Did anyone ever think that Intel has been made the bitch of Rambus Inc? And that they may be trying to tell us what we already know?
Could Intel bring out a PC133 based mobo and show us that it's better? Why is the PC133 model number i815 and the Rambus model i820 when the i815 is NEWER than the i820 (AFAIK that is)... oh well.
I've always been paranoid about seraching for a name.. worried that something will register it seeing that I'm interested in it - much better and more accurate than dictionary searches... I have always crammed a few through that I was never interested in anyhow and used a local whois to see for registered names;P
Oh yeah, and it's okay in my books for the netsol company to recoup losses of its services if you (the owner of a domain) fail to pay on time (with a reasonable warning).
I think it really depends on WHEN you registered you domain name. If you registerd when they were an organization, then they have no buisness auctioning off the name - because they were simply the only people who did it, and it would be unfar as far as I'm concerned. If, however, you registered after netsol became a company and the whole thing was opened up, then they should have the right to recoup lost funds from any delinquant account (and any accounts made before they became a company would roll over when they are renewed).
I'm for this, and against it at the same time.
What should be done is put a rule that says that if you are buying an auction domain you MUST be buying it to actually use it - no squatting. This way, if I saw "mynick.com" open I could register it for my site and the original company couldn't say jack because they lost it and I am using it with a valid reason. I do not agree that squatting should be allowed or, intentionally buying a domain to sell it back to it original owner.
However, here's another way to look at it. If you are delinquant on your payments it shows that you really don't care about the domain name. Regardless, you are DELINQUANT in your account and netsol has FULL RIGHTS to recoup lost income by mitigating damages. They mitigate by doing the only thing possible - selling off your domain to recoup the costs.
Here's what I think they should do (and it's only my OPINION so no flames please)..
if an account becomes delinquant send an inital warning letter twice in a 30 day period (say, day 1 and day 15). After day 30, shut off the resolution of the name and send another warning. This would make it VERY obvious to the owner that something is up. After that (now 60 days) send 2 more warnings over a 30 day period as before (now a total of 90 days). After that, if the account is not paid they should sell the domain and use the monies to a) recoup the money for the delinquant account and b) pay for the new registration..
This is good people... Netsol is nolonger and organization and now a company with financial interests.. if ya don't like it, start your own;)
What is it? ATM or ABM? depends on the branch I guess.
I would be dead without the ATM... Man, it takes maybe 30 seconds to get in, do whatever, get out, I'm done. I really enjoy casually walking up to the machine, getting my cash, and crusing out... all the time eyeing the paranoid people who stand in line because they don't trust the machine.. muhahahahah.
Also, since I'm anti-social (as I'm sure most of you are too.. don't deny it...) it makes for another chance to avoid human contact. w00t. I don't know about you, but I have some great chats with the ATM thing...
And don't be calling it an ATM machine or ABM machine... Thats what the M is there for:P call it the ATM, AT Machine, or simply The Machine.. don't make yerself look dumber than you already are people;)
I'm in a programming course right now... well.. will be in about 6 hours... umm.. yeah...
Anyway, our instructor seems to favour Visual Basic over C++ and seems to know Java (accedently used typeof instead of typedef when writing an example program on the presentation screen). My problem is that I know this stuff so I either sleep through or not show up at class. It was the same last year too.. they get to the really interesting stuff near the END of the term, and just as it's getting good... its over...;(.
All programming students listen up. Take your text and flip to the chapters near the back -- the ones your instructor may not take you to. After the term is over, try some of the more difficult stuff for the heck of it - you'll be better off for it, especially if you have programming classes in subsequent terms. (I know it may not count for much, but since I started in this course I've written a huffman based compresser, wrote a simple programming language/interpreter, make a simple web-browser, all from scratch... from reading ahead)..
IMO, Java is no substitute for well written, portable, C++. Too bad my school is dropping C++ courses in favour of Java courses... sigh... time to choose another college I guess.
I was recently looking at an IBM Thinkpad model A20 (brand new - actually a demo system) and noticed that the windows serial number was on a sticker on the bottom of the machine. After seeing this posting it's pretty apparent that IBM is doing just what Dell is doing in the article. Then again, AFAIK, IBM has _always_ used product recovery cd's that are designed to work with a specific model (be it desktop, laptop, or whatever)... This is pretty much why I don't buy computers from these jerk-off companies.. If it comes time that I upgrade the system (keep the HD, maybe the floppy and cd drives, but replace the mobo - including the bios) I __have__ to buy Windows again, even if the old system ends up being un-useable (I have several ancient "part" machines, and imagine I'll have some more in the future).
Microsoft just gets suckier and suckier every day....
Okay, forget PnP, UPnP, whatever.. What we need is the ability to have universal drivers. I know it's probably been said a million times already, but untill such a beast arrives we will still be in the dark ages.
My thought of device independant drivers verges on the line of the idea behind Java. Every system has things that are in common with all other systems - something plugs into something else (be it a chipset, add-on card, etc) to make something happen (RNG on P2 mobos, sound card, video card, network card, etc). There would be a platform level loader that provides a common, standard interface to a higher-level driver. This driver would be directly portable across any platform for which there is a written loader.
Currently its like:
OS -> Driver -> Device
The OS talks to the driver and the driver controlls the device. The problem being that the Driver has to be in a language the OS can understand as well as the device.
Here's what I thought (maybe from reading simealr stuff)...
OS -> Loader -> Device | Driver
The loader is called by the OS and uses the instructions of the driver to control the device. The loader is essentially an interpreter for the code in the driver, and since the driver is independant of the OS a company can release ONE driver and hit Linux, BeOS, Windows, whatever... yes, providing that the OS provides an interface for this.
Is there something like this in the works? Linux would be a great place to piononeer a "universal device driver"... base it on Java, or make something new...
Bah, whatever;)
(if there is something like this I would be very interested in reading up on it)
I personally can not wait for the Mandrake Infomagic Caldera Redhat Openbsd Slackware Openlinux Freebsd Transmetta merger... heh.. that'll be a good one.. yup.. the MICROSOFT linux distro will 0wn j00!;) Bah.. Are free software groups turning into the very corporate image that they have shuned from the beginning? FSF people don't merge... we think of a GNU way and code-share... bah.. flame on..
When I said "they," I meant the lawyers, of course. You read too far into things man.
Yes, I don't think this case has a point. Why? Because it has NOTHING to do with DeCSS other than 2600 provided links to it. I guess rootshell better shutdown quick before someone sues them for hosting denial of service attacks. wooo.
All 2600 did was link to files. Hollywood doesn't like these files (ok, I can see where they are coming from and agree that DeCSS isn't the "best" thing out there) and demands that 2600 censor information. I applaud 2600 for standing up for our free speech.
Again, all that this lawsuit will prove in the end is that money buys censorship. If a company doesn't like something, shut the people up and keep their mouths closed with beurocratic red tape.
Yes, DeCSS could destroy DVD by making studios cautios about releasing big titles on DVD.
No, 2600 should not be responsable for a program that they linked to.
In the deposition, they point to meaningless issues of Mr. Schumann trying out DeCSS himself. They try to accuse him of pirating a movie when all he was guilty was of curiosity about some cryptography.
Whoops.. I guess its illegal to be curious or inquisitive in this world. I guess we should all shutup, fall in line, take a number, and fit into YOUR cookie cutter mould. Bah, not for me.
Lighten up. The CREATORS of DeCSS should be under lawsuit, not the people who were talking about it.
Page 25, starting at around line 17. They get into the definition of a "compressed" file and how he obtained it. Instead of understanding simply "I downloaded the program in a compressed archive, unpacked it and used it," they drag it out to this long winded borefest of who compressed it, how it was compressed, why it was compressed, how long it took to decompress, blah.. god.. it's all like that.. ugh.
4 Q. Well, tell me how you had it
5 compressed.
6 A. I didn't compress it. I received
7 it -- I would have received it, I believe,
8 compressed. I don't remember the details. It's a
9 standard technique, however.
They have the nerve to ask for his harddrive simply because he used DeCSS to see if it would work. It's irrevelant unless they wish to accuse him of stealing movies (like, if he copied lots of movies on his harddrive and ran a site.. that would be bad... but if was just examining DeCSS.. then gimme a break!)
Anyone who knows me will tell you I drink WAY too much coke... Way more than any human should, infact, thats probablly the root of all my problems... anyway, while I'm still on my cafene high, I'd like to say something... that car example is perfect. Hell yeah, get Ford running around to everyones homes suing them for trying to fix their Ford cars (bwhahahahahah)..
Seriously, thats really good. If these close-source companies made cars, your engine hood would be welded shut and the gaguges would be taped over. The only indication that there is a problem is when the damn thing breaks down and you're stranded on the side of the road ahead (that was intentional... hehe), calling out for help... but no one can help... only the people who run the company can help you, and you have no way of reaching them right now... why? because your cell phone was an 'integrated' communications feature of the car and, when the car broke down, it died with the car.
Now, back to my Coke thing. When I stop at a vending machine and plunk in my loonie (yup, it costs a buck for 255ml Coke.. is that good?) and it spits out a nice Cold refreshing Coke.. Umm.. sorry 'bout the ad... anyway, I open the can and slurp it down and give that trademarked "ahhhh" immediatly after. Now, Coke has licenced me a single beverage contaier containing several ingrediants listed on the side of the can. Inside of this can is a preformulated beverage that has been mass produced based on the instructions that their chemists came up with. Those chemists worked hard to create a beverage that, when consumed, would be satisfying and provide the ability for the government to control our minds... uhh.. forget that last part... yeah.. anyway, those chemists are much like software engineers (admittidly the chemists are probably a LOT cleaner and get sleep at night, but thats irrevelant) toil long hours to create a final product. And they, like programmers, artists, musicians, construction workers, etc, deserve to dictate how their product is sold.
The problem is, and this is where the DMCA and all that political shit comes in to play, what happens AFTER the sale? Most people would agree that when you plop down some hard earned cash for something, you OWN that item. You know that you don't OWN the Coke company, or the Ford company, or the Microsoft company, but you DO feel that you OWN that instance of their product.
Now, whos gonna stop me from making a small lab and taking apart Coke and creating a "clone" beverage using the ingrediants on the side? Heh, not a lot of people do this, and those who DO proballby do it just for themselves and family/friends. You're not gonna get far in live selling the "very simelar to Coke, but it isn't Coke, Coke."
I could easily download the current Linux kernel and a copy of Redhat, change all the logos and titles and copyrights and stuff, compile it, upload it and call it the MyOs 1.0... Now, after some people download it, they're gonna say "hey, this is just Redhat repackaged and fucked with." And HOW can they tell that? because every OS, every product, every person thinks differently and aims differently on their project. Their goals are different and their plans to reach that goal are different.
While the end result remains the same, the path that leads us there varies from person to person.
So that "I can't believe it's not Coke" drink of yours is obviously a clone of Coke because it tastes "just like Coke" and we all know that Coke came long before your Coke, just like Redhat came long before MyOs, and just like VMS came before NT. Whatever.
IMHO, Apple should have won against MS on terms of look-and-feel. Why? Because look and feel defines a product. It seperates the Coke from the Pepsi, the Sprite from the 7-up, the Mountin Dew from the Dr. Pepper, the Ford from the Crysler.
No matter how much a product is opened in terms of source code, ingrediant lists, product summaries, descriptions, patents, images, logos, slogans, whatever... that product is itself even in the copies of it. You can see the Linux in Redhat, much as you can see the MS-DOS in Windows 98. If DOS was made by a seperate company, you could easily see that Microsoft used it in Windows 98, even though it has been obfusticated with logo screens, thinly knit veils of tried old ways of sweeping things under the mat.
If companies are forced to open their software we will hit an end to all software development. No one will develop anything under fear that they might be accused of hiding something, keeping it back... hidden deep in the annels of unread documentation. Rather, companies should opt to do this because instead of having just clients, they now have developers. Developers who can pour invaluable insights and ideas back into the product - to help develop the software for their own needs and realizing that someone else might benifit from those additions and insights. It opens a new market place where someone else can market a widget for windows that upon startup it fires up an external Coke can opener so your programmers have extra Coke. Or implement new and exciting ideas that the origianl developer never thought of.
When will companies realize that open-source can be to their own advantage? Look at the game industry... Id software opened the game source to the Quake series and sunnenly a new market was spawned - modifications. Fans of the game could tweak things to their liking and expand the product to a new market place. More copies of the Quake series sell because it now has a much broader appeal - thanks to the openness of the game. Now think of an OS. We can add new system calls that help speed things up, or add accountability, or create a new widget for wackos, or whatever. Now think of a word processor, now an office suite, now a browser, now a database, now whatever.
Fortunatly, a lot of people do see the advantage and go with it.
W00t. thats it for me... My Coke high has expired and I'm too far from the vending machine to care..
Take care...
Oh yeah, by reading this submittion you agree to send me a $39.95CDN licence fee subject to my approval for each and every word contained herin. Failure to do so will be a copyright infringement of some sort and I'll be really pissed (not to mention poor).
Think about it.. the ONLY thing that is redeeming and good about this film is the fact that it ENDS.. (shudders).. It COULD have just kept going and going and going and.. well you get the idea..
My favourite book into movie flop was/is Dune... great film... too bad Universal fucked up on the distribution.
Don't you like instruction manuals that say something along the lines of: step 1) open the box, step 2) read manual.... Uhh.. the manual is INSIDE the box...
I know, instead of describing the product on the back of the box, print the fscking EULA... I'd rather know how yer gonna screw me than how the product supposedly works (which we ALL know that the back of the box is usually a bunch of shit).
I read the part about "backdoors" being put in software to remotely diable the software in the event of piracy? I think, and I don't think I'm alone here, that the rights of big business are startting to klobber the rights of the consumer.
When you buy a car, does the dealer keep a copy of your keys in case the car is stolen? I don't think so..
When you buy a book, is there a clause that says if you photocopy it the publish has the right to burn down your house (to ensure the destruction of the infringed copyrights).
Here's my problem as a programmer. I use tools like gcc, emacs, and even msvc.. Now, the latter of msvc could easily have a EULA (shrink-wrapped of course) that tells me I have to pay Microsoft a "fee" every time I release a program. Thats not so bad... What if Microsoft revokes my licence? Ahh.. The thousands of millions of dollars that my employer has spent to develop this project using those tools has been flushed down the toilet.
Don't get me wrong... In the above example there shouldn't be a problem unless there is grounds for revoktion... like.. oh.. gee.. lets say I work for Joes Software Conglomerate that recently pointed the finger at Microsoft during the trial. We _need_ that new patch/fix for msvc but it comes at the cost of accepting a new licence (click-wrap of course) and now being screwed every which way.
Sorry about the Microsoft reference.. they're so easy to blame now.. but if weird licencing issues come in to play we may face a beast worse than the one from Redmond...
Why cant the EULA just be simple and say something like:
1. Don't copy it without our permission 2. Don't tear it apart without our permission 3. Don't blame us if it fucks up..
ahhh.. see.. all that legalese to cover up the fact that A) they don't want to be responsable for their own product and B) they want YOU liable for anything and everything you do to/with/around it.
They want an escape clause to make buggy software, another one to take control of your system, and another to screw you out of business if you compete with 'em.
What if someone hax0rz it and uses it to disable computer software at will? Because of the EULA, the original compay is not responsable - it was a but.. whoops..
Corporate America has to stop blaming consumers... we are not the problem.. I don't claim to know what the problem is, but it's not me and don't make me pay for the actions of the few.
Whereas at one time, most everyone used non-free software such as Netscape for web browsing, acroread for PDF reading, or xv for graphic viewing, there are quality free replacements for all of these programs. Therefore, the rationale of "we need non-free for usable standard system" no longer applies.
Think about it and he's right. In fact, if we do away with the commercial software, even if gaps are left behind, we are better off becuase (hopefully, heh) someone will fill the gaps. As he mentioned, there is already a free alternative to the major components in the system.
I'm not against commercialism (oops, don't want to be flamed...) rather, I would prefer to get the code with the product. Maybe expunge all binary-only and source-so-obfusticated-it-may-as-well-<b>be</b>-bi nary-only code from the existance of ALL distributions. This should be the way I would like to see everyone go because it leads the way to more 'openness' in software.
What do we have to lose? Binary only packages. What do we have to gain? More open software, more code, more free beer.
Hey hey!
Off topic Matrix humor;
I need the code.... I need to recompile my kernel... And you have to tell me how... You're going to tell me, or you're going to grep/dev/random
I personally like seeing the inane, off topic, postings that ravage this board. I enjoy seeing copies of Slashdot's front page reposted within the forum... weird, but makes me chuckle a bit at the sheer idoicy of some people out there.
Then again, you often get really interesting posts by people you might not otherwise get an opinion from...
And then there are the people who will make up eighty-two syllable words just to make themselves look smart.. ah yes, the pseudo-intellects... the ones who bicker about the correct spelling of virui (my version... there are many like it, but this one is mine..). Who the FUCK cares?
I rather like some trolls more than some of the pseudo-intellects... though the truely insightful posts shine through..
Troll on boys..
What does this say about hurting customers
on
Microsoft Quickies
·
· Score: 1
I just got off my co-op from last term and I got to talking with others about network servers. Now, each of us were in places with high-demand networks running a mixed bag of NT, Unix, and (gasp) Linux (mostly Redhat... sigh). Now, we came to the consesus that follows:
1) The NT server goes down. Eh. We tell the users the NT server is down and wait until it's fixed. Usually this prevents people from accessing some printers and most fileshares - an inconvenance at best. Some mail is held back too, but everyone expects it.. hell, even that stereotypoical secretary just goes about as a routine daily event.
2) The UNIX/Linux server goes down (umm.. they go down?).. Call the fscking police, call out the IT army it's a disaster! You have IT people fevourshly running around despartly trying to get it back up. There's paper flying, people don't know what to do. Everyone is paniking and the users are getting irritated. Calls are coming in by the thousands and all hell breaks loose.. Then the server goes up and slowly things go back to normal.
Now, just anyone reading this may simply assume that the Unix server is more high maintenance thant the NT server right? nope. In fact, one of the Unix servers this guy worked with had an uptime of 8 years... 8 FUCKING YEARS! Apparently a UPS blew out and they turned it off to be safe because no replacement was handy. Thats right.. the Unix server came down because of something that was unrelated to the OS..
Now the NT server died because it got overloaded... Overloaded? it provides auxillary finctions to the Unix server and the NT box is technically superior to the Unix box (more ram, faster processor, much newer version, etc). I simply don't get these MCSE zealots that think NT is even NEAR ready for the enterprise. It's NOWHERE NEAR as good as ANYTHING ELSE. I'd rather base my network off a pair of TRS-80's than trust NT to add 1+1 and spit out an accurate result.
Bye bye MS.. You've hurt consumers with crappy products, bad support, and ruined competition. And Bill, don't let the door hit you on the way out:P
Re:There is no one to blame: It's fiction.
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
I agree with you 99.9% except for one major problem... what if ID goes away (I know I'm reaching here...) or any company that uses a central server for key-checks goes away? Doh! game no longer workable. Now we -hope- that a responsable company will release a patch that will turn off the feature but sometimes companies sink rather quickly (LGS!). What then?
I like the idea of codes. Battle.net and WON are the best examples of this in action - keycodes can actually ADD to the value with extra services and what not.
I _hate_ Asherons Call, UO, and EQ for the plain simple fact that you pay a recurring fee. I like Battle.net where you pay by looking at ads - I don't mind looking at an ad or two if I get something tangable, like a game server, in exchange.
I disagree that unsanctioned copying is not a threat to sales. It is a threat to sales.. go to www.isonews.com if you don't believe me. Why is it a threat more now than ever? because people have faster connections and game content isn't getting much larger (most are maxing out at 650MB with some titles going to multiple CD's). Its a threat to sales because people will download the free rip version first or even the whole ISO. This _is_ a debatable issue and not one that you can easily defend one way or another, but in my opinion, most warezerz are kids who don't have the money for software and older "kids" who don't want to pay for software. There is also the issue of price gouging (oddly enough this is to prevent people from pirating by charging more than people can pay... laughabale at best).
I remember the old days of an ad with a kid at a C64 playing away and a dirty old guy with a satchel of game disks. Like a drug dealer the guy pushes the grimy disks on the kid... the ad read something like "Do you know where your software has been?"...
Oh well.. ent rant.
Re:About Quake3's serial numbers....
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
It seems to me that keys are much nicer than the code wheels of the past. God those things were a nusance... and did THEY stop piracy? Nope. The server side keycheck is probably the best anti-piracy solution for the next few years (IMHO).
Crackers are still able to play single player (equivlant to masturbation in the online gaming world) and are prevented from enjoying the online experience..
Keep up the great work John, and good luck with Doom!
When I buy something its MINE
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
Physically its mine.. If i buy a Ford Mustang then that instance of the Mustang is MINE. I do not claim to own the "Ford Mustang", but that one is mine... there are many like it, but this one belongs to me.... Its mine... get it? (anyone wanna sell me a Mustang?)
It should be so with software and books. When I buy a book, that copy is mine... no one can take it back... no one can tell me I can't sell it at a garage sale. I have that right. With software, as long as I do not duplicate the software I should be within my rights to sell it off (even at a profit) modify it for personal use, or whatever else I feel like doing.
Just like AOL CD's.. If I wanna use 'em as a coaster or frisbee then I have the right to do so without AOL coming along and demanding I return the CD...
Its a good thing that Microsoft is on the way out otherwise I might have cared about that Windows aspect of things...
File sharing and downloading have slightly different meanings. If I simply download music (and even PAY for it) then I am not sharing anything. Sharing implies that when I download something from someone I then provide that content for someone else to access.
The pay-for-use services may want to preclude this and remove the sharing aspect of file sharing. Why pay for access to Napster (assuming they went fee-based) when openNap servers are widely available. Another point - if you pay for a service, you expect some sort of reliability. If a user disconnects then you loose the file and have to try again. Not an issue for broadband users, but it is an issue (resume downloads?). Quality Assurance is also another issue - how do I know if something is even WORTH downloading or sharing to others?
I have a bad feeling about paying money for the privelage of sharing content. I am not adverse to paying for music but I don't feel that I should have to pay to share something with others. For this reason alone I would never pay for a Napster-like service. Blah.
Why not have some sort of public reconition of the companies that DO open-source closed information - especially important components like video cards, SCSI adapters, network cards, etc.
I think it's important for companies to follow published standards. If the product follows a published standard, then at least minimal drivers could be produced without much effort - heck, one day we could have an OS that comes with the "standardized" driver code and then companies could release enhancement drivers. On the other hand, I personally don't like the idea of a "compatability list". I think it limits the vision of people writing new stuff. We need a "not-yet-compatable" list.;)
Excuse me? Least we forget that Paul Allen PORTED Basic from the mainframe to the Altair (and probably took this code verbatim and sold it to CBM). And DOS was QF86-DOS (or something like that) that Bill BOUGHT from someone else and hus gaggle of hacker friends developed. Windows has code which is LICENCED from Apple but one wonders why Bill worked on OS/2 before splitting all ties from IBM. Bill Gates is a shrewd buisness man and otherwise is an incompetitant MORON. Go read his responses in direct testimony at the USDOJ's site and see how dumb this moron is.
Slashdot Mirror
Did anyone ever think that Intel has been made the bitch of Rambus Inc? And that they may be trying to tell us what we already know?
Could Intel bring out a PC133 based mobo and show us that it's better? Why is the PC133 model number i815 and the Rambus model i820 when the i815 is NEWER than the i820 (AFAIK that is)... oh well.
Conspiracy theroists of the world unite!
I've always been paranoid about seraching for a name.. worried that something will register it seeing that I'm interested in it - much better and more accurate than dictionary searches... I have always crammed a few through that I was never interested in anyhow and used a local whois to see for registered names ;P
Oh yeah, and it's okay in my books for the netsol company to recoup losses of its services if you (the owner of a domain) fail to pay on time (with a reasonable warning).
I think it really depends on WHEN you registered you domain name. If you registerd when they were an organization, then they have no buisness auctioning off the name - because they were simply the only people who did it, and it would be unfar as far as I'm concerned. If, however, you registered after netsol became a company and the whole thing was opened up, then they should have the right to recoup lost funds from any delinquant account (and any accounts made before they became a company would roll over when they are renewed).
;)
I'm for this, and against it at the same time.
What should be done is put a rule that says that if you are buying an auction domain you MUST be buying it to actually use it - no squatting. This way, if I saw "mynick.com" open I could register it for my site and the original company couldn't say jack because they lost it and I am using it with a valid reason. I do not agree that squatting should be allowed or, intentionally buying a domain to sell it back to it original owner.
However, here's another way to look at it. If you are delinquant on your payments it shows that you really don't care about the domain name. Regardless, you are DELINQUANT in your account and netsol has FULL RIGHTS to recoup lost income by mitigating damages. They mitigate by doing the only thing possible - selling off your domain to recoup the costs.
Here's what I think they should do (and it's only my OPINION so no flames please)..
if an account becomes delinquant send an inital warning letter twice in a 30 day period (say, day 1 and day 15). After day 30, shut off the resolution of the name and send another warning. This would make it VERY obvious to the owner that something is up. After that (now 60 days) send 2 more warnings over a 30 day period as before (now a total of 90 days). After that, if the account is not paid they should sell the domain and use the monies to a) recoup the money for the delinquant account and b) pay for the new registration..
This is good people... Netsol is nolonger and organization and now a company with financial interests.. if ya don't like it, start your own
What is it? ATM or ABM? depends on the branch I guess.
:P call it the ATM, AT Machine, or simply The Machine.. don't make yerself look dumber than you already are people ;)
I would be dead without the ATM... Man, it takes maybe 30 seconds to get in, do whatever, get out, I'm done. I really enjoy casually walking up to the machine, getting my cash, and crusing out... all the time eyeing the paranoid people who stand in line because they don't trust the machine.. muhahahahah.
Also, since I'm anti-social (as I'm sure most of you are too.. don't deny it...) it makes for another chance to avoid human contact. w00t. I don't know about you, but I have some great chats with the ATM thing...
And don't be calling it an ATM machine or ABM machine... Thats what the M is there for
I'm in a programming course right now... well.. will be in about 6 hours... umm.. yeah...
;(.
Anyway, our instructor seems to favour Visual Basic over C++ and seems to know Java (accedently used typeof instead of typedef when writing an example program on the presentation screen). My problem is that I know this stuff so I either sleep through or not show up at class. It was the same last year too.. they get to the really interesting stuff near the END of the term, and just as it's getting good... its over...
All programming students listen up. Take your text and flip to the chapters near the back -- the ones your instructor may not take you to. After the term is over, try some of the more difficult stuff for the heck of it - you'll be better off for it, especially if you have programming classes in subsequent terms. (I know it may not count for much, but since I started in this course I've written a huffman based compresser, wrote a simple programming language/interpreter, make a simple web-browser, all from scratch... from reading ahead)..
IMO, Java is no substitute for well written, portable, C++. Too bad my school is dropping C++ courses in favour of Java courses... sigh... time to choose another college I guess.
I was recently looking at an IBM Thinkpad model A20 (brand new - actually a demo system) and noticed that the windows serial number was on a sticker on the bottom of the machine. After seeing this posting it's pretty apparent that IBM is doing just what Dell is doing in the article. Then again, AFAIK, IBM has _always_ used product recovery cd's that are designed to work with a specific model (be it desktop, laptop, or whatever)... This is pretty much why I don't buy computers from these jerk-off companies.. If it comes time that I upgrade the system (keep the HD, maybe the floppy and cd drives, but replace the mobo - including the bios) I __have__ to buy Windows again, even if the old system ends up being un-useable (I have several ancient "part" machines, and imagine I'll have some more in the future).
Microsoft just gets suckier and suckier every day....
Platform independance.
;)
Okay, forget PnP, UPnP, whatever.. What we need is the ability to have universal drivers. I know it's probably been said a million times already, but untill such a beast arrives we will still be in the dark ages.
My thought of device independant drivers verges on the line of the idea behind Java. Every system has things that are in common with all other systems - something plugs into something else (be it a chipset, add-on card, etc) to make something happen (RNG on P2 mobos, sound card, video card, network card, etc). There would be a platform level loader that provides a common, standard interface to a higher-level driver. This driver would be directly portable across any platform for which there is a written loader.
Currently its like:
OS -> Driver -> Device
The OS talks to the driver and the driver controlls the device. The problem being that the Driver has to be in a language the OS can understand as well as the device.
Here's what I thought (maybe from reading simealr stuff)...
OS -> Loader -> Device
|
Driver
The loader is called by the OS and uses the instructions of the driver to control the device. The loader is essentially an interpreter for the code in the driver, and since the driver is independant of the OS a company can release ONE driver and hit Linux, BeOS, Windows, whatever... yes, providing that the OS provides an interface for this.
Is there something like this in the works? Linux would be a great place to piononeer a "universal device driver"... base it on Java, or make something new...
Bah, whatever
(if there is something like this I would be very interested in reading up on it)
I personally can not wait for the Mandrake Infomagic Caldera Redhat Openbsd Slackware Openlinux Freebsd Transmetta merger... heh.. that'll be a good one.. yup.. the MICROSOFT linux distro will 0wn j00! ;) Bah.. Are free software groups turning into the very corporate image that they have shuned from the beginning? FSF people don't merge... we think of a GNU way and code-share... bah.. flame on..
When I said "they," I meant the lawyers, of course. You read too far into things man.
Yes, I don't think this case has a point. Why? Because it has NOTHING to do with DeCSS other than 2600 provided links to it. I guess rootshell better shutdown quick before someone sues them for hosting denial of service attacks. wooo.
All 2600 did was link to files. Hollywood doesn't like these files (ok, I can see where they are coming from and agree that DeCSS isn't the "best" thing out there) and demands that 2600 censor information. I applaud 2600 for standing up for our free speech.
Again, all that this lawsuit will prove in the end is that money buys censorship. If a company doesn't like something, shut the people up and keep their mouths closed with beurocratic red tape.
Yes, DeCSS could destroy DVD by making studios cautios about releasing big titles on DVD.
No, 2600 should not be responsable for a program that they linked to.
In the deposition, they point to meaningless issues of Mr. Schumann trying out DeCSS himself. They try to accuse him of pirating a movie when all he was guilty was of curiosity about some cryptography.
Whoops.. I guess its illegal to be curious or inquisitive in this world. I guess we should all shutup, fall in line, take a number, and fit into YOUR cookie cutter mould. Bah, not for me.
Lighten up. The CREATORS of DeCSS should be under lawsuit, not the people who were talking about it.
Page 25, starting at around line 17. They get into the definition of a "compressed" file and how he obtained it. Instead of understanding simply "I downloaded the program in a compressed archive, unpacked it and used it," they drag it out to this long winded borefest of who compressed it, how it was compressed, why it was compressed, how long it took to decompress, blah.. god.. it's all like that.. ugh.
4 Q. Well, tell me how you had it
5 compressed.
6 A. I didn't compress it. I received
7 it -- I would have received it, I believe,
8 compressed. I don't remember the details. It's a
9 standard technique, however.
They have the nerve to ask for his harddrive simply because he used DeCSS to see if it would work. It's irrevelant unless they wish to accuse him of stealing movies (like, if he copied lots of movies on his harddrive and ran a site.. that would be bad... but if was just examining DeCSS.. then gimme a break!)
Anyone who knows me will tell you I drink WAY too much coke... Way more than any human should, infact, thats probablly the root of all my problems... anyway, while I'm still on my cafene high, I'd like to say something... that car example is perfect. Hell yeah, get Ford running around to everyones homes suing them for trying to fix their Ford cars (bwhahahahahah)..
Seriously, thats really good. If these close-source companies made cars, your engine hood would be welded shut and the gaguges would be taped over. The only indication that there is a problem is when the damn thing breaks down and you're stranded on the side of the road ahead (that was intentional... hehe), calling out for help... but no one can help... only the people who run the company can help you, and you have no way of reaching them right now... why? because your cell phone was an 'integrated' communications feature of the car and, when the car broke down, it died with the car.
Now, back to my Coke thing. When I stop at a vending machine and plunk in my loonie (yup, it costs a buck for 255ml Coke.. is that good?) and it spits out a nice Cold refreshing Coke.. Umm.. sorry 'bout the ad... anyway, I open the can and slurp it down and give that trademarked "ahhhh" immediatly after. Now, Coke has licenced me a single beverage contaier containing several ingrediants listed on the side of the can. Inside of this can is a preformulated beverage that has been mass produced based on the instructions that their chemists came up with. Those chemists worked hard to create a beverage that, when consumed, would be satisfying and provide the ability for the government to control our minds... uhh.. forget that last part... yeah.. anyway, those chemists are much like software engineers (admittidly the chemists are probably a LOT cleaner and get sleep at night, but thats irrevelant) toil long hours to create a final product. And they, like programmers, artists, musicians, construction workers, etc, deserve to dictate how their product is sold.
The problem is, and this is where the DMCA and all that political shit comes in to play, what happens AFTER the sale? Most people would agree that when you plop down some hard earned cash for something, you OWN that item. You know that you don't OWN the Coke company, or the Ford company, or the Microsoft company, but you DO feel that you OWN that instance of their product.
Now, whos gonna stop me from making a small lab and taking apart Coke and creating a "clone" beverage using the ingrediants on the side? Heh, not a lot of people do this, and those who DO proballby do it just for themselves and family/friends. You're not gonna get far in live selling the "very simelar to Coke, but it isn't Coke, Coke."
I could easily download the current Linux kernel and a copy of Redhat, change all the logos and titles and copyrights and stuff, compile it, upload it and call it the MyOs 1.0... Now, after some people download it, they're gonna say "hey, this is just Redhat repackaged and fucked with." And HOW can they tell that? because every OS, every product, every person thinks differently and aims differently on their project. Their goals are different and their plans to reach that goal are different.
While the end result remains the same, the path that leads us there varies from person to person.
So that "I can't believe it's not Coke" drink of yours is obviously a clone of Coke because it tastes "just like Coke" and we all know that Coke came long before your Coke, just like Redhat came long before MyOs, and just like VMS came before NT. Whatever.
IMHO, Apple should have won against MS on terms of look-and-feel. Why? Because look and feel defines a product. It seperates the Coke from the Pepsi, the Sprite from the 7-up, the Mountin Dew from the Dr. Pepper, the Ford from the Crysler.
No matter how much a product is opened in terms of source code, ingrediant lists, product summaries, descriptions, patents, images, logos, slogans, whatever... that product is itself even in the copies of it. You can see the Linux in Redhat, much as you can see the MS-DOS in Windows 98. If DOS was made by a seperate company, you could easily see that Microsoft used it in Windows 98, even though it has been obfusticated with logo screens, thinly knit veils of tried old ways of sweeping things under the mat.
If companies are forced to open their software we will hit an end to all software development. No one will develop anything under fear that they might be accused of hiding something, keeping it back... hidden deep in the annels of unread documentation. Rather, companies should opt to do this because instead of having just clients, they now have developers. Developers who can pour invaluable insights and ideas back into the product - to help develop the software for their own needs and realizing that someone else might benifit from those additions and insights. It opens a new market place where someone else can market a widget for windows that upon startup it fires up an external Coke can opener so your programmers have extra Coke. Or implement new and exciting ideas that the origianl developer never thought of.
When will companies realize that open-source can be to their own advantage? Look at the game industry... Id software opened the game source to the Quake series and sunnenly a new market was spawned - modifications. Fans of the game could tweak things to their liking and expand the product to a new market place. More copies of the Quake series sell because it now has a much broader appeal - thanks to the openness of the game. Now think of an OS. We can add new system calls that help speed things up, or add accountability, or create a new widget for wackos, or whatever. Now think of a word processor, now an office suite, now a browser, now a database, now whatever.
Fortunatly, a lot of people do see the advantage and go with it.
W00t. thats it for me... My Coke high has expired and I'm too far from the vending machine to care..
Take care...
Oh yeah, by reading this submittion you agree to send me a $39.95CDN licence fee subject to my approval for each and every word contained herin. Failure to do so will be a copyright infringement of some sort and I'll be really pissed (not to mention poor).
Think about it.. the ONLY thing that is redeeming and good about this film is the fact that it ENDS.. (shudders).. It COULD have just kept going and going and going and.. well you get the idea..
My favourite book into movie flop was/is Dune... great film... too bad Universal fucked up on the distribution.
Don't you like instruction manuals that say something along the lines of: step 1) open the box, step 2) read manual.... Uhh.. the manual is INSIDE the box...
I know, instead of describing the product on the back of the box, print the fscking EULA... I'd rather know how yer gonna screw me than how the product supposedly works (which we ALL know that the back of the box is usually a bunch of shit).
I read the part about "backdoors" being put in software to remotely diable the software in the event of piracy? I think, and I don't think I'm alone here, that the rights of big business are startting to klobber the rights of the consumer.
When you buy a car, does the dealer keep a copy of your keys in case the car is stolen? I don't think so..
When you buy a book, is there a clause that says if you photocopy it the publish has the right to burn down your house (to ensure the destruction of the infringed copyrights).
Here's my problem as a programmer. I use tools like gcc, emacs, and even msvc.. Now, the latter of msvc could easily have a EULA (shrink-wrapped of course) that tells me I have to pay Microsoft a "fee" every time I release a program. Thats not so bad... What if Microsoft revokes my licence? Ahh.. The thousands of millions of dollars that my employer has spent to develop this project using those tools has been flushed down the toilet.
Don't get me wrong... In the above example there shouldn't be a problem unless there is grounds for revoktion... like.. oh.. gee.. lets say I work for Joes Software Conglomerate that recently pointed the finger at Microsoft during the trial. We _need_ that new patch/fix for msvc but it comes at the cost of accepting a new licence (click-wrap of course) and now being screwed every which way.
Sorry about the Microsoft reference.. they're so easy to blame now.. but if weird licencing issues come in to play we may face a beast worse than the one from Redmond...
Why cant the EULA just be simple and say something like:
1. Don't copy it without our permission
2. Don't tear it apart without our permission
3. Don't blame us if it fucks up..
ahhh.. see.. all that legalese to cover up the fact that A) they don't want to be responsable for their own product and B) they want YOU liable for anything and everything you do to/with/around it.
They want an escape clause to make buggy software, another one to take control of your system, and another to screw you out of business if you compete with 'em.
What if someone hax0rz it and uses it to disable computer software at will? Because of the EULA, the original compay is not responsable - it was a but.. whoops..
Corporate America has to stop blaming consumers... we are not the problem.. I don't claim to know what the problem is, but it's not me and don't make me pay for the actions of the few.
/rant
Think about it and he's right. In fact, if we do away with the commercial software, even if gaps are left behind, we are better off becuase (hopefully, heh) someone will fill the gaps. As he mentioned, there is already a free alternative to the major components in the system.
I'm not against commercialism (oops, don't want to be flamed...) rather, I would prefer to get the code with the product. Maybe expunge all binary-only and source-so-obfusticated-it-may-as-well-<b>be</b>-b
What do we have to lose? Binary only packages.
What do we have to gain? More open software, more code, more free beer.
Hey hey!
Off topic Matrix humor;
I need the code....
I need to recompile my kernel...
And you have to tell me how...
You're going to tell me, or you're going to grep
I personally like seeing the inane, off topic, postings that ravage this board. I enjoy seeing copies of Slashdot's front page reposted within the forum... weird, but makes me chuckle a bit at the sheer idoicy of some people out there.
Then again, you often get really interesting posts by people you might not otherwise get an opinion from...
And then there are the people who will make up eighty-two syllable words just to make themselves look smart.. ah yes, the pseudo-intellects... the ones who bicker about the correct spelling of virui (my version... there are many like it, but this one is mine..). Who the FUCK cares?
I rather like some trolls more than some of the pseudo-intellects... though the truely insightful posts shine through..
Troll on boys..
I just got off my co-op from last term and I got to talking with others about network servers. Now, each of us were in places with high-demand networks running a mixed bag of NT, Unix, and (gasp) Linux (mostly Redhat... sigh). Now, we came to the consesus that follows:
:P
1) The NT server goes down. Eh. We tell the users the NT server is down and wait until it's fixed. Usually this prevents people from accessing some printers and most fileshares - an inconvenance at best. Some mail is held back too, but everyone expects it.. hell, even that stereotypoical secretary just goes about as a routine daily event.
2) The UNIX/Linux server goes down (umm.. they go down?).. Call the fscking police, call out the IT army it's a disaster! You have IT people fevourshly running around despartly trying to get it back up. There's paper flying, people don't know what to do. Everyone is paniking and the users are getting irritated. Calls are coming in by the thousands and all hell breaks loose.. Then the server goes up and slowly things go back to normal.
Now, just anyone reading this may simply assume that the Unix server is more high maintenance thant the NT server right? nope. In fact, one of the Unix servers this guy worked with had an uptime of 8 years... 8 FUCKING YEARS! Apparently a UPS blew out and they turned it off to be safe because no replacement was handy. Thats right.. the Unix server came down because of something that was unrelated to the OS..
Now the NT server died because it got overloaded... Overloaded? it provides auxillary finctions to the Unix server and the NT box is technically superior to the Unix box (more ram, faster processor, much newer version, etc). I simply don't get these MCSE zealots that think NT is even NEAR ready for the enterprise. It's NOWHERE NEAR as good as ANYTHING ELSE. I'd rather base my network off a pair of TRS-80's than trust NT to add 1+1 and spit out an accurate result.
Bye bye MS.. You've hurt consumers with crappy products, bad support, and ruined competition. And Bill, don't let the door hit you on the way out
I agree with you 99.9% except for one major problem... what if ID goes away (I know I'm reaching here...) or any company that uses a central server for key-checks goes away? Doh! game no longer workable. Now we -hope- that a responsable company will release a patch that will turn off the feature but sometimes companies sink rather quickly (LGS!). What then?
I like the idea of codes. Battle.net and WON are the best examples of this in action - keycodes can actually ADD to the value with extra services and what not.
I _hate_ Asherons Call, UO, and EQ for the plain simple fact that you pay a recurring fee. I like Battle.net where you pay by looking at ads - I don't mind looking at an ad or two if I get something tangable, like a game server, in exchange.
I disagree that unsanctioned copying is not a threat to sales. It is a threat to sales.. go to www.isonews.com if you don't believe me. Why is it a threat more now than ever? because people have faster connections and game content isn't getting much larger (most are maxing out at 650MB with some titles going to multiple CD's). Its a threat to sales because people will download the free rip version first or even the whole ISO. This _is_ a debatable issue and not one that you can easily defend one way or another, but in my opinion, most warezerz are kids who don't have the money for software and older "kids" who don't want to pay for software. There is also the issue of price gouging (oddly enough this is to prevent people from pirating by charging more than people can pay... laughabale at best).
I remember the old days of an ad with a kid at a C64 playing away and a dirty old guy with a satchel of game disks. Like a drug dealer the guy pushes the grimy disks on the kid... the ad read something like "Do you know where your software has been?"...
Oh well.. ent rant.
It seems to me that keys are much nicer than the code wheels of the past. God those things were a nusance... and did THEY stop piracy? Nope. The server side keycheck is probably the best anti-piracy solution for the next few years (IMHO).
Crackers are still able to play single player (equivlant to masturbation in the online gaming world) and are prevented from enjoying the online experience..
Keep up the great work John, and good luck with Doom!
Physically its mine.. If i buy a Ford Mustang then that instance of the Mustang is MINE. I do not claim to own the "Ford Mustang", but that one is mine... there are many like it, but this one belongs to me.... Its mine... get it? (anyone wanna sell me a Mustang?)
It should be so with software and books. When I buy a book, that copy is mine... no one can take it back... no one can tell me I can't sell it at a garage sale. I have that right. With software, as long as I do not duplicate the software I should be within my rights to sell it off (even at a profit) modify it for personal use, or whatever else I feel like doing.
Just like AOL CD's.. If I wanna use 'em as a coaster or frisbee then I have the right to do so without AOL coming along and demanding I return the CD...
Its a good thing that Microsoft is on the way out otherwise I might have cared about that Windows aspect of things...
File sharing and downloading have slightly different meanings. If I simply download music (and even PAY for it) then I am not sharing anything. Sharing implies that when I download something from someone I then provide that content for someone else to access.
The pay-for-use services may want to preclude this and remove the sharing aspect of file sharing. Why pay for access to Napster (assuming they went fee-based) when openNap servers are widely available. Another point - if you pay for a service, you expect some sort of reliability. If a user disconnects then you loose the file and have to try again. Not an issue for broadband users, but it is an issue (resume downloads?). Quality Assurance is also another issue - how do I know if something is even WORTH downloading or sharing to others?
I have a bad feeling about paying money for the privelage of sharing content. I am not adverse to paying for music but I don't feel that I should have to pay to share something with others. For this reason alone I would never pay for a Napster-like service. Blah.
My problem, not yours.. flame on..
I think it's important for companies to follow published standards. If the product follows a published standard, then at least minimal drivers could be produced without much effort - heck, one day we could have an OS that comes with the "standardized" driver code and then companies could release enhancement drivers. On the other hand, I personally don't like the idea of a "compatability list". I think it limits the vision of people writing new stuff. We need a "not-yet-compatable" list. ;)
and I have the install disks to prove it :P
Excuse me? Least we forget that Paul Allen PORTED Basic from the mainframe to the Altair (and probably took this code verbatim and sold it to CBM). And DOS was QF86-DOS (or something like that) that Bill BOUGHT from someone else and hus gaggle of hacker friends developed. Windows has code which is LICENCED from Apple but one wonders why Bill worked on OS/2 before splitting all ties from IBM. Bill Gates is a shrewd buisness man and otherwise is an incompetitant MORON. Go read his responses in direct testimony at the USDOJ's site and see how dumb this moron is.