Why wasn't this the default to begin with? There's no good reason to automatically run anything on media like hard disks or flash drives. It's an obvious virus vector.
A compromise would have been to ask the user, but disabling is completely is probably better, since it will avoid stuff like the Sony Root kit, being installed by a clueless user. After all:
Computer: "Do you want to do xyz? It may break you computer." User: clicky, clicky "Why yes of course"
Does anyone have any screen shot for this? I can't see anything on the Microsoft site, and I am still waiting for SP3 on my work machine, so I can't verify the validity of this post. I just put out an e-mail to my boss, and would feel better if there was something more concrete than 'I read this on/.'.
Because it invites other to sue you too. IBM could have easily bought SCOX to make their little... 'problem' go away, but it did not. Instead it spent millions to BURY SCOX to let all other know that it will not be intimidated into buying out a plaintiff.
IBM didn't make the first move to sue, SCO did. In many ways I feel IBMs lawyers felt fighting SCO was better than letting the arrogant little bastards get their way. SCO's case was so full of holes that everyone wanted them to suffer. SCO was also going after stuff that didn't simply attack Linux, but every variant of Unix out there, including AIX. Chances are SCO, as arrogant as there were, probably wouldn't have wanted to be bought at any price.
If the power consumption is comparable to an average home DSL router, and it had an extra port, it would make a great base for DD-WRT or something of the sort.
As to the whole sealed shenanigans.. I guess we have to wait and see.
I suppose all this depends if it has an expiry date. IANAL, so if someone knows if a sealed court order has no expiry, what does it take to get it unsealed?
Q: What becomes unavailable to the public when a file is sealed by the court? A: Only those portions of the file that the judge has ordered sealed. In the event of a partial sealing, certain information in the court file will continue to be available for public inspection.
Welcome to Slashdot, where the libertarians want everything for free.
I wouldn't go that far, but I would say that both sides ignore the need for a good balance between the two extremes. On one side there is a group which want to charge for ever for something, even when they aren't maintaining the work and there is another group who wants everything for free. While there may some libertarians that a anti-property, there are certainly those that a pro-property.
The introductory text at wikipedia states: "Libertarianism is a term used by a broad spectrum[1] of political philosophies which seek to maximize individual liberty[2] and minimize or abolish the state.[3] There are a number of libertarian view points, ranging from anarchist to small government, and from anti-property to pro-property.".
Copyright is fine as long as it is not abused. The problem is that copyright holder are abusing the system and are doing anything in their power to prevent copyrighted work reach the public domain. If getting hold of copyrighted was easier legally, and affordably, then there would be less pirates, but there will always be pirates. One example I have of the difficulty of easily getting copyright affordably is the Farscape seasons. Whatever your opinion is of this series, you find yourself either not able to find season 1 because of distribution rights mess, or paying out of your nose for the seasons you can get hold of.
I do buy media, though I just wait until it is in the price range of us mere mortals.
So in many ways copyright is fine, but not the way it is now. As it is, it is just a license for big media to screw everyone with their extortionate practices. 70 year copyrights? So which creating artist is still alive to benefit from this?
The article argues that people won't upgrade from XP - it expects that as MS tries to force them, people will migrate to Linux instead. I think as Microsoft discontinues support for XP, people will move to Windows 7 - sales of Windows based netbooks seem to be much higher than for Linux.
I have no issue upgrading to a 'new and better' operating system, on the condition that I see some worth in what's new and better. The issue I have with Windows Vista and Windows 7, is that other than higher hardware requirements, I am not sure what it is offering me that I don't already have? Is it making my life easier? Is going through the hoops of learning a new UI going to provide me a better usage experience? and where are those options hidden now?
This kinda of reminds of the '640KB should be enough for everyone' theory. If everyone is just content surfing the web and writing e-mails, then sure the 'good enough' solution sounds fair, but if 'good enough' also means dealing with a Windows ME experience then no thanks. At the same time what is considered 'good enough' will evolve over time and new solutions are created and user expectations evolve.
Will my 'good enough' computer handle my photo library, my 32MP entry level camera, recognise the faces in my photo collection. This sound like far fetched stuff today, but as these technologies peculate down from high end systems and people get used to the computer doing more of their mind-numbing repetitive tasks, user expectation will adapt and want them in their 'good enough' computers.
In many ways plenty of people are already using 'good enough' computers. Whether they are satisfied with them is a whole other question.
Is anyone surprised at this? Seriously, does copyright ever end these days?
I am starting to believe copyright was what killed this civilisations. Atlantis probably decided to sink itself than pay the license fees.
I honestly feel that copyright holders would rather see the death of civilisation and culture before relinquishing their hold on their over extended copyrights, and even then.
Why even bother with the Adobe "Tax", when you can just use MPEG4 with H264. Surely that's all Flash does anyhow? The only third-party software that I would look forward to on my set top box is VLC.
High speed rail may not end up being profitable, as the history of Amtrak tends to show, but the positive effect on surrounding growth (industries, commerce, etc), may well make it a system worth subsidising.
Sounds a classic issue of people not doing anything because of "Not my Budget" syndrome. Basically it is either going to cost them in the short term for taking the short term, or cause budgeting to be cut. This is certainly a management issue, but one that needs to be negotiated to the advantage of everyone.
Okay, I'll bite. Release dates: 2001: OSX 10.0/.1, Windows XP 2002: OSX 10.2 2003: OSX 10.3 2005: OSX 10.4 2007: OSX 10.5, Vista (retail)
True, but maybe Microsoft should try this too? It may cost more in the long run, but in the short it feels cheaper. Also, Microsoft keeps on wanting to go the subscription route, but if they provided incremental upgrades that people wanted, then people would spend money as if it was a subscription.
It should be noted that Linux also goes though just a many yearly revisions as MacOS X, with Ubuntu leading the pack. I think bite sized improvements help people stay interested and also means each release is trying to focus on less features but push more quality.
The ipod and OSX were both released in 2001. I think there is a bit of causation there. OS9 sucked hard compared to W2k; even 10.0 was pretty terrible (buggy as hell). The press had just about every reason to hate Macs in the late 90's and through the release of 10.1 (also in 2001, but you got a freebie upgrade on that one, IIRC... again cuz 10.0 sucked).
Yup, what really hurt Apple was their belief that Windows was only just catching up. What ended up happening is that Apple did not innovate in the right places and let Microsoft pass by. The product line was equally confusing with model numbers that didn't mean anything to anyone.
In many ways I feel Gil Amelio made the right choice of purchasing NeXT instead of Be, since I suspect this would have caused Apple to become a software only company. In purchasing NeXT Apple got Steve Jobs, someone who IMHO, who had a vision (not the spiritual one) of where things should be going. When Steve Jobs came on board he brought OpenStep, a system that was ahead of it time, but not really finding itself a market until it became the core of MacOS X. He also simplified the product line into a range that people could understand. This is something I don't see with companies like Dell, who offer such a large range of computers and models that you are left scratching your head as to which is the right for you.
For me what really made me understand Steve Jobs was a Wired Interview which was done back in the 1990s, and I believe is a must read. He believed in simplicity and the fact the computers should be present but not visible, to the point where you don't even think of what you are using as a computer.
You're not just buying the thing being offered in many cases though. With advertising and PR you're also buying into the image that comes with it.
Well that matters a fair bit to some people, especially for people who aren't tech savy. There is also the anti-image crowd who would rather avoid what they want, just to avoid appearing that they were another sheep. For me, I don't really care whether I am considered a sheep, as long as I got the device for the reasons that mattered to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Why wasn't this the default to begin with? There's no good reason to automatically run anything on media like hard disks or flash drives. It's an obvious virus vector.
A compromise would have been to ask the user, but disabling is completely is probably better, since it will avoid stuff like the Sony Root kit, being installed by a clueless user. After all:
Computer: "Do you want to do xyz? It may break you computer."
User: clicky, clicky "Why yes of course"
Does anyone have any screen shot for this? I can't see anything on the Microsoft site, and I am still waiting for SP3 on my work machine, so I can't verify the validity of this post. I just put out an e-mail to my boss, and would feel better if there was something more concrete than 'I read this on /.'.
That's it, I'm moving back to assembler. There are so many more lines there and I even get the added bonus of getting people to pay for NOOP lines :)
Because it invites other to sue you too. IBM could have easily bought SCOX to make their little... 'problem' go away, but it did not. Instead it spent millions to BURY SCOX to let all other know that it will not be intimidated into buying out a plaintiff.
IBM didn't make the first move to sue, SCO did. In many ways I feel IBMs lawyers felt fighting SCO was better than letting the arrogant little bastards get their way. SCO's case was so full of holes that everyone wanted them to suffer. SCO was also going after stuff that didn't simply attack Linux, but every variant of Unix out there, including AIX. Chances are SCO, as arrogant as there were, probably wouldn't have wanted to be bought at any price.
I've got the Sheevaplug that has the Marvell SoC
If the power consumption is comparable to an average home DSL router, and it had an extra port, it would make a great base for DD-WRT or something of the sort.
C'mon man, this is Microsoft. They will do both.
I am sure there is Clippy joke here, but I can't think of one.
As to the whole sealed shenanigans.. I guess we have to wait and see.
I suppose all this depends if it has an expiry date. IANAL, so if someone knows if a sealed court order has no expiry, what does it take to get it unsealed?
Here is one answer (source: State of Connecticut Judicial Branch):
Q: What becomes unavailable to the public when a file is sealed by the court?
A: Only those portions of the file that the judge has ordered sealed. In the event of a partial sealing, certain information in the court file will continue to be available for public inspection.
Now, I'm not a lawyer but that's got a whole lot of lengthy legalese that no human could understand.
So what are you trying to say about lawyers? ;)
Welcome to Slashdot, where the libertarians want everything for free.
I wouldn't go that far, but I would say that both sides ignore the need for a good balance between the two extremes. On one side there is a group which want to charge for ever for something, even when they aren't maintaining the work and there is another group who wants everything for free. While there may some libertarians that a anti-property, there are certainly those that a pro-property.
The introductory text at wikipedia states: "Libertarianism is a term used by a broad spectrum[1] of political philosophies which seek to maximize individual liberty[2] and minimize or abolish the state.[3] There are a number of libertarian view points, ranging from anarchist to small government, and from anti-property to pro-property.".
Copyright is fine as long as it is not abused. The problem is that copyright holder are abusing the system and are doing anything in their power to prevent copyrighted work reach the public domain. If getting hold of copyrighted was easier legally, and affordably, then there would be less pirates, but there will always be pirates. One example I have of the difficulty of easily getting copyright affordably is the Farscape seasons. Whatever your opinion is of this series, you find yourself either not able to find season 1 because of distribution rights mess, or paying out of your nose for the seasons you can get hold of.
I do buy media, though I just wait until it is in the price range of us mere mortals.
So in many ways copyright is fine, but not the way it is now. As it is, it is just a license for big media to screw everyone with their extortionate practices. 70 year copyrights? So which creating artist is still alive to benefit from this?
The article argues that people won't upgrade from XP - it expects that as MS tries to force them, people will migrate to Linux instead. I think as Microsoft discontinues support for XP, people will move to Windows 7 - sales of Windows based netbooks seem to be much higher than for Linux.
I have no issue upgrading to a 'new and better' operating system, on the condition that I see some worth in what's new and better. The issue I have with Windows Vista and Windows 7, is that other than higher hardware requirements, I am not sure what it is offering me that I don't already have? Is it making my life easier? Is going through the hoops of learning a new UI going to provide me a better usage experience? and where are those options hidden now?
This kinda of reminds of the '640KB should be enough for everyone' theory. If everyone is just content surfing the web and writing e-mails, then sure the 'good enough' solution sounds fair, but if 'good enough' also means dealing with a Windows ME experience then no thanks. At the same time what is considered 'good enough' will evolve over time and new solutions are created and user expectations evolve.
Will my 'good enough' computer handle my photo library, my 32MP entry level camera, recognise the faces in my photo collection. This sound like far fetched stuff today, but as these technologies peculate down from high end systems and people get used to the computer doing more of their mind-numbing repetitive tasks, user expectation will adapt and want them in their 'good enough' computers.
In many ways plenty of people are already using 'good enough' computers. Whether they are satisfied with them is a whole other question.
Is anyone surprised at this? Seriously, does copyright ever end these days?
I am starting to believe copyright was what killed this civilisations. Atlantis probably decided to sink itself than pay the license fees.
I honestly feel that copyright holders would rather see the death of civilisation and culture before relinquishing their hold on their over extended copyrights, and even then.
>> why do you sign your username?
>
>Because I feel like it. What's it to you?
>
>-jcr
Which is certainly better that signing with someone else's ;)
-anonymous (not)
one of them will be the System Idle process. Naturally. That's the one that hogs 98% almost all the time.
So that's why my hard disk is thrashing so much.
Why even bother with the Adobe "Tax", when you can just use MPEG4 with H264. Surely that's all Flash does anyhow? The only third-party software that I would look forward to on my set top box is VLC.
Why is it that Slashdot posts such opinionated summaries at times?
Because they are good for getting /. panicking and supporting the ad revenue ;)
[/cynic mode]
High speed rail may not end up being profitable, as the history of Amtrak tends to show, but the positive effect on surrounding growth (industries, commerce, etc), may well make it a system worth subsidising.
'cobbled together set of components designed to mimic similar functionality.'
And in certain cases do a pretty darn good job of it. Just don't expect us to be there 24/7, since the developers might be in a different time zone.
Sounds a classic issue of people not doing anything because of "Not my Budget" syndrome. Basically it is either going to cost them in the short term for taking the short term, or cause budgeting to be cut. This is certainly a management issue, but one that needs to be negotiated to the advantage of everyone.
Okay, I'll bite.
Release dates:
2001: OSX 10.0/.1, Windows XP
2002: OSX 10.2
2003: OSX 10.3
2005: OSX 10.4
2007: OSX 10.5, Vista (retail)
True, but maybe Microsoft should try this too? It may cost more in the long run, but in the short it feels cheaper. Also, Microsoft keeps on wanting to go the subscription route, but if they provided incremental upgrades that people wanted, then people would spend money as if it was a subscription.
It should be noted that Linux also goes though just a many yearly revisions as MacOS X, with Ubuntu leading the pack. I think bite sized improvements help people stay interested and also means each release is trying to focus on less features but push more quality.
The ipod and OSX were both released in 2001. I think there is a bit of causation there. OS9 sucked hard compared to W2k; even 10.0 was pretty terrible (buggy as hell). The press had just about every reason to hate Macs in the late 90's and through the release of 10.1 (also in 2001, but you got a freebie upgrade on that one, IIRC... again cuz 10.0 sucked).
Yup, what really hurt Apple was their belief that Windows was only just catching up. What ended up happening is that Apple did not innovate in the right places and let Microsoft pass by. The product line was equally confusing with model numbers that didn't mean anything to anyone.
In many ways I feel Gil Amelio made the right choice of purchasing NeXT instead of Be, since I suspect this would have caused Apple to become a software only company. In purchasing NeXT Apple got Steve Jobs, someone who IMHO, who had a vision (not the spiritual one) of where things should be going. When Steve Jobs came on board he brought OpenStep, a system that was ahead of it time, but not really finding itself a market until it became the core of MacOS X. He also simplified the product line into a range that people could understand. This is something I don't see with companies like Dell, who offer such a large range of computers and models that you are left scratching your head as to which is the right for you.
For me what really made me understand Steve Jobs was a Wired Interview which was done back in the 1990s, and I believe is a must read. He believed in simplicity and the fact the computers should be present but not visible, to the point where you don't even think of what you are using as a computer.
You're not just buying the thing being offered in many cases though. With advertising and PR you're also buying into the image that comes with it.
Well that matters a fair bit to some people, especially for people who aren't tech savy. There is also the anti-image crowd who would rather avoid what they want, just to avoid appearing that they were another sheep. For me, I don't really care whether I am considered a sheep, as long as I got the device for the reasons that mattered to me.
Wow, that's a blast from the past, if you are indeed referring to "Saturn 3".
Another film with gardening robots is "Castle in the Sky".