Is it just me or does anyone else have doubts about a society that would allow one company to dictate our computing needs (work, games, home automation etc) to such an extent. If Microsoft are going ahead with this idea, they should make the hardware/software more open to allow competitors and user choice.
I guess I'm not surprised that Microsoft would do this, but I do wonder at the logic. Do they really think that people would be willing to have all computing functions (hardware/software/comms) controlled by a single company.......
But the original poster is right, that there's little downside to saying obvious things shouldn't be patented. No one can hold that against you during a campaign, whereas it's quite valuable to say "he voted AGAINST the communications DECENCY act!"...
Isn't it obvious... a law that doesn't offend anyone will have tons of stuff tacked on that doesn't make sense. Someone in congress who wants stricter gun control or more guns (who knows) will agree to support the bill only if these things are tacked on.... This is the way that it always goes... innocent bills are bastardised to serve the interests of a small group. When will they learn?
"The only truly secure system is one which is switched off, disconnected from all networks, buried in a bunker made of six foot thick concrete with armed guards posted outside. Even then I wouldn't stake my life on it being secure!"
I tend to think this is overkill. Like everything in life, security is a trade-off. The more secure the system, the less usable it is.
OpenBSD is pretty good if you need high security, but is overkill for home users (and office workers). For this reason OpenBSD will never have the same popularity as Linux or Windows.
It still has its place though, in ensuring that standards are maintained in these other OS's as I believe that it really sets the benchmark for what should be possible with any OS.
BrendanB.
I mean, if linking to stuff deemed 'illegal' is also made illegal, then these forums could be in danger...
Someone may post a comment to slashdot with a link in it to a site containing 'illegal' material or a link directly to that material. Is it reasonable to export the editors(moderators - whatever) to check all links before a comment is posted??? It would end up being more trouble than it is worth to those who run these forums...
I think that it is a good thing that someone is challenging the notion that providing a link is 'illegal'... lets just hope the judges have the sense to realise the stupidity of it all. Just because one site links to information on another site doesn't mean that the authors of the site linking have checked what is provided, or are really providing it... This is the argument used by ISP's for saying that they cannot be sued if someone puts up a site with 'illegal' content using their service. Yes, they will take action if alerted, but they deny all liability for the actions of its users.
Strangely, in Australia we have no (effective) privacy laws. There are no checks on how this information is collected, so it may be quite erroneous(sp) data.
Another thought to consider is that once a person is released from prison (if they get to prison) they are to be treated like ordinary citizens. This means that police resources must be used to protect them from vigilantes and others.
Last year a convicted pedophile was released after serving an 18 year sentence, and the papers published his address. People surrounded his house, throwing rocks and protesting until police had to come and disperse the crowd. The state government then payed for him to be moved to a secret location for his own protection.
This will happen more and more now that these names are available. Remember, in Australia it is relatively easy to track someone down by name alone.. and it is not illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
Is it just me or does anyone else have doubts about a society that would allow one company to dictate our computing needs (work, games, home automation etc) to such an extent. If Microsoft are going ahead with this idea, they should make the hardware/software more open to allow competitors and user choice.
I guess I'm not surprised that Microsoft would do this, but I do wonder at the logic. Do they really think that people would be willing to have all computing functions (hardware/software/comms) controlled by a single company.......
did anyone manage to grab a copy of the k5 article before k5 was /.ed???
But the original poster is right, that there's little downside to saying obvious things shouldn't be patented. No one can hold that against you during a campaign, whereas it's quite valuable to say "he voted AGAINST the communications DECENCY act!"...
Isn't it obvious... a law that doesn't offend anyone will have tons of stuff tacked on that doesn't make sense. Someone in congress who wants stricter gun control or more guns (who knows) will agree to support the bill only if these things are tacked on.... This is the way that it always goes... innocent bills are bastardised to serve the interests of a small group. When will they learn?
BrendanB.
Thats the one!!! - Sorry it was late at night and I really couldn't remember where I read it.... I know I have it in a book somewhere.....
Thanx..
BrendanB
I read somewhere the following quote:
"The only truly secure system is one which is switched off, disconnected from all networks, buried in a bunker made of six foot thick concrete with armed guards posted outside. Even then I wouldn't stake my life on it being secure!"
I tend to think this is overkill. Like everything in life, security is a trade-off. The more secure the system, the less usable it is.
OpenBSD is pretty good if you need high security, but is overkill for home users (and office workers). For this reason OpenBSD will never have the same popularity as Linux or Windows.
It still has its place though, in ensuring that standards are maintained in these other OS's as I believe that it really sets the benchmark for what should be possible with any OS. BrendanB.
Could this spell the end of forums like slashdot?
I mean, if linking to stuff deemed 'illegal' is also made illegal, then these forums could be in danger...
Someone may post a comment to slashdot with a link in it to a site containing 'illegal' material or a link directly to that material. Is it reasonable to export the editors(moderators - whatever) to check all links before a comment is posted??? It would end up being more trouble than it is worth to those who run these forums...
I think that it is a good thing that someone is challenging the notion that providing a link is 'illegal'... lets just hope the judges have the sense to realise the stupidity of it all. Just because one site links to information on another site doesn't mean that the authors of the site linking have checked what is provided, or are really providing it... This is the argument used by ISP's for saying that they cannot be sued if someone puts up a site with 'illegal' content using their service. Yes, they will take action if alerted, but they deny all liability for the actions of its users.
Strangely, in Australia we have no (effective) privacy laws. There are no checks on how this information is collected, so it may be quite erroneous(sp) data.
Another thought to consider is that once a person is released from prison (if they get to prison) they are to be treated like ordinary citizens. This means that police resources must be used to protect them from vigilantes and others.
Last year a convicted pedophile was released after serving an 18 year sentence, and the papers published his address. People surrounded his house, throwing rocks and protesting until police had to come and disperse the crowd. The state government then payed for him to be moved to a secret location for his own protection.
This will happen more and more now that these names are available. Remember, in Australia it is relatively easy to track someone down by name alone.. and it is not illegal.