All pirates care about is 1) Does it install? 2) Can I "activate" it?
Yet another "everybody's like me" Slashdotter. This isn't aimed at preventing dorks like you from borrowing your friend's install disc. MS would certainly like to prevent that kind of piracy, but they don't really lose sleep over it. What they do lose sleep over is big commercial pirate software organizations that want to pass off their product as "legitimate".
Actually, it depends on where the Wheel of Fortune is when it stops revolving. You may win a dream vacation, or you may be required to sign away your soul.
You've been to Amazon, haven't you? 2001 is when the paperback came out. The hardcover edition came out in 1999.
But you're still right, of course. The movie came first. All the same, those "chariots of the gods" bozos you mention don't posit a conspiracy with a magic portal dug up by archaeologists. EvD had the aliens arriving in plain old space ships. ZS talked about evil hominids who live on a dark planet that comes back every few thousand years.
I cannot escape the conclusion that "The Stargate Conspiracy" is a ripoff of the TV show! Is nothing sacred???!!!
Yes, but they look like lizards. OK, if you look real close there are some interesting differences (no penis!). But reminding people that a tuatara isn't a lizard is sort of like making an issue of the fact that the peanut is actually a kind of bean.
Naturally, you don't want to confuse your users with trivial nitpicking terminology. But I don't actually see that much difference between your "fat clients" and the "thin clients" that all the rage 10 years ago. These also downloaded their applications from a server, and used the server to store data. The only differences is that systems like the JavaStation and the Oracle NC ran special OSs, and the applications that ran on them were compiled to Java bytestreams, rather than native code.
Anyway, congratulations on a really significant achievement. I just hope that somebody in mainstream IT catches wind of it.
As they say in Wikitruthland, "attribution needed." On what do you base your insight into the motives of the secrecy labelers? The fact that we're a "free and open" society? That increases the need to keep stuff secret, because public scrutiny increases the chance that you'll be seen doing something you'd rather not be seen doing.
And I'm not arguing this because of any preconceived notions about the character of people who work in defense or intelligence. Any large bureaucratic organization fosters a CYA attitude.
Also, need I remind you that the top echelon of the defense/intelligences agencies consists not of stalwart soldiers or intrepid spies, but of plain old-fashioned politicians — a profession for which manipulating smoke and mirrors comes as naturally as breathing.
No self-respecting Evil Cabal would stoop to such a wimpy strategy. The only way to deal with somebody who's trying to out you is to have them discretely murdered (or at least confined in an insane asylum) and have every copy of their book destroyed.
Back in the 60s there was a popular story (probably an urban legend, but still a good story) about a realtor in McLean, VA, who needed to do a report on how many people worked in the area. That would include CIA headquarters. The CIA refused to release any figures — it's a national secret! So the guy called up the Soviet embassy, which was happy to provide the data he needed.
Secrecy, often as not, is less about keeping the bad guys in the dark than about avoiding public scrutiny.
I thought the Stargate program pays for itself (indeed, even turns a profit) by selling off all the technology they brought back.
I've always been amused by the premise of this franchise. It comes from one a (supposedly) non-fiction book called The Stargate Conspiracy, which claims that a secret cabal is bringing back alien technology through a portal dug up in Egypt, and trading it for money and power. The amusing thing is that the TV show makes the same people who were the evil conspirators in the book into the good guys!
The professional usage nazi in me hates the submitter for calling these systems "terminals". A "terminal" is just a brainless box that passes data back and forth, without the ability to actually run applications locally. A diskless system that boots off a server is a thin client, which is actually a lot more impressive. What's ironic is that you see lots of systems such as the Sun Ray that are sold as "thin clients", but are actually just terminals!
But my inner usage nazi needs to get over it. This usage is lame, but too well established to go away. Time to move on.
YAAL (Yet Another Amateur Lawyer). This one is particularly choice. Not only is his theory lame (show me a residential ISP that guarantees bandwidth!) it doesn't really get him anywhere. Stop paying and they'll stop providing you with service. Then where are you?
Ok, we're obviously not going too convince each other. But at least we ended the argument with a clear statement of ideas, and without a final exchange of insults. That, in itself, is an accomplishment of sorts!
OK, that clarifies things. You want people to be able to get out of contracts if the contract is "too complex". I can just imagine the fun lawyers will have, litigating the meaning of the word "complex".
It seems to me that the essence of your argument is this:
The modern concept that thwarts what I think is the way it ought to be done is the "Contract of Adhesion"... the notion that says that once a contract is signed, insofar as the terms are reasonable and similar to other such provisions in like contracts, whether or not you knew about the terms is of no concern. Now, it seems to me that if we do away with what you call the "contract of adhesion", anybody can get out of a contract just by claiming they didn't understand what they had agreed to.
It's very clear that you don't accept that implication, but I don't see anything in your posts that says why. Perhaps it's there, buried in all your personal attacks. If so, I'd appreciate your copying and pasting it so my feeble brain doesn't undergo further strain.
RTFA, dude. This is not about reproducing the functionality of a TV or PVR. This is about reproducing the functionality of the set top box. Without which, you can't receive (or record) encrypted content.
Say you're going away for the weekend, so you want to record the Sopranos finale, then record the latest episode of Dexter. These are on different pay-cable networks, so you can't record them both without changing the channel on your STB. Your PVR can't do this without some kind of control mechanism. Up until now, this has been some nasty kludge, such as an IR emitter that emulates the STB remote. Much better to have a simple connection.
Of course, anybody who thinks the cost of multiple pay cable subscriptions is worth the cost needs to get a life. But that's a different issue.
Don't be so literal minded. In this context, "You believe" means "it's your opinion that". You stated this complicated theory, and I boiled it down it down to its foreseeable consequences. If you feel my logic is flawed. feel free to explain why. But don't go ballistic based on a childish misinterpretation of an ordinary turn of phrase.
Just don't be one of those people who are 60 days late with a credit card payment and then are shocked that somehow it's written into all their CC terms that all their cards will now raise their rates by 12% because they've suddenly become much higher risk.
Yeah, that's the justification the credit card companies use. But they don't really care that much about your "risk factor". People who are not at risk are lousy credit card customers: they pay off their balances every month, giving the bank no opportunity to seriously profit.
In real life, credit card companies raise your rates and/or stick you with fees for tiny excuses, such as as your paying your cable bill one day late. And they deliberately introduce delays into the process (such as locating their payment centers in rural areas with slow mail service) to increase the chance that your payment won't be processed on time.
In recent years, they've started levying fees with no justification at all. There have been several recent cases of credit card companies levying a fee on every customer, and then reversing it for everybody who complains. Customers who don't carefully check their bills, or who run out of patience and/or time after being told "Your call is very important to us" 100 times, are stuck.
The claim that extra fees and interest are about "risk" is pure BS. They charge extra because they can.
According to this lady, most credit card agreements are deliberately obfuscated, but actually boil down to a very simple statement: "As long as you use our card, we're allowed to impose any interest rate or fee we choose; any claim you think we've made to the contrary is null and void."
Slashdot Mirror
I resent being called an "asshat" just because I talk on my cell phone without a headset while traveling at high speeds--on the bus.
With some truths, you have to either laugh or cry.
Next you'll be telling me the Mac is "just a computer"!
Actually, it depends on where the Wheel of Fortune is when it stops revolving. You may win a dream vacation, or you may be required to sign away your soul.
You've been to Amazon, haven't you? 2001 is when the paperback came out. The hardcover edition came out in 1999.
But you're still right, of course. The movie came first. All the same, those "chariots of the gods" bozos you mention don't posit a conspiracy with a magic portal dug up by archaeologists. EvD had the aliens arriving in plain old space ships. ZS talked about evil hominids who live on a dark planet that comes back every few thousand years.
I cannot escape the conclusion that "The Stargate Conspiracy" is a ripoff of the TV show! Is nothing sacred???!!!
So you're using off-the-shelf hardware. Does that make you fat? Some are born thin, some achieve thinness through self-restraint...
Yes, but they look like lizards. OK, if you look real close there are some interesting differences (no penis!). But reminding people that a tuatara isn't a lizard is sort of like making an issue of the fact that the peanut is actually a kind of bean.
Naturally, you don't want to confuse your users with trivial nitpicking terminology. But I don't actually see that much difference between your "fat clients" and the "thin clients" that all the rage 10 years ago. These also downloaded their applications from a server, and used the server to store data. The only differences is that systems like the JavaStation and the Oracle NC ran special OSs, and the applications that ran on them were compiled to Java bytestreams, rather than native code.
Anyway, congratulations on a really significant achievement. I just hope that somebody in mainstream IT catches wind of it.
As they say in Wikitruthland, "attribution needed." On what do you base your insight into the motives of the secrecy labelers? The fact that we're a "free and open" society? That increases the need to keep stuff secret, because public scrutiny increases the chance that you'll be seen doing something you'd rather not be seen doing.
And I'm not arguing this because of any preconceived notions about the character of people who work in defense or intelligence. Any large bureaucratic organization fosters a CYA attitude.
Also, need I remind you that the top echelon of the defense/intelligences agencies consists not of stalwart soldiers or intrepid spies, but of plain old-fashioned politicians — a profession for which manipulating smoke and mirrors comes as naturally as breathing.
No self-respecting Evil Cabal would stoop to such a wimpy strategy. The only way to deal with somebody who's trying to out you is to have them discretely murdered (or at least confined in an insane asylum) and have every copy of their book destroyed.
Back in the 60s there was a popular story (probably an urban legend, but still a good story) about a realtor in McLean, VA, who needed to do a report on how many people worked in the area. That would include CIA headquarters. The CIA refused to release any figures — it's a national secret! So the guy called up the Soviet embassy, which was happy to provide the data he needed.
Secrecy, often as not, is less about keeping the bad guys in the dark than about avoiding public scrutiny.
I thought the Stargate program pays for itself (indeed, even turns a profit) by selling off all the technology they brought back.
I've always been amused by the premise of this franchise. It comes from one a (supposedly) non-fiction book called The Stargate Conspiracy, which claims that a secret cabal is bringing back alien technology through a portal dug up in Egypt, and trading it for money and power. The amusing thing is that the TV show makes the same people who were the evil conspirators in the book into the good guys!
The professional usage nazi in me hates the submitter for calling these systems "terminals". A "terminal" is just a brainless box that passes data back and forth, without the ability to actually run applications locally. A diskless system that boots off a server is a thin client, which is actually a lot more impressive. What's ironic is that you see lots of systems such as the Sun Ray that are sold as "thin clients", but are actually just terminals!
But my inner usage nazi needs to get over it. This usage is lame, but too well established to go away. Time to move on.
YAAL (Yet Another Amateur Lawyer). This one is particularly choice. Not only is his theory lame (show me a residential ISP that guarantees bandwidth!) it doesn't really get him anywhere. Stop paying and they'll stop providing you with service. Then where are you?
Ok, we're obviously not going too convince each other. But at least we ended the argument with a clear statement of ideas, and without a final exchange of insults. That, in itself, is an accomplishment of sorts!
OK, that clarifies things. You want people to be able to get out of contracts if the contract is "too complex". I can just imagine the fun lawyers will have, litigating the meaning of the word "complex".
It's very clear that you don't accept that implication, but I don't see anything in your posts that says why. Perhaps it's there, buried in all your personal attacks. If so, I'd appreciate your copying and pasting it so my feeble brain doesn't undergo further strain.
Try it again, without the critique of my psychic skills.
You keep telling me I'm wrong, but you wont say why.
Yeah, I know, you don't care...
RTFA, dude. This is not about reproducing the functionality of a TV or PVR. This is about reproducing the functionality of the set top box. Without which, you can't receive (or record) encrypted content.
Say you're going away for the weekend, so you want to record the Sopranos finale, then record the latest episode of Dexter. These are on different pay-cable networks, so you can't record them both without changing the channel on your STB. Your PVR can't do this without some kind of control mechanism. Up until now, this has been some nasty kludge, such as an IR emitter that emulates the STB remote. Much better to have a simple connection.
Of course, anybody who thinks the cost of multiple pay cable subscriptions is worth the cost needs to get a life. But that's a different issue.
Don't be so literal minded. In this context, "You believe" means "it's your opinion that". You stated this complicated theory, and I boiled it down it down to its foreseeable consequences. If you feel my logic is flawed. feel free to explain why. But don't go ballistic based on a childish misinterpretation of an ordinary turn of phrase.
Yeah, that's the justification the credit card companies use. But they don't really care that much about your "risk factor". People who are not at risk are lousy credit card customers: they pay off their balances every month, giving the bank no opportunity to seriously profit.
In real life, credit card companies raise your rates and/or stick you with fees for tiny excuses, such as as your paying your cable bill one day late. And they deliberately introduce delays into the process (such as locating their payment centers in rural areas with slow mail service) to increase the chance that your payment won't be processed on time.
In recent years, they've started levying fees with no justification at all. There have been several recent cases of credit card companies levying a fee on every customer, and then reversing it for everybody who complains. Customers who don't carefully check their bills, or who run out of patience and/or time after being told "Your call is very important to us" 100 times, are stuck.
The claim that extra fees and interest are about "risk" is pure BS. They charge extra because they can.
According to this lady, most credit card agreements are deliberately obfuscated, but actually boil down to a very simple statement: "As long as you use our card, we're allowed to impose any interest rate or fee we choose; any claim you think we've made to the contrary is null and void."