No, you see, Sony is claiming that the rootkit was defective in that it was discovered in the first place. A non-defective rootkit would never have been discovered.
And with kids you want the original in a safe place so you can make another copy when the first copy is scratched beyond recognition. I just rent DVDs from the locally-owned video store. Only about 1 in 50 movies I ever watch again years later. I tried buying a few DVDs years ago but just don't want to watch them again. With all the new movies out there, there's little reason to re-watch. Now with music, it's different, since one can listen to it all day, and enjoy hearing the same song many times. I still don't grasp why people have 100+ DVD collections.
If you can increase sales by 50% by simply recoding an existing product then go for it. Note: I'm a software developer and I know very well that's not as easy as it sounds.
It's easier if you plan ahead and avoid using unique features of a particular console (at least in your core architecture). This of course makes it even worse for Sony, since it discourages use of the Cell units except for minor aspects of a game.
That's the thing, this $200 sweet spot apparently doesn't psychologically adjust itself to inflation. So you can't get away with arguing "Yeah, $500 seems like a lot, but if you adjust for inflation, it's like you're getting a console that costed $200 many years ago. We're sure our logic will overcome your psychology without difficulty!" Except that electronics goods are constantly getting cheaper, so we expect them to cost the same or less in the future, using whatever the current dollar is.
True, it's not completely hidden, but they don't document the file format and forbid reverse-engineering for the purpose of making a compatible compressor. Still kind of funny, given that 7-zip exists, with its solid LZMA compression (which I believe is not proprietary in any way).
"Alexander Ratushnyak's open-sourced GPL program is called paq8hp12 (link to paq8hp12any.rar)."
Funny that the GPLed source code is stored in a proprietary compression format for which there isn't any GPLed decompressor (that I know of which handles the latest RAR format).
Holographic is a synonym for vaporware in the storage industry. (to the companies) No, don't tell me about your new technology that might result in greater storage; tell me about something already shipping.
But they will be shielded by shifting the blame to the company that produced the robot, or others who also took part in the decision. Like with electronic "voting" machines in the U.S., the failure will take years to correct, if at all.
"If I'm trying to break into some code, and I can read the source code to determine how the author protected it, I'll have an easier job (note: "easier", not "easy") because I can home in on the algorithm the author used."
This is why open source software is more secure, not less: since anyone can easily break half-assed security schemes, you don't employ them. On the other hand if a piece of closed-source software was suddenly made open-source, then the above would be a reason for it to become less secure.
"Surprisingly as it may seem, there are A LOT of people who do use the Internet and still do not know about GMail."
Tell me about it! I set up my father with a gmail account and I hear him spelling it out over the phone quite often. I'm like "hasn't everyone heard of gmail.com by now?!?"
Another often-ignored requirement of the LGPL is that the end-user must be able to re-link your program with a newer version of the LGPL library (assuming the API didn't change significantly). This requires that the program either dynamically link to the LGPL library (built as a DLL), or that the program's full source/object code be made available to the end-user. Sections 5 and 6 of the LGPL 2.1 spell it out pretty clearly:
5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.
However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library". The executable is therefore covered by this License. Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables.
[...]
6. As an exception to the Sections above, you may also combine or link a "work that uses the Library" with the Library to produce a work containing portions of the Library, and distribute that work under terms of your choice, provided that the terms permit modification of the work for the customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications.
[...] Also, you must do one of these things:
* a) Accompany the work with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code for the Library including whatever changes were used in the work (which must be distributed under Sections 1 and 2 above); and, if the work is an executable linked with the Library, with the complete machine-readable "work that uses the Library", as object code and/or source code, so that the user can modify the Library and then relink to produce a modified executable containing the modified Library. (It is understood that the user who changes the contents of definitions files in the Library will not necessarily be able to recompile the application to use the modified definitions.)
* b) Use a suitable shared library mechanism for linking with the Library. A suitable mechanism is one that (1) uses at run time a copy of the library already present on the user's computer system, rather than copying library functions into the executable, and (2) will operate properly with a modified version of the library, if the user installs one, as long as the modified version is interface-compatible with the version that the work was made with.
Always remember to call it Digital Restrictions Management, since that's what it actually does. In most cases the restrictions aren't there to protect anyone's right, just their greed.
"For a benefit of perhaps 1% of the value of the transaction, people are glad to give away their private information."
As long as they don't mind thinking I'm Michael Jackson and oddly have the same phone number as the grocery store itself, I'm glad to give away "my" private information.
Still could be electrical. Maybe the Xbox 360 is less tolerant of power glitches, or the times of day he uses it are different than for the other devices. Or perhaps it's the only electronic device he uses that has a long cord to a controller that he sits on a static electricity-prone couch or something. Sucks to be him, regardless of the cause.
The experiment is confused. Are the evaluators supposed to do their own research on the products, or respond with their trusted search engine? If the former, they shouldn't care what the raw data is from. If the latter, then it's not just branding, since each company is different and the point of trusting a company is that you accept their results without scrutiny (at least, with less); after all, what's the purpose of using their services if you feel you have to verify everything yourself anyway?
They're already forwarding them! Here's a copy of the letter I received:
Dear Sir/Madam,
Please contact us to verify that your PC/Mac/Linux/other computer has been used to illegally download copyrighted music. Be sure to include your full name, address, and a list of what you have downloaded, so that we can be sure we don't sue you for things you didn't download. If you don't reply with this information we'll double the amount we're suing for!!
Slashdot Mirror
'Nuff said.
No, you see, Sony is claiming that the rootkit was defective in that it was discovered in the first place. A non-defective rootkit would never have been discovered.
And with kids you want the original in a safe place so you can make another copy when the first copy is scratched beyond recognition. I just rent DVDs from the locally-owned video store. Only about 1 in 50 movies I ever watch again years later. I tried buying a few DVDs years ago but just don't want to watch them again. With all the new movies out there, there's little reason to re-watch. Now with music, it's different, since one can listen to it all day, and enjoy hearing the same song many times. I still don't grasp why people have 100+ DVD collections.
It's easier if you plan ahead and avoid using unique features of a particular console (at least in your core architecture). This of course makes it even worse for Sony, since it discourages use of the Cell units except for minor aspects of a game.
That's the thing, this $200 sweet spot apparently doesn't psychologically adjust itself to inflation. So you can't get away with arguing "Yeah, $500 seems like a lot, but if you adjust for inflation, it's like you're getting a console that costed $200 many years ago. We're sure our logic will overcome your psychology without difficulty!" Except that electronics goods are constantly getting cheaper, so we expect them to cost the same or less in the future, using whatever the current dollar is.
True, it's not completely hidden, but they don't document the file format and forbid reverse-engineering for the purpose of making a compatible compressor. Still kind of funny, given that 7-zip exists, with its solid LZMA compression (which I believe is not proprietary in any way).
You could compress your post by not using so many one-sentence paragraphs.
"Alexander Ratushnyak's open-sourced GPL program is called paq8hp12 (link to paq8hp12any.rar)."
Funny that the GPLed source code is stored in a proprietary compression format for which there isn't any GPLed decompressor (that I know of which handles the latest RAR format).
Holographic is a synonym for vaporware in the storage industry. (to the companies) No, don't tell me about your new technology that might result in greater storage; tell me about something already shipping.
But they will be shielded by shifting the blame to the company that produced the robot, or others who also took part in the decision. Like with electronic "voting" machines in the U.S., the failure will take years to correct, if at all.
"People should stick to completely avoiding movies that suck, so they won't have to waste money or time."
There, corrected that for you.
"If I'm trying to break into some code, and I can read the source code to determine how the author protected it, I'll have an easier job (note: "easier", not "easy") because I can home in on the algorithm the author used."
This is why open source software is more secure, not less: since anyone can easily break half-assed security schemes, you don't employ them. On the other hand if a piece of closed-source software was suddenly made open-source, then the above would be a reason for it to become less secure.
Good thing there won't be any discussion of the iPhone for this article. No siree, no mention of the iPhone.
"Surprisingly as it may seem, there are A LOT of people who do use the Internet and still do not know about GMail."
Tell me about it! I set up my father with a gmail account and I hear him spelling it out over the phone quite often. I'm like "hasn't everyone heard of gmail.com by now?!?"
Wait, you're saying that these TV shows are fiction and aren't actual worlds that I'm missing out on if I don't watch?
(been TV-free for about 6 years now and haven't missed a thing)
Fucking wow. Just wow.
Always remember to call it Digital Restrictions Management, since that's what it actually does. In most cases the restrictions aren't there to protect anyone's right, just their greed.
I'm sorry, you need to turn in your "human" card. You can't go questioning our dogmatic knowledge that we know everything and aren't missing anything.
(seriously, good question)
"For a benefit of perhaps 1% of the value of the transaction, people are glad to give away their private information."
As long as they don't mind thinking I'm Michael Jackson and oddly have the same phone number as the grocery store itself, I'm glad to give away "my" private information.
It'll only be truely accurate when they simulate the simulator on itself, recursively.
Tune in next time to see if future articles end with a cliffhanger...
Still could be electrical. Maybe the Xbox 360 is less tolerant of power glitches, or the times of day he uses it are different than for the other devices. Or perhaps it's the only electronic device he uses that has a long cord to a controller that he sits on a static electricity-prone couch or something. Sucks to be him, regardless of the cause.
The experiment is confused. Are the evaluators supposed to do their own research on the products, or respond with their trusted search engine? If the former, they shouldn't care what the raw data is from. If the latter, then it's not just branding, since each company is different and the point of trusting a company is that you accept their results without scrutiny (at least, with less); after all, what's the purpose of using their services if you feel you have to verify everything yourself anyway?
They're already forwarding them! Here's a copy of the letter I received:
Dear Sir/Madam,
Please contact us to verify that your PC/Mac/Linux/other computer has been used to illegally download copyrighted music. Be sure to include your full name, address, and a list of what you have downloaded, so that we can be sure we don't sue you for things you didn't download. If you don't reply with this information we'll double the amount we're suing for!!
Thanks,
MAFIAA