Re:Tell them we don't need a Mac / Linux port.
on
Trillian 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
While I agree with you that there are far too many skin-able applications out there... you have to remember who many of them are designed for... those who like their PC to look cute and pretty... rather than be lean, mean and as fast as possible without wasting time on cute things here and there.
Hell, it's this attempt at cuteness that has kept me from upgrading to Windows XP, even in the non Fisher Price mode it's still to pastel for me.
Although it's been a while since I've used Mozilla (being the MS loving whore that I am), I recall a couple of years ago a pre-load option that would load the browser into memory as Windows would start up, and each time you'd need to use it, it would simply be displayed (as opposed to loaded from scratch)... I found this a rather nifty feature... sad to hear that it sounds like it was removed.
Why tell people what something is? Very simple, to attract potential users.
Take your sig for example... someone who doesn't know what it is most likely going to say "Firefox? What is that? Why should I get it?" Yes, they could go to the webpage and inquire for themselves, but that takes effort, and many (including Slashdot readers) like a brief summery that helps them decide if they will click on the link to learn more.
Yes, despite being a Windows user/fan, I know what GTK is... but that doesn't mean everyone does. Can we please have some more descriptive articles about software releases for the uninformed?
"I think the problem here may be more of a question of getting rid of the bad Internets and keeping the good Internets. 'Cause I think we can all agree, there's just too many Internets."
You are correct... however even the military systems require the civilian signals at first in order to lock on to the military band. This is why your average, run of the mill GPS jammer is such a threat not only to the unit sitting on top of your car and mine, but to the one inside of almost every us tank, humvee and plane.
I've got a friend who got C&Ded for downloading a tv show while running PeerGuardian with all of the latest updates.
Unfortunately, IP blocking like PG is pretty much worthless. Yes, it's easy to find out the IP's of the corporate parents, but they need only get a consumer level DSL/Cable line or have some of their employees run their pirate hunting software at home... and they will be virtually impossible to track down.
Are you forgetting that Minnesota is the same state the at elected Jesse Ventura as it's governor?
As a (now) former Minnesotan who voted in that horrible 1998 election, I too carry the shame of his being elected, even though I voted for one of the other guys (who is now a congressmen).
Just because you can get a patch out faster in the OSS world doesn't mean you should. It's pretty easy to open up a block of code and fix a bug (provided you know what it is, where it is and how to fix it), it's the testing to make sure that your fix didn't break anything else and that your system still works exactly like before (other than the fixed bug of course) is the time consuming part.
Does Microsoft spend weeks doing regression and unit testing? I do not know, however making the assumption that a patch can get out in the OSS world faster is better is not a very good one.
Having patch writers on hand 24x7 would be great for the actual fix, but would not reduce the amount of time required to make sure that the fix works and is safe.
It should be pointed out that the advantage of a proprietary model of development vs the FOSS one is one of liability. A patch needs to have at least the same, if not better quality (speed, error proneness, etc) than the bits that it is replacing. It is far easier for a small FOSS group to release a quickly written and tested fix than it is for Microsoft too. Despite popular belief, Microsoft has extremely high quality standards. How many companies do you know who have programmers on call 24x7 should their code break a build?
It's good for the economy in the short term, but should he ever lose his free housing, he'd be SOL. Despite my inability to do it for years, saving for that rainy day is quite important.
For desktop use, yes, they are horribly slow by today's standards. But for simple embedded solutions, they can at times be considered overkill. Ex: When I get around to putting a mediapc under my drivers seat... I have no need or desire for a chip whose clock is measured in Ghz, simply because it's far more power (heat and draw) than I need to play mp3's and basic custom software.
And small companies too. My company is only ~150 people strong... oh how I miss the days of being an intern with OT... now, like many, when that clock strikes 5, I feel ill the longer I am at my desk, and of course make it a point to feel ill as infrequently as possible.
I find it rather entertaining that so many on/. seem to think there is the same burden of proof with regards to the MPAA calling up your ISP and saying "I caught Joe Blow sharing one of my movies" and the MPAA filing criminal/civil charges against you and going to trial.
In the latter, a substantial amount of proof is required if one expects to win, in the prior, no proof at all is required to send a C&D, just a belief, however they do tend to put a few facts in with it for good measure.
Most C&D's are not in the tone of "you dirty pirate", they accuse little, only stating that they found someone using the IP in question at the time and date noted, sharing material that they do not believe that the person owning the IP in question is authorized to do, period.
Ever get grounded by your parents? Or sent to detention in school? Lord knows I did, and rarely was there ever overwhelming evidence of my wrong-doing, something that could be taken into court and be given as proof of my doing ____. They don't need that, nor does the MPAA/RIAA/BayTSP/etc when dealing with your ISP.
As I said above though, all they need to 'prove' is that you were sharing the file at the time in question, and DLing the file in question on BT, with you giving them a few blocks here and there is a great way to collect all the evidence they need to convince your ISP that you were being bad.
Even on SuprNova you'll occasionally find a completely legit torrent.
I do not think anyone here is saying that BT is illegal, the protocol itself cannot break the law, use of it can.
With your above quote, it almost sounds like you are trying to make SuperNova be as legit as BT... which it is not. Substantial non-infringing use is where the legitimate uses substantially outnumber the illicit uses... SuperNova I fear is almost exclusively an illicit use site, no matter how often the legit torrents may show up.
BT however has the same weakness as HTTP and FTP, only more so.
A single point of failure. With HTTP and FTP, you can easily setup a farm to handle large # of requests, but with BT, it's pretty easy to overload a tracker and take down an entire network of files.
How would encryption save you? Once the protocol is understood, one need only build a client (or modify an existing open source one) to download a particular file, all the while logging each and every IP it gets a bit of the file from. Once done, you verify the file is infringing on someone's copyright, and bam, you let the C&D's fly against all of those IP's you logged.
Unless you can completely remove the IP from the process (ie go through some anonymous proxy), you are still catchable once BayTSP and crew decide to track people on a network.
You haven't received a C&D before? I cannot speak for most ISP's, only my own.
When a friend a few months ago received a C&D, it included his IP, the time and date of the offence along with some info on the file... the ISP in question, just sends a warning letter on the first offense, unplugs you until you call in for the 2nd and unplugs you for 30 days on the 3rd, and this is only from the complaint.
You might have an open wap, or a trojan on your PC, or any number of other legitimate reasons of why your connection was used to DL unauthorized material in a way that was not authorized by you... it doesn't matter to this ISP, a complaint is a complaint, and as per the safe harbor provision of the DMCA, they act upon it.
Were you to get a 3rd C&D on this ISP and get unplugged for 30 days, you could always haul them into court and demand to get reinstated, but by the time you got your hearing, the 30 days would be over.
More so, it is the ISP's network, and by using it and paying for their services you agree to their rules, and if their rules say "we may suspend your access at our slightest whim should we receive information saying that you had allegedly infringed on someone's copyright", they can.
This is not the court system we are dealing with, this is free enterprise, and is little different than me refusing to personally associate with anyone under 5'0", simply because that is how I do business.
I shouldn't dignify that comment with a response... but I am going to anyway...
By server, I mean the centralized systems that permit different clients to talk to one another.
Yes, the 'server' that gets run on the client is a 'server', the entire system on the client side is still fundamentally a client and I choose to label it as such.
Just imagine the benefits of the system, with so many new trackers, the RIAA/MPAA will demand even more when they haul you into court.
"Your honor, the defendant wasn't just a person sharing the file, our records indicate that he was the person sharing the file, running a server, not just a client on a network with files to share"
It is far easier to go after the sellers than it is the buyers, but both are equally illegal when it comes to copyright law. You are knowingly purchasing/using/etc an unauthorized copy of their works.
To reiterate my above point, it is far easier for the copyright holders to see who is sharing a given file and target the source, than it is to host their own files, and see who downloads them. In the latter case, they add to the problem while in the prior, they seek out and destroy the one of the sources.
That may ask be, and the man down the street with the trench coat can sell heroin addicts what they 'need'... doesn't make it right.
The problem with both is getting caught, ones crack dealer is unlikely to keep the sorts of records that your tv show dealer does, or that exist outside of either of your abilities to control.
I use the drug comparison because like your tv use, it can be a double whammy. It's illegal to use certain substances, as well as to buy and possess them. Should your dealer ever get caught and his records be checked, they've automatically got you for buying for known 'pirated' material, and the assumption that you used it is not too far off and would easily result in higher demands from the copyright holder(s) should they sue you.
Doesn't sound like much of an barrier compared to Spaces most likely being integrated with Passport, so after being logged in one would just have to say "I want a blog".
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree with you that there are far too many skin-able applications out there... you have to remember who many of them are designed for... those who like their PC to look cute and pretty... rather than be lean, mean and as fast as possible without wasting time on cute things here and there.
Hell, it's this attempt at cuteness that has kept me from upgrading to Windows XP, even in the non Fisher Price mode it's still to pastel for me.
Although it's been a while since I've used Mozilla (being the MS loving whore that I am), I recall a couple of years ago a pre-load option that would load the browser into memory as Windows would start up, and each time you'd need to use it, it would simply be displayed (as opposed to loaded from scratch)... I found this a rather nifty feature... sad to hear that it sounds like it was removed.
Why tell people what something is? Very simple, to attract potential users.
Take your sig for example... someone who doesn't know what it is most likely going to say "Firefox? What is that? Why should I get it?" Yes, they could go to the webpage and inquire for themselves, but that takes effort, and many (including Slashdot readers) like a brief summery that helps them decide if they will click on the link to learn more.
Yes, despite being a Windows user/fan, I know what GTK is... but that doesn't mean everyone does. Can we please have some more descriptive articles about software releases for the uninformed?
The internet sucks anyway
"I think the problem here may be more of a question of getting rid of the bad Internets and keeping the good Internets. 'Cause I think we can all agree, there's just too many Internets."
Or the V5 5500 which had just two GPU's.
Granted the thing was a POS (and is now in my junk box), it sure beat out this new one.
While not the same, I do recall and old Voodoo 2 card that was nothing more than two cards stuck to each other in SLI mode.
You are correct... however even the military systems require the civilian signals at first in order to lock on to the military band. This is why your average, run of the mill GPS jammer is such a threat not only to the unit sitting on top of your car and mine, but to the one inside of almost every us tank, humvee and plane.
I've got a friend who got C&Ded for downloading a tv show while running PeerGuardian with all of the latest updates.
Unfortunately, IP blocking like PG is pretty much worthless. Yes, it's easy to find out the IP's of the corporate parents, but they need only get a consumer level DSL/Cable line or have some of their employees run their pirate hunting software at home... and they will be virtually impossible to track down.
Sensible?
Are you forgetting that Minnesota is the same state the at elected Jesse Ventura as it's governor?
As a (now) former Minnesotan who voted in that horrible 1998 election, I too carry the shame of his being elected, even though I voted for one of the other guys (who is now a congressmen).
Just because you can get a patch out faster in the OSS world doesn't mean you should. It's pretty easy to open up a block of code and fix a bug (provided you know what it is, where it is and how to fix it), it's the testing to make sure that your fix didn't break anything else and that your system still works exactly like before (other than the fixed bug of course) is the time consuming part.
Does Microsoft spend weeks doing regression and unit testing? I do not know, however making the assumption that a patch can get out in the OSS world faster is better is not a very good one.
Having patch writers on hand 24x7 would be great for the actual fix, but would not reduce the amount of time required to make sure that the fix works and is safe.
It should be pointed out that the advantage of a proprietary model of development vs the FOSS one is one of liability. A patch needs to have at least the same, if not better quality (speed, error proneness, etc) than the bits that it is replacing. It is far easier for a small FOSS group to release a quickly written and tested fix than it is for Microsoft too. Despite popular belief, Microsoft has extremely high quality standards. How many companies do you know who have programmers on call 24x7 should their code break a build?
It's good for the economy in the short term, but should he ever lose his free housing, he'd be SOL. Despite my inability to do it for years, saving for that rainy day is quite important.
For desktop use, yes, they are horribly slow by today's standards. But for simple embedded solutions, they can at times be considered overkill. Ex: When I get around to putting a mediapc under my drivers seat... I have no need or desire for a chip whose clock is measured in Ghz, simply because it's far more power (heat and draw) than I need to play mp3's and basic custom software.
Hey Taco... any chance you'd be so kind as to tell us the IP of the above AC poster?
And small companies too. My company is only ~150 people strong... oh how I miss the days of being an intern with OT... now, like many, when that clock strikes 5, I feel ill the longer I am at my desk, and of course make it a point to feel ill as infrequently as possible.
I find it rather entertaining that so many on /. seem to think there is the same burden of proof with regards to the MPAA calling up your ISP and saying "I caught Joe Blow sharing one of my movies" and the MPAA filing criminal/civil charges against you and going to trial.
In the latter, a substantial amount of proof is required if one expects to win, in the prior, no proof at all is required to send a C&D, just a belief, however they do tend to put a few facts in with it for good measure.
Most C&D's are not in the tone of "you dirty pirate", they accuse little, only stating that they found someone using the IP in question at the time and date noted, sharing material that they do not believe that the person owning the IP in question is authorized to do, period.
Ever get grounded by your parents? Or sent to detention in school? Lord knows I did, and rarely was there ever overwhelming evidence of my wrong-doing, something that could be taken into court and be given as proof of my doing ____. They don't need that, nor does the MPAA/RIAA/BayTSP/etc when dealing with your ISP.
As I said above though, all they need to 'prove' is that you were sharing the file at the time in question, and DLing the file in question on BT, with you giving them a few blocks here and there is a great way to collect all the evidence they need to convince your ISP that you were being bad.
Even on SuprNova you'll occasionally find a completely legit torrent.
I do not think anyone here is saying that BT is illegal, the protocol itself cannot break the law, use of it can.
With your above quote, it almost sounds like you are trying to make SuperNova be as legit as BT... which it is not. Substantial non-infringing use is where the legitimate uses substantially outnumber the illicit uses... SuperNova I fear is almost exclusively an illicit use site, no matter how often the legit torrents may show up.
BT however has the same weakness as HTTP and FTP, only more so.
A single point of failure. With HTTP and FTP, you can easily setup a farm to handle large # of requests, but with BT, it's pretty easy to overload a tracker and take down an entire network of files.
How would encryption save you? Once the protocol is understood, one need only build a client (or modify an existing open source one) to download a particular file, all the while logging each and every IP it gets a bit of the file from. Once done, you verify the file is infringing on someone's copyright, and bam, you let the C&D's fly against all of those IP's you logged.
Unless you can completely remove the IP from the process (ie go through some anonymous proxy), you are still catchable once BayTSP and crew decide to track people on a network.
You haven't received a C&D before? I cannot speak for most ISP's, only my own.
When a friend a few months ago received a C&D, it included his IP, the time and date of the offence along with some info on the file... the ISP in question, just sends a warning letter on the first offense, unplugs you until you call in for the 2nd and unplugs you for 30 days on the 3rd, and this is only from the complaint.
You might have an open wap, or a trojan on your PC, or any number of other legitimate reasons of why your connection was used to DL unauthorized material in a way that was not authorized by you... it doesn't matter to this ISP, a complaint is a complaint, and as per the safe harbor provision of the DMCA, they act upon it.
Were you to get a 3rd C&D on this ISP and get unplugged for 30 days, you could always haul them into court and demand to get reinstated, but by the time you got your hearing, the 30 days would be over.
More so, it is the ISP's network, and by using it and paying for their services you agree to their rules, and if their rules say "we may suspend your access at our slightest whim should we receive information saying that you had allegedly infringed on someone's copyright", they can.
This is not the court system we are dealing with, this is free enterprise, and is little different than me refusing to personally associate with anyone under 5'0", simply because that is how I do business.
I shouldn't dignify that comment with a response... but I am going to anyway...
By server, I mean the centralized systems that permit different clients to talk to one another.
Yes, the 'server' that gets run on the client is a 'server', the entire system on the client side is still fundamentally a client and I choose to label it as such.
Just imagine the benefits of the system, with so many new trackers, the RIAA/MPAA will demand even more when they haul you into court.
"Your honor, the defendant wasn't just a person sharing the file, our records indicate that he was the person sharing the file, running a server, not just a client on a network with files to share"
It is far easier to go after the sellers than it is the buyers, but both are equally illegal when it comes to copyright law. You are knowingly purchasing/using/etc an unauthorized copy of their works.
To reiterate my above point, it is far easier for the copyright holders to see who is sharing a given file and target the source, than it is to host their own files, and see who downloads them. In the latter case, they add to the problem while in the prior, they seek out and destroy the one of the sources.
That may ask be, and the man down the street with the trench coat can sell heroin addicts what they 'need'... doesn't make it right.
The problem with both is getting caught, ones crack dealer is unlikely to keep the sorts of records that your tv show dealer does, or that exist outside of either of your abilities to control.
I use the drug comparison because like your tv use, it can be a double whammy. It's illegal to use certain substances, as well as to buy and possess them. Should your dealer ever get caught and his records be checked, they've automatically got you for buying for known 'pirated' material, and the assumption that you used it is not too far off and would easily result in higher demands from the copyright holder(s) should they sue you.
TV2Me is legal, your method is highly questionable and most likely illegal.
What barrier to entry?
You mean like signing up with Blogger?
Doesn't sound like much of an barrier compared to Spaces most likely being integrated with Passport, so after being logged in one would just have to say "I want a blog".