QUOTE: "Ed Owens began voicing concerns about the security of these containers and that every other officer within the Department might be at risk. As a result, he was subsequently fired after fifteen months for allegedly violating department policies."
Oh yeah. Hide the problem instead of facing it head-on and dealing with it. Damn politicians.
>>>not buy Apple products to show them we disapprove of their actions
No problem. Apple gadgets cost 2 times more. Not just Macs (see my sig) but phones too. My ISP VirginMobile is selling the non-apple phone with equivalent function at a mere $200. The iphone 4S for $650..... 3 times more. (Meanwhile the HTC Evo4 with enhanced 4G; larger screen is only $300.)
Most things cost half of Apple. Not just Macs (see my sig) but phones too. My ISP VirginMobile is selling the iphone 4S for $650, if I recall correctly. The non-apple phone with equivalent function is a mere $200..... 1/3rd the cost. The HTC Evo4 with enhanced functionality (4G; larger screen) is $300.
The average consumer has 8,000 in credit card debt and are therefore really stupid. I do not follow their example of overspending for products I don't need, especially when I can get the same product for much les ($5 cellphone, $15 internet, $23 Dish TV, $15,000 Civic, et cetera).
>>>and so does the competition, which is selling products at the same price as Apple.
>>>Apple does not charge for the equivalent of service packs.
The now-annual updates from 0.6 to 0.7 to 0.8 are equivalent to Microsoft's service packs. Difference is MS provides those major OS upgrades for free, while Apple charges.
The Apple +0.0.1 updates that are free are equivalent to Microsoft's nightly updates/bugfixes. When Apple jumped from OS 8 to OS 9 to OS X that was equivalent to Microsoft's moves from 95 to 98 to XP.
And all of this doesn't matter. As my sig shows Apple's simply cost too damn much, right from the start:
It's Windows 7. The guy's probably not allowed to install it.
I keep all my stuff in a "personal" folder so when the time comes for me to leave I just drag the folder to my USB: drive and then delete it from the computer. Technically the IT guys could undelete and recover, but it's doubtful they would. More likely they just reinstall the whole OS for the next guy.
My browsers are Opera and Chrome portable. When I delete the personal folder, they disappear too. Not that it really matters; the proxy server has a record of every place I've ever visited. (There is no privacy on a work computer.)
That's a nice 3-page essay your wrote (if it was double-spaced), but it doesn't change the fact Canonical and Redhat were forced to buy a license *from Microsoft* or else their OSes would not run.
That is called restraint-of-trade and it is VERY clearly a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. As I stated MS already got in trouble with the EU merely for giving-away Explorer for free & thereby gaining an unfair advantage over Opera/Google/other browsers..... now they are actively blocking other OSes from Opera/Google/other OSes from running (unless they beg MS for a license). I expect the EU to slap them down again
Now here's an essay for you to read..... written by the Free Software Foundation: (snip)
In theory, there should be no problem. In practice, the situation is more complicated. As currently proposed, Secure Boot impedes free software adoption. It is already bad enough that nearly all computers sold come with Microsoft Windows pre-installed. In order to convince users to try free software, we must convince them to remove the operating system that came on their computers (or to divide their hard drives and make room for a new system, perceptually risking their data in the process).
With Secure Boot, new free software users must take an additional step to install free software operating systems. Because these operating systems do not have keys stored in every computer's firmware by default like Microsoft does, users will have to disable Secure Boot before booting the new system's installer. Proprietary software companies may present this requirement under the guise of "disable security on your computer," which will mislead new users into thinking free software is insecure.
Without a doubt, this is an obstacle we don't need right now, and it is highly questionable that the security gains realized from Secure Boot outweigh the difficulties it will cause in practice for users trying to actually provide for their own security by escaping Microsoft Windows.
It's also a problem because the Windows 8 Logo program currently mandates Restricted Boot on all ARM systems, which includes popular computer types like tablets and phones. It says that users must not be able to disable the boot restrictions or use their own signing keys. In addition to being unacceptable in its own right, this requirement was a reversal from Microsoft's initial public position, which claimed that the Windows 8 program would not block other operating systems from being installed. With this deception, Microsoft has demonstrated that they can't be trusted. While we are interpreting their current guidelines, we must keep in mind that they could change their mind again in the future and expand the ARM restrictions to more kinds of systems.
The best way out of all of this (other than having all computers come pre-installed with free software) would be for free software operating systems to also be installable by default on any computer, without needing to disable Secure Boot. In the last few weeks, we've seen two major GNU/Linux distributions, Fedora and Ubuntu, sketch out two different paths in an attempt to achieve this goal.
Fedora's approach
There is much to like about Fedora's thinking, as explained by Matthew Garrett......... Unfortunately, while it is compliant with the license of GRUB 2 and any other GPLv3-covered software, we see two serious problems with the Microsoft program approach.
1) Users wishing to run in a Secure Boot environment will have to trust Microsoft in order to boot official Fedora. The Secure Boot signing format currently allows only one signature on a binary -- so Fedora's shim bootloader can be signed only by the Microsoft-vouched key. If a user removes Microsoft's key, official Fedora will no longer boot, as long as Secure Boot is on.
2) We reject the recommendation that others join the Microsoft developer program. In addition to the $99 expense being a barrier for many people around the world, the process for joining this program is objectionable. A nonexhaustive list of the problems includes: restrictive terms in multiple of the half-dozen contracts that must be signed, a forced commitment "to receive targeted advertisements and periodic member email messages from Microsoft," and a requirement to provide notarized proof of government-issued identification and a credit card.
Ubuntu's approach
Their approach has the same issue as Fedora's official method. Users have to trust Microsoft in order to boot official Ubuntu CDs. Their certification program amplifies this problem, because it means no one can sell certified Ubuntu machines without trusting Microsoft.
"Cattle class" also known as coach gives you a seat similar to an airline seat, but with twice as much space between seats, and it reclines 40 degrees. You also have access to the upper-story lounge with recliner-type seats. Or the cafe' for dining.
That's a nice 3-page essay (double-space I presume), but it doesn't change the fact Canonical and Redhat were forced to buy a license *from Microsoft* or else their OSes would not run.
That is called restraint-of-trade and it is VERY clearly a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. As I stated MS already got in trouble with the EU merely for giving-away Explorer for free & thereby gaining an unfair advantage over Opera/Google/other browsers..... now they are actively blocking other OSes from Opera/Google/other OSes from running (unless they beg MS for a license). I expect the EU to slap them down again.
Problem si that peope like YOU seem to think corproatuions never od anything wrong, even when a company like Ford designs Pintos with faulty gas tanks that blowup. Or when Toyota builds engines that die after only 25,000 miles & refuse to fix the engine under warranty. "Oh that's okay... it's a free market. I love the megacorps". You Corporate loving sellout.
Actually the announcement came from a federal court of appeals in late 2000. QUOTE: "The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Jackson's rulings against Microsoft. This was partly because the Appellate court had adopted a "drastically altered scope of liability" under which the Remedies could be taken......" In other words they decided not to breakup the company.
Late 2000..... before President Shrub arrived on the scene. But hey! Why let "facts" get in the way of good-ole FOX or NBC style distorted reporting?
Will Jitsi let me call home to my old wired phone?
Corporations working closely with government, and government working closely with corporations, including exchanges of money through campaign donations & legislative acts. Plus favorable regulations to help the megacorps and block new startups. There's a word for that...... hmmmm, right on the tip of my tongue. Starts with an F. Or a C.
>>>Any idea how Win7 will be treated by UEFI should we want to install it onto 'newer' hardware in the future?
Disable the SecureBoot and install Win7 normally. The only problem I worry is that Win7 might not have the necessary modem, printer, wifi, etc drivers for newer i9 or i11 computers?
>>>>>let go without so much as a hand-slap again >> >>Yet another FU from GWBush:(
Great. Another one of the "Blame bush not obama" crowd. George duh Bush was even president yet when the Federal Court of Appeals overturned the original "breakup" decision in 2000. Mr. Clinton was still president. Maybe you should reword your sentence: "Yet another FU from WJClinton:("
Desktop and laptop PCs are still 88% dominated by the Microsoft OS. Requiring other OS makers to buy a license from Microsoft is very clear evidence of using their monopoly power to stifle competition. Opera won their lawsuit in the EU with lesser charges. (MS didn't block Opera... just made it difficult to compete against the free OS-embedded IE.) In this case MS is actively blocking Chrome, Ubuntu, Kolibri and other OSes.
I guess I just found another reason to buy a Win7 PC instead of the Win8 version with blockeboot.
>>>Wait what? $2k-$3k for a Windows/Linux computer?
(1) Yes in the 80s IBM PCs and Macs cost that much. Atari STs and Commodore Amigas were $500 for the low-end, $1000 for the high end. In other words affordable. (2) Linux didn't exist yet.
4 hours via concorde or 6 via normal plane is not a huge difference, so people choose the cheaper route.
Same on the ground. I compared the "speedy" Amtrak Acela versus the normal train, and from Philly to Boston it only saves 15-20 minutes..... but costs $250! (For that cost you could take a train across the whole country.)
>>>experienced IT administrators all know: Acquisition is a small part of the entire cost of owning and operating a computer over its lifetime.
I buy a PC and plop it on the floor next to my recliner. The end. There is no additional cost..... the AVG keeps-out the viruses, and Microsoft supplies free service pack 0.1 updates (versus Apple who charges for them). My current PC lasted 10 years with no additional money spent..... thus I saved ~$600 by not getting the overpriced Mac.
Oh and it's a mistake to assume Mac's never have administrative problems, and thus have Zero adminstrative costs. I took some time to read ars technica articles on OS X 10.7, and that version had TONS of problems. Apparently some 10.7 Macs couldn't even do a basic function like talk to WiFi. Not until 10.7.3 was that issue resolved..... pathetic.
Yes for $35/month it's a good service. It has all the basic channels Comcast provides for $60/month, plus extra channels that Comcast charges ~$100 more to get. Also Dish provides both east & west coast feeds, so if you miss a show at 3pm because you're working, you can catch the pacific feed at 6pm instead.
I don't understand where this Dish hatred is coming from. Maybe it's similar to fanboyism..... people don't want to admit, "I made a mistake by spending $500 on a PS3." Or, "I made a mistake by spending $70 for DirecTV, and now I'm stuck for two years."
>>>makes sense that disproportionally fewer people with slow Internet connections
"makes sense" is not data.
Back up your claim by PROVING "only the people paying for the fast speeds are the ones using" speedtest, and never low-speed persons. (You can't.) You are arbitrarily rejecting speedtest.net simply because you refuse to accept that the U.S. is equal to the E.U. in average speed, and ahead of Canada, Australia, China, etc. You want to hate the U.S. and damn any facts that show otherwise. Illogical.
Speedtest.net is still the most reliable source I've found for measuring ACTUAL speeds, and nobody has shown me any better.
>>>"The 2000 Insight ranks as the most efficient United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) certified gasoline-fueled vehicle ever, with a highway rating of 61 miles per US gallon."
The sticker on my car said 70mpg when I bought it, so I don't know where you got your info from? It's wrong. And 90mpg on a flat interstate is not unrealistic. It's a tiny 3 cylinder engine at a mere 67 horsepower that engages lean-burn under interstate conditions. It barely burns any gas at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Locks are designed by engineers. (Nerds)
QUOTE: "Ed Owens began voicing concerns about the security of these containers and that every other officer within the Department might be at risk. As a result, he was subsequently fired after fifteen months for allegedly violating department policies."
Oh yeah. Hide the problem instead of facing it head-on and dealing with it. Damn politicians.
>>>proxy to your home over Stunnel
Proxies are blocked.
>>>not buy Apple products to show them we disapprove of their actions
No problem.
Apple gadgets cost 2 times more.
Not just Macs (see my sig) but phones too. My ISP VirginMobile is selling the non-apple phone with equivalent function at a mere $200. The iphone 4S for $650..... 3 times more. (Meanwhile the HTC Evo4 with enhanced 4G; larger screen is only $300.)
Most things cost half of Apple.
Not just Macs (see my sig) but phones too. My ISP VirginMobile is selling the iphone 4S for $650, if I recall correctly. The non-apple phone with equivalent function is a mere $200..... 1/3rd the cost. The HTC Evo4 with enhanced functionality (4G; larger screen) is $300.
>>>Other consumers clearly disagree with you
The average consumer has 8,000 in credit card debt and are therefore really stupid. I do not follow their example of overspending for products I don't need, especially when I can get the same product for much les ($5 cellphone, $15 internet, $23 Dish TV, $15,000 Civic, et cetera).
>>>and so does the competition, which is selling products at the same price as Apple.
Not true.
See my signature.
>>>Apple does not charge for the equivalent of service packs.
The now-annual updates from 0.6 to 0.7 to 0.8 are equivalent to Microsoft's service packs. Difference is MS provides those major OS upgrades for free, while Apple charges.
The Apple +0.0.1 updates that are free are equivalent to Microsoft's nightly updates/bugfixes. When Apple jumped from OS 8 to OS 9 to OS X that was equivalent to Microsoft's moves from 95 to 98 to XP.
And all of this doesn't matter. As my sig shows Apple's simply cost too damn much, right from the start:
>>>Apple products are way over-priced
Indeed.
Look at my sig:
It's Windows 7. The guy's probably not allowed to install it.
I keep all my stuff in a "personal" folder so when the time comes for me to leave I just drag the folder to my USB: drive and then delete it from the computer. Technically the IT guys could undelete and recover, but it's doubtful they would. More likely they just reinstall the whole OS for the next guy.
My browsers are Opera and Chrome portable. When I delete the personal folder, they disappear too. Not that it really matters; the proxy server has a record of every place I've ever visited. (There is no privacy on a work computer.)
That's a nice 3-page essay your wrote (if it was double-spaced), but it doesn't change the fact Canonical and Redhat were forced to buy a license *from Microsoft* or else their OSes would not run.
That is called restraint-of-trade and it is VERY clearly a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. As I stated MS already got in trouble with the EU merely for giving-away Explorer for free & thereby gaining an unfair advantage over Opera/Google/other browsers..... now they are actively blocking other OSes from Opera/Google/other OSes from running (unless they beg MS for a license). I expect the EU to slap them down again
.
Now here's an essay for you to read..... written by the Free Software Foundation:
(snip)
In theory, there should be no problem. In practice, the situation is more complicated. As currently proposed, Secure Boot impedes free software adoption. It is already bad enough that nearly all computers sold come with Microsoft Windows pre-installed. In order to convince users to try free software, we must convince them to remove the operating system that came on their computers (or to divide their hard drives and make room for a new system, perceptually risking their data in the process).
With Secure Boot, new free software users must take an additional step to install free software operating systems. Because these operating systems do not have keys stored in every computer's firmware by default like Microsoft does, users will have to disable Secure Boot before booting the new system's installer. Proprietary software companies may present this requirement under the guise of "disable security on your computer," which will mislead new users into thinking free software is insecure.
Without a doubt, this is an obstacle we don't need right now, and it is highly questionable that the security gains realized from Secure Boot outweigh the difficulties it will cause in practice for users trying to actually provide for their own security by escaping Microsoft Windows.
It's also a problem because the Windows 8 Logo program currently mandates Restricted Boot on all ARM systems, which includes popular computer types like tablets and phones. It says that users must not be able to disable the boot restrictions or use their own signing keys. In addition to being unacceptable in its own right, this requirement was a reversal from Microsoft's initial public position, which claimed that the Windows 8 program would not block other operating systems from being installed. With this deception, Microsoft has demonstrated that they can't be trusted. While we are interpreting their current guidelines, we must keep in mind that they could change their mind again in the future and expand the ARM restrictions to more kinds of systems.
The best way out of all of this (other than having all computers come pre-installed with free software) would be for free software operating systems to also be installable by default on any computer, without needing to disable Secure Boot. In the last few weeks, we've seen two major GNU/Linux distributions, Fedora and Ubuntu, sketch out two different paths in an attempt to achieve this goal.
Fedora's approach
There is much to like about Fedora's thinking, as explained by Matthew Garrett......... Unfortunately, while it is compliant with the license of GRUB 2 and any other GPLv3-covered software, we see two serious problems with the Microsoft program approach.
1) Users wishing to run in a Secure Boot environment will have to trust Microsoft in order to boot official Fedora. The Secure Boot signing format currently allows only one signature on a binary -- so Fedora's shim bootloader can be signed only by the Microsoft-vouched key. If a user removes Microsoft's key, official Fedora will no longer boot, as long as Secure Boot is on.
2) We reject the recommendation that others join the Microsoft developer program. In addition to the $99 expense being a barrier for many people around the world, the process for joining this program is objectionable. A nonexhaustive list of the problems includes: restrictive terms in multiple of the half-dozen contracts that must be signed, a forced commitment "to receive targeted advertisements and periodic member email messages from Microsoft," and a requirement to provide notarized proof of government-issued identification and a credit card.
Ubuntu's approach
Their approach has the same issue as Fedora's official method. Users have to trust Microsoft in order to boot official Ubuntu CDs. Their certification program amplifies this problem, because it means no one can sell certified Ubuntu machines without trusting Microsoft.
"Cattle class" also known as coach gives you a seat similar to an airline seat, but with twice as much space between seats, and it reclines 40 degrees. You also have access to the upper-story lounge with recliner-type seats. Or the cafe' for dining.
That's a nice 3-page essay (double-space I presume), but it doesn't change the fact Canonical and Redhat were forced to buy a license *from Microsoft* or else their OSes would not run.
That is called restraint-of-trade and it is VERY clearly a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. As I stated MS already got in trouble with the EU merely for giving-away Explorer for free & thereby gaining an unfair advantage over Opera/Google/other browsers..... now they are actively blocking other OSes from Opera/Google/other OSes from running (unless they beg MS for a license). I expect the EU to slap them down again.
Problem si that peope like YOU seem to think corproatuions never od anything wrong, even when a company like Ford designs Pintos with faulty gas tanks that blowup. Or when Toyota builds engines that die after only 25,000 miles & refuse to fix the engine under warranty. "Oh that's okay... it's a free market. I love the megacorps". You Corporate loving sellout.
Actually the announcement came from a federal court of appeals in late 2000. QUOTE: "The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Jackson's rulings against Microsoft. This was partly because the Appellate court had adopted a "drastically altered scope of liability" under which the Remedies could be taken......" In other words they decided not to breakup the company.
Late 2000..... before President Shrub arrived on the scene. But hey! Why let "facts" get in the way of good-ole FOX or NBC style distorted reporting?
Will Jitsi let me call home to my old wired phone?
Corporations working closely with government, and government working closely with corporations, including exchanges of money through campaign donations & legislative acts. Plus favorable regulations to help the megacorps and block new startups. There's a word for that...... hmmmm, right on the tip of my tongue. Starts with an F. Or a C.
>>>Any idea how Win7 will be treated by UEFI should we want to install it onto 'newer' hardware in the future?
Disable the SecureBoot and install Win7 normally. The only problem I worry is that Win7 might not have the necessary modem, printer, wifi, etc drivers for newer i9 or i11 computers?
>>>>>let go without so much as a hand-slap again :(
>>
>>Yet another FU from GWBush
Great. Another one of the "Blame bush not obama" crowd. George duh Bush was even president yet when the Federal Court of Appeals overturned the original "breakup" decision in 2000. Mr. Clinton was still president. Maybe you should reword your sentence: :("
"Yet another FU from WJClinton
Desktop and laptop PCs are still 88% dominated by the Microsoft OS. Requiring other OS makers to buy a license from Microsoft is very clear evidence of using their monopoly power to stifle competition. Opera won their lawsuit in the EU with lesser charges. (MS didn't block Opera... just made it difficult to compete against the free OS-embedded IE.) In this case MS is actively blocking Chrome, Ubuntu, Kolibri and other OSes.
I guess I just found another reason to buy a Win7 PC instead of the Win8 version with blockeboot.
>>>You have obviously never priced cross-country Amtrak tickets.
L.A. -to- Philadelphia or Baltimore or D.C. or Pittsburgh or Chicago or New York City: $212 or $262.
>>>Wait what? $2k-$3k for a Windows/Linux computer?
(1) Yes in the 80s IBM PCs and Macs cost that much. Atari STs and Commodore Amigas were $500 for the low-end, $1000 for the high end. In other words affordable. (2) Linux didn't exist yet.
4 hours via concorde or 6 via normal plane is not a huge difference, so people choose the cheaper route.
Same on the ground. I compared the "speedy" Amtrak Acela versus the normal train, and from Philly to Boston it only saves 15-20 minutes..... but costs $250! (For that cost you could take a train across the whole country.)
>>>experienced IT administrators all know: Acquisition is a small part of the entire cost of owning and operating a computer over its lifetime.
I buy a PC and plop it on the floor next to my recliner. The end. There is no additional cost..... the AVG keeps-out the viruses, and Microsoft supplies free service pack 0.1 updates (versus Apple who charges for them). My current PC lasted 10 years with no additional money spent..... thus I saved ~$600 by not getting the overpriced Mac.
Oh and it's a mistake to assume Mac's never have administrative problems, and thus have Zero adminstrative costs. I took some time to read ars technica articles on OS X 10.7, and that version had TONS of problems. Apparently some 10.7 Macs couldn't even do a basic function like talk to WiFi. Not until 10.7.3 was that issue resolved..... pathetic.
>>>Did you look at Dish TVs hundeds of channels?
Yes for $35/month it's a good service. It has all the basic channels Comcast provides for $60/month, plus extra channels that Comcast charges ~$100 more to get. Also Dish provides both east & west coast feeds, so if you miss a show at 3pm because you're working, you can catch the pacific feed at 6pm instead.
I don't understand where this Dish hatred is coming from. Maybe it's similar to fanboyism..... people don't want to admit, "I made a mistake by spending $500 on a PS3." Or, "I made a mistake by spending $70 for DirecTV, and now I'm stuck for two years."
>>>makes sense that disproportionally fewer people with slow Internet connections
"makes sense" is not data.
Back up your claim by PROVING "only the people paying for the fast speeds are the ones using" speedtest, and never low-speed persons. (You can't.) You are arbitrarily rejecting speedtest.net simply because you refuse to accept that the U.S. is equal to the E.U. in average speed, and ahead of Canada, Australia, China, etc. You want to hate the U.S. and damn any facts that show otherwise. Illogical.
Speedtest.net is still the most reliable source I've found for measuring ACTUAL speeds, and nobody has shown me any better.
>>>"The 2000 Insight ranks as the most efficient United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) certified gasoline-fueled vehicle ever, with a highway rating of 61 miles per US gallon."
The sticker on my car said 70mpg when I bought it, so I don't know where you got your info from? It's wrong. And 90mpg on a flat interstate is not unrealistic. It's a tiny 3 cylinder engine at a mere 67 horsepower that engages lean-burn under interstate conditions. It barely burns any gas at all.