The worst part is that you can't find it Control Panel->Add/Remove--> Installed Updates so you can uninstall it.
You basically need to hack around to be able to remove it.
No, the one who cannot think is none other than you. The only thing you can manage is play on words, and here is why:
Yeah, that and the presence of file sharing software on the computers, and the open admission on the part of the defendant that he was sharing the files 'because he believed it was fair use to do so'.
Everybody except you (because of a deficiency in how you think) knows that I wasn't talking about this particular case, but in general all cases in which Intellectual Property is taken to court; people are persecuted and blackmailed under nothing but IP addresses. Please don't blame me for your inadequate ability to think straight, you can use more word play here to satisfy your ego, but it won't change the fact about how your brain works, I'm so sorry.
That a penalty is unjust has no bearing on whether or not the proceedings are unfair.
Here you conduct more useless wordplay. WTF is the point of a trial if the punishments are 100,000+ times worth the crime (assuming a crime)? Are you saying that since the proceedings of the trial were conducted in a normal fashion, that it becomes a fair trial no matter the absurdity of the outcome? Notice how you play on the words, I did NOT say the proceedings of the trial were unfair, I said that the trial in its ENTIRETY was unfair. Your attempt to falsify my claim (that the trial is unfair) by choosing one side of the trial that was done correctly (maybe) is obvious and is rendered useless because the point of a trial is not its proceedings, but its outcome; which is almost always unfair in all IP-related trials.
It's a right in every frakkin country in the world except the US and the countries affected by its policies!
I see. Do you rape 12 year old children because it's a legal in some countries? Do you stone adulterers in your neighborhood because it's legal in some countries? If not, then you seem awfully selective in who you choose to use as a precedent.
What the hell? How unreasonable can your argument be? How can you liken the right to use a device I bought as I wish to the ability to rape children? You are very reasonable and I offer you a piece of advice: Learn how to compare.
Since you can't understand, allow me to rephrase: The right of a customer to hack the shit out of a device he made is a simple right that everybody has everywhere, except in the USA because it conflicts with the interests of corporations; hence the point of my original post: Rights of the people are only applicable when they don't interfere with the interests of those with deep pockets.
How can somebody compare this simple right with raping kids, I don't know.
If I was citing an unreasonable right, then yeah you can compare it to raping kids, but I'm talking about hacking consumer devices, for God's sake.
should I remind you of the Patriot Act? Have fun being spied upon for no reason whatsoever.
Ah yes, and here we see the final act of the play - as predictable as sunrise. After creating 'rights' which don't exist, ranting against the corporations, and gratuitous anti-US blather, comes the completely unrelated preference to the Patriot Act. Not only are you completely disconnected from reality, you're an utter loon without the ability to frame a coherent argument. Instead you substitute slinging everything little bit of dogma you can think of because you can't actually think.
Ah, here is where you show the true nature behind your entire argument: blind patriotism. That I cannot cure, I'm sorry again.
The reason I brought in the Patriot Act is obvious: Your rights and how they are easily taken away whenever convenient. If you still can't understand that my original post was more about your lost rights in general, then you won't understand why the inclusion of the Patriot Act was relevant.
The rights I have mentioned above are rights eve
Since I already answered a similar question, here is a copypasta:
If you guys have the right to a fair trial then why in the world are people persecuted based on their IPs? The IP is the lone piece of evidence they use against alleged file sharers, and everybody who knows anything about computers knows that the IP as an evidence is, practically, no evidence.
How is a trial 'fair' when you get fined 2 million dollars for 20 songs? The outcome of the trial is part of the trial, you know. How come in your system; you have to have lots of money to spend around if you want to be innocent, what kind of fair trial is it if the opposition can defeat me in court by depleting my money? What kind of fair court favors, through and through, the size with the deep pockets as we've seen numerous times? What kind of fair trial is this if the opposing side is the one monitoring my privacy and and sending me extortion letters?
Should I remind you of the Patriot Act? Have fun being spied upon for no reason whatsoever. Enjoy sleeping in honey.
The easiest thing for the lazy geezers is to look the other way, instead of doing something about how their rights are slowly being taken away. After all, looking the other way is much easier. Trying to sound old and wise while doing so is also recommended to satisfy one's ego.
Whether you looked or not, the problems are there, and will continue to do so unless an action is taken, the digital revolution is continuously contradicting with the powerholders' grasp of things and unless the public does something, the rights will continue to be suppressed.
Oh really? You say you have the right to a fair trial? Why in the world, then, are people persecuted based on their IPs? The IP is the lone piece of evidence they use against alleged file sharers, and everybody who knows anything about computers knows that the IP as an evidence is, practically, no evidence.
How in the hell is a trial 'fair' when you get fined 2 million dollars for 20 songs? The outcome of the trial is part of the trial, you know. How come in your system; you have to have lots of money to spend around if you want to be innocent, what kind of fair trial is it if the opposition can defeat me in court by depleting my money?
What kind of fair court favors, through and through, the size with the deep pockets as we've seen numerous times?
What kind of fair trial is this if the opposing side is the one monitoring my privacy and and sending me extortion letters?
Also, how in the world is using what you bought in whatever way you wish NOT a right? It's a right in every frakkin country in the world except the US and the countries affected by its policies! If I bought a device, I have every right to disassemble it, break it and use it in another way; including breaking whatever protection put on the device; it's my device after all. You guys were the ones who invented the illegality of protection circumcision which basically means "Buy our device and use it only in the ways we approve of".
Are you guys kidding? Your patriotism is blinding you, and the US public is losing more and more power over time. Should I remind you of the Patriot Act? Have fun being spied upon for no reason whatsoever.
Enjoy sleeping in honey.
Bit by bit, people in America lose everybit of freedom they thought they had.
It seems that freedom in America is granted as long as it doesn't interfere with the interests of corporations.
That's worse than the freedom in many many parts around the world!
Is the American public capable of a revolution against the system that favors those with deep pockets?
The right to share, the right for a fair trial, the right to use what you bought in whatever way you want; and consequently the right of privacy; are the first forts of freedom to fall. What else are you people going to let go, citizens of the USA?
So how come I can't make fun of the Holocaust or deny it using the excuse of Freedom of Speech?
Why is Freedom of Speech only nice when it is used to insult someone you don't care about?
Can I write an article in NY Times making fun of the Holocaust or even denying it? What about gays?
Nothing is more insulting to the principle of Freedom of Speech than defending the abuse of it as a good principle. Any freedom of speech lover should hate it when freedom of speech is abused and made bad-looking.
Surely those who, for generations, fought for the freedom of speech didn't do so just so some uneducated kid can freely insult big groups of people just for the heck of it.
I'm not talking about this Orkut incident here, but about how you label countries that care about the feelings of their people and minorities as being hell-bent on destroying free speech.
Seeing the summary and many of the posts here, it's so sad to see how the internet gave every idiot a podium.
It's always going to be catch-22 for Microsoft, even if they donated 40 billion dollars for every open source foundation/cancer research facility in the world.
It's sad to see CS graduates, sysadmins and programmers with the mentalities of 4channers. Huh
No one is saying Linux is about as secure as XP, but the OP is saying that because of the spreading culture among many Linux users that there is no way they can get malware, this type of attack might easily fly under the radar. No need to compare to XP because we all know it's not a fair comparison!
Wow, grow up, guys.
So he has Microsoft connections? So what? If open source affiliation is a valid reason to hate somebody, you might start rethinking your life priorities.
The Mono project gives Linux developers more choice, especially if they have been working with.NET tech for a long time. Would you forfeit years of.NET training and experience because you want to use a Linux platform?
That, or I am missing a bigger picture, in such case maybe someone can elaborate in the implications of said "teacup storm"?
LOL, sounds like fun. They're still assholes, though.
Too bad really hardworking ethical employees get shafted world-wide.
And... really, did they do more harm than some of the world-widely known software companies in the world?
An MSI tablet running Android would definitely induce drool for me. Android is on the extreme end of the stick against Apple's OS in terms of openness, and so it helps to have an open competitor in the face of a totalitarian locked-down sorry excuse of a computing device.... As long as Android's problems are addressed at a quicker rate.
Even having said so, the iPad will not be popular because of its usefullness or usability for the most part, but because of brand power.
For an Android tablet to fight that, it really has to exceed the iPad (LOL) in all aspects.
Slashdot Mirror
The worst part is that you can't find it Control Panel->Add/Remove--> Installed Updates so you can uninstall it. You basically need to hack around to be able to remove it.
LOL, if only I had mod points!
It wasn't added to Firefox users who didn't use MSN or Bing toolbars.
Is this, by any chance, a result of the FTC probe on Apple's business practices?
Yay!
I would buy a Nintendo phone. In a heartbeat.
Yeah, that and the presence of file sharing software on the computers, and the open admission on the part of the defendant that he was sharing the files 'because he believed it was fair use to do so'.
Everybody except you (because of a deficiency in how you think) knows that I wasn't talking about this particular case, but in general all cases in which Intellectual Property is taken to court; people are persecuted and blackmailed under nothing but IP addresses. Please don't blame me for your inadequate ability to think straight, you can use more word play here to satisfy your ego, but it won't change the fact about how your brain works, I'm so sorry.
That a penalty is unjust has no bearing on whether or not the proceedings are unfair.
Here you conduct more useless wordplay. WTF is the point of a trial if the punishments are 100,000+ times worth the crime (assuming a crime)? Are you saying that since the proceedings of the trial were conducted in a normal fashion, that it becomes a fair trial no matter the absurdity of the outcome? Notice how you play on the words, I did NOT say the proceedings of the trial were unfair, I said that the trial in its ENTIRETY was unfair. Your attempt to falsify my claim (that the trial is unfair) by choosing one side of the trial that was done correctly (maybe) is obvious and is rendered useless because the point of a trial is not its proceedings, but its outcome; which is almost always unfair in all IP-related trials.
I see. Do you rape 12 year old children because it's a legal in some countries? Do you stone adulterers in your neighborhood because it's legal in some countries? If not, then you seem awfully selective in who you choose to use as a precedent.
What the hell? How unreasonable can your argument be? How can you liken the right to use a device I bought as I wish to the ability to rape children? You are very reasonable and I offer you a piece of advice: Learn how to compare. Since you can't understand, allow me to rephrase: The right of a customer to hack the shit out of a device he made is a simple right that everybody has everywhere, except in the USA because it conflicts with the interests of corporations; hence the point of my original post: Rights of the people are only applicable when they don't interfere with the interests of those with deep pockets. How can somebody compare this simple right with raping kids, I don't know. If I was citing an unreasonable right, then yeah you can compare it to raping kids, but I'm talking about hacking consumer devices, for God's sake.
Ah yes, and here we see the final act of the play - as predictable as sunrise. After creating 'rights' which don't exist, ranting against the corporations, and gratuitous anti-US blather, comes the completely unrelated preference to the Patriot Act. Not only are you completely disconnected from reality, you're an utter loon without the ability to frame a coherent argument. Instead you substitute slinging everything little bit of dogma you can think of because you can't actually think.
Ah, here is where you show the true nature behind your entire argument: blind patriotism. That I cannot cure, I'm sorry again. The reason I brought in the Patriot Act is obvious: Your rights and how they are easily taken away whenever convenient. If you still can't understand that my original post was more about your lost rights in general, then you won't understand why the inclusion of the Patriot Act was relevant. The rights I have mentioned above are rights eve
Since I already answered a similar question, here is a copypasta: If you guys have the right to a fair trial then why in the world are people persecuted based on their IPs? The IP is the lone piece of evidence they use against alleged file sharers, and everybody who knows anything about computers knows that the IP as an evidence is, practically, no evidence. How is a trial 'fair' when you get fined 2 million dollars for 20 songs? The outcome of the trial is part of the trial, you know. How come in your system; you have to have lots of money to spend around if you want to be innocent, what kind of fair trial is it if the opposition can defeat me in court by depleting my money? What kind of fair court favors, through and through, the size with the deep pockets as we've seen numerous times? What kind of fair trial is this if the opposing side is the one monitoring my privacy and and sending me extortion letters? Should I remind you of the Patriot Act? Have fun being spied upon for no reason whatsoever. Enjoy sleeping in honey.
The easiest thing for the lazy geezers is to look the other way, instead of doing something about how their rights are slowly being taken away. After all, looking the other way is much easier. Trying to sound old and wise while doing so is also recommended to satisfy one's ego. Whether you looked or not, the problems are there, and will continue to do so unless an action is taken, the digital revolution is continuously contradicting with the powerholders' grasp of things and unless the public does something, the rights will continue to be suppressed.
Oh really? You say you have the right to a fair trial? Why in the world, then, are people persecuted based on their IPs? The IP is the lone piece of evidence they use against alleged file sharers, and everybody who knows anything about computers knows that the IP as an evidence is, practically, no evidence. How in the hell is a trial 'fair' when you get fined 2 million dollars for 20 songs? The outcome of the trial is part of the trial, you know. How come in your system; you have to have lots of money to spend around if you want to be innocent, what kind of fair trial is it if the opposition can defeat me in court by depleting my money? What kind of fair court favors, through and through, the size with the deep pockets as we've seen numerous times? What kind of fair trial is this if the opposing side is the one monitoring my privacy and and sending me extortion letters? Also, how in the world is using what you bought in whatever way you wish NOT a right? It's a right in every frakkin country in the world except the US and the countries affected by its policies! If I bought a device, I have every right to disassemble it, break it and use it in another way; including breaking whatever protection put on the device; it's my device after all. You guys were the ones who invented the illegality of protection circumcision which basically means "Buy our device and use it only in the ways we approve of". Are you guys kidding? Your patriotism is blinding you, and the US public is losing more and more power over time. Should I remind you of the Patriot Act? Have fun being spied upon for no reason whatsoever. Enjoy sleeping in honey.
Bit by bit, people in America lose everybit of freedom they thought they had. It seems that freedom in America is granted as long as it doesn't interfere with the interests of corporations. That's worse than the freedom in many many parts around the world! Is the American public capable of a revolution against the system that favors those with deep pockets? The right to share, the right for a fair trial, the right to use what you bought in whatever way you want; and consequently the right of privacy; are the first forts of freedom to fall. What else are you people going to let go, citizens of the USA?
So how come I can't make fun of the Holocaust or deny it using the excuse of Freedom of Speech? Why is Freedom of Speech only nice when it is used to insult someone you don't care about? Can I write an article in NY Times making fun of the Holocaust or even denying it? What about gays? Nothing is more insulting to the principle of Freedom of Speech than defending the abuse of it as a good principle. Any freedom of speech lover should hate it when freedom of speech is abused and made bad-looking. Surely those who, for generations, fought for the freedom of speech didn't do so just so some uneducated kid can freely insult big groups of people just for the heck of it. I'm not talking about this Orkut incident here, but about how you label countries that care about the feelings of their people and minorities as being hell-bent on destroying free speech.
*insert car analogy about how useful this EEG application is*
Maddox playing as a nurse. Well played.
Seeing the summary and many of the posts here, it's so sad to see how the internet gave every idiot a podium. It's always going to be catch-22 for Microsoft, even if they donated 40 billion dollars for every open source foundation/cancer research facility in the world. It's sad to see CS graduates, sysadmins and programmers with the mentalities of 4channers. Huh
No one is saying Linux is about as secure as XP, but the OP is saying that because of the spreading culture among many Linux users that there is no way they can get malware, this type of attack might easily fly under the radar. No need to compare to XP because we all know it's not a fair comparison!
So it's about time Linux users get down to earth and learn "It's not the system, it's the user" the hard way?
They want to bring Linux to your grandma!
Wow, you guys are now discriminating against other Lin-frakking-ux users? You guys have no friends...
Too bad they're recordings, though.
This is a frakkin' great April Fools! Especially the tinfoil guy. Props to you, whoever you are.
Wow, grow up, guys. So he has Microsoft connections? So what? If open source affiliation is a valid reason to hate somebody, you might start rethinking your life priorities. The Mono project gives Linux developers more choice, especially if they have been working with .NET tech for a long time. Would you forfeit years of .NET training and experience because you want to use a Linux platform?
That, or I am missing a bigger picture, in such case maybe someone can elaborate in the implications of said "teacup storm"?
LOL, sounds like fun. They're still assholes, though. Too bad really hardworking ethical employees get shafted world-wide. And... really, did they do more harm than some of the world-widely known software companies in the world?
An MSI tablet running Android would definitely induce drool for me. Android is on the extreme end of the stick against Apple's OS in terms of openness, and so it helps to have an open competitor in the face of a totalitarian locked-down sorry excuse of a computing device. ... As long as Android's problems are addressed at a quicker rate.
Even having said so, the iPad will not be popular because of its usefullness or usability for the most part, but because of brand power.
For an Android tablet to fight that, it really has to exceed the iPad (LOL) in all aspects.
Center Investing Authority, I like that name's coupling with its acronym.