I don't really know where to start if you don't even read my postings. Maybe I quote myself and hope that you are going to read it this time?
And recently it was Mass SQL Injection Attack Hits Sites Running IIS [slashdot.org] Where that was an SQL Injection Attack but
[it] is targeting servers running Microsoft IIS and ASP.net software
but not Linux and Apache, where Linux+Apache would be a much bigger target.
Conficker has since spread rapidly into what is now believed to be the largest computer worm infection since the 2003 SQL Slammer,[2] with more than seven million government, business and home computers in over 200 countries now under its control.
... on Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, and Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta
You right, neither is really doing better than the other. Before Conficker it was SQL Slammer
It spread rapidly, infecting most of its 75,000 victims within ten minutes.
[...]it exploited a buffer overflow bug in Microsoft's flagship SQL Server and Desktop Engine database products,[...]
Shouldn't be MS in favor of dropping H246 and support WebM? Sure it's from Google, but WebM is free, meaning they don't have to pay any cent to MPEG LA. Oh wait, MS is a member of MPEG LA, so if everyone is using WebM then MPEG LA and thus MS don't get a dime from the internet. Aren't they a little bit biased to accept their arguments?
Is that the same business that infect the MS IIS so frequent? Oh wait, MS ISS Server is not the dominant web server, it's Apache. Where are all the Linux+Apache viruses out there, which powers the majority of the internet? Why are all virus attacks only for Windows and MS ISS, which are in the minority?
Botnets come from because of the factors add together: Users downloading crap from different sites and insecure system in which the crap can infect other systems automatically. Make an app store, but make it optional and have a secure system. Just like any Linux distribution. No need to lock down the phone.
Such thing as "free indie media" doesn't exists. If you have an internet radio you have to pay royalties, if you have a bar and play music you have to pay, in Germany everyone is paying a royalty on CDs, DVDs, flash drivers, hard disks. The "Content Industry" have such power that they lobbied every government that if you play music you have to pay royalties to them even if you don't play any music owned by them. Either you pay the royalties or you are at a very great risk of being sued to death.
Thanks to such laws that every work falls automatically under copyright the "Content Industry" business methods are not so different to the Mafia. Either you pay up or you get a visit from one of their agents and they make you pay (not by breaking your legs but by threatening to sue you and make you bankrupt).
Now you can argue (very reasonably) that perhaps strings should be a core language feature and not just a feature of the library, but this ignores that the language designer can't add EVERY type for which it is reasonable to write a "+" operator to the core language.
Sure you can. Just take the most common types and that includes strings: boolean, byte, short, int, long, float, double, char, string and arrays. If you want you can add BigDecimal (arbitrary-precision signed decimal numbers) and Complex. Define operators for those and forbid op.ov. Other types are so uncommon that operators are not necessary and are just a little bit sugar (like vector, map). There just aren't so many primitive types in a language and for self defined types (like classes) a method is better.
Why when someone does that with operator overloading do we say "a language shouldn't support operator overloading" but when someone comes up with a bad name for a function (would you like some examples? I've seen plenty) we don't say "a language shouldn't support functions"?
True, bad names are everywhere. But at least with a method I can just hover my mouse over the name and the IDE will get me the documentation in a nice tool tip. Furthermore, with a method I can see the method. Try to spot the op.ov in that code: http://www.copypastecode.com/61754/
At least now we have some what of a chance to have an open web without any plugins. Gif, Jpget and Png are already free and now since over half the web browsers (Chrome have 10%, Firefox have 40%, Opera have 5% [or some what in that region]) won't support H264 the web sites have to use either Ogg or WebM at least as a second option. But since you have to convert your movies either to Ogg or WebM anyway and you don't need to pay license fees with the two, web sites are good to use just Ogg or WebM and just leave H264 in the dust. Hurray for Google. Now if Google would drop Flash for Youtube (after FF and IE support the new video tag) and make WebM the only codec for Youtube we could say bye bye H264 and welcome to open web.
Ok. C++ sucks anyway. I programmed in C++ 10 years ego, now I would not touch it even if it was the last programming language out there.
C++ programs a buggy and crash all the time, have a lot of security and memory issues. C++ is bloated and it takes them over 7 years to get a new standard out. Everyone writes his own implementation of String and Vector and the compilation time is the worst of all languages.
Whenever there is a discussion about op.ov. always comes an example with a vector, matrix, complex number, etc., i.e. with something math. I get the impression the only thing people write in C++ are some yet another math. library.
You know how other languages solve complex expressions? With Builders. Instead of abusing op. like that:
xml << tag << text
xml << tag << text Or whatever you can write:root { tag { text }, tag { text } }
Only because C++ don't have such features, it doesn't mean op.ov. is such a great idea.
You have to do that for named functions too. What's the difference between calling a function "+" and calling it "plus"?
Because it's not a plus. If there was no op.ov. I could tell you that it is a plus. But in C++ it's not a plus, it can be append, save, write, or something completely different. So why confuse the user more and instead just call the method what the method is doing?
Practically speaking, the name of complex operator+(complex const & rhs) is "+" to the same degree that the name of complex plus(complex const & rhs) is "plus". I feel quite strongly about this.
In C++ the name is not "plus" but the symbol "+". This symbol "+" can stand for anything you want, like append, save, concat, plus, add, etc. ppp. If you set a normal name for the operation like "append" or even "add" for complex numbers, the user of your library does not need to look up what the method is doing because it tells him in the name. It's all about a fluent API The Wikipedia is about method chaining but I rever here more to the designing a "API in a way that aims to provide for more readable code.".
So you don't think "+" is a good name for a function that adds two complex numbers, or that "[4]" is a good name for a function that returns the 5th element of an STL vector?
It is a good name for those particular examples. But why it is not in the C++ standard like in Java is "+" for Strings a concatenation? Operator Ov. is a good thing if it's in the language. Because this operators are well defined and they are a part of the language itself. It's like operators make a lot of sense in mathematic expressions, because operators are a part of mathematics. In mathematics nobody will wonder what 1+1 means, because it's well defined.
Operator should be part of a language and they should not just change the meaning. The same goes for keywords, are you going to argue that keywords overloading is a good idea?
The reason that op.ov. is generally bad is not efficiency, is not whether it's a good name or good style. It's maintainability. Why obscure the code with op.ov.? Why not state very clear in the code what you are going to do?
As example, a very abused operator is the <<. You write file << "text" It's look very cool, but what does it mean? Why not state clearly what it means: file.append("text") or file.save("text").
You will read code more then you are going to write it and with op.ov. I need to study every class I use what is the meaning of each op. C++ is probably the first language with build in obfuscater.
The only thing around it is just forbid op.ov. because no operator is a good name for an operation, except the build in operators. The build in op. are well documented and are only with build in types, so everybody can known what they are mean. But with custom op. you have to study each new interface.
It's the same reasoning why the named constructor idiom is a good practice. Because ctors. are like operators, they don't have a name, so you can't state clearly what the code means. Point p1 = Point::rectangular(5.7, 1.2);// Obviously rectangular
The problem are the other libraries you are including in your project. It's easy to say, if I don't like feature X I will not use it, but the language is still great. What if the developer(s) of a library you need thinks feature X is really cool and use it? Now you have to deal with feature X anyway and so you have to deal with every feature of a language regardless if you want or not.
It's not like you can just turn off a feature with a compiler flag and everything will work.
Java is pretty much everything C++ claims to be, except for system programming. It's have static typing, it's almost as fast as C++, you can use C libraries pretty easy via JNI, it's have a lot of open source libraries and it have the best IDEs and tools.
Since when are pheromones controversial? We are still animals, of course we produce and react to pheromones. I though that was establish science. Hm, a quick Google search shows that there aren't so many studies of human pheromones, how come?
The real question is why you have the right to take the right away from me to copy your work? If you don't want to give it up, you should never perform it. But since you performed it, why should I'm not be able to copy your work? I'm not stealing anything from you, you shared it with me. But after you shared it with me, you turn around and forbid me to copy and modify your work or share the copy with others.
It's like a carpenter forbidding me to make a copy of his chair after he shows me the char. Where does this moral came from?
Only because with the new technology innovation that I can copy and share your work perfectly to others you try to label me as a thief or pirate. Why you don't share it with others so I don't have to?
Don't try to make copyright any special right that belongs to you as a human right.
Pink Floyd's works are now over 40 years old. Why does anyone have still any rights to it, why are the rights not expired by now? The fans paid the artistic work million times by now, the band is more then enough compensated. Why is the music not in public domain and can be performed by anyone and sold by everyone.
Fuck Pink Floyd and fuck the EMI. How does we get there that we arguing about almost half a century old works? In the era of digital age where technology is going faster then ever, works can be distributed with light speed across the world with no cost and we have the most richest culture ever.
While the top 1% of artists are sitting on their past works, the bottom 99% are needing a real job to get some food on their table.
Why we don't just lobby the policymaker to make policies in favor of the citizens? We still live in a democracy and the politicians are paid by us and they should be working for us. Of course it would make some of us go up from their chairs, write letters and actual vote. It's sure harder then just write a blog and whine how corrupt and broken everything is.
If we give up on the way democracy is suppose to work then we have way bigger problems then the internet. Join the EFF, vote the pirate party, join the OSF, write to your politicians.
Because there is no market. The customers don't have any choice. Where ever you go you will get Microsoft Windows and your "market" will drop support if you use anything else then Microsoft Windows. Many OEMs are going so far that they even will drop the warranty if you dare to install something else on your computer then Windows.
The government, the schools, the employers support this monopoly. Because they are all dependent on Microsoft Windows. The government and the schools failed to implement open standards. Everybody have to use Microsoft Word and Excel.
What choice does he have? You cannot get a computer without Windows in the first place. Plus you need Microsoft Word and Excel to get your work done or to communicate with the government. Plus you need Windows to play the games out there. You even need Windows to pay your taxes.
The automobile market have a lot of vendors. There is GM, BWM, Ford, Ferrari, etc. In your market there is only one vendor, Ferrari, and the streets are only supporting the wheels of Ferrari. There are only garages for Ferraris and the parking slots are only for Ferraris.
What free market? You mean the market where I can go to Mediamarkt and get 99% of the computer, laptop with Windows 7? Or the free market in Saturn where 99% of the computer and laptop are with Windows 7? Or the free market at best buy where 99% of the computer and laptop are with Windows 7? Or maybe the free market with Dell, Hp, Samsung, Lenovo?
To what market I go if I don't wish to buy a computer or laptop with a more secure system?
A free market can only work if there are many vendors, which are competing on fair grounds. But there is only one vendor, Microsoft which can and will dictate price.
Because gmail is pretty new to the market? Hotmail was released in July 4, 1996; 14 years ago. Yahoo mail was released October 8, 1997, 13 years ago. Gmail was released March 21, 2004, just 6 (now 7) years ego. From this standpoint hotmail is not better or worse then Gmail because it was available the double time Gmail was available and they have only double the users. You can argue if Gmail were available in 1996 it would have the same amount of users as hotmail.
You know what else we could do? Just put copyright back to place. To the good old days where you have to register your copyright and where it's only lasted 14 years.
We should limit copyright even more because with the internet it's so easy to publish. The limit should be 5 years now, with +5 years extend.
With a sane copyright law the artists and the publisher could come up with new ideas how to make money instead of be depended of an indefinitely state granted monopoly. What we have now is already socialism. It's worse, it's planed economy.
With the political power that such groups as the RIAA and MAFIA have and the laws behind them (100+ years copyright, DMCA, etc.) we could just make them government owned like in China and call them Office for Arts, Music, Movies.
With a limited copyright we could finally have a rich public domain, which is the most import factor for new innovation. Without a rich public domain there are no work available to build upon, for which all works we have now are build upon older works and ideas.
fuzzer_timeline.txt OMG That's the best web site I ever saw on the WWW. Why are other websites not like this? No ads, no images, no crazy CSS. Just plain the information I need. I wish all links to articles on Slashdot would be like this site.
As long as the people still buy the games from Ubisoft, they will not drop any DRM. My guess is that it was calculated (i.e. x% are pirats, y% are pissed, z% will still buy) and it makes more profit with the DRM then without. A lot of people just don't care until the servers are stopped or changed for a new game. In that case it will be just a press release "We are very very sorry but we have to terminate the activation service. Look at the EULA it's perfectly legal and you can do shit about it. So please just forgot this game and buy our new games now with more DRM because the pirates are forcing us to protect our IP.".
That is the epitome of the USA "IP" laws. Because cooperation have lobbed your government so much that an idea (or an algorithm) can be patented you can't just take a free copy of Ubuntu and play your mp3 files on it. On the other hand you outsource your jobs and your production so fast to China and India that in a few years the "IP" is the only thing of value your country would have left. You government knows that, that's why there is so big push towards forcing all other countries adopt your idea of "IP" as well.
I never had a commodore64, the first computer I had was a 8086 PC with some kind of DOS on it. But the model in the article looks like a laptop only without a monitor. Make it flatter and cheap and I would buy it for the office/at home. Should be as flat as a laptop but way cheaper, like under 200$.
Slashdot Mirror
And recently it was Mass SQL Injection Attack Hits Sites Running IIS [slashdot.org] Where that was an SQL Injection Attack but [it] is targeting servers running Microsoft IIS and ASP.net software but not Linux and Apache, where Linux+Apache would be a much bigger target.
Conficker has since spread rapidly into what is now believed to be the largest computer worm infection since the 2003 SQL Slammer,[2] with more than seven million government, business and home computers in over 200 countries now under its control.
... on Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, and Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta
You right, neither is really doing better than the other. Before Conficker it was SQL Slammer
It spread rapidly, infecting most of its 75,000 victims within ten minutes.
[...]it exploited a buffer overflow bug in Microsoft's flagship SQL Server and Desktop Engine database products,[...]
And recently it was Mass SQL Injection Attack Hits Sites Running IIS Where that was an SQL Injection Attack but
[it] is targeting servers running Microsoft IIS and ASP.net software
but not Linux and Apache, where Linux+Apache would be a much bigger target.
I don't like to break your bubble so you right, neither is doing better than the other.........
Shouldn't be MS in favor of dropping H246 and support WebM? Sure it's from Google, but WebM is free, meaning they don't have to pay any cent to MPEG LA. Oh wait, MS is a member of MPEG LA, so if everyone is using WebM then MPEG LA and thus MS don't get a dime from the internet. Aren't they a little bit biased to accept their arguments?
Is that the same business that infect the MS IIS so frequent? Oh wait, MS ISS Server is not the dominant web server, it's Apache. Where are all the Linux+Apache viruses out there, which powers the majority of the internet? Why are all virus attacks only for Windows and MS ISS, which are in the minority?
Botnets come from because of the factors add together: Users downloading crap from different sites and insecure system in which the crap can infect other systems automatically. Make an app store, but make it optional and have a secure system. Just like any Linux distribution. No need to lock down the phone.
Such thing as "free indie media" doesn't exists. If you have an internet radio you have to pay royalties, if you have a bar and play music you have to pay, in Germany everyone is paying a royalty on CDs, DVDs, flash drivers, hard disks. The "Content Industry" have such power that they lobbied every government that if you play music you have to pay royalties to them even if you don't play any music owned by them. Either you pay the royalties or you are at a very great risk of being sued to death.
Thanks to such laws that every work falls automatically under copyright the "Content Industry" business methods are not so different to the Mafia. Either you pay up or you get a visit from one of their agents and they make you pay (not by breaking your legs but by threatening to sue you and make you bankrupt).
Now you can argue (very reasonably) that perhaps strings should be a core language feature and not just a feature of the library, but this ignores that the language designer can't add EVERY type for which it is reasonable to write a "+" operator to the core language.
Sure you can. Just take the most common types and that includes strings: boolean, byte, short, int, long, float, double, char, string and arrays. If you want you can add BigDecimal (arbitrary-precision signed decimal numbers) and Complex. Define operators for those and forbid op.ov. Other types are so uncommon that operators are not necessary and are just a little bit sugar (like vector, map). There just aren't so many primitive types in a language and for self defined types (like classes) a method is better.
Why when someone does that with operator overloading do we say "a language shouldn't support operator overloading" but when someone comes up with a bad name for a function (would you like some examples? I've seen plenty) we don't say "a language shouldn't support functions"?
True, bad names are everywhere. But at least with a method I can just hover my mouse over the name and the IDE will get me the documentation in a nice tool tip. Furthermore, with a method I can see the method. Try to spot the op.ov in that code: http://www.copypastecode.com/61754/
At least now we have some what of a chance to have an open web without any plugins. Gif, Jpget and Png are already free and now since over half the web browsers (Chrome have 10%, Firefox have 40%, Opera have 5% [or some what in that region]) won't support H264 the web sites have to use either Ogg or WebM at least as a second option. But since you have to convert your movies either to Ogg or WebM anyway and you don't need to pay license fees with the two, web sites are good to use just Ogg or WebM and just leave H264 in the dust. Hurray for Google. Now if Google would drop Flash for Youtube (after FF and IE support the new video tag) and make WebM the only codec for Youtube we could say bye bye H264 and welcome to open web.
Ok. C++ sucks anyway. I programmed in C++ 10 years ego, now I would not touch it even if it was the last programming language out there.
C++ programs a buggy and crash all the time, have a lot of security and memory issues. C++ is bloated and it takes them over 7 years to get a new standard out. Everyone writes his own implementation of String and Vector and the compilation time is the worst of all languages.
Whenever there is a discussion about op.ov. always comes an example with a vector, matrix, complex number, etc., i.e. with something math. I get the impression the only thing people write in C++ are some yet another math. library.
You know how other languages solve complex expressions? With Builders. Instead of abusing op. like that: xml << tag << text xml << tag << text Or whatever you can write:root { tag { text }, tag { text } }
Only because C++ don't have such features, it doesn't mean op.ov. is such a great idea.
You have to do that for named functions too. What's the difference between calling a function "+" and calling it "plus"?
Because it's not a plus. If there was no op.ov. I could tell you that it is a plus. But in C++ it's not a plus, it can be append, save, write, or something completely different. So why confuse the user more and instead just call the method what the method is doing?
Practically speaking, the name of complex operator+(complex const & rhs) is "+" to the same degree that the name of complex plus(complex const & rhs) is "plus". I feel quite strongly about this.
In C++ the name is not "plus" but the symbol "+". This symbol "+" can stand for anything you want, like append, save, concat, plus, add, etc. ppp. If you set a normal name for the operation like "append" or even "add" for complex numbers, the user of your library does not need to look up what the method is doing because it tells him in the name. It's all about a fluent API The Wikipedia is about method chaining but I rever here more to the designing a "API in a way that aims to provide for more readable code.".
So you don't think "+" is a good name for a function that adds two complex numbers, or that "[4]" is a good name for a function that returns the 5th element of an STL vector?
It is a good name for those particular examples. But why it is not in the C++ standard like in Java is "+" for Strings a concatenation? Operator Ov. is a good thing if it's in the language. Because this operators are well defined and they are a part of the language itself. It's like operators make a lot of sense in mathematic expressions, because operators are a part of mathematics. In mathematics nobody will wonder what 1+1 means, because it's well defined.
Operator should be part of a language and they should not just change the meaning. The same goes for keywords, are you going to argue that keywords overloading is a good idea?
The reason that op.ov. is generally bad is not efficiency, is not whether it's a good name or good style. It's maintainability. Why obscure the code with op.ov.? Why not state very clear in the code what you are going to do?
As example, a very abused operator is the <<. You write file << "text" It's look very cool, but what does it mean? Why not state clearly what it means: file.append("text") or file.save("text").
You will read code more then you are going to write it and with op.ov. I need to study every class I use what is the meaning of each op. C++ is probably the first language with build in obfuscater.
The only thing around it is just forbid op.ov. because no operator is a good name for an operation, except the build in operators. The build in op. are well documented and are only with build in types, so everybody can known what they are mean. But with custom op. you have to study each new interface.
It's the same reasoning why the named constructor idiom is a good practice. Because ctors. are like operators, they don't have a name, so you can't state clearly what the code means. Point p1 = Point::rectangular(5.7, 1.2); // Obviously rectangular
The problem are the other libraries you are including in your project. It's easy to say, if I don't like feature X I will not use it, but the language is still great. What if the developer(s) of a library you need thinks feature X is really cool and use it? Now you have to deal with feature X anyway and so you have to deal with every feature of a language regardless if you want or not.
It's not like you can just turn off a feature with a compiler flag and everything will work.
Java is pretty much everything C++ claims to be, except for system programming. It's have static typing, it's almost as fast as C++, you can use C libraries pretty easy via JNI, it's have a lot of open source libraries and it have the best IDEs and tools.
Since when are pheromones controversial? We are still animals, of course we produce and react to pheromones. I though that was establish science. Hm, a quick Google search shows that there aren't so many studies of human pheromones, how come?
The real question is why you have the right to take the right away from me to copy your work? If you don't want to give it up, you should never perform it. But since you performed it, why should I'm not be able to copy your work? I'm not stealing anything from you, you shared it with me. But after you shared it with me, you turn around and forbid me to copy and modify your work or share the copy with others.
It's like a carpenter forbidding me to make a copy of his chair after he shows me the char. Where does this moral came from?
Only because with the new technology innovation that I can copy and share your work perfectly to others you try to label me as a thief or pirate. Why you don't share it with others so I don't have to?
Don't try to make copyright any special right that belongs to you as a human right.
Pink Floyd's works are now over 40 years old. Why does anyone have still any rights to it, why are the rights not expired by now? The fans paid the artistic work million times by now, the band is more then enough compensated. Why is the music not in public domain and can be performed by anyone and sold by everyone.
Fuck Pink Floyd and fuck the EMI. How does we get there that we arguing about almost half a century old works? In the era of digital age where technology is going faster then ever, works can be distributed with light speed across the world with no cost and we have the most richest culture ever.
While the top 1% of artists are sitting on their past works, the bottom 99% are needing a real job to get some food on their table.
Why we don't just lobby the policymaker to make policies in favor of the citizens? We still live in a democracy and the politicians are paid by us and they should be working for us. Of course it would make some of us go up from their chairs, write letters and actual vote. It's sure harder then just write a blog and whine how corrupt and broken everything is.
If we give up on the way democracy is suppose to work then we have way bigger problems then the internet. Join the EFF, vote the pirate party, join the OSF, write to your politicians.
Because there is no market. The customers don't have any choice. Where ever you go you will get Microsoft Windows and your "market" will drop support if you use anything else then Microsoft Windows. Many OEMs are going so far that they even will drop the warranty if you dare to install something else on your computer then Windows.
The government, the schools, the employers support this monopoly. Because they are all dependent on Microsoft Windows. The government and the schools failed to implement open standards. Everybody have to use Microsoft Word and Excel.
What choice does he have? You cannot get a computer without Windows in the first place. Plus you need Microsoft Word and Excel to get your work done or to communicate with the government. Plus you need Windows to play the games out there. You even need Windows to pay your taxes.
The automobile market have a lot of vendors. There is GM, BWM, Ford, Ferrari, etc. In your market there is only one vendor, Ferrari, and the streets are only supporting the wheels of Ferrari. There are only garages for Ferraris and the parking slots are only for Ferraris.
What free market? You mean the market where I can go to Mediamarkt and get 99% of the computer, laptop with Windows 7? Or the free market in Saturn where 99% of the computer and laptop are with Windows 7? Or the free market at best buy where 99% of the computer and laptop are with Windows 7? Or maybe the free market with Dell, Hp, Samsung, Lenovo?
To what market I go if I don't wish to buy a computer or laptop with a more secure system?
A free market can only work if there are many vendors, which are competing on fair grounds. But there is only one vendor, Microsoft which can and will dictate price.
Because gmail is pretty new to the market? Hotmail was released in July 4, 1996; 14 years ago. Yahoo mail was released October 8, 1997, 13 years ago. Gmail was released March 21, 2004, just 6 (now 7) years ego. From this standpoint hotmail is not better or worse then Gmail because it was available the double time Gmail was available and they have only double the users. You can argue if Gmail were available in 1996 it would have the same amount of users as hotmail.
You know what else we could do? Just put copyright back to place. To the good old days where you have to register your copyright and where it's only lasted 14 years.
We should limit copyright even more because with the internet it's so easy to publish. The limit should be 5 years now, with +5 years extend.
With a sane copyright law the artists and the publisher could come up with new ideas how to make money instead of be depended of an indefinitely state granted monopoly. What we have now is already socialism. It's worse, it's planed economy.
With the political power that such groups as the RIAA and MAFIA have and the laws behind them (100+ years copyright, DMCA, etc.) we could just make them government owned like in China and call them Office for Arts, Music, Movies.
With a limited copyright we could finally have a rich public domain, which is the most import factor for new innovation. Without a rich public domain there are no work available to build upon, for which all works we have now are build upon older works and ideas.
fuzzer_timeline.txt OMG That's the best web site I ever saw on the WWW. Why are other websites not like this? No ads, no images, no crazy CSS. Just plain the information I need. I wish all links to articles on Slashdot would be like this site.
As long as the people still buy the games from Ubisoft, they will not drop any DRM. My guess is that it was calculated (i.e. x% are pirats, y% are pissed, z% will still buy) and it makes more profit with the DRM then without. A lot of people just don't care until the servers are stopped or changed for a new game. In that case it will be just a press release "We are very very sorry but we have to terminate the activation service. Look at the EULA it's perfectly legal and you can do shit about it. So please just forgot this game and buy our new games now with more DRM because the pirates are forcing us to protect our IP.".
That is the epitome of the USA "IP" laws. Because cooperation have lobbed your government so much that an idea (or an algorithm) can be patented you can't just take a free copy of Ubuntu and play your mp3 files on it. On the other hand you outsource your jobs and your production so fast to China and India that in a few years the "IP" is the only thing of value your country would have left. You government knows that, that's why there is so big push towards forcing all other countries adopt your idea of "IP" as well.
I never had a commodore64, the first computer I had was a 8086 PC with some kind of DOS on it. But the model in the article looks like a laptop only without a monitor. Make it flatter and cheap and I would buy it for the office/at home. Should be as flat as a laptop but way cheaper, like under 200$.