A lot of that stuff would further decay, be disturbed by land development or natural disasters and just get looted in those 300 years. Besides how would the science advance if we're not out in the field, better to do the best we can to save what we can find.
You think that's the worst mistake in the article? If you were ever exposed to "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" you'll already know that Dr. Jones is well up on his "space archaeology" already. witness.
Ugh, they should've just made The Fate Of Atlantis into a movie instead of making that turd. Friggin' Lucas can't stop ruining perfectly good trilogies.
The reason, Xerox was an Apple investor, it'd be like suing yourself
“Xerox could have owned the PC revolution, but instead it sat on the technology for years. Then, in exchange for the opportunity to invest in a hot new pre-IPO start-up called “Apple,” the Xerox PARC commandos were forced — under protest — to give Apple’s engineers a tour and a demonstration of their work. The result was the Apple Macintosh, which Microsoft later copied to create Windows. [...] The compensation for the Xerox PARC technology sharing deal with Apple was in form of $1 million dollars pre-IPO Apple stock / investment (if Apple does well, Xerox will benefit from Apple’s success)."
Here's the problem in 1 sentence from a Samsung Galaxy S review : "In the time we’ve been carrying the Galaxy S, more than a few people – geeks included – have mistaken it for an iPhone 3GS." There's a fine line between using similar desing elements and making something so similar it's mistaken for something else. Should it be illegal ? Probably not, but you can sort of see why Apple is pissed off.
No only if you purposefully make them look so much alike that it can potentially confuse the consumer. Like when you make a nearly identical handset and change the icons to very closely resemble the iPhone ones. Now personally I don't think this should be against the law, but the first time I saw a commercial for one of these phones I do remember thinking to myself they were shameless iPhone rip offs. I'm not the only one either :
Samsung Galaxy S Review : "In the time we’ve been carrying the Galaxy S, more than a few people – geeks included – have mistaken it for an iPhone 3GS. The glossy black plastic and metal-effect bezel both echo Apple’s second/third-gen smartphone"
Hate to say this, but Apple is the new Sony. Steve jobs will as much as admit it. He loved Sony like we all did back in the day of Trinitrons and Walkmans. They made GORGEOUS hardware.
"Alan Deutschman, Reynolds professor of business journalism at University of Nevada-Reno and author of "The Second Coming of Steve Jobs" -- the definitive unauthorized biography of the Apple CEO -- notes that from his early twenties on, Jobs had a fascination with Sony that bordered on obsession. [...] "At the time, Sony was committed to not releasing a crappy product just because the market was there; they waited until they had a truly revolutionary innovation, combined it with great design and then profited from it for long, long time," says Deutschman."
That is really not what I was referring to. I really just want to stop a particular user from running setuid/setgid programs and from running programs in their home directory. [...] It is not even clear to me that the Mac parental controls feature actually prevents users from executing programs in their home directories (e.g. a program they downloaded from some website).
That can be emulated by not giving them the admin password + enabling parental controls, it's an application whitelist.
In any case, the real point here was that there is no reason to pay the Apple premium if your goal is to protect an unsophisticated user from malware.
My point was that there's no reason to inflict Linux on them either;-) The user might be more comfortable with an OS other than Linux.
You could argue that if there's a problem of trust between you and an organization you shouldn't be running any code from them at all. And these kind of controls might actually stimulate such an organization to ask for the broadest possible permissions figuring power users will tune them down themselves and they can still profit from the ignorant and the lazy.
My approach is cheaper: lock down the system. Install Fedora, give my mother a user that has type user_u in SELinux, and breath a little easier now that I know she cannot accidentally run some random program she downloaded. There are still vulnerabilities, but it would take a far more sophisticated attack than what one normally sees.
Sounds like a headache for developers: "these are the permissions you can ask for, but it's not sure they'll actually be granted." Then you'd have to build in checks absolutely everywhere because you can't rely on anything. Sounds more like a compromise position than anything malicious to me.
Sounds like a good way to break apps. The tacit assumption here is that apps are asking for more permissions than they need. This seems pretty paranoid, why not just use the app as the author intended or else find some other app that conforms more to your expectations ?
I agree with nearly everything you say, my problem with Google is this: they make a big show about "openness" but giving away the OS is the easy part. People buying into this crap will end up with their "open" phone in a desert without content and a few crappy open source apps because Google, as most corporations refuse to support openness where it's hard and it counts. And I don't buy the argument that they have to play along with content providers. Apple, though far from perfect, at least plays hardball with these assholes forcing the price of music downloads down, getting rid of DRM on iTunes music, kicking NBC out of the iTunes store because they wanted to raise prices on videos. Google could buy these companies several times over but they haven't shown any backbone in a good while now. They talk the talk without walking the walk.
Google dictating the terms of the Android Market being limited does not mean that Android is closed any more than Amazon requiring you to have an Amazon account to use their market does.
What do you think it says about Google's plans for the future of the Android platform that they are excluding rooted devices from using some of their own services ? Google the grand protector of openness, unless of course it's inconvenient.
How about working libraries ? A decent package manager actually containing most of the libraries I use (like all debian variants have, and, to a slightly lesser degree, all redhat variants have too).
You mean package manager like Fink, Macports or Homebrew ? They are useful for installing FOSS stuff. Personally I can't stand package managers the way they work on Linux, nothing like having to update half your DE because you install a new package and it requires a dot update of some library. You don't see that insanity on any other Unix.
Installing such trivialities as NumPy on Mac OS X is about as easy as it is on Windows. It's not that hard (unless there are conflicts), but removing something you installed is all but impossible.
That's really the fault of the person who created the package for not providing an uninstall script, and a bit like complaining doing a "configure; make ; make install" makes it hard to uninstall stuff.
Nearly all geeks but they are probably disproportionately represented among my friends. I think probably among "normal" people the jailbreak rate isn't that high in my country because we can buy the iPhone unlocked, there's a lot more jailbreaking going on in neighbouring countries as a prerequisite to unlocking. It'd actually be interesting to see some kind of survey on the amount of jailbroken and/or unlocked iPhones in circulation by country.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of that stuff would further decay, be disturbed by land development or natural disasters and just get looted in those 300 years. Besides how would the science advance if we're not out in the field, better to do the best we can to save what we can find.
You think that's the worst mistake in the article? If you were ever exposed to "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" you'll already know that Dr. Jones is well up on his "space archaeology" already. witness.
Ugh, they should've just made The Fate Of Atlantis into a movie instead of making that turd. Friggin' Lucas can't stop ruining perfectly good trilogies.
The reason, Xerox was an Apple investor, it'd be like suing yourself
“Xerox could have owned the PC revolution, but instead it sat on the technology for years. Then, in exchange for the opportunity to invest in a hot new pre-IPO start-up called “Apple,” the Xerox PARC commandos were forced — under protest — to give Apple’s engineers a tour and a demonstration of their work. The result was the Apple Macintosh, which Microsoft later copied to create Windows.
[...]
The compensation for the Xerox PARC technology sharing deal with Apple was in form of $1 million dollars pre-IPO Apple stock / investment (if Apple does well, Xerox will benefit from Apple’s success)."
This is completely different. It'd be more like having to check libc is installed every time a program is executed.
That's controversial. Despite a lot of bluster LG never did file a lawsuit so they probably didn't have much of a case.
Here's the problem in 1 sentence from a Samsung Galaxy S review : "In the time we’ve been carrying the Galaxy S, more than a few people – geeks included – have mistaken it for an iPhone 3GS." There's a fine line between using similar desing elements and making something so similar it's mistaken for something else. Should it be illegal ? Probably not, but you can sort of see why Apple is pissed off.
No only if you purposefully make them look so much alike that it can potentially confuse the consumer. Like when you make a nearly identical handset and change the icons to very closely resemble the iPhone ones. Now personally I don't think this should be against the law, but the first time I saw a commercial for one of these phones I do remember thinking to myself they were shameless iPhone rip offs. I'm not the only one either :
First Look: Samsung Vibrant Rips Off iPhone 3G Design
Review: The IPhone Look Alike Samsung Eternity SGH-A867 (AT&T)
Samsung Galaxy S Review : "In the time we’ve been carrying the Galaxy S, more than a few people – geeks included – have mistaken it for an iPhone 3GS. The glossy black plastic and metal-effect bezel both echo Apple’s second/third-gen smartphone"
That's for in 2 years time when they finally get around to copying the current designs.
Next up : Dell. Hey if you got to copy so
Hate to say this, but Apple is the new Sony. Steve jobs will as much as admit it. He loved Sony like we all did back in the day of Trinitrons and Walkmans. They made GORGEOUS hardware.
Great article discussing just that here.
"Alan Deutschman, Reynolds professor of business journalism at University of Nevada-Reno and author of "The Second Coming of Steve Jobs" -- the definitive unauthorized biography of the Apple CEO -- notes that from his early twenties on, Jobs had a fascination with Sony that bordered on obsession.
[...]
"At the time, Sony was committed to not releasing a crappy product just because the market was there; they waited until they had a truly revolutionary innovation, combined it with great design and then profited from it for long, long time," says Deutschman."
They should have started UID's at 9001 to make RedHat MEME compliant.
That is really not what I was referring to. I really just want to stop a particular user from running setuid/setgid programs and from running programs in their home directory. [...] It is not even clear to me that the Mac parental controls feature actually prevents users from executing programs in their home directories (e.g. a program they downloaded from some website).
That can be emulated by not giving them the admin password + enabling parental controls, it's an application whitelist.
In any case, the real point here was that there is no reason to pay the Apple premium if your goal is to protect an unsophisticated user from malware.
My point was that there's no reason to inflict Linux on them either ;-) The user might be more comfortable with an OS other than Linux.
You could argue that if there's a problem of trust between you and an organization you shouldn't be running any code from them at all. And these kind of controls might actually stimulate such an organization to ask for the broadest possible permissions figuring power users will tune them down themselves and they can still profit from the ignorant and the lazy.
There probably isn't such a thing as a "safe file." Well, they've still got time to change the defaults in Lion.
My approach is cheaper: lock down the system. Install Fedora, give my mother a user that has type user_u in SELinux, and breath a little easier now that I know she cannot accidentally run some random program she downloaded. There are still vulnerabilities, but it would take a far more sophisticated attack than what one normally sees.
Kid Proofing a Mac With Parental Controls
s/Kid/Parent/
Allows you to limit the applications a user can execute.
Apple treating this like what it is, a very minor security update. Won't stop the trolls trolling trolls though.
Sometimes I leave the phone on in airplane mode at night not to have to go through all those dialogs.
You are coming to a sad realization. [C]ancel or [A]llow ?
Sounds like a headache for developers: "these are the permissions you can ask for, but it's not sure they'll actually be granted." Then you'd have to build in checks absolutely everywhere because you can't rely on anything. Sounds more like a compromise position than anything malicious to me.
Sounds like a good way to break apps. The tacit assumption here is that apps are asking for more permissions than they need. This seems pretty paranoid, why not just use the app as the author intended or else find some other app that conforms more to your expectations ?
You've been trolled
I agree with nearly everything you say, my problem with Google is this: they make a big show about "openness" but giving away the OS is the easy part. People buying into this crap will end up with their "open" phone in a desert without content and a few crappy open source apps because Google, as most corporations refuse to support openness where it's hard and it counts. And I don't buy the argument that they have to play along with content providers. Apple, though far from perfect, at least plays hardball with these assholes forcing the price of music downloads down, getting rid of DRM on iTunes music, kicking NBC out of the iTunes store because they wanted to raise prices on videos. Google could buy these companies several times over but they haven't shown any backbone in a good while now. They talk the talk without walking the walk.
Great, I'd like to do that with Honeycomb. Got a link for me ?
Google's Android Market != Android
Google dictating the terms of the Android Market being limited does not mean that Android is closed any more than Amazon requiring you to have an Amazon account to use their market does.
What do you think it says about Google's plans for the future of the Android platform that they are excluding rooted devices from using some of their own services ? Google the grand protector of openness, unless of course it's inconvenient.
How about working libraries ? A decent package manager actually containing most of the libraries I use (like all debian variants have, and, to a slightly lesser degree, all redhat variants have too).
You mean package manager like Fink, Macports or Homebrew ? They are useful for installing FOSS stuff. Personally I can't stand package managers the way they work on Linux, nothing like having to update half your DE because you install a new package and it requires a dot update of some library. You don't see that insanity on any other Unix.
Installing such trivialities as NumPy on Mac OS X is about as easy as it is on Windows. It's not that hard (unless there are conflicts), but removing something you installed is all but impossible.
That's really the fault of the person who created the package for not providing an uninstall script, and a bit like complaining doing a "configure; make ; make install" makes it hard to uninstall stuff.
Nearly all geeks but they are probably disproportionately represented among my friends. I think probably among "normal" people the jailbreak rate isn't that high in my country because we can buy the iPhone unlocked, there's a lot more jailbreaking going on in neighbouring countries as a prerequisite to unlocking. It'd actually be interesting to see some kind of survey on the amount of jailbroken and/or unlocked iPhones in circulation by country.