Use their ELUA agianst them; list any "application" that prohibits anti-spy/anti-virus/anti-threat software from "testing, accessing, or evaluating the software" as a threat. Publish a policy that simply tells these vendors that if they want to be removed from the list they have two choices. They can either have the restricting statement(s) removed from the EULA or, they can provide the vendor with written permission granting them an exception, allowing them to access, test, and evaluate - making an independant decision on the status of the software.
In otherwords, make it policy to call this crap a threat until it can be proven otherwise. This isn't "innocent until proven guilty" time.
General SONY BMG: 212-833-8000
Arista Records: 646-840-5600
SONY BMG U.S. Latin: 305-695-3600
J Records: 646-840-5600
Jive Records: 212-727-0016
RCA Label Group Nashville: 615-301-4300
RCA Records: 212-930-4000
SONY BMG Corporate Press: 212-833-5047
WHOIS INFORMATION:
Registrant:
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
550 Madison Avenue, Sixth Floor.
New York, NY 10022
US
Email: mis_online@SONYMUSIC.COM
Registrar Name....: REGISTER.COM, INC.
Registrar Whois...: whois.register.com
Registrar Homepage: www.register.com
Domain Name: sonybmg.com
Created on..............: Tue, Jan 25, 2000
Expires on..............: Sun, Jan 25, 2009
Record last updated on..: Fri, Aug 19, 2005
Administrative Contact:
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
550 Madison Avenue, Sixth Floor.
New York, NY 10022
US
Phone: +1.2128337305
Email: mis_online@SONYMUSIC.COM
Technical Contact:
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
550 Madison Avenue, Sixth Floor.
New York, NY 10022
GB
Phone: +1.2128337305
Email: mis_online@SONYMUSIC.COM
DNS Servers:
udns1.ultradns.net
udns2.ultradns.net
Execuitives:
ANDREW LACK CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SONY BMG MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT
Andrew Lack is the founding Chief Executive Officer of Sony BMG Music Entertainment, a post he assumed in August of 2004. Sony BMG Music Entertainment is a joint venture between Sony Corporation of America and Bertelsmann AG, comprising the recorded music businesses of both companies. From January of 2003 to August of 2004, Mr. Lack served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Sony Music Entertainment.
As CEO of Sony BMG Mr. Lack oversees all operations of the global recorded music company, which is a leading producer and marketer of pre-recorded music and video.
Previously, Andrew Lack served as President and Chief Operating Officer for NBC since June of 2001. During his tenure with NBC he oversaw the operations of most of NBC's divisions, including Entertainment, News and MSNBC, Network, Stations, CNBC, Sales, and Broadcast & Network Operations
From 1993 to 2001 Mr. Lack was the president of NBC News, where he transformed the News division into the most-watched news organization in the world. Today, NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, and Meet the Press are each No. 1 in their time periods, and the primetime franchise Dateline NBC is the top newsmagazine in key sales demographic categories and a significant part of NBC's primetime program
I've asked myself that too. But if you pull up Cingular's web site and look for Blackberry coverage anywhere west of the East Coast, you will see large areas not covered. The maps seem to be reasonably accurate too. Usually the coverage of a metro area will be good out through say the second tier of suburbs and it drops off pretty quickly after that. Larger outstate cities, of say 20,000 or more will have coverage but it will just be in the city itself.
There are a couple of things that Blackberry does differently than regular email phones - for instance the Blackberry will synch up with an enterprise email system using the "BES" or "Blackberry Enterprise Server." There is also a "desktop redirector" that I am aware of but do not have to hassle with.
The Blackberry does all of it's wireless work in the background and it is fast (not instant though). The way we have it set up, it only does email and calendar items wirelessly (I don't know if that is a config & bandwidth issue or a limitation of the system). The Contacts, Notes, and so on are synched by wire.
If I want to stay that much in touch, I'd be happy to set up a rule that would forward email to my cel phone. There are limits to the length of these messages though. That is SMS for ya. Oh well. I'm too cheap to enable Web 2.0 on my phone - if I did that I could use web mail and have a little better way of checking email.
I support a number of Blackberry users. A couple of them who live in major metro areas are very satisfied with them and evangilize them to others who do not live in such populated areas. These guys buy them and then I have to support them. Blackberry coverage outside of metro areas is spotty at best.
Then come the complaints. I tell them yep, you won't get messages out in the country. Then they ask me why they spent hundreds of dollars for it? I tell them because they did not ask me first, I would have told them.
I also tell them that a shut down may be coming soon. That RIM, the manufacturers of the device have lost a patent infringment suit and a subsiquent appeal and that the Supreme Court has already refused to hear it. But these guys are like addicts. The prefer a service that barely works for them to no service what so ever.
I don't get it. Being connected is important but not that important. I'm afraid that if and when the Blackberry is shut down that I will have to deal with the fall out - but at least I won't have to deal with them after that!
As soon as I learned about the rootkit DRM issue, I immediatley committed myself to not buying any more Sony products. No TVs, no car stereos, no DVD players, no notebooks and especially no music or other media.
Sony is a big fish in a big pond. I suspect that there are many more like me who will make this decision. This will cost them dearly, across all of their divisions.
What are the privacy implications of a government doing this?
I am all for some sort of system that finds a way of shutting down bots and will even admit that I would not mind seeing user's required to care for their computers (making them responsible for what is on their machines). Having said that, my experience is that so far in the cyber-world, governments have not been able to pass legislation that deals with these kinds of things in an effective manner. Governments are too much "brick and mortar" to really grasp the ether qualities of the cyber world.
The lesson that I think should be taken from this actions are that "we" (internet users and providers alike) should be finding ways to self-regulate so that we do not have to deal with big brother deciding to do it for us.
There are places where the two worlds need to cooperate and come together. Some laws need to be written to deal with crimes unique to the cyber-world for instance.
I laughed at this, not because it is so funny but because it capures an essence that I know deep down is true.
Geeks are a hard working bunch when you can keep them tasked with things that interest them but like cats, they are strong individuals who need a good reason to work together. They have to realize that the sum of the individual work is greater than individual work. As long as they are all interested in the goal, the work is interesting, then the manager's job pretty much becomes keeping other people (the dogs) out of their hair!
And again, that is nothing new, it has been going on for a long time too. That is how places like Selma Alabama, Watts (LA CA), and Kent State (Ohio) became so famous. It is how people like Martin Luther King Jr. and even Rodney King (to a much lesser degree) became famous.
The fight for what is right must continue. It seems odd to be able to lump so many issues into one bag but civil rights, equality, anti-war, and freedom all hold a place in that bag. While as citizens we can't know all there is to know, we have to make our leaders accountable! We have the right to expect that they will do what is best for the citizens.
Doesn't it just feel like we are on the cusp of something big happening? I can feel it in my bones. The 1960's seem like a long ways back, but they should serve as a lesson to our current regime. History forgotten is bound to repeat itself. We are not being lead by people who share the same values as us; they are apparently in it to exploit their position and help their cronies out. How long can we stand for this to happen?
People: You can argue all you want if a government agency can obtain a patent or why one branch can over-rule another branch on a security issue. On the face of it your arguments have logic and many of them seem well-reasoned.
But we are dealing with the government, the U.S. government. While we (the citizens of the U.S.) have many rights (like the freedom of speech) we no longer have control of our government. It will do what it damned well wants to. It has been that way since WWII with only a couple of notable exceptions. The truth is they will spend what they need to in order to accomplish what they want. Their lawyers will obstruficate enough laws and outspend anyone who tries to get in their way ten to one, making it impossible for even the wealthiest people or corporations to be little more then a speed-bump on the agenda.
I'm not anti-government. We need government and we need the laws that protect us. But face it, what we have created is something that lives and operates behind closed doors and establishes its own rules. Nothing, or nobody is big enough to change it. That hardly means don't try. As citizens we need to demand accountability because it is we who they represent. The article was good from that standpoint. It uses our freedom to challenge the government to explain itself. Unfortunately, we already know the answer will be a stoney wall of silence.
This will be a long story, I am kinda dumping my feelings and my memory here. It is the only way I know how to express myself when it comes to this subject.
In the late 1960's my father developed kidney disease - his kidneys stopped functioning and basically turned to stone. As unfortunate as this was for him, it really was a good time to get the disease. There was a great deal of research being done in the field and "kidney machines" were far enough advanced so that he was able to lead a somewhat comfortable life. He was placed on "the list" to wait for a transplant and went to dyalisis three times a week. The "machine" was both friend and enemy, it made him feel better and allowed him to function enough to be home most often but occasionally there were complications, sometimes pretty severe and he'd end up in the hospital for days or even weeks.
Then, in the middle of the night a call came, he had "matched" and a kidney was on it's way from the East Coast for him. The operation went well and within a few weeks he was home. He was being treated with "exparamental" anti-rejection drugs and seemed quite healthy and normal. He expected to even be able to get a job again (he had never really quit working but had always taken short term jobs that he could complete in a day or two).
One day we were at a family reunion and he started acting funny. My mom drove him to the hospital where we learned that he had a stroke that was caused by blood clots breaking away from his transplanted kidney. He was in rejection and the kidney had to be removed to save his life. What we ultimately learned was that some blood cells from the horse that was used to make the anti-rejection serum made it through the filtering process and entered his body where the healthy kidney detected them and tried to filter them out. This is what caused the blood clots and what led to the rejection.
Many years after dad had died, we learned that this rejection had been "covered up" and that the drug which showed so much promise for so long to so many had hurt other people as well. There was a lawsuit and the doctor and staff responsible were punnished. But that is neither here nor there to me.
The rejection was terrible. He first had a stroke, then heart problems, followed by further strokes and more hear problems. He spent months in the hospital in an isolation room, too sick to be on the ward with other sick paitents.
Dad went back on "the list" when he got well enough and eventually was given another kidney. This time he was treated with other exparamental anti-rejection drugs and did very well although his other health problems continued to plauge him. He was pretty much unable to work (he still tried earning some cash though, running a lawn service, selling vegitables and so on). His trips to the hospital were now routine, once or twice a month, mostly for monitoring. He continued to recive various medical treatments and pills that were considered exparamental and lived a limited but comfortable life for six more years, eventually dying from heart failure at 49 (the age I am now).
There is no doubt in my mind that medical research extended my dad's life by at least ten years. Most of that time was at least somewhat comfortable. He got to see me marry and he got to see one of his grandchildren. I know what that meant to him. Hell, I know what it meant to me.
My father was a voulinteer for almost any research that came his way. The truth of the matter is that he was not included in any reseach that did not hold more promise than the alternitives available in conventional medicine. He also felt that furthering science was as much a paitent's responsibility as it was a doctor's. Sure there were risks involved but the alternitive was just as bad or worse.
There were at the time moral implications being discussed regarding the harvesting of human organs. Dad would have died much earlier if he had not had the two transplants he had. It is as simple as that to me and that is
Most of the PDA's I've seen deliver but they fall just short of what the user wants. Granted some are better than others but the truth is the apps almost all feel like they are crippled. Then the typical PDA owner seems to also have high expectations; they seem to think that the PDA should replace the laptop when reality is more like it is an accessory to a laptop.
Amazingly, I think I fall in to the same trap. I'd like to see a true blue little computer that runs the exact same O/S I use on my primary computer and the exact same applications that I run on my primary computer. Frankly, anything less will leave me feeling like I can't get the most out of the machine.
I have helped a couple of salespeople get upper-end PDA's to do some interesting things. They use the PDA to show customers custom taylored one-on-one presentations. This works very well for the salesperson because they get the person inside of their personal space and this (apparently) helps establish a bond that closes deals. These guys are hooked on their PDA and I understand why. It is a valuable selling tool that can also be used to record details while working one-on-one with the customer.
Most people want a lot more than a device that does one thing and does it well. They want the PDA to be a sort of Swiss Army Knife device. That is harder to do. Using it for anything beyond a very short email or recording a very short note makes it show it's limitations very quickly. Some of these limitations are addressed by add-on devices like folding keyboards and so on. While I do not have a lot of experience with these accessories, the one or two people that I have asked tell me most of these things are poorly made or poorly implimented and that they seem to take away from the functionality of the device because it takes time to assemble all the junk. I guess I understand that.
I can see a couple of things that I'd like a PDA to do for me and I know the hardware is out there, things like a GPS reciever and a multi-media player (which I would want to interface with my car's radio). I suppose that if I was willing to shell out the bux and limit my use of the device to a few things that it does well, I could be satisfied but I know myself and I would keep pushing the machines limits, trying to make it into something it isn't quite ready to be. For that reason, I will wait to buy my next PDA until they have grown up!
We can trace the roots of the internet back to DARPA projects that related to networking and the construction of a "bullet-proof" network used by the United States government, the military, and educational institutions. In a way, the United States can lay claim to the discovery of the internet. By extenstion, since "we" discovered it and "we" built it, it is possible to lay claims of ownership over it - but these would be historical claims and not something that we could use to control it's use outside of our borders.
Over the years, we have allowed others to connect up and use "our" network and our technology. This has been a two way street with people from all over the world working for mutual benefit. The fact is that while the roots of the network may have sprung from the United States, it is no longer an American institution, it is a world-wide communications network and nobody can lay claim to owning all of it.
Like a geo-political boundary, we can decided what enters our counrty and what we do not permit (like the Nazi paraphanalia issue that Yahoo went through with France). In order to make this effective though we would need some sort of cyber-customs.
Does this then mean that the UN should wrest control of ICANN and other orginizations? What makes the United Nations uniquely qualified to serve as an arbitrator of cyber-space? Is it because we can expect a special sort of nuterality out of them? Is it because they can create international forums to deal with issues unique to the internet and cyberspace in general? If this were the case, I'd be all for the UN running the show. But the UN does not work that way, they are a very political orginization and they tend to mix issues using their influence on one issue to gain compliance in some other realm. Like oil for food. No, the UN has too broad a charter and is too willing to trade one cause for another. I'd feel uncomfortable with the UN having a huge role in internet regulation and control.
Still, I suspect that there will have to be some such agency, something that can rein in the outlaws and bring fair and impartial decisions that relate to various conflicts. How about a completely seperate orginization seeded with people from DARPA, CERN, ICANN and other orginizations that have done more than their fair share to build the internet?
The first thing that I do when I get a magazine is turn it over and knock out all of the "blown in inserts" and other crap. So, I don't just do this in the virtual realm.
Online ads aren't something I trust so I do my best to ignore them. Why don't I trust them? Because a good percentage of them are selling snake oil - like "spyware removers" that don't remove spyware, "memory cleaners" that do absolutly nothing and so on.
The ads that interfere with what I am trying to read are worst of all! Even if I was looking for something they were selling as a matter of principal, I would not buy because I hate that kind of interference advertising.
I find sites that are selling something that run ads amusing in a sick sort of way. I assume the ad placement is based on the product being advertised as having a higher profit margine than the one I am intentionally looking at. I have no idea this is true or not but that is the way that I think. It is the cyber equivalent of a high pressure salesman trying to sell you a product with a higher profit margin so he can pad his comission. Something else I don't fall for.
While I'll agree with the people that say that parts of the story sound unbelieveable, I think that with the tail for DNA testing there is enough evidence so that we should keep an "open mind" and wait and see what the testing reveals.
Also, having been interviewed and "quoted" by a newspaper before, I can tell you that the possibility exists that the story he told the reporter is not the one that you read. The reporter may have misquoted him or the editors may have changed the story enough so that if you asked the retired engineer; he may tell you that the story you read was hardly recognizable as the one he told! These guys are far more interested in selling their paper and ads than they are in telling the real story.
I've heard local stories about odd animals in the woods here in Minnesota (including albino sasquaches) and while I don't exactly believe them - but I've seen some strange things in the woods myself, including a pile of scat that was so big I would have hated to see the animal that left it! I've seen freak of nature animals that include white (not albino) deer, black and white squirrils. People I trust have told me about black deer and a grey bear (who I assume was a very old black bear).
It would be nice if a program could be developed where someone could buy three laptops, donating two to the project and getting one for their own.
This would be a very nice way of supporting a worthwhile cause while at the same time getting something for yourself. I'm attracted to this PC for several reasons. First, I like the overall general design, secondly I think the hand-crank would be usefull to me. It would never be my primary computer but I could see using it on weekends, while camping, and for reading.
I'd also guess that the machine would be quite "hackable" in the good sense of the word. I imagine people retasking the machine for other purposes (like as a control device for other equipment). I can see other people developing add ons for it so it could be used with various devices (printers, external storage and so on).
I want one, I'd buy three to get one. Seems like a wonderful way to fund the program.
I am not an iPod or Apple computer owner, I've only paid attention to them because I have a friend who is in the video publishing business who is an Apple fan, he is the first to buy anything new from them. He is stuck solidly on the brand!
I wish he could hear himself talk. He is constantly complaining about this or that and spends a great deal of time fighting with things that one would think are easy. I'd dismiss him as being a sort of inexperienced user and a perfectionist except that it seems like when I talk to other Apple users, they all to one degree or another echo his complaints and experiences. I know the "Apple community" is very active and involved - much more so than PC users; they seem happy to jump in and help solve problems (and I believe this is a real plus for the Apple company) but, when it comes down to it, the community is much smaller than the PC community and, they tend to pool in niche markets. All together, this means that support is somewhat less than stellar when there is some sort of unique problem.
I like the concept of the iPod and think that it is a nifty little product but it is something that I do not see myself having for some time yet. First, several of the devices have had usability issues (bad batterys, scratched screens...) and second, the cost of filling the iPod with music sounds a bit extreme.
I'm not an audiophile, I only buy a few CDs a year but even so, I've amassed quite a collection of the music that is important to me. I don't walk down the street listening to it, I listen to it at home and in the car and I doubt that will change. I do love music though and can understand people who have a different lifestyle than me needing an iPod like device for walking, riding the bus, and so on. I see the value of this kind of device. This makes me wonder how long Apple will have so much of the market. My guess is that this is not something that will last long. Other companies will make close approximations of the device at a lower cost but similar (or better) quality. When another big name company gains the right kind of foothold, Apple's iPod business will become like their computer business, a niche market.
I do give them kudos to their exceptional design as far as user interface goes. But the device itself is more than just that and it sounds like they need to pay closer attention to the rest of the machine.
Would we need to deforest anything? We have thousands of acres in setaside programs where the land is planted in "cover crop" and farmers are being paid not to farm it. These CRP (Crop Reduction Programs) programs "help" keep the cost of comodities like corn and wheat artificially high so that farmers will continue to produce them at a profit.
If there was a greater demand for them, they could eliminate these programs and put land back into production which would fuel our economy three ways. First by having a market, second by eliminating the program paid for by taxes, and third by bringing energy production back in to our country.
Again, pointing to Brazil, this process has litteraly refueled their economy. They still have a long way to go to catch up to the US but they are better off today than yesterday and the expect continued growth because of their energy industry.
The cool thing is if that happens, they are ready. Their cars will run on either gas or ethanol or anything in between. While gas is twice as expensive as ethanol, they can run just fine on it.
On the History Channel the other night I watched the Modern Marvels segment on Sugar. Brazil has all but given up on petrolium and are using ethanol that they brew from sugar. It is nearly as efficient as gas and is 100% renewable, and for those eco friendly types, it is carbon neutral. They have a law that requires all gas stations to sell gas, diesel, and alcohol. They require all manufacturers to make multi-fuel cars and they are succeding.
We don't need a box that does some fake magic hocus pocus, we need something like what Brazil is doing!
You see it really did have serious consiquences. You were drunk and that reduced you to the level of becoming an AOL user. This is PROOF that drinking kills brain cells!
You are lucky, when you sobered up you were able to remember the event and call and cancel service. What on earth would have happened had you passed out and didn't recall doing this? It could have involved serious consiquences, you could have been a longer term AOL member!
For your saftey, for those people you love, stop drinking now before you lose too many brain cells and become a permament AOL subscriber! Man you are already living too close to the edge.
For your own well being, I hope someone takes your CD-ROM drive away!
The proposed standard sounds really great and all that, I'm sure I'll be able to see a bit of difference and that may or may not make a believer out of me. I already have millions of colors and thousands of lines of resolution though and I treasure each and every one of them.
What I don't treasure out of the current specs is the limited length that the cable can go before I see too much distortion. The engineers tell me this is mostly a limitation caused by signal speed and certain laws of physics. Yes there really are times where I would like the monitor fifteen feet from the computer! Please in your new standard, consider this.
Forgive me for a moment, this post may seem slightly off topic but I think that what we are seeing is the symptom of a larger problem and that is what I want to address in this post. So, flame away if you want.
Kids, by their very nature are curious and, a bit rebelious. That hasn't changed in generations, kids have always been tempted by things that they know they should not do and kids have always been known to defy authority. I know I did, and I'll bet you did too!
I was very fortunate to have had several teachers who were actually able to harness my curiosity and my desire to "push the boundaries." To this day, I think they were the best teachers I had.
I also had the other kind of teacher; I remember specifically one English teacher who told us to read a specfic chapter. I got in trouble for reading beyond the chapter! I loved reading and simply got caught up in the story. Why he got upset is still beyond me.
Many teachers no longer teach kids, they teach cirruclium. They expect kids to march in lock-step to their plans. Kids going though this feel like they are prisoners and that their teachers are little more than glorified babysitters! They get bored, they don't understand why they are being limited and, they naturally fight this by defying the silly rules established by the people in authority. In short, the kids will be kids (just like they always have been).
Yeah, the kids hacked the computers and used them for things that maybe they shouldn't have. I have to say that the administrators of the school should have expected this.
It seems to me there were probably a number of other things that could have been done - including a policy of "if you hack this, we will take it away from you and you will fail the class". The way that it has happend smells like the administration has chosen, intentionally, to make examples out of these kids. I suspect that this was done to send a message to future students "Don't mess with us" - but this kind of thing against kids seldom works and can easily backfire (especially if nothing comes of the charges).
I feel for the kids, I really do. Not because they hacked the computers but because the administration and staff of the school have obviously made some poor choices along the way. This problem is a symptom of something wrong much deeper in the system. The teachers should realize they are teaching kids who are naturally curious, naturally push the limits, and naturally defy authority. If these kids were challenged, rather than restricted, they would learn a hell of a lot more.
Teachers, please go back to teaching kids, not cirriculum!
Thank you for your reply and all of the great information that it contained. Someone Please mod this up!!!!
Can I ask you a layman's question? What are the first products that consumers are likely to see made out of this technology? When are we likely to see them in production?
Once again, thank you very much for your reply. I really appreciate it.
Slashdot Mirror
In otherwords, make it policy to call this crap a threat until it can be proven otherwise. This isn't "innocent until proven guilty" time.
From their Web Site "Contact Us" page:
.
.
.
General SONY BMG: 212-833-8000
Arista Records: 646-840-5600
SONY BMG U.S. Latin: 305-695-3600
J Records: 646-840-5600
Jive Records: 212-727-0016
RCA Label Group Nashville: 615-301-4300
RCA Records: 212-930-4000
SONY BMG Corporate Press: 212-833-5047
WHOIS INFORMATION:
Registrant:
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
550 Madison Avenue, Sixth Floor
New York, NY 10022
US
Email: mis_online@SONYMUSIC.COM
Registrar Name....: REGISTER.COM, INC.
Registrar Whois...: whois.register.com
Registrar Homepage: www.register.com
Domain Name: sonybmg.com
Created on..............: Tue, Jan 25, 2000
Expires on..............: Sun, Jan 25, 2009
Record last updated on..: Fri, Aug 19, 2005
Administrative Contact:
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
550 Madison Avenue, Sixth Floor
New York, NY 10022
US
Phone: +1.2128337305
Email: mis_online@SONYMUSIC.COM
Technical Contact:
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
Sony Music Entertainment Corporation
550 Madison Avenue, Sixth Floor
New York, NY 10022
GB
Phone: +1.2128337305
Email: mis_online@SONYMUSIC.COM
DNS Servers:
udns1.ultradns.net
udns2.ultradns.net
Execuitives:
ANDREW LACK
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
SONY BMG MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT
Andrew Lack is the founding Chief Executive Officer of Sony BMG Music Entertainment, a post he assumed in August of 2004. Sony BMG Music Entertainment is a joint venture between Sony Corporation of America and Bertelsmann AG, comprising the recorded music businesses of both companies. From January of 2003 to August of 2004, Mr. Lack served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Sony Music Entertainment.
As CEO of Sony BMG Mr. Lack oversees all operations of the global recorded music company, which is a leading producer and marketer of pre-recorded music and video.
Previously, Andrew Lack served as President and Chief Operating Officer for NBC since June of 2001. During his tenure with NBC he oversaw the operations of most of NBC's divisions, including Entertainment, News and MSNBC, Network, Stations, CNBC, Sales, and Broadcast & Network Operations
From 1993 to 2001 Mr. Lack was the president of NBC News, where he transformed the News division into the most-watched news organization in the world. Today, NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, and Meet the Press are each No. 1 in their time periods, and the primetime franchise Dateline NBC is the top newsmagazine in key sales demographic categories and a significant part of NBC's primetime program
I've asked myself that too. But if you pull up Cingular's web site and look for Blackberry coverage anywhere west of the East Coast, you will see large areas not covered. The maps seem to be reasonably accurate too. Usually the coverage of a metro area will be good out through say the second tier of suburbs and it drops off pretty quickly after that. Larger outstate cities, of say 20,000 or more will have coverage but it will just be in the city itself.
There are a couple of things that Blackberry does differently than regular email phones - for instance the Blackberry will synch up with an enterprise email system using the "BES" or "Blackberry Enterprise Server." There is also a "desktop redirector" that I am aware of but do not have to hassle with.
The Blackberry does all of it's wireless work in the background and it is fast (not instant though). The way we have it set up, it only does email and calendar items wirelessly (I don't know if that is a config & bandwidth issue or a limitation of the system). The Contacts, Notes, and so on are synched by wire.
If I want to stay that much in touch, I'd be happy to set up a rule that would forward email to my cel phone. There are limits to the length of these messages though. That is SMS for ya. Oh well. I'm too cheap to enable Web 2.0 on my phone - if I did that I could use web mail and have a little better way of checking email.
I support a number of Blackberry users. A couple of them who live in major metro areas are very satisfied with them and evangilize them to others who do not live in such populated areas. These guys buy them and then I have to support them. Blackberry coverage outside of metro areas is spotty at best.
Then come the complaints. I tell them yep, you won't get messages out in the country. Then they ask me why they spent hundreds of dollars for it? I tell them because they did not ask me first, I would have told them.
I also tell them that a shut down may be coming soon. That RIM, the manufacturers of the device have lost a patent infringment suit and a subsiquent appeal and that the Supreme Court has already refused to hear it. But these guys are like addicts. The prefer a service that barely works for them to no service what so ever.
I don't get it. Being connected is important but not that important. I'm afraid that if and when the Blackberry is shut down that I will have to deal with the fall out - but at least I won't have to deal with them after that!
As soon as I learned about the rootkit DRM issue, I immediatley committed myself to not buying any more Sony products. No TVs, no car stereos, no DVD players, no notebooks and especially no music or other media.
Sony is a big fish in a big pond. I suspect that there are many more like me who will make this decision. This will cost them dearly, across all of their divisions.
So long Sony, to me you no longer exist.
What are the privacy implications of a government doing this?
I am all for some sort of system that finds a way of shutting down bots and will even admit that I would not mind seeing user's required to care for their computers (making them responsible for what is on their machines). Having said that, my experience is that so far in the cyber-world, governments have not been able to pass legislation that deals with these kinds of things in an effective manner. Governments are too much "brick and mortar" to really grasp the ether qualities of the cyber world.
The lesson that I think should be taken from this actions are that "we" (internet users and providers alike) should be finding ways to self-regulate so that we do not have to deal with big brother deciding to do it for us.
There are places where the two worlds need to cooperate and come together. Some laws need to be written to deal with crimes unique to the cyber-world for instance.
I laughed at this, not because it is so funny but because it capures an essence that I know deep down is true.
Geeks are a hard working bunch when you can keep them tasked with things that interest them but like cats, they are strong individuals who need a good reason to work together. They have to realize that the sum of the individual work is greater than individual work. As long as they are all interested in the goal, the work is interesting, then the manager's job pretty much becomes keeping other people (the dogs) out of their hair!
And again, that is nothing new, it has been going on for a long time too. That is how places like Selma Alabama, Watts (LA CA), and Kent State (Ohio) became so famous. It is how people like Martin Luther King Jr. and even Rodney King (to a much lesser degree) became famous.
The fight for what is right must continue. It seems odd to be able to lump so many issues into one bag but civil rights, equality, anti-war, and freedom all hold a place in that bag. While as citizens we can't know all there is to know, we have to make our leaders accountable! We have the right to expect that they will do what is best for the citizens.
Doesn't it just feel like we are on the cusp of something big happening? I can feel it in my bones. The 1960's seem like a long ways back, but they should serve as a lesson to our current regime. History forgotten is bound to repeat itself. We are not being lead by people who share the same values as us; they are apparently in it to exploit their position and help their cronies out. How long can we stand for this to happen?
People: You can argue all you want if a government agency can obtain a patent or why one branch can over-rule another branch on a security issue. On the face of it your arguments have logic and many of them seem well-reasoned.
But we are dealing with the government, the U.S. government. While we (the citizens of the U.S.) have many rights (like the freedom of speech) we no longer have control of our government. It will do what it damned well wants to. It has been that way since WWII with only a couple of notable exceptions. The truth is they will spend what they need to in order to accomplish what they want. Their lawyers will obstruficate enough laws and outspend anyone who tries to get in their way ten to one, making it impossible for even the wealthiest people or corporations to be little more then a speed-bump on the agenda.
I'm not anti-government. We need government and we need the laws that protect us. But face it, what we have created is something that lives and operates behind closed doors and establishes its own rules. Nothing, or nobody is big enough to change it. That hardly means don't try. As citizens we need to demand accountability because it is we who they represent. The article was good from that standpoint. It uses our freedom to challenge the government to explain itself. Unfortunately, we already know the answer will be a stoney wall of silence.
I'm thinking that their first new product ought to be code-named "Othello."
This will be a long story, I am kinda dumping my feelings and my memory here. It is the only way I know how to express myself when it comes to this subject.
In the late 1960's my father developed kidney disease - his kidneys stopped functioning and basically turned to stone. As unfortunate as this was for him, it really was a good time to get the disease. There was a great deal of research being done in the field and "kidney machines" were far enough advanced so that he was able to lead a somewhat comfortable life. He was placed on "the list" to wait for a transplant and went to dyalisis three times a week. The "machine" was both friend and enemy, it made him feel better and allowed him to function enough to be home most often but occasionally there were complications, sometimes pretty severe and he'd end up in the hospital for days or even weeks.
Then, in the middle of the night a call came, he had "matched" and a kidney was on it's way from the East Coast for him. The operation went well and within a few weeks he was home. He was being treated with "exparamental" anti-rejection drugs and seemed quite healthy and normal. He expected to even be able to get a job again (he had never really quit working but had always taken short term jobs that he could complete in a day or two).
One day we were at a family reunion and he started acting funny. My mom drove him to the hospital where we learned that he had a stroke that was caused by blood clots breaking away from his transplanted kidney. He was in rejection and the kidney had to be removed to save his life. What we ultimately learned was that some blood cells from the horse that was used to make the anti-rejection serum made it through the filtering process and entered his body where the healthy kidney detected them and tried to filter them out. This is what caused the blood clots and what led to the rejection.
Many years after dad had died, we learned that this rejection had been "covered up" and that the drug which showed so much promise for so long to so many had hurt other people as well. There was a lawsuit and the doctor and staff responsible were punnished. But that is neither here nor there to me.
The rejection was terrible. He first had a stroke, then heart problems, followed by further strokes and more hear problems. He spent months in the hospital in an isolation room, too sick to be on the ward with other sick paitents.
Dad went back on "the list" when he got well enough and eventually was given another kidney. This time he was treated with other exparamental anti-rejection drugs and did very well although his other health problems continued to plauge him. He was pretty much unable to work (he still tried earning some cash though, running a lawn service, selling vegitables and so on). His trips to the hospital were now routine, once or twice a month, mostly for monitoring. He continued to recive various medical treatments and pills that were considered exparamental and lived a limited but comfortable life for six more years, eventually dying from heart failure at 49 (the age I am now).
There is no doubt in my mind that medical research extended my dad's life by at least ten years. Most of that time was at least somewhat comfortable. He got to see me marry and he got to see one of his grandchildren. I know what that meant to him. Hell, I know what it meant to me.
My father was a voulinteer for almost any research that came his way. The truth of the matter is that he was not included in any reseach that did not hold more promise than the alternitives available in conventional medicine. He also felt that furthering science was as much a paitent's responsibility as it was a doctor's. Sure there were risks involved but the alternitive was just as bad or worse.
There were at the time moral implications being discussed regarding the harvesting of human organs. Dad would have died much earlier if he had not had the two transplants he had. It is as simple as that to me and that is
Most of the PDA's I've seen deliver but they fall just short of what the user wants. Granted some are better than others but the truth is the apps almost all feel like they are crippled. Then the typical PDA owner seems to also have high expectations; they seem to think that the PDA should replace the laptop when reality is more like it is an accessory to a laptop.
Amazingly, I think I fall in to the same trap. I'd like to see a true blue little computer that runs the exact same O/S I use on my primary computer and the exact same applications that I run on my primary computer. Frankly, anything less will leave me feeling like I can't get the most out of the machine.
I have helped a couple of salespeople get upper-end PDA's to do some interesting things. They use the PDA to show customers custom taylored one-on-one presentations. This works very well for the salesperson because they get the person inside of their personal space and this (apparently) helps establish a bond that closes deals. These guys are hooked on their PDA and I understand why. It is a valuable selling tool that can also be used to record details while working one-on-one with the customer.
Most people want a lot more than a device that does one thing and does it well. They want the PDA to be a sort of Swiss Army Knife device. That is harder to do. Using it for anything beyond a very short email or recording a very short note makes it show it's limitations very quickly. Some of these limitations are addressed by add-on devices like folding keyboards and so on. While I do not have a lot of experience with these accessories, the one or two people that I have asked tell me most of these things are poorly made or poorly implimented and that they seem to take away from the functionality of the device because it takes time to assemble all the junk. I guess I understand that.
I can see a couple of things that I'd like a PDA to do for me and I know the hardware is out there, things like a GPS reciever and a multi-media player (which I would want to interface with my car's radio). I suppose that if I was willing to shell out the bux and limit my use of the device to a few things that it does well, I could be satisfied but I know myself and I would keep pushing the machines limits, trying to make it into something it isn't quite ready to be. For that reason, I will wait to buy my next PDA until they have grown up!
We can trace the roots of the internet back to DARPA projects that related to networking and the construction of a "bullet-proof" network used by the United States government, the military, and educational institutions. In a way, the United States can lay claim to the discovery of the internet. By extenstion, since "we" discovered it and "we" built it, it is possible to lay claims of ownership over it - but these would be historical claims and not something that we could use to control it's use outside of our borders.
Over the years, we have allowed others to connect up and use "our" network and our technology. This has been a two way street with people from all over the world working for mutual benefit. The fact is that while the roots of the network may have sprung from the United States, it is no longer an American institution, it is a world-wide communications network and nobody can lay claim to owning all of it.
Like a geo-political boundary, we can decided what enters our counrty and what we do not permit (like the Nazi paraphanalia issue that Yahoo went through with France). In order to make this effective though we would need some sort of cyber-customs.
Does this then mean that the UN should wrest control of ICANN and other orginizations? What makes the United Nations uniquely qualified to serve as an arbitrator of cyber-space? Is it because we can expect a special sort of nuterality out of them? Is it because they can create international forums to deal with issues unique to the internet and cyberspace in general? If this were the case, I'd be all for the UN running the show. But the UN does not work that way, they are a very political orginization and they tend to mix issues using their influence on one issue to gain compliance in some other realm. Like oil for food. No, the UN has too broad a charter and is too willing to trade one cause for another. I'd feel uncomfortable with the UN having a huge role in internet regulation and control.
Still, I suspect that there will have to be some such agency, something that can rein in the outlaws and bring fair and impartial decisions that relate to various conflicts. How about a completely seperate orginization seeded with people from DARPA, CERN, ICANN and other orginizations that have done more than their fair share to build the internet?
Just dreaming I guess.
The first thing that I do when I get a magazine is turn it over and knock out all of the "blown in inserts" and other crap. So, I don't just do this in the virtual realm.
Online ads aren't something I trust so I do my best to ignore them. Why don't I trust them? Because a good percentage of them are selling snake oil - like "spyware removers" that don't remove spyware, "memory cleaners" that do absolutly nothing and so on.
The ads that interfere with what I am trying to read are worst of all! Even if I was looking for something they were selling as a matter of principal, I would not buy because I hate that kind of interference advertising.
I find sites that are selling something that run ads amusing in a sick sort of way. I assume the ad placement is based on the product being advertised as having a higher profit margine than the one I am intentionally looking at. I have no idea this is true or not but that is the way that I think. It is the cyber equivalent of a high pressure salesman trying to sell you a product with a higher profit margin so he can pad his comission. Something else I don't fall for.
While I'll agree with the people that say that parts of the story sound unbelieveable, I think that with the tail for DNA testing there is enough evidence so that we should keep an "open mind" and wait and see what the testing reveals.
Also, having been interviewed and "quoted" by a newspaper before, I can tell you that the possibility exists that the story he told the reporter is not the one that you read. The reporter may have misquoted him or the editors may have changed the story enough so that if you asked the retired engineer; he may tell you that the story you read was hardly recognizable as the one he told! These guys are far more interested in selling their paper and ads than they are in telling the real story.
I've heard local stories about odd animals in the woods here in Minnesota (including albino sasquaches) and while I don't exactly believe them - but I've seen some strange things in the woods myself, including a pile of scat that was so big I would have hated to see the animal that left it! I've seen freak of nature animals that include white (not albino) deer, black and white squirrils. People I trust have told me about black deer and a grey bear (who I assume was a very old black bear).
It would be nice if a program could be developed where someone could buy three laptops, donating two to the project and getting one for their own.
This would be a very nice way of supporting a worthwhile cause while at the same time getting something for yourself. I'm attracted to this PC for several reasons. First, I like the overall general design, secondly I think the hand-crank would be usefull to me. It would never be my primary computer but I could see using it on weekends, while camping, and for reading.
I'd also guess that the machine would be quite "hackable" in the good sense of the word. I imagine people retasking the machine for other purposes (like as a control device for other equipment). I can see other people developing add ons for it so it could be used with various devices (printers, external storage and so on).
I want one, I'd buy three to get one. Seems like a wonderful way to fund the program.
I am not an iPod or Apple computer owner, I've only paid attention to them because I have a friend who is in the video publishing business who is an Apple fan, he is the first to buy anything new from them. He is stuck solidly on the brand!
I wish he could hear himself talk. He is constantly complaining about this or that and spends a great deal of time fighting with things that one would think are easy. I'd dismiss him as being a sort of inexperienced user and a perfectionist except that it seems like when I talk to other Apple users, they all to one degree or another echo his complaints and experiences.
I know the "Apple community" is very active and involved - much more so than PC users; they seem happy to jump in and help solve problems (and I believe this is a real plus for the Apple company) but, when it comes down to it, the community is much smaller than the PC community and, they tend to pool in niche markets. All together, this means that support is somewhat less than stellar when there is some sort of unique problem.
I like the concept of the iPod and think that it is a nifty little product but it is something that I do not see myself having for some time yet. First, several of the devices have had usability issues (bad batterys, scratched screens...) and second, the cost of filling the iPod with music sounds a bit extreme.
I'm not an audiophile, I only buy a few CDs a year but even so, I've amassed quite a collection of the music that is important to me. I don't walk down the street listening to it, I listen to it at home and in the car and I doubt that will change. I do love music though and can understand people who have a different lifestyle than me needing an iPod like device for walking, riding the bus, and so on. I see the value of this kind of device. This makes me wonder how long Apple will have so much of the market. My guess is that this is not something that will last long. Other companies will make close approximations of the device at a lower cost but similar (or better) quality. When another big name company gains the right kind of foothold, Apple's iPod business will become like their computer business, a niche market.
I do give them kudos to their exceptional design as far as user interface goes. But the device itself is more than just that and it sounds like they need to pay closer attention to the rest of the machine.
Would we need to deforest anything? We have thousands of acres in setaside programs where the land is planted in "cover crop" and farmers are being paid not to farm it. These CRP (Crop Reduction Programs) programs "help" keep the cost of comodities like corn and wheat artificially high so that farmers will continue to produce them at a profit.
If there was a greater demand for them, they could eliminate these programs and put land back into production which would fuel our economy three ways. First by having a market, second by eliminating the program paid for by taxes, and third by bringing energy production back in to our country.
Again, pointing to Brazil, this process has litteraly refueled their economy. They still have a long way to go to catch up to the US but they are better off today than yesterday and the expect continued growth because of their energy industry.
Their cars are even better - they run on 100% ethanol. All the major manufacturers build 'em for that market which is much smaller than the US.
Also, all of the major oil companies play along. If they will do that for Brazil, they will do that for the US too.
The cool thing is if that happens, they are ready. Their cars will run on either gas or ethanol or anything in between. While gas is twice as expensive as ethanol, they can run just fine on it.
On the History Channel the other night I watched the Modern Marvels segment on Sugar. Brazil has all but given up on petrolium and are using ethanol that they brew from sugar. It is nearly as efficient as gas and is 100% renewable, and for those eco friendly types, it is carbon neutral. They have a law that requires all gas stations to sell gas, diesel, and alcohol. They require all manufacturers to make multi-fuel cars and they are succeding.
We don't need a box that does some fake magic hocus pocus, we need something like what Brazil is doing!
You see it really did have serious consiquences. You were drunk and that reduced you to the level of becoming an AOL user. This is PROOF that drinking kills brain cells!
You are lucky, when you sobered up you were able to remember the event and call and cancel service. What on earth would have happened had you passed out and didn't recall doing this? It could have involved serious consiquences, you could have been a longer term AOL member!
For your saftey, for those people you love, stop drinking now before you lose too many brain cells and become a permament AOL subscriber! Man you are already living too close to the edge.
For your own well being, I hope someone takes your CD-ROM drive away!
The proposed standard sounds really great and all that, I'm sure I'll be able to see a bit of difference and that may or may not make a believer out of me. I already have millions of colors and thousands of lines of resolution though and I treasure each and every one of them.
What I don't treasure out of the current specs is the limited length that the cable can go before I see too much distortion. The engineers tell me this is mostly a limitation caused by signal speed and certain laws of physics. Yes there really are times where I would like the monitor fifteen feet from the computer! Please in your new standard, consider this.
Thank you,
Forgive me for a moment, this post may seem slightly off topic but I think that what we are seeing is the symptom of a larger problem and that is what I want to address in this post. So, flame away if you want.
Kids, by their very nature are curious and, a bit rebelious. That hasn't changed in generations, kids have always been tempted by things that they know they should not do and kids have always been known to defy authority. I know I did, and I'll bet you did too!
I was very fortunate to have had several teachers who were actually able to harness my curiosity and my desire to "push the boundaries." To this day, I think they were the best teachers I had.
I also had the other kind of teacher; I remember specifically one English teacher who told us to read a specfic chapter. I got in trouble for reading beyond the chapter! I loved reading and simply got caught up in the story. Why he got upset is still beyond me.
Many teachers no longer teach kids, they teach cirruclium. They expect kids to march in lock-step to their plans. Kids going though this feel like they are prisoners and that their teachers are little more than glorified babysitters! They get bored, they don't understand why they are being limited and, they naturally fight this by defying the silly rules established by the people in authority. In short, the kids will be kids (just like they always have been).
Yeah, the kids hacked the computers and used them for things that maybe they shouldn't have. I have to say that the administrators of the school should have expected this.
It seems to me there were probably a number of other things that could have been done - including a policy of "if you hack this, we will take it away from you and you will fail the class". The way that it has happend smells like the administration has chosen, intentionally, to make examples out of these kids. I suspect that this was done to send a message to future students "Don't mess with us" - but this kind of thing against kids seldom works and can easily backfire (especially if nothing comes of the charges).
I feel for the kids, I really do. Not because they hacked the computers but because the administration and staff of the school have obviously made some poor choices along the way. This problem is a symptom of something wrong much deeper in the system. The teachers should realize they are teaching kids who are naturally curious, naturally push the limits, and naturally defy authority. If these kids were challenged, rather than restricted, they would learn a hell of a lot more.
Teachers, please go back to teaching kids, not cirriculum!
Thank you for your reply and all of the great information that it contained. Someone Please mod this up!!!!
Can I ask you a layman's question? What are the first products that consumers are likely to see made out of this technology? When are we likely to see them in production?
Once again, thank you very much for your reply. I really appreciate it.