine there's anywhere else it could hurt more... And they make sure your muscles are as as stretched as possible for maximum pain (ok, they don't do it on purpose, and I could always lay off the candy).
"Don't worry, it just feels like a mosquito bite". Yeah, like a mosquito bite on my crotch, maybe.
Carbocaine sounds great, but with previous experiences with other prescription pain killers, I'm wary to try it.
Last major dental surgery was having wisdom teeth removed. After waking up, I puked lots of blood (I'm told I was a real winner for the amount -- and the first in the last while) and was given Toradol for the pain.
After two Toradols I sat in a seat for a while trying to catch my breath while my heart was racing (probably a stupid thing to do -- next time I'll get my ass to the hospital instead). So again, I lived with the pain, and used that super-duper tylenol they prescribe you instead.
Maybe I'm just an over-sensitive, over-complaining loser, though. Or it could be the fact I haven't been in hospital for anything serious for a couple of decades. No, the first one sounds more realistic.
Thanks for the suggestion anyways. I'll ask about it...
>"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
I don't know where you pulled that.
The constitution actually says:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
It doesn't say what you said at all -- I'm assuming you are trying to quote the constitution. I might be wrong. Perhaps you are quoting the NRA instead?
>Pretty much says it all. When guns are finally outlawed by the left wingers, do you think the criminals will turn theirs in?
Guns are outlawed unless you are part of a well regulated Militia. Notice Militia is in capitals, and that it must be well regulated. An individual is not a militia.
Oh, and I don't care if criminals turn theirs in. I don't care about the entire gun argument at all in the US. I just stand in awe that people can misquote their OWN most basic founding laws.
Actually, the constitution only allows militias to own guns. It doesn't allow individuals who aren't part of a militia to own a gun (by which the mere use of the word requires a group of more than one, or it is a vigilante).
God only knows why the NRA keeps force feeding such inane lies.
>I *just* dont want guns at my store
:-)
Query: Ontario, Canada is swamped with Wal-Mart stores, but local laws prohibit (or so it appears) Wal-Mart from selling them. Knowing this, would you shop at a Wal-Mart there?
Just a for fun, what-if question. Not to be taken any more seriously than the NRA takes the 2nd amendment.
Why, even after a double dose of Novocain, I always feel some pain when the dentist works on my cavities (black/grey hair here)? Is it worth it to ask for another hit? :-)
Last time I told the dentist the drill was hurting he told me "I'll get it done quicker then"... ARGH! Quicker hurts more! (You're better just not to say anything).
>You've missed the point. You should have said "imagine a Microsoft EULA that says: if you don't contribute to Linux you can use Windows for free". Not such an issue anymore, is it?
Let's rewrite that so it's a factual statement.
Imagine a Microsoft EULA that says: "if you don't include Netscape with your OS, you can use IE for free".
A much larger issue now, isn't it?
Saying you can't make product B if you use product A for free stinks of market monopolization.
>Also, it would be nice if you would get your facts straight. Bitkeeper (the gratis version, anyway) only restricts you from using it to develop a competing project, not from using one.
Yeah, because this is so normal in everyday life we should just accept it.
Fortunately, I'm not a professional software developer (yet), so I don't care which of these the linux kernel uses.
I just know that if I buy a TV/Fridge/Car and feel like ripping it apart and building one identical with my own two hands (minus the trademarks, of course, and any patented parts) I damn well should be able to. It's disgusting when software licenses say things like this to me. It's a direct attack at your freedoms.
Next thing you know my Citizen clock radio will come with a EULA that tells me I can't buy the generic clock chip they used and hook it up according to their simple PCB design. Pffft... Like hell this is ok.
It doesn't surprise me, though. Linus has always said he just wants to make an OS he likes, that he didn't have to buy. He never really seemed to care past that...
Waiting for a DVD to rip.
So:
Go buy any old digital camera and try to download the pics on a RedHat system.
Go buy a DVD-R and try to burn a disc.
Go to any old website showing media (RealPlayer, QuickTime, Windows Media) and see how successful you are at viewing content.
Buy a Firewire DV Video Camera and see how successful you are in getting the video off and editing it.
Try to visit a site that's made for IE.
Go to the store and buy a game. (I'll give you these -- VmWare and other solutions are a serious bitch to setup, and don't work well except in certain Distros)
Buy a PDA and get it to synch up.
Your network card doesn't work, find somebody you know willing to come over and fix it. (Huh? If the card is broken, even your God(s) ain't/aren't gonna fix it.)
>The steps to do any of the above in Windows are very easy
Uhhh, sure... I mean, I mean, if you want to have every two or three DVDs come out as coasters (happens with Prassi Primo DVD for me) sure. Or if you want to use crappy outdated camera software that just lets you easily download one picture at a time through a slow ass serial connection, great (Fuji MX-1200). I've never done DV, but Kino doesn't look too hard. Or you can try Cinerella, which seems more full featured and easier.
>When a DVD-Burner manufacturer is swamped with "Uhh where's the Linux Drivers?"
DVD-R in linux doesn't use "drivers", unless you count the built in generic SCSI support built in linux (since well before DVD was available for most PCs) as a "driver". Try saying that about windows. Especially windows 9x...
HTH. And take it from me, there's NO software in windows that lets you use a Celeron 300 to burn DVD-R at 2x and surf the 'net at the same time.
Linux's motto should be "Spend some time now -- Then do more, quicker".
>I purchased a travel insurance contract in about 15 minutes online with no difficulty.
15 minutes is the keyword. It takes 10 minutes to drive down to the store. Now the Best Buy agent explains, point by point, the contract, and has you sign it. In the end, when you return home, 40 minutes have passed instead of 25.
Now, travel insurance is pretty much a necessity (if you don't have it you're going to look sick) and is part of the entire "preparing for a vacation" deal.
Many software purchases are convenience purchases. Those aren't going to happen if it takes too long.
Not to mention that unlike your online site, buying at a store will hold up the guys at Best Buy for 15 minutes. This will translate into a $10 or $20 price increase on all EULAized software, after administration. That will not be popular with Best Buy, and they won't carry software that makes them so uncompetitive to online sites. No EULAized software on their shelves means no exposure. No exposure brings the EULA software on par with non-EULA software. And bingo! GPL (et al.) software has a fighting chance.
North America has already shown everyone that a lack of convenience will always kill a product. Look at Divx for example.
>That is, if the industry heavyweights don't collude to standardize on a set of restrictive terms, to the disadvantage of customers. That's what has happened in many other areas, e.g., banking, mortgages, etc.
:-(
All these still require an extensive amount of paperwork, discussion of the contract point by point with the customer, and a signature. It takes far longer to get a mortgage than it does to buy windows XP. I think I can safely say I could even install XP before you'd have the mortgage sorted out.
>Furthermore, many EULAs are only available after purchasing and opening the products.
Which, fortunately, invalidates the EULA unless it allows you to return the software. Infact, in many cases, most EULAs are rendered invalid in court by other causes as well...
>It would really make a lot of sense for the government to define standard terms of sale for computer software.
They did. It's called copyright, and it extends very well to software. You can run the software for yourself, and can't copy it for others. What more should a home user, or a small business need to worry about?
>If companies want different terms, they should be required to present a written contract prior to purchase and have it signed by both parties.
Totally agreed. Buying software with complicated EULAs that specifies things like how many backup copies you are allowed to make should take as long as signing a mortgage. But it ain't gonna happen as long as the governments of the world are mostly running the offending software...
>so by the "it's OK because X didn't lose money" argument, incorporating od code is OK as well.
Maybe so. But that's not my argument at all.
>Sure, but I'm willing to accept the argument that someone who uses a copy of a piece of software just long enough to see if it meets their needs, and then either deletes or buys it, is different from some one who simply pirate s the software and continues to use it for their benefit while rationalizing it by claiming " I would bnever buy it."
No problem. You'll notice I didn't say it was very immoral to "steal" in this manner... Maybe it is just a little. Maybe not at all.
>You think that the end of EULAs won't affect GPL software?
>Really?
Very much a wholehearted NO. GPL software will be a stronger market presence as an effect. It will effect it in a good way, very strongly.
>There are EULA's for the major Linux distros
One word: DEBIAN.
>Actually read one.
I run slackware. It's EULA seems fine to me. Of course, it really doesn't seem to have one past the GPL.
>This will help, since for the Select/Enterprise their is a contract, signed and sealed, before entering the program.
First, companies are only using MS trash because people at home use it and companies are notoriously lazy at training people, prefering the free training that people get at home on crapware instead of quality training on decent software.
Second, if this were the end of EULAs, people at home would be running GPL software, and MS would be run into the ground. You would choose the licensing method -- you could choose per computer, per user, or per machine that is on. Basically, a company manned 24/7 could probably purchase less than 1/4 of the licenses they use, legally.
>RedHat on the other hand may have trouble selling even a $40 copy of RH because of the required hassle of signing a contract
Then RedHat will go out of business. It's about time, too. Their distro sucks. Blech. Stick with proper GPL software, like Debian, or really loose contracts, like Slackware, and life is so much easier in this regard.
>Unless you have a really nice TV, it's only displaying 352x240 NTSC or 352x288 PAL.
Ohhh boy that's not right.
First of off, there's no horizontal resolution at all on TVs.
Next of all, you are talking about the resolution of the field rate (1 per 60 Hz). But TVs are doublescanning. They mix an even and an odd field by drawing them alternately fast enough that the glowing phosphor for one field mix into the glowing phosphor of the other.
The full (30 Hz) frame rate delivers 525 lines of resolution (for NTSC, slightly higher lines and lower rate for PAL).
Any TV that only displays one frame is going to make "mice text" (lawyer notes for commercials) unreadable. And it will cost a lot more to ignore those extra frames -- why bother?
Now, if your TV is out of focus or otherwise broken, I believe you. But most TVs aren't.
And it doesn't take much to see these lines. I can usually see them on any TV larger than 35".
>Just sign the appology and forget about it.
:-)
No, sign the apology, don't do it again, and make sure you get a copy of the apology.
Make the public aware of the idiocy going on at the university. The only way you, the accused, can win in a situation like this is to disarm your attackers. When you are clearly in the right (like this student) you don't even have to plead a case -- just make it public.
The admins will look like fools faster than you can believe. I can see their answers now -- I know one, because I've been in a similar situation. "Looking through open shares is like breaking into lockers and rifling through them". Uhhh, yeah. It doesn't take a two digit IQ to realize the problem with that sentence.
Of course, an admin would never want anyone to think about this course of action...
Now, eating in the labs, that's a little different. Especially when the policy is clear (which isn't the case for the file browser software) and it's unlikely that anyone with half a brain would disagree with you.
But file browsing? I don't doubt you could get one of those nicely worded "Don't talk about this issue to the student newspaper" letters from the boss for deciding to prevent it.
Of course, that's just me. Defiant to the end. Goes with the territory of being opressed by shitty admins for so long.
Not that you're a shitty admin. Just my experience has been so.
In the real world you can't "fire" your customers because they're poking around your store.
Nor can you get another worker fired without proving some kind of violation (and there's no way you can prove to a judge that looking at the list of files available on open shared counts, unless you have a signed agreement to that affect). If you did, expect a hefty lawsuit for an illicit firing.
A student is nothing more than a customer to a college/university. You can't go round getting them into trouble until you draw some lines. This is no different than those outdoor booths that happen to have the cash register in plain view to the customer (usually right beside the products that are being sold). The customer is free to bend over and take note of the pretty buttons on the cash register. It isn't until the customer crosses the line (ie: steps inside the booth) that you have a say.
I've been persecuted for exactly the same thing, a long time ago, at my high school. I was accused of hacking for poking around public directories in File Manager. I had my access taken away. I didn't give in. In the end, probably after pressure from the principals (I decided to be a squeaky wheel and waste a LOT of their time) the admin (whose name I won't mention here) told me I didn't have to admit any wrongdoing, just explain that I won't do it again. Which I was willing to do.
Never admit you are wrong unless you are. Otherwise you give in to control freaks. Nothing pleases assholes like that more than having people give in to them.
Really, this all comes down to B&E laws that the cops have to follow. If they think someone is a robber, they don't bother going after the tresspassing charge (since that'll never stick -- you have to be informed prior to the "crime" to commit trespassing), they don't even go after the B&E when you break down the front door. They'd rather catch you with something in your hands when you walk out.
This guy did nothing more than walk on land that wasn't labelled private property, never mind marked "No Trespassing".
>Instead you'll have a bare minimum sit down with a sales negoiator. You and he will talka bout the contract you will be shortly signing.
That's the idea. If it becomes a major PITA (and this is) to buy products that require a EULA, then people won't. They will prefer to buy products covered by basic copyright law (like GPLd products) and will be happy that they didn't waste their time buying products that take _forever_ to buy.
>Why does everybody want to vote on-line?
This is simple. Jean Chretien is straining to leave a "legacy" behind in this country after 3 terms of heavy-handed rule. He doesn't like what his opposition paints as his legacy -- A liar on the GST "The GST is history!", a thug with his shawinigan handshake, a bumbling moron infront of cameras, a person who can't even keep himself safe from break-ins no matter how much security he can pay for, a man who puts the lives of the Canadian military in jeopardy without them even being on a mission, a man who can't handle being wrong, a man who doesn't believe in your chartered right to free speech, a man who wrongfully invests your money, a man who supports things by doing nothing, such as the CD-Levy that assumes all Canadians are criminals, and the anti-piracy laws that leave at least 3 million Canadians with the inability to be multicultural in their television watching.
The rubber suit is wearing thin, finally.
>For anyone who doesn't own a car
Dude. Seriously. You're Canadian.
The chances that you don't own a car and that you can't catch a ride with either of your neighbours is really tiny. I suppose you do exist, but we're talking like 0.01% of Canadians are in your situation.
Driving a car is a virtual necessity in Canada, even in certain big cities. Whether this is good or not is a separate issue, but most Canadians I talk to live 10-30 minute drives away from work. And these are drives at 80 km/h. Not the sort of thing you can bike, and no way you can run there in rime.
Not to mention that if you phone up the political party for whom you wish to vote, they will give you a free ride to the booth. Or lie and phone up the party you wouldn't vote for. Either way you still get a free ride.
>What if the 12 year-old has upper middle class parents who can afford the software?
Smart parents from any class wouldn't spoil the child by giving them $1000 pieces of software. Or one would hope (mine didn't, and they probably fit in that range).
>What if the the 12 year old is 16 and has a job and can save up for JASC's software instead, or he can use GIMP.
Unless he shows an intent to purchase, no stealing can be proven. If only Minority Report had covered this topic... It's a good movie that deals with an issue similar to this.
I suppose he could use GIMP, but then he can't deal with his friends, most all of whom will have the pirated PhotoShop. I would suggest a child's development comes above software.
>If the textbook came on CD I assume you'd think its okay that he pirate that too, huh?
Again, is there an intent to purchase? I think in the case of the textbook on CD, there would be, assuming he wants to pass the class. So this is stealing.
But in this case I would consider it moral stealing, because if the CD textbook costs $110, the publisher is ripping people off in the name of education.
Unless you can prove the software was supposed to be purchased, it isn't stealing, IMHO, and also in the court's opinion. There are isolated cases that can prove the intent to purchase the software (such as buying fraudulently pirated boxed copy look-alike software at full price), but otherwise it's very difficult.
Now, don't get me wrong. Most piracy is immoral, but I just separate immoral from stealing, since they are different. One's an emotion, and the other is an act. Stealing just doesn't cover piracy well at all, since most of the time there's always huge holes in the "all piracy is stealing" argument that can't be covered up, unless you want to water down the english language.
>So is it OK to use open source code in closed source projects, because no one loses any money as a result?
No, this is a different crime. This is the crime of fraud. You are defrauding the author by putting your name on their work.
This is the equivalent to pirating software, and then finding every reference to the company in it, and replacing it with a reference to your warez group.
This would bear no difference to copying someone's paper, and sticking your name on it. It's fraud, and now it is stealing, because you're now profiting from their work because your name is on it, and therefore any benefits from that work will be received by you and not the author.
In the world of piracy this is similar to pirating a piece of software (let's say MS Office, since this happened not so long ago), making an official box for it, faking a certificate of authenticity, and getting the CDs professionally stamped. Every time someone pays you $300 for that package, they expected to be paying MS. Literally, you stole that $300 from MS, because that consumer expected to pay MS. It's all fraud...
>How is that different from a company spending money to figure out who are the most serious pirates on Kazza?
That is optional. Downloading spam isn't if you want to continue your normal mail reading habits. Pressing charges / finding pirates is not going to net you more sales, and, more importantly, is optional. Your business will still continue without this optional "service".
You cannot count optional/ethereal costs, just like you can't say the guy who has 5 pirated CD copies of MS Office at home cost the company 5 copies of MS Office.
>Quite frankly, I don't have a problem with someone pirating a copy of software, checking to see if it meets their needs, and then either buying it or deleting it.
But that is stealing! Why?
The consumer plans to shell out the cost of the software. So now, instead of shelling it out, they test it first. What if it doesn't meet their needs? They don't buy it.
But wait a minute, without pirating it first, they would have infact bought it to find out if it met their needs. And with today's EULAs, he would have no hope of returning the software.
In this case, the consumer did steal the software.
>instead of rationalizing theft by saying it didn't hurt anyone
I don't rationalize it, I simply separate theft from copyright violation. I don't say it doesn't hurt anyone (it can, in VAST quantities), I don't say it's moral (piracy often isn't), but it just isn't stealing. It might just be semantics, but with the BSA/RIAA attempting to force feed consumers the misnomer that all piracy is stealing people have to be vigilant. Otherwise, next day, you'll see everything is stealing.
You'd be surprised how you can use the word stealing if you believe the BSAs line on it:
- Murder is stealing someone's life.
- A car accident is stealing the quality of someone's car, and possibly life.
- Vandalism is stealing the usefullness of what you vandalize.
- Farting in an elevator full of midgets is stealing their air.
- Picking up a quarter from the ground is stealing from a bum.
- Using your friend's phone without asking to call a local number (free in my country) is stealing their phone service from them.
- Watching TV through your neighbour's window is stealing their TV service.
- Making a 3 point turn in someone's driveway is stealing their use of the driveway.
- Using a pun from TV in your own joke is stealing their joke from them.
The list can go on and on. Fortunately, none of these are actually stealing. But the minute the dictionary gets redefined by anti-pirate vigilantes like the BSA, watch out the next time you do anything with something that is someone else's. You may just be stealing.
>By that argument, it's ok for Kazza or other companies to put sypware on your machine to serve up ads or use unused cpu cycles - which, for flat rate bandwidth pricing, costs you no money - and the cpu only works when you've already decided to turn the PC on.
No, because the CPU takes my power. Which I pay for.
This is a poor attempt to derail the issue.
>Of course, you may say that their is some infitesimal cost associated with cpu use
I do. And don't derail the issue. We're talking copyright violation, not fraud.
>the copyright holder alos spends money on copy protection and anti-piracy efforts as well
First, this is their option. Nothing forces them to do this.
Second, anti-piracy efforts are wasted money and don't prevent piracy. They never have and never will.
Third, media without anti-piracy methods still sells VERY well. For example, DVDs, which, in their current form are virtually free of any anti-piracy measures since DeCSS came out years ago. Yet their sales steadily climb, and I see more DVD players and DVD media for sale in Wal-Mart than VHS. Not to mention VHS has been easy to pirate, even with the release of Macrovision anti-pirate technology (which was broken decades BEFORE it was released), but it still makes the studios BIG money despite the fact that the anti-piracy features are useless.
Fourth, anti-piracy technology eats into the (varporous) right of Fair use. Anything that attempts to take away from something the consumer should have the right to do (even if it isn't written down on the law books specifically) is wrong, and I'm very glad if it costs the company money. I hope it costs them so much they go out of business. They deserve to be if they sell a product for $xxx and don't let me do with it as I please (apart from violating copyright, that is). If I want to copy a PS2 game so I don't destroy the $80 original, I damn well should be able to without a mod-chip.
Fifth, anti-piracy technology actually makes the pirates money. Hacked satellite cards, hacked consoles, and DVD copying hacks are all things that can be, and are, bought. Why companies are so stupid as to actually fuel and create the black market by causing consumers who will pirate to pay someone for it beats the hell out of me. It just gets the new protections broken faster when a pirate knows there's money in it for them.
Anti-piracy is a non-argument. It does nothing but hinder the legitimate consumer, and infact can increase piracy when a legitimate consumer can no longer use the media the way they want to (look at how the new anti-piracy CDs are destroying the sales of CDs), plus it causes a profitable black market.
>By that arguement, spam is OK because you may buy something
Spam uses MY network resources, and therefore costs me money. Another attempt to derail the issue that isn't so.
>Of course, they could just as easily use Linux and some free alternative instead of pirating a copy
Agreed, but up to now, Linux has yet to provide a viable alternative for certain important niche programs. Unless you are a programmer, there is no good Photoshop alternative in Linux (GIMP ain't bad, but it isn't there). There is no illustrator alternative in Linux (kIllustrator, or whatever they called it since adobe threatened them, sucks ass). I can come up with more if you want...
A 1/2 track would be a purposely misformatted track on a disk. Normal copying would result in corrupted data because the track is out of alignment.
Since the 1541 (commodore disk drive) could be reprogrammed to misalign itself (it had it's own computer), a coder could (and often did) make a custom formatted disk with only some 1/2 tracks, and some normal ones, and would program the 1541 disk drive to compensate. It would often screw up and thats when you would hear the horrible brrrrt-clunk! noise come from the drive (it would hit the stop, which had no sensor, and just keep trying until the software gave up). Of course, it was just RAM memory in the drive, which is erased immediately when the C64 is reset (or so I am told), so you couldn't just reset and hope to copy the disk.
Hackers would need to read the code for the software and find which tracks were 1/2 tracks, copy them off with a special utility like DiSector or Hack 'em Fast, and remove the "protection" code, leaving you with a normal disk that loads faster!
Or game companies would just laser out a bit of a disk (always the same part) and the game would try to write to that section. If it's the original, it won't read back the same data, since there's no disk to write to there. If it's a copy, it'll read back the data correctly.