"You are ignorant. You methods breed new fundamentist muslim terrorists."
if you do nothing, there will still be new fundamentilist muslim terrorists. So why not at least try to do something? It's foolish to sit back and let someone attack you.
"The correct way is not using any force at all. If you know where they are, send that region economic help. Do everything to increase happiness in that region, and take no violent action whatsoever. If they blow up a plane, just shrug and say "losers", then move one. Don't pay alot of attention to it, they are, just losers after all."
Hehe, you're funny. Take a look at all the countries that did that during WW2. Hitler rolled his tanks in and the US ended up having to use force to bail them out. The world does not work the way you think. Leaders and extremists are not rational and they will not listen.
"Unless you take away the reasons they exist, they will exist. Violence can only take away these reasons by killing everyone, innocent civilians included. And that is not an expectable way."
The reason goes beyond the US. Their religion has existed for thousands of years. This is their reason, which may not stop until the entire world is muslim and under their control. Would that satisfy you?
"For the same reason Britney Spears CDs are on TorrentSpy. Somewhere there's a market for every bad game"
Although you may not agree, Britney Spears CDs get sold because people actually like the music. It is the most pirated because of the type of people listening to it (young kids/teeneagers, who are more likely to share and download).
It makes no sense to share or download something you will never listen to or that sucks (games, apps, or music).
I agree with everything except this. The man show with Adam Carolla and Jimmy Kimmel was hilarious (not the other hosts though). I used to watch it all the time on comedy central.
I think the "jump the shark" moment for TechTV (G4,ZDTV) for me was when they had that sex show (it had the younger guy that was part of the screensavers). They had porn stars, web cams, and sex toys. It seemed to me like they were very desperate to get new viewers at that time.
"Oh, good grief. If you're going to parrot what some guy said on whichever current affairs program you watch, you could at least do some basic research to make sure you know what the conflict is about."
oo, do you feel special now?
"(I do like your rather ludicrous implication that it's fine to lob bombs into someone's towns as long as you announce your intention first, though. Thanks for the laugh.)"
Your statement is comical at best. There is a difference between attacking a country un-announced with major acts of terrorism and defending your country with force. There is a definite good and evil in this world..but many people such as yourself don't seem to be able to tell the difference. I feel sorry for you.
"People should not be free to create closed source software, simply because its not a freedom. Its a power over the users' freedoms. The net effect is the reduction of freedom."
well, it's taking away freedoms away from the programmer. I'm actually glad stallman is such a nut job because it's turning a ton of people and companies away from using the GNU license. Now it can die the slow and painful death that it deserves.
"If you're truly "pro-freedom", you're not going to object to someone extending your code, even if the purpose of their modifications is to *gasp* allow someone to burn a playlist more than 10 times, or share their music collection amongst SIX computers, and other horrors"
This isn't true. Pro-freedom would allow me to extend the code and close it up or extend the code and give my additions away. When you think about it, the original code would still be there, with all of it's glory (and freedom). Other people just wouldn't get my additions.
The GPL takes away the freedoms of the people that would like to keep their additions private.
People put code out under the GPL because they want changes to be redistributed. The fact that you could use the code as a webservice was never intended as a feature of the GPL, it was a loophole. It allowed a way for people to redistribute GPLed code as a service without releasing changes. If this change makes it into GPL3 it will be a good thing. IMO, its one of the two most important changes needed in the GPL (the other being patents).
If you are using it as a service, why does the source need to be released? It makes no sense to me and will just alienate a lot of individuals and companies from using GPLd code.
You no onger get to have your cake and eat it too.
I find this statement ironic. Especially from someone who claims to be about "freedom".
"You worked to get the money for the House, The Grill, the charcoal/propane, the lighter fluid, the matches, the food to cook on it, the beverages to drink (a surpluss of them since it's more then you will eat or drink). Yet everyone you invited over can't have any of it? since it would be stealing (by your own admission) since they did nothing to earn it."
this is bullshit. For starters, those are finite things. Once they are gone..you need to get more. It's not the same thing with digital goods.
"Same goes for anything else, you work and work and work for something and decide to share it with the world but there are so many limits put on it against your will that anyone who looks at it, listens to it or uses it can get sued or harassed for doing what you had intended them to do."
you are allowed to share the one copy you purchased. Going with your grill scenario: It would be equivalent of buying one bag and then giving the rest out to your friends at no cost.
"We're using McAfee VirusScan 8.0. If by "small footprint" you mean installation coincides with a sudden, lasting rash of virtual memory errors on 2 Ghz desktop machines with 512mb of RAM, sure. Not to mention the fact that it's pretty much useless against spyware, which is a bigger resource problem for us than viruses, and even trojans are often requiring manual intervention to remove. It's no worse than Trend was, I'll grant you, but it's not so good you should be giving it free advertising."
I have not had any of these experiences. I have used both 8.0 and 7.0 on many systems and it has not crashed nor had the virtual memory thrashing you mentioned. I never use the firewall or the anti-spyware app, so this may be the issue.
"One of my home machines with AVG, Windows Firewall, and SpywareBlaster has historically been more secure (read: never compromised) than my work laptop, which has been compromised at least twice from behind our corporate firewall... and I'm not even in sales. Though it does seem to have a pretty decent boot time."
There may be other reasons for this..not just the insecurities of mcafee. For instance, your system at work may be on a subnet that is attacked and/or scanned more often than your system at home. I can't believe you are using spyblaster though. It's the worst piece of software I've ever used. AVG is good, I switched over it it when my mcafee licensing ran out.
"On Windows, many applications fail to run unless you have Administrator priveleges, simply due to sloppy coding and lack of testing. As a result, almost everyone ordinary Windows user I know runs with administrator priveleges. It's a completely different mind-set."
so is this fault of Microsoft? or sloppy programmers? The functionality is there (IE: the ability to run a program as a non-administrator), it's just not being used.
7. Don't install something that you do not know (to within a reasonable degree of certainty) to be trust-worthy"
That's about as useful as saying: "Don't want to get an STD or pregnant? don't have sex!"
Most people are running windows, so this just isn't an option. Humans are still the weakest link in the chain. If we had people that were a little more educated about not opening emails that are obviously viruses, malware, or people phishing, we would have much less of a problem.
I think it's also very difficult for the average person to tell if an application is un-trustworthy. Especially since it's not cut and dry..it's more of an art than a science.
I use Internet explorer, windows 2003, and outlook express, with AVG, and I haven't had a virus or trojan on my system in 4 years. I also don't open attachment from people I don't know, keep myself behind my router, and I don't go to websites that seem like they are un-trustworthy.
"The program was the most obscene resource hogs I've ever had the displeasure to use"
The home editions are a resource hog. The enterprise edition (at least of mcafee) has a very small footprint and is lightning fast. Mcafee should consider using the same build on their home editions.
"Another concern of critics of monopolistic competition is that it fosters advertising and the creation of brand names"
and we can't forget the characteristics of a "monopolistically competitive market":
"Monopolistically competitive markets have the following characteristics:
1) There are many producers and many consumers in a given market. 2)Consumers have clearly defined preferences and sellers attempt to differentiate their products from those of their competitors; the goods and services are heterogeneous. 3) There are no barriers to entry and exit"
There are many producers,consumers, and no barrier to entry or exit. What is the problem? The people in this world that get ahead don't complain and bitch about the other guy..they strive to make themselves better.
At the moment, linux has the chance to become something great (more popular than Microsoft). I don't think it ever will, however. This is mainly to to the zealous, religious behavior that turns many people off (see: Richard Stallman).
"Better get a big drive then, since I'll wager it will fill up with all kinds of shows that will mostly *never* be watched. This is fine, too, though - think of all the time you have saved not watching that junk, the number of disks you never burned, and just look at how little it cost you!"
a 300 gig will do for starters..and prices on harddrives are going down every day. A buddy of mine has > 500 movies in his collection. He has the netflix and blockbuster (I think..not sure if they discontinued this or not) online programs. There are also websites where you can print out movie covers. Plastic cases are also pretty cheap.
Yes, it may be illegal..but I really don't see anything wrong as long as you aren't selling them.
"The problem with this is that it gives lazy developers (and there are an awful lot of them) a plausable excuse to continue to be lazy... Either saying "Oh, we never knew about that..." (even if they did), or the excuse that they consider an exploit to be a complex enough problem that they expect to have a fix out before it becomes a problem (read as "whenever they decide to get around to it", which without any accountability generally has only a slightly higher priority than making a mental note to remember to teach their newborn kid how to drive when he turns 16)."
Many times, I don't think it is pure laziness. Programs that get to a considerable size (with a large amount of developers working on it) are difficult to maintain and as a result, have bugs and security holes.
The only way we would ever be able to stop this is to have accountability of software laws passed..but this would also effectivly mean the end of most OSS projects (because the risk would be too great).
"I disagree. I love Netflix. Although some things do start collecting dust, most of what I order is watched within days. I just make a point of watching my latest DVD instead of watching reruns on TV. People just need to learn to watch their DVDs when they have time. Another technique that works is setting a deadline for viewing. When a DVD comes in the mail, I set a deadline for viewing and I stick to it."
one could also make a backup copy for later..store it on their harddrive..and burn when necessary. This would allow you to get a movie and send it back without having to watch it.
Which is, in the nutshell, just the old "security by obscurity" argument. Which has already been debated to hell and back and is known to not work that way. And, frankly, it's weird to see McAffee preaching that attitude, because the anti-virus makers should know the best that it never worked that way.
security through obscurity doesn't work by itself, but it does add one more level of complexity, which can slow adoption by the black hats until a proper fix can be released.
I think it's irresponsible for research groups to release security flaw information before the majority of people are able to patch it. People here on slashdot seem to jump to many conclusions about open source and windows.
" agree with the notion that you don't go into academia for the money, unless you're very very successful and have entrepreneurial assistance from the University. You do it for the freedom of schedule, interaction with students, and enjoyment of doing your own projects. In Engineering, you can get OK salary, and you can do consulting to increase it, but corporate money is *MUCH* better"
and the hot college chicks. You can't forget about the ladies.
"MS has been a monopoly for a long time. When a monopoly sets prices, they do it based on supply and demand (not competition). MS could have set the price of Office at $10"
Really? Is that why I can buy star office and download open office for free? How does this constitute a monopoly?
Slashdot Mirror
"You are ignorant. You methods breed new fundamentist muslim terrorists."
if you do nothing, there will still be new fundamentilist muslim terrorists. So why not at least try to do something? It's foolish to sit back and let someone attack you.
"The correct way is not using any force at all. If you know where they are, send that region economic help. Do everything to increase happiness in that region, and take no violent action whatsoever. If they blow up a plane, just shrug and say "losers", then move one. Don't pay alot of attention to it, they are, just losers after all."
Hehe, you're funny. Take a look at all the countries that did that during WW2. Hitler rolled his tanks in and the US ended up having to use force to bail them out. The world does not work the way you think. Leaders and extremists are not rational and they will not listen.
"Unless you take away the reasons they exist, they will exist. Violence can only take away these reasons by killing everyone, innocent civilians included. And that is not an expectable way."
The reason goes beyond the US. Their religion has existed for thousands of years. This is their reason, which may not stop until the entire world is muslim and under their control. Would that satisfy you?
"For the same reason Britney Spears CDs are on TorrentSpy. Somewhere there's a market for every bad game"
Although you may not agree, Britney Spears CDs get sold because people actually like the music. It is the most pirated because of the type of people listening to it (young kids/teeneagers, who are more likely to share and download).
It makes no sense to share or download something you will never listen to or that sucks (games, apps, or music).
"Make a good game, and people will buy it."
that may be true, but more people will also pirate it. Bad games will not be pirated as much because people just don't want them (to buy or pirate).
"G4 is an operation driven by vapid interpretations of demographic data with a blatant disregard for style or common sense"
I think it's being run by a bunch of suits that are loading up the network with what they think will make the most money.
"(The Man Show)"
I agree with everything except this. The man show with Adam Carolla and Jimmy Kimmel was hilarious (not the other hosts though). I used to watch it all the time on comedy central.
I think the "jump the shark" moment for TechTV (G4,ZDTV) for me was when they had that sex show (it had the younger guy that was part of the screensavers). They had porn stars, web cams, and sex toys. It seemed to me like they were very desperate to get new viewers at that time.
"Oh, good grief. If you're going to parrot what some guy said on whichever current affairs program you watch, you could at least do some basic research to make sure you know what the conflict is about."
oo, do you feel special now?
"(I do like your rather ludicrous implication that it's fine to lob bombs into someone's towns as long as you announce your intention first, though. Thanks for the laugh.)"
Your statement is comical at best. There is a difference between attacking a country un-announced with major acts of terrorism and defending your country with force. There is a definite good and evil in this world..but many people such as yourself don't seem to be able to tell the difference. I feel sorry for you.
"People should not be free to create closed source software, simply because its not a freedom. Its a power over the users' freedoms.
The net effect is the reduction of freedom."
well, it's taking away freedoms away from the programmer. I'm actually glad stallman is such a nut job because it's turning a ton of people and companies away from using the GNU license. Now it can die the slow and painful death that it deserves.
And even more so, given that Israel had no legitimate reason to attack Lebanon AT ALL.
uh-huh. How about lobbing bombs into their towns un-announced. Syria, Iran, and Lebanon are all at fault here.
Yeah. People should be free to run and distribute closed-source apps.
Just like North Korea should be free to torture its people and restrict the rights of their citizens.
it's this kind evangilism that will always keep OSS out of the mainstream public.
"If you're truly "pro-freedom", you're not going to object to someone extending your code, even if the purpose of their modifications is to *gasp* allow someone to burn a playlist more than 10 times, or share their music collection amongst SIX computers, and other horrors"
This isn't true. Pro-freedom would allow me to extend the code and close it up or extend the code and give my additions away. When you think about it, the original code would still be there, with all of it's glory (and freedom). Other people just wouldn't get my additions.
The GPL takes away the freedoms of the people that would like to keep their additions private.
The only truly free license is public domain.
People put code out under the GPL because they want changes to be redistributed. The fact that you could use the code as a webservice was never intended as a feature of the GPL, it was a loophole. It allowed a way for people to redistribute GPLed code as a service without releasing changes. If this change makes it into GPL3 it will be a good thing. IMO, its one of the two most important changes needed in the GPL (the other being patents).
If you are using it as a service, why does the source need to be released? It makes no sense to me and will just alienate a lot of individuals and companies from using GPLd code.
You no onger get to have your cake and eat it too.
I find this statement ironic. Especially from someone who claims to be about "freedom".
Actually if you have an anti-spam product, then advertising it by spamming is the perfect strategy
The article never mentions if it was an opt-on mailing list. If so, I wouldn't consider it spam.
"You worked to get the money for the House, The Grill, the charcoal/propane, the lighter fluid, the matches, the food to cook on it, the beverages to drink (a surpluss of them since it's more then you will eat or drink).
Yet everyone you invited over can't have any of it? since it would be stealing (by your own admission) since they did nothing to earn it."
this is bullshit. For starters, those are finite things. Once they are gone..you need to get more. It's not the same thing with digital goods.
"Same goes for anything else, you work and work and work for something and decide to share it with the world but there are so many limits put on it against your will that anyone who looks at it, listens to it or uses it can get sued or harassed for doing what you had intended them to do."
you are allowed to share the one copy you purchased. Going with your grill scenario: It would be equivalent of buying one bag and then giving the rest out to your friends at no cost.
"We're using McAfee VirusScan 8.0. If by "small footprint" you mean installation coincides with a sudden, lasting rash of virtual memory errors on 2 Ghz desktop machines with 512mb of RAM, sure. Not to mention the fact that it's pretty much useless against spyware, which is a bigger resource problem for us than viruses, and even trojans are often requiring manual intervention to remove. It's no worse than Trend was, I'll grant you, but it's not so good you should be giving it free advertising."
I have not had any of these experiences. I have used both 8.0 and 7.0 on many systems and it has not crashed nor had the virtual memory thrashing you mentioned. I never use the firewall or the anti-spyware app, so this may be the issue.
"One of my home machines with AVG, Windows Firewall, and SpywareBlaster has historically been more secure (read: never compromised) than my work laptop, which has been compromised at least twice from behind our corporate firewall... and I'm not even in sales. Though it does seem to have a pretty decent boot time."
There may be other reasons for this..not just the insecurities of mcafee. For instance, your system at work may be on a subnet that is attacked and/or scanned more often than your system at home. I can't believe you are using spyblaster though. It's the worst piece of software I've ever used. AVG is good, I switched over it it when my mcafee licensing ran out.
"On Windows, many applications fail to run unless you have Administrator priveleges, simply due to sloppy coding and lack of testing. As a result, almost everyone ordinary Windows user I know runs with administrator priveleges. It's a completely different mind-set."
so is this fault of Microsoft? or sloppy programmers? The functionality is there (IE: the ability to run a program as a non-administrator), it's just not being used.
"good list, but I would add;
6. Don't use Windows
7. Don't install something that you do not know (to within a reasonable degree of certainty) to be trust-worthy"
That's about as useful as saying: "Don't want to get an STD or pregnant? don't have sex!"
Most people are running windows, so this just isn't an option. Humans are still the weakest link in the chain. If we had people that were a little more educated about not opening emails that are obviously viruses, malware, or people phishing, we would have much less of a problem.
I think it's also very difficult for the average person to tell if an application is un-trustworthy. Especially since it's not cut and dry..it's more of an art than a science.
I use Internet explorer, windows 2003, and outlook express, with AVG, and I haven't had a virus or trojan on my system in 4 years. I also don't open attachment from people I don't know, keep myself behind my router, and I don't go to websites that seem like they are un-trustworthy.
"The program was the most obscene resource hogs I've ever had the displeasure to use"
The home editions are a resource hog. The enterprise edition (at least of mcafee) has a very small footprint and is lightning fast. Mcafee should consider using the same build on their home editions.
This wiki article is awesome. Here is a quote:
"Another concern of critics of monopolistic competition is that it fosters advertising and the creation of brand names"
and we can't forget the characteristics of a "monopolistically competitive market":
"Monopolistically competitive markets have the following characteristics:
1) There are many producers and many consumers in a given market.
2)Consumers have clearly defined preferences and sellers attempt to differentiate their products from those of their competitors; the goods and services are heterogeneous.
3) There are no barriers to entry and exit"
There are many producers,consumers, and no barrier to entry or exit. What is the problem? The people in this world that get ahead don't complain and bitch about the other guy..they strive to make themselves better.
At the moment, linux has the chance to become something great (more popular than Microsoft). I don't think it ever will, however. This is mainly to to the zealous, religious behavior that turns many people off (see: Richard Stallman).
"Better get a big drive then, since I'll wager it will fill up with all kinds of shows that will mostly *never* be watched.
This is fine, too, though - think of all the time you have saved not watching that junk, the number of disks you never burned, and just look at how little it cost you!"
a 300 gig will do for starters..and prices on harddrives are going down every day. A buddy of mine has > 500 movies in his collection. He has the netflix and blockbuster (I think..not sure if they discontinued this or not) online programs. There are also websites where you can print out movie covers. Plastic cases are also pretty cheap.
Yes, it may be illegal..but I really don't see anything wrong as long as you aren't selling them.
"The problem with this is that it gives lazy developers (and there are an awful lot of them) a plausable excuse to continue to be lazy... Either saying "Oh, we never knew about that..." (even if they did), or the excuse that they consider an exploit to be a complex enough problem that they expect to have a fix out before it becomes a problem (read as "whenever they decide to get around to it", which without any accountability generally has only a slightly higher priority than making a mental note to remember to teach their newborn kid how to drive when he turns 16)."
Many times, I don't think it is pure laziness. Programs that get to a considerable size (with a large amount of developers working on it) are difficult to maintain and as a result, have bugs and security holes.
The only way we would ever be able to stop this is to have accountability of software laws passed..but this would also effectivly mean the end of most OSS projects (because the risk would be too great).
"(Due to a quite enjoyable college experience my memory is not what it used to be and there is no way I could remember all these movie titles!)"
;-)
hmm..with a name of "hempola"..should we be surpisied?
"I disagree. I love Netflix. Although some things do start collecting dust, most of what I order is watched within days. I just make a point of watching my latest DVD instead of watching reruns on TV. People just need to learn to watch their DVDs when they have time. Another technique that works is setting a deadline for viewing. When a DVD comes in the mail, I set a deadline for viewing and I stick to it."
one could also make a backup copy for later..store it on their harddrive..and burn when necessary. This would allow you to get a movie and send it back without having to watch it.
Which is, in the nutshell, just the old "security by obscurity" argument. Which has already been debated to hell and back and is known to not work that way. And, frankly, it's weird to see McAffee preaching that attitude, because the anti-virus makers should know the best that it never worked that way.
security through obscurity doesn't work by itself, but it does add one more level of complexity, which can slow adoption by the black hats until a proper fix can be released.
I think it's irresponsible for research groups to release security flaw information before the majority of people are able to patch it. People here on slashdot seem to jump to many conclusions about open source and windows.
" agree with the notion that you don't go into academia for the money, unless you're very very successful and have entrepreneurial assistance from the University. You do it for the freedom of schedule, interaction with students, and enjoyment of doing your own projects. In Engineering, you can get OK salary, and you can do consulting to increase it, but corporate money is *MUCH* better"
and the hot college chicks. You can't forget about the ladies.
"MS has been a monopoly for a long time. When a monopoly sets prices, they do it based on supply and demand (not competition). MS could have set the price of Office at $10"
Really? Is that why I can buy star office and download open office for free? How does this constitute a monopoly?