The issue isn't poor security. Using ssl/tls with a self signed certificate is more secure than passing all communications in the clear. With recent news Why One-time Passwords Suck For MITM Attacks one wonders what we are getting by trusting the CAs. Note in the article that a researcher was able to get a certificate for login.live.com so he now has a CA IE will accept. The real security issue is that by making it difficult/expensive for the small web service to get a valid certificate from a CA that both IE and Firefox accept and providing a warning screen that will cause some users to avoid the service, we will get services that use no encryption. Since we all know that a large portion of the web using community use one password for all their services, this makes these sites an easy resource for harvesting credentials.
My guess... They are adding features to try to stay on top of the free email pile. A loss of an account is a loss of a mark, I mean potential customer at an advertiser.
How does this aid in preventing shoplifting? If I am shoplifting I am not handing those items to the cashier to put into the bag that security is going to look into. They are likely hidden on your person and because the guy checking the bag doesn't do a pat down, the only thing he could possibly find is things that you stole at or behind the cashier and were stupid enough to put in your bag. Maybe you attached a fake UPC, but that is something that the cashier should be looking at when ringing up the sale. By your reasoning we should submit to a pat down search to aid in keeping costs low. One real possibility is that is really a check on the cashier, but that could also be solved without the bag check.
The real injustice here is that a person calling the police was arrested for asserting his rights. A police officer should have known that he didn't have to provide identification. He also should have asked the caller what the issue was. The only reason he should have had to submit was if the store was accusing him of shoplifting and if he wasn't he had the right to file false arrest against them. The police officer overstepped his authority and this guy paid for it. Sure he wasn't making things easy on everyone, but he doesn't have to and no way should he have been arrested for doing nothing wrong.
You completely missed the point. There are rights the consumers have regarding copyrighted material. Those rights can be found in the laws of the appropriate jurisdictions.
Let me preface by saying I am a fan of FOSS, and am thinking about undertaking a project I would likely release under the GPL. That being said, the GPL carries quite a few restrictions for being 'free'. I think people need to come up with comparison than the speech beer one. All free speech guarantees is the right to communicate without censorship. I think most people are really thinking of the higher ideal of freedom, that was being expressed at the end of the movie Braveheart. Which is something that the GPL does not give you. Free means without restriction.
I merely used the TV to illustrate that inability to legally acquire something doesn't give you carte blanche to violate the law. I am causing a loss of sale if they ever release it in my market (or at the very least to present it with revenue generating content.) I don't buy into the numbers bandied about regarding the billions lost to piracy, because I know many of those would not have bought it. However, just because you aren't taking anything from the IP owner when you download the show/song/game/productivity software doesn't mean that it is harmless either. Take an indie game designer, for example. They might not be losing anything when you play their game without paying for it, but if any people that would have bought it pirate it, that could be the difference between them making a living or going under.
Most TV (If not all, I don't look for them.) shows will have the copyright symbol and list all rights reserved. You can now consult your US copyright law (I say US since we are talking about NBC.) to see what rights you have. So yeah, they are including licensing info with the show. That isn't even necessary, since all IP created in the US is automatically copyrighted and it is not necessary to display the copyright symbol or any notice. You should assume no rights to the IP unless specifically given. Try parking on your local courthouse lawn, than see how far you get telling the officer that will inevitably come, that you can park there since there isn't a no parking sign. The reason the GPL includes the license is because they are granting additional rights and restrictions.
The GPL parallels broadcast TV amazingly well. The GPL essentially says you can access and do whatever you want to the IP. However if you modify it and redistribute it, you must 'pay' for it by allowing others free access to your IP. Broadcast TV you can get for free. However if you want to redistribute it, you have to follow their terms. Just like the GPL does.
Do you really believe that if you took a bunch of videotapes of broadcast tv to the Flea Market and handed them out even for free, you would likely run afoul of the law. Fair use would only cover individual use. By your logic I would be within my rights to record songs off the radio and make my own internet radio station. We know the RIAA would be loving you than. I think that the Napster and Kazaa cases pretty much set precedent that mass distribution over the internet of copyrighted material is not legal. I take it you don't download any content that came from a cable channel? Since it was never broadcast over the air.
We can't have it both ways we either need to respect everybody's rights and licenses or let all consume with no restriction.
I'm not overstating things at all. I'm sorry that you can't get the shows legitimately till years later, but that doesn't give you the right to download it. I live in the US, and am a fan of Dr. Who and a few other BBC shows. I currently don't have access to them, am I downloading them, no because I wouldn't want people ignoring the license or rights of my IP. Soon I am going to be getting rid of my cable and am going to lose access to about 90% of the shows I like watching. I won't be downloading them either. So in my opinion my alternatives are realistic, your stealing is the only remaining option is what I mean by entitlement. Do you feel that people without TV's would be justified in stealing them so they can watch the TV shows they are entitled to? If they can't afford one it is the only realistic option.
For all we know, NBC is working on or has an alternate venue for the shows on the web. Obviously NBC didn't find the current licensing deal with Apple to their liking. Should NBC be forced to bow to Apple, since they are the major online media distributor? My take is no they shouldn't. I also would bet that we will see most of those shows available in some manner online in the near future.
He can wait for the DVD release, he can use an antenna or stop watching. The implied 'I'm going to have to illegally download it.' sounds kinda whiny and entitled, especially since TV is pretty much the least restricted medium out there. Even high definition capture cards can be purchased at fairly reasonable prices.
Change this from a TV show to a software package released under the GPL, would we be as self righteous about violating the licensing.
I was thinking along the same lines. This plan gives the government a lot of options. Subvert it as you mention, block it, monitor who uses it, and the list goes on. It would be like advertising a dead drop site and what signals to use, in the newspaper. It is compromised from the start.
You're scenario would likely hurt you much more than help. Civil cases aren't as cut and dry as criminal cases. To win the damages, they only have to convince the jury that it is more likely than not that you were infringing their copyrights. Your formatting the hard drive after receiving a letter, may even be enough to cause the jury to find the case against you. The RIAA has alot going for it in these cases. First off, the offer of a settlement for a few grand. It would likely cost you more to mount a defense (The Foster case asked for $114,000 for attorney fees.) So right there you have to decide that if it is worth it to risk going to court. Now if you go to court they waive the settlement offer and now you are looking at full damages, which will likely be in the five figure range. Now even assume that you win your case, you probably won't get the RIAA to cover your legal costs (So far we know of only one case where legal costs were awarded and at least five where they were denied.) In other words the likely outcome if you are targeted by the RIAA, is you are going to be out a fair amount of money.
The second system might work, but it would require you to perjure and that could come back to bite you if they somehow found out you had another system. And of course, you would still likely be out legal fees.
If you modify GPL code and distribute it, you must make that new code available under the GPL. For example I distribute my "Hello World." program under the GPL. You download it change it to "Hola Mundo." If you then distribute it on your website, you would need to make the source code available under the GPL. So if VMWare is modified Linux source code, than that software must be made available under the terms of the GPL.
My point is that the CDROM multimedia bubble, wasn't a bubble. Nobody was investing in these business to the level that it would have caused an large economic impact. The bubble phenomenon is when we ignore the value or can't correctly value the business and we continue to invest in it, as you mentioned and eventually someone is going to get come to their senses and cause a selling frenzy (The pop of the bubble). I didn't read TFA, because I do believe that most of his commentary is designed spread FUD and bring views to his column. That being said I belive the CDROM bubble he evidently mentioned is likely similar to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1 983. Since there wasn't widespread speculation in these markets there was no bubble to pop. There is a cycle, but it happens alot and doesn't have the impact of a bubble. The big bubbles to pop in the 20th century was dot com bust and the stock market crash in the twenties and Dvorak implies that this Web 2.0 will be at least worse than the dot com bust which I find hard to swallow.
He is completely clueless. The dot com bubble has very little to do with markets disappearing or businesses failing. The bubble was all about people that would blindly invest in internet stocks and businesses. After awhile when the overvalued internet companies started to fail, and all that stock was worthless, it caused an impact on the economy. CDROM based interactive multimedia didn't do that, they never had the investment that the dot coms did. I believe currently people are more wary of investing in unproven web businesses and you really need to have an environment where people will blindly invest in companies that think they are going to make money shipping 50 pound bags of dog food to the people. The current bubble that might hurt is the mortgage fiasco that is currently playing out right now.
All my optical mice have been much more accurate than any ball mouse I ever used. I am currently using a Logitech G7 on a freebie mouse pad, that is solid blue with the vendors logo on it, and have no control issues on it and use it all the time for gaming. The only caveat with a optical mouse, is to keep hair/fur off your mousing surface. One of my cats tends to sleep on my mouse pad, so every once in awhile I will get a piece of fur stuck in the laser/camera hole, which can either cause the cursor not to move or move randomly. Overall though, this happens very infrequently and isn't as bad as the gunk that used to build up on the rollers of my ball mice.
To combat the battery issue, I have only been buying mice that use rechargeable batteries and have a charger in the base.
1988 5,000 to 10,000 dead in Central and the Eastern U.S. 2003 35,000 dead in Europe (7,000 in Germany). 2006 140 dead in California, 25,000 cattle dead and 700,000 poultry dead due to heat.
The Real World mechanisms are all fallible and take a huge amount of the communities resources to maintain. How many times have we seen news of people violating a restraining order to disastrous results and people can escape from jail. Online we can implement more effective mechanisms that will require much less of an investment in community resources. By no means is the online community more constrained than we are in the Real World. If the community (this obviously includes the host of the service) wanted to they could create commands that would allow one avatar to completely ignore the existence of any other avatar with a few keystrokes. Going a step farther and a page from the social networking sites, we could create the equivalent of this avatar only interacts with avatars in it's friends list. Making it incredibly difficult for an individual with malicious intent to even bother anyone. The only reason the Real World might seem safer, is because we have spent centuries implementing the code(Laws) and spend a very large amount of the communities resources enforcing it. Even in the Real World there are going to be times it isn't your "Ball and Bat" and if you don't like the way the game is being played don't play there.
Both items I mentioned have a superior warranty to Apple Care. I wouldn't expect the manufacturer to take much longer to replace the items than Apple would. Plus you still have your overpriced 1GB RAM and 250GB HD to use while you wait. If you are really worried spend the money you saved on the 16GB of memory and a couple 750GB HDs to buy another bare bones Mac Pro just in case. It is crazy that Apple is selling that RAM 88% over what I can buy it myself. At that rate I can buy 6 more sticks of RAM that I can replace immediately and still have a few bucks left over. For the price of 2 750GB HDs at Apple, I can buy 3 retail and still have $100 left over. Don't get me wrong, I think the Mac Pro is a great design, and would love to have one. I just feel that Apple is gouging you on the price of addons.
Sorry, bud... But if this is a design house, I hope they have someone that can spend their time sourcing parts. If it is a freelancer spec'ing out their own machine, they are doing themselves a disservice by not spending an hour looking around for alternatives. Just to point out how bad the price gouging is...
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35 590/ It does have Bluetooth 2.0. Size difference is minimal. It will support push email (can't find the page I saw that on.) It has GPS functionality. I assume the iPhone does, but you would think that they would mention it somewhere on the website. Also note that the Google Maps shown on the high technology wireless page has a search for "San Francisco Starbucks" If the iPhone was able to open up Google Maps and tie in location you don't need the city in the query. iPhone is cool and will undoubtedly be more popular than the OpenMoko line, but it isn't as revolutionary as they want it to be.
An easier fix would be to keep the processor pegged at 100% with a low priority process. Any new process would just keep the maxed, so there shouldn't be any appreciable heat related skew.
Slashdot Mirror
The issue isn't poor security. Using ssl/tls with a self signed certificate is more secure than passing all communications in the clear. With recent news Why One-time Passwords Suck For MITM Attacks one wonders what we are getting by trusting the CAs. Note in the article that a researcher was able to get a certificate for login.live.com so he now has a CA IE will accept. The real security issue is that by making it difficult/expensive for the small web service to get a valid certificate from a CA that both IE and Firefox accept and providing a warning screen that will cause some users to avoid the service, we will get services that use no encryption. Since we all know that a large portion of the web using community use one password for all their services, this makes these sites an easy resource for harvesting credentials.
My guess... They are adding features to try to stay on top of the free email pile. A loss of an account is a loss of a mark, I mean potential customer at an advertiser.
How does this aid in preventing shoplifting? If I am shoplifting I am not handing those items to the cashier to put into the bag that security is going to look into. They are likely hidden on your person and because the guy checking the bag doesn't do a pat down, the only thing he could possibly find is things that you stole at or behind the cashier and were stupid enough to put in your bag. Maybe you attached a fake UPC, but that is something that the cashier should be looking at when ringing up the sale. By your reasoning we should submit to a pat down search to aid in keeping costs low. One real possibility is that is really a check on the cashier, but that could also be solved without the bag check.
The real injustice here is that a person calling the police was arrested for asserting his rights. A police officer should have known that he didn't have to provide identification. He also should have asked the caller what the issue was. The only reason he should have had to submit was if the store was accusing him of shoplifting and if he wasn't he had the right to file false arrest against them. The police officer overstepped his authority and this guy paid for it. Sure he wasn't making things easy on everyone, but he doesn't have to and no way should he have been arrested for doing nothing wrong.
You completely missed the point. There are rights the consumers have regarding copyrighted material. Those rights can be found in the laws of the appropriate jurisdictions.
Let me preface by saying I am a fan of FOSS, and am thinking about undertaking a project I would likely release under the GPL. That being said, the GPL carries quite a few restrictions for being 'free'. I think people need to come up with comparison than the speech beer one. All free speech guarantees is the right to communicate without censorship. I think most people are really thinking of the higher ideal of freedom, that was being expressed at the end of the movie Braveheart. Which is something that the GPL does not give you. Free means without restriction.
I merely used the TV to illustrate that inability to legally acquire something doesn't give you carte blanche to violate the law. I am causing a loss of sale if they ever release it in my market (or at the very least to present it with revenue generating content.) I don't buy into the numbers bandied about regarding the billions lost to piracy, because I know many of those would not have bought it. However, just because you aren't taking anything from the IP owner when you download the show/song/game/productivity software doesn't mean that it is harmless either. Take an indie game designer, for example. They might not be losing anything when you play their game without paying for it, but if any people that would have bought it pirate it, that could be the difference between them making a living or going under.
Most TV (If not all, I don't look for them.) shows will have the copyright symbol and list all rights reserved. You can now consult your US copyright law (I say US since we are talking about NBC.) to see what rights you have. So yeah, they are including licensing info with the show. That isn't even necessary, since all IP created in the US is automatically copyrighted and it is not necessary to display the copyright symbol or any notice. You should assume no rights to the IP unless specifically given. Try parking on your local courthouse lawn, than see how far you get telling the officer that will inevitably come, that you can park there since there isn't a no parking sign. The reason the GPL includes the license is because they are granting additional rights and restrictions.
The GPL parallels broadcast TV amazingly well. The GPL essentially says you can access and do whatever you want to the IP. However if you modify it and redistribute it, you must 'pay' for it by allowing others free access to your IP. Broadcast TV you can get for free. However if you want to redistribute it, you have to follow their terms. Just like the GPL does.
Do you really believe that if you took a bunch of videotapes of broadcast tv to the Flea Market and handed them out even for free, you would likely run afoul of the law. Fair use would only cover individual use. By your logic I would be within my rights to record songs off the radio and make my own internet radio station. We know the RIAA would be loving you than. I think that the Napster and Kazaa cases pretty much set precedent that mass distribution over the internet of copyrighted material is not legal. I take it you don't download any content that came from a cable channel? Since it was never broadcast over the air.
We can't have it both ways we either need to respect everybody's rights and licenses or let all consume with no restriction.
I'm not overstating things at all. I'm sorry that you can't get the shows legitimately till years later, but that doesn't give you the right to download it. I live in the US, and am a fan of Dr. Who and a few other BBC shows. I currently don't have access to them, am I downloading them, no because I wouldn't want people ignoring the license or rights of my IP. Soon I am going to be getting rid of my cable and am going to lose access to about 90% of the shows I like watching. I won't be downloading them either. So in my opinion my alternatives are realistic, your stealing is the only remaining option is what I mean by entitlement. Do you feel that people without TV's would be justified in stealing them so they can watch the TV shows they are entitled to? If they can't afford one it is the only realistic option.
For all we know, NBC is working on or has an alternate venue for the shows on the web. Obviously NBC didn't find the current licensing deal with Apple to their liking. Should NBC be forced to bow to Apple, since they are the major online media distributor? My take is no they shouldn't. I also would bet that we will see most of those shows available in some manner online in the near future.
He can wait for the DVD release, he can use an antenna or stop watching. The implied 'I'm going to have to illegally download it.' sounds kinda whiny and entitled, especially since TV is pretty much the least restricted medium out there. Even high definition capture cards can be purchased at fairly reasonable prices.
Change this from a TV show to a software package released under the GPL, would we be as self righteous about violating the licensing.
Disney will probably be doing it soon. They just need to put a 3d scanner next to the camera in the Star Tours gift shop.
I was thinking along the same lines. This plan gives the government a lot of options. Subvert it as you mention, block it, monitor who uses it, and the list goes on. It would be like advertising a dead drop site and what signals to use, in the newspaper. It is compromised from the start.
You're scenario would likely hurt you much more than help. Civil cases aren't as cut and dry as criminal cases. To win the damages, they only have to convince the jury that it is more likely than not that you were infringing their copyrights. Your formatting the hard drive after receiving a letter, may even be enough to cause the jury to find the case against you. The RIAA has alot going for it in these cases. First off, the offer of a settlement for a few grand. It would likely cost you more to mount a defense (The Foster case asked for $114,000 for attorney fees.) So right there you have to decide that if it is worth it to risk going to court. Now if you go to court they waive the settlement offer and now you are looking at full damages, which will likely be in the five figure range. Now even assume that you win your case, you probably won't get the RIAA to cover your legal costs (So far we know of only one case where legal costs were awarded and at least five where they were denied.) In other words the likely outcome if you are targeted by the RIAA, is you are going to be out a fair amount of money.
The second system might work, but it would require you to perjure and that could come back to bite you if they somehow found out you had another system. And of course, you would still likely be out legal fees.
If you modify GPL code and distribute it, you must make that new code available under the GPL. For example I distribute my "Hello World." program under the GPL. You download it change it to "Hola Mundo." If you then distribute it on your website, you would need to make the source code available under the GPL. So if VMWare is modified Linux source code, than that software must be made available under the terms of the GPL.
My point is that the CDROM multimedia bubble, wasn't a bubble. Nobody was investing in these business to the level that it would have caused an large economic impact. The bubble phenomenon is when we ignore the value or can't correctly value the business and we continue to invest in it, as you mentioned and eventually someone is going to get come to their senses and cause a selling frenzy (The pop of the bubble). I didn't read TFA, because I do believe that most of his commentary is designed spread FUD and bring views to his column. That being said I belive the CDROM bubble he evidently mentioned is likely similar to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1 983. Since there wasn't widespread speculation in these markets there was no bubble to pop. There is a cycle, but it happens alot and doesn't have the impact of a bubble. The big bubbles to pop in the 20th century was dot com bust and the stock market crash in the twenties and Dvorak implies that this Web 2.0 will be at least worse than the dot com bust which I find hard to swallow.
He is completely clueless. The dot com bubble has very little to do with markets disappearing or businesses failing. The bubble was all about people that would blindly invest in internet stocks and businesses. After awhile when the overvalued internet companies started to fail, and all that stock was worthless, it caused an impact on the economy. CDROM based interactive multimedia didn't do that, they never had the investment that the dot coms did. I believe currently people are more wary of investing in unproven web businesses and you really need to have an environment where people will blindly invest in companies that think they are going to make money shipping 50 pound bags of dog food to the people. The current bubble that might hurt is the mortgage fiasco that is currently playing out right now.
All my optical mice have been much more accurate than any ball mouse I ever used. I am currently using a Logitech G7 on a freebie mouse pad, that is solid blue with the vendors logo on it, and have no control issues on it and use it all the time for gaming. The only caveat with a optical mouse, is to keep hair/fur off your mousing surface. One of my cats tends to sleep on my mouse pad, so every once in awhile I will get a piece of fur stuck in the laser/camera hole, which can either cause the cursor not to move or move randomly. Overall though, this happens very infrequently and isn't as bad as the gunk that used to build up on the rollers of my ball mice.
To combat the battery issue, I have only been buying mice that use rechargeable batteries and have a charger in the base.
Heatwaves...
o ad/ew_heat_wave.en.pdf
1988 5,000 to 10,000 dead in Central and the Eastern U.S.
2003 35,000 dead in Europe (7,000 in Germany).
2006 140 dead in California, 25,000 cattle dead and 700,000 poultry dead due to heat.
And they want it to get hotter?
This also ignores crop related issues. http://www.grid.unep.ch/product/publication/downl
I think you have the situation reversed.
The Real World mechanisms are all fallible and take a huge amount of the communities resources to maintain. How many times have we seen news of people violating a restraining order to disastrous results and people can escape from jail. Online we can implement more effective mechanisms that will require much less of an investment in community resources. By no means is the online community more constrained than we are in the Real World. If the community (this obviously includes the host of the service) wanted to they could create commands that would allow one avatar to completely ignore the existence of any other avatar with a few keystrokes. Going a step farther and a page from the social networking sites, we could create the equivalent of this avatar only interacts with avatars in it's friends list. Making it incredibly difficult for an individual with malicious intent to even bother anyone. The only reason the Real World might seem safer, is because we have spent centuries implementing the code(Laws) and spend a very large amount of the communities resources enforcing it. Even in the Real World there are going to be times it isn't your "Ball and Bat" and if you don't like the way the game is being played don't play there.
This is not FUD. APC in this case stands for Australian Personal Computing. Here is a link to a story about Vista prices in Australia http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/6154/53/
Both items I mentioned have a superior warranty to Apple Care. I wouldn't expect the manufacturer to take much longer to replace the items than Apple would. Plus you still have your overpriced 1GB RAM and 250GB HD to use while you wait. If you are really worried spend the money you saved on the 16GB of memory and a couple 750GB HDs to buy another bare bones Mac Pro just in case. It is crazy that Apple is selling that RAM 88% over what I can buy it myself. At that rate I can buy 6 more sticks of RAM that I can replace immediately and still have a few bucks left over. For the price of 2 750GB HDs at Apple, I can buy 3 retail and still have $100 left over. Don't get me wrong, I think the Mac Pro is a great design, and would love to have one. I just feel that Apple is gouging you on the price of addons.
Sorry, bud... But if this is a design house, I hope they have someone that can spend their time sourcing parts. If it is a freelancer spec'ing out their own machine, they are doing themselves a disservice by not spending an hour looking around for alternatives. Just to point out how bad the price gouging is...
Apple 16GB (8x2GB) FB-DIMM 667 $4499
Newegg 16GB (8x2GB) Kingston (KVR667D2D8F5/1G) FB-DIMM 667 $2392
Apple 750GB SATA 3GB/s $$499
ZipZoomFly ST3750640NS 750GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s $299
Apple Warranty 1 Year
Seagate HD Warranty 5 Years
Kingston Memory Lifetime Warranty
So at the least buy a bare bones Mac Pro and add your own parts, you will save a ton.
Try the "Art of Assembly Language Programming" available free at this website http://webster.cs.ucr.edu/AoA/index.html it should get you started.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35 590/ It does have Bluetooth 2.0. Size difference is minimal. It will support push email (can't find the page I saw that on.) It has GPS functionality. I assume the iPhone does, but you would think that they would mention it somewhere on the website. Also note that the Google Maps shown on the high technology wireless page has a search for "San Francisco Starbucks" If the iPhone was able to open up Google Maps and tie in location you don't need the city in the query. iPhone is cool and will undoubtedly be more popular than the OpenMoko line, but it isn't as revolutionary as they want it to be.
Lots of the iPhone features will be available this month on the FIC Neo1973 Smartphone. It is also an open platform.
http://www.openmoko.com/press/index.html/
An easier fix would be to keep the processor pegged at 100% with a low priority process. Any new process would just keep the maxed, so there shouldn't be any appreciable heat related skew.