Funny that moral grounds would be an argument *against* DRM and not in support of it...
There's nothing wrong with Digital Rights per se, but there are flawed implementations. But confusing this fundamental isn't going to help fair use and privacy.
Got any research that support that statement ? I mean, real research as opposed to that crap webpage where some amateur without knowledge of statistics selects data to prove a point ?
> kids who commit crimes that are supposedly caused by video games
I guess you were in such a hurry for an early post that you forgot to read the article... It doesn't have anything to say about crimes "supposedly" caused by video games. It deals with how violent video games make players more violent. Regardless of their parents.
Can we get a Dvorak topic that we can ignore, please?
John Dvorak writes for the average WinTel user who isn't following tech trends more than what makes the evening news. I can't understand how anything he writes is of any interest to/.ers., really.
I don't think you understand... they're not in the same market as Microsoft. Apple primarily makes money off of hardware and are targeting a small but profiting corner of the market.
Why sell twice the machines at half the price ? That's double the amount of work for the same profit.
This guy doesn't have a clue. He's suffering from the delusion that "quantity has a quality in itself" (Stalin quote).
3 firewalls ? Why not 6 or 12 ? Or 1, properly configured.
5 passwords ? Why not 20 ? How is he tracking all his passwords - with "Password days" and all ? I'm betting the farm he isn't memorizing them all. If he is, they're not different enough, not good enough. I'm sure 4 of those 5 can be cracked with readily available cracker kits.
No, he's all about "a lot of security" as opposed to "good security".
I agree with you regarding the importance of civil disobedience. Absolutely.
But not in this particular case. The copyright changes and **AA lawsuits and the whole crap that is dangerous to our civil liberties were brought upon us *because* of file sharing. Illegal file sharing is *not* the reaction, it is the cause of the bad legislation we're seeing.
Downloading the latest movies or albums does *not* constitute civil disobedience as a protest of the diminuishing rights of indviduals vis-à-vis corporations. It only shows that the person is a cheap. If the product is bad, don't buy it, don't download it. If the product is good, buy it. There's no "I want to use this product but I don't want to pay for it" middle-way that is excusable when it comes to consumer goods (e.g. music).
A proper way to protest draconinan extensions to copyright law would be to organize boycotts and media awareness to the problem. Civil disobedience is a way of saying "I don't have a clue how democracy works. I just want it my way."
The conclusion "download all you want" isn't really a necessary conclusion of the premises. Copyright infrigement is still illegal, moral rights or not.
If you had read the coverage of this issue, you would have known what AFP's first request to Google was. Hint: It was not to sue. I'll leave it as homework for you to look it up. Maybe you can Google for it:)
And nothing shows class like a sweeping generalization...
Google broke the law and is correcting its unlawful behavior.
Get the facts right. The lawsuit had nothing to do with traffic to the AFP site, it was about AFP owned images on other news sites. How many comments have their been about this already ? Do you even read stories or comments on/. ?
And the "remove all links to them" set a really nice precedent for anyone with complaints on Google doesn't it ? I bet you'd throw a fit if MSN Search did a similar thing.
> There even exist techniques that make a MITM attack very difficult without even requiring a trusted third party. Do a seach on "fortified key negotiation".
I did, and I couldn't find anything practical. Do you have any links to fortified key negotiation implementations that would make SSL-mitm attacks impossible ?
Slashdot Mirror
Funny that moral grounds would be an argument *against* DRM and not in support of it...
There's nothing wrong with Digital Rights per se, but there are flawed implementations. But confusing this fundamental isn't going to help fair use and privacy.
Got any research that support that statement ? I mean, real research as opposed to that crap webpage where some amateur without knowledge of statistics selects data to prove a point ?
Didn't think so.
> kids who commit crimes that are supposedly caused by video games
I guess you were in such a hurry for an early post that you forgot to read the article... It doesn't have anything to say about crimes "supposedly" caused by video games. It deals with how violent video games make players more violent. Regardless of their parents.
> Shouldn't that be Zeno, not Archemides?
It's close enough for practical purpose...
Seriously though, more people have heard about "Archemides and the turtle" than have heard who came up with the paradox.
Didn't Clarke go away to avoid legal problems he had ? IIRC, he was under scrutiny for similar things that Michael Jackson now is.
Someone make this a geocache spot so we can stampede it into extinction once and for all!
You kidding ? I bet he claims to have founded it...
Can we get a Dvorak topic that we can ignore, please?
/.ers., really.
John Dvorak writes for the average WinTel user who isn't following tech trends more than what makes the evening news. I can't understand how anything he writes is of any interest to
From a legal standpoint it *is* odd that TigerDirect waited for so long to file this, and that is likely something that the judge will inquire about.
From a cheap-bastard standpoint it is clear why they waited so long, but that won't help them win this case.
I don't think you understand... they're not in the same market as Microsoft. Apple primarily makes money off of hardware and are targeting a small but profiting corner of the market.
Why sell twice the machines at half the price ? That's double the amount of work for the same profit.
No you got it backwards...
Captitalism is about squashing competition to create a monopoly.
Funny how privacy issues and personal liberties doesn't apply when dealing with your own kids... :)
This guy doesn't have a clue. He's suffering from the delusion that "quantity has a quality in itself" (Stalin quote).
3 firewalls ? Why not 6 or 12 ? Or 1, properly configured.
5 passwords ? Why not 20 ? How is he tracking all his passwords - with "Password days" and all ? I'm betting the farm he isn't memorizing them all. If he is, they're not different enough, not good enough. I'm sure 4 of those 5 can be cracked with readily available cracker kits.
No, he's all about "a lot of security" as opposed to "good security".
> all instances of a page are sharing the same object, which is very frustrating and anoying after having done it the other way.
What are you talking about ? Two instances of a JSP don't share objects. They are both different instances of the jsp servlet class.
I agree with you regarding the importance of civil disobedience. Absolutely.
But not in this particular case. The copyright changes and **AA lawsuits and the whole crap that is dangerous to our civil liberties were brought upon us *because* of file sharing. Illegal file sharing is *not* the reaction, it is the cause of the bad legislation we're seeing.
Downloading the latest movies or albums does *not* constitute civil disobedience as a protest of the diminuishing rights of indviduals vis-à-vis corporations. It only shows that the person is a cheap. If the product is bad, don't buy it, don't download it. If the product is good, buy it. There's no "I want to use this product but I don't want to pay for it" middle-way that is excusable when it comes to consumer goods (e.g. music).
A proper way to protest draconinan extensions to copyright law would be to organize boycotts and media awareness to the problem. Civil disobedience is a way of saying "I don't have a clue how democracy works. I just want it my way."
Flawed logic: -5
The conclusion "download all you want" isn't really a necessary conclusion of the premises. Copyright infrigement is still illegal, moral rights or not.
It sounds like msn.com is more like the kind of news site your are looking for buddy. After all, it is catering to the uninformed masses.
Can we please get a OFF-TOPIC topic that I can uncheck in my preferences ?
Thanks in advance.
If you had read the coverage of this issue, you would have known what AFP's first request to Google was. Hint: It was not to sue. I'll leave it as homework for you to look it up. Maybe you can Google for it :)
And nothing shows class like a sweeping generalization...
Don't be a jerk.
/. ?
Google broke the law and is correcting its unlawful behavior.
Get the facts right. The lawsuit had nothing to do with traffic to the AFP site, it was about AFP owned images on other news sites. How many comments have their been about this already ? Do you even read stories or comments on
And the "remove all links to them" set a really nice precedent for anyone with complaints on Google doesn't it ? I bet you'd throw a fit if MSN Search did a similar thing.
The statment "I haven't answered them, of course." becomes instantly funny when you read a simple explanation like this...
I'm getting too old for gaming jokes. The only bell that went off when I read "DDR" was East Germany...
> There even exist techniques that make a MITM attack very difficult without even requiring a trusted third party. Do a seach on "fortified key negotiation".
I did, and I couldn't find anything practical. Do you have any links to fortified key negotiation implementations that would make SSL-mitm attacks impossible ?
Perhaps a funny coincidence, but the sig was almost more on topic than the post itself...