In the US, the corporations are trying to impose regulations to get maximum profit, while the government (for now) has mostly stayed out of it because of respect for free speech. Outside the US, where speech is not so free, governments will try to regulate in accordance with their countries beliefs. I hardly think this can be compared to shipping and aviation.
Regarding the cover story, the hinderences caused by distance will (like everything in the computer field) be overcome by technology. Data traveling from PC to server and back at the speed of light can have very little difference in travel time when the computers are next to each other compared to opposite sides of the planet. Of course we're far from this (optics direct to the computer, instant switching, etc.), but we'll get there, just like everything else. We'll look back and laugh at cover stories like this in the decades to come.
Just to continue on your thought, even if systems like this are used only for good, it gives an uncomfortable feeling. The thought of being watched in public, even with nothing to hide and no one after you, is simply uncomfortable. Of course, if I had something to hide or the systems were used in evil ways, it would be even more unconfortable.
<rant>And I don't want to hear (or read) that "If you have nothing to hide, then it's not a problem" crap. An eye over my shoulder, even if for no other reason than to watch what I'm doing, is very disconcerting.</rant>
The flip side to that is that many kids are becoming well rounded because of the net. Kids that are introverted and used to spending time mostly alone and indoors can now spend that time on a computer and internet. It's an outlet to interact with others (to a limited extent) while still being introverted. It's better that the shy kids are on the internet, learning to use computers, maybe learning to program, rather than doing nothing.
But what's the overall picture? I think most kids who are active and outgoing remain active and outgoing; I doubt most of them trade in sports for the internet. And I would imagine most kids who are introverted, but have a computer at home, use the computer and become more well-rounded.
They fix CD prices so as not to undercut each other and to all make max profit. They crack down on all new forms of music sharing as soon as they come out. They force online radio stations into court, so now air-wave music stations have to pay double fees so they can also play online. And now, after they attempt to destroy all forms of online music, they create their own... and just to keep out others, "MusicNet allegedly requires companies to commit to advance payments of as much as $750,000 before entering into licensing talks."
And they wonder why the DoJ has been investigating them for years.
A court case like this over the DMCA would almost certainly get overturned (of course, IANAL, but this is IMO). However, a Russian would have to wait in our federal jails until the whole process is complete. We could be talking years. I would be more inclined to want the case to go to trial if an American were in jail. And no, it's not so an American can be the hero, but because he/she will be closer to home and would most certainly be treated better.
FBI web readers take note: I am almost inclined to heavily study encryption, reverse engineer some stuff, and publish it on the web just to say, "Come and get me, let's go to trial and get this sh*t over with." I have no immediate family, so I'm almost tempted to do it.
if you don't like Tux, the 1.0 release will be more politically correct. Sunspire is adding other little critters, including a seal, a polar bear, and a female penguin.
Yes, having a female penguin falling down a mountain and hitting obstacles sounds far more politically correct than a male penguin. And from the user's point of view, wouldn't you almost be forced to look up her skirt?
Hmmmm... getting an idea for a reality based TV show... cam races through the small intesting or something... actually getting to watch people digest the bugs after they eat them...
At least it should make those surgery programs on TV even more interesting.
The rates can't be too high and the content can't be too crappy... because otherwise 10 million people wouldn't pay for it. There's always land-line cable. I don't know about you, but I don't (voluntarily) pay for things I don't like.
Interesting timing. A few months ago Wired published an article detailing the history of electronic arcade games. Pong was the first electronic arcade game with a coin slot. The guys who invented it found it was popular in their local bar, so they started charging a little per game.
Incorrect. He broke a law on US soil. He's being held for disseminating information on how to circumvent a copy control mechanism. That's probably why he was arrested after his presentation and not before. He's not under arrest for cracking the encryption. He is not being prosecuted as a representative of his company, but as an individual speaking in public on the methods of the decryption. Check out the DMCA... you now aren't allowed to speak about methods of circumventing encryption of copywritten material.
Let's remember something: we may not agree with the DMCA, but it's the law. It's the prosecution's job to bring law breakers in front of the court. It's exclusively the job of the court to interpret the laws and also to determine if they are unconstitutional. So while the law is obviously unconstitutional (obviously to us, anyway), Sklyarov is going to be treated as a suspected criminal. It can't properly end until a court declares the law is in violation of the consitution and the law is revoked.
I had to read your post twice. The first time I agreed; MS might not understand or see the passive (and restrictive) power they posess. But thinking about it awhile I have to disagree. It's impossible for a corporation which hears attacks from other companies on an almost daily basis and is constantly under scrutiny by the federal government to not at least wonder about its power. If MS only heard small cries from others, but was basically able to go on its merry way without a sound, I could agree with you. But considering it was declared an abusive monopoly, and sends some of its representatives to open debate to hear complaints from others, I can't see how MS could be blind to its passive power.
Without studies (i.e. "scientific" proof), most people don't want to believe certain things. When the general feeling is that computer games cause problems in kids, and common sense is ignored (or maybe changed), then a study is needed to prove otherwise. I agree that a study is certainly not needed to know this information. But for the general population to swallow it, a study is absolutely necessary.
Any child who plays video games 18 hours a week probably owns a computer (or at least his family does). Thus his family is most likely to be upper-middle class or higher, socially speaking.
Ummm, Game Boy Advance: $100. Sony Playstation, $300. The poor family (near poverty) who used to live across the street had a console and more games than I did. Computer games != home computer, and therefore computer games != upper-middle class or higher.
I don't think there should be any regulation on what companies can be allowed to ask, if that's what you're implying. If a person is willing to give out personal info, then so be it. But at the same time, people should be smart enough to know not to give just anyone their most personal info. If everyone said, "No, I'm not giving you my social security number; you're not the social security department of the US." then no companies would be asking for it. Companies require it because it's helpful to them (guaranteed unique ID) and people are willing to give it out. It's the general population's fault for giving out too much info and the company's fault for not being secure enough. But I'll bet neither problem is going to stop Verizon from making a lot of money selling phone service.
it's interesting to see a sudden interest in "interoperability."
This isn't a sudden interest. In fact, it's not an interest at all. For those who don't recall, this interoperability is a requirement of AOL's merger with Time-Warner. The FTC made it a requirement, supposedly to help prevent abuse of monopoly in the future.
I've used SQL Server for years... not because I want to, but because the company I work for prefers it. I've never seen such a problem of dropping every 1000 transactions. But there is one particular thing about this story that bugs me (no punn intended)... if the bug isn't in Microsoft's software, as they contend, then why did they tell the Russians to upgrade to a newer version to solve the problem???
Microsoft should have argued that they are really in the user interface market, and as such, the operating system and browser are naturally related.
But do you really believe that? Or should that have simply been Microsoft's tactic (true or otherwise)? Because if they had used that in court in the initial trial, I would hope that the government's experts could have shot down that argument. Otherwise every application could be considered part of the OS. And then the whole desktop really would be owned by MS.
One thing that really bothers me is MS's claim that users can un-install IE in XP. I couldn't give a crap about the technology, but to think that fixing it now implies past offences shouldn't be punished is insulting. Let's say you get caught driving through a red light. You decide to fight the ticket. A month later you're in court saying "I haven't run a red light in the last month. I've seen the evil of my ways. Please don't punish me." And the court breaks into laughter. You are punished for past crimes.
The "fact" that IE can be un-installed is completely irrelavent to this case... and I hope the court agrees.
How, exactly, did researchers reach their conclusions? For starters, by monitoring hundreds of thousands of Web surfers across dozens of sites from April to June, then randomly surveying them after their exposure to ads of all different types.
A pop-up poll after a pop-up ad. The first choice in the poll was probably already checked. And the Vote button was the largest button available to close the new annoying window. I can't believe companies will take this survey seriously. I would have hit Vote just to the get the window the hell out of my way. And the first choice was probably "Yes, I liked the ad! I will remember that company."
Slashdot Mirror
In the US, the corporations are trying to impose regulations to get maximum profit, while the government (for now) has mostly stayed out of it because of respect for free speech. Outside the US, where speech is not so free, governments will try to regulate in accordance with their countries beliefs. I hardly think this can be compared to shipping and aviation.
Regarding the cover story, the hinderences caused by distance will (like everything in the computer field) be overcome by technology. Data traveling from PC to server and back at the speed of light can have very little difference in travel time when the computers are next to each other compared to opposite sides of the planet. Of course we're far from this (optics direct to the computer, instant switching, etc.), but we'll get there, just like everything else. We'll look back and laugh at cover stories like this in the decades to come.
Just to continue on your thought, even if systems like this are used only for good, it gives an uncomfortable feeling. The thought of being watched in public, even with nothing to hide and no one after you, is simply uncomfortable. Of course, if I had something to hide or the systems were used in evil ways, it would be even more unconfortable.
<rant>And I don't want to hear (or read) that "If you have nothing to hide, then it's not a problem" crap. An eye over my shoulder, even if for no other reason than to watch what I'm doing, is very disconcerting.</rant>
... if you didn't read his columns, he wouldn't be a paid, featured columnist.
The flip side to that is that many kids are becoming well rounded because of the net. Kids that are introverted and used to spending time mostly alone and indoors can now spend that time on a computer and internet. It's an outlet to interact with others (to a limited extent) while still being introverted. It's better that the shy kids are on the internet, learning to use computers, maybe learning to program, rather than doing nothing.
But what's the overall picture? I think most kids who are active and outgoing remain active and outgoing; I doubt most of them trade in sports for the internet. And I would imagine most kids who are introverted, but have a computer at home, use the computer and become more well-rounded.
Actually, kerubi gets a cookie just by browsing Slashdot.
(Sorry, I just couldn't resist.)
They fix CD prices so as not to undercut each other and to all make max profit. They crack down on all new forms of music sharing as soon as they come out. They force online radio stations into court, so now air-wave music stations have to pay double fees so they can also play online. And now, after they attempt to destroy all forms of online music, they create their own... and just to keep out others, "MusicNet allegedly requires companies to commit to advance payments of as much as $750,000 before entering into licensing talks."
And they wonder why the DoJ has been investigating them for years.
A court case like this over the DMCA would almost certainly get overturned (of course, IANAL, but this is IMO). However, a Russian would have to wait in our federal jails until the whole process is complete. We could be talking years. I would be more inclined to want the case to go to trial if an American were in jail. And no, it's not so an American can be the hero, but because he/she will be closer to home and would most certainly be treated better.
FBI web readers take note: I am almost inclined to heavily study encryption, reverse engineer some stuff, and publish it on the web just to say, "Come and get me, let's go to trial and get this sh*t over with." I have no immediate family, so I'm almost tempted to do it.
if you don't like Tux, the 1.0 release will be more politically correct. Sunspire is adding other little critters, including a seal, a polar bear, and a female penguin.
Yes, having a female penguin falling down a mountain and hitting obstacles sounds far more politically correct than a male penguin. And from the user's point of view, wouldn't you almost be forced to look up her skirt?
---
Hmmmm... getting an idea for a reality based TV show... cam races through the small intesting or something... actually getting to watch people digest the bugs after they eat them...
At least it should make those surgery programs on TV even more interesting.
---
The rates can't be too high and the content can't be too crappy... because otherwise 10 million people wouldn't pay for it. There's always land-line cable. I don't know about you, but I don't (voluntarily) pay for things I don't like.
Interesting timing. A few months ago Wired published an article detailing the history of electronic arcade games. Pong was the first electronic arcade game with a coin slot. The guys who invented it found it was popular in their local bar, so they started charging a little per game.
---
Incorrect. He broke a law on US soil. He's being held for disseminating information on how to circumvent a copy control mechanism. That's probably why he was arrested after his presentation and not before. He's not under arrest for cracking the encryption. He is not being prosecuted as a representative of his company, but as an individual speaking in public on the methods of the decryption. Check out the DMCA... you now aren't allowed to speak about methods of circumventing encryption of copywritten material.
---
I'm gonna be trolled for this, but...
Let's remember something: we may not agree with the DMCA, but it's the law. It's the prosecution's job to bring law breakers in front of the court. It's exclusively the job of the court to interpret the laws and also to determine if they are unconstitutional. So while the law is obviously unconstitutional (obviously to us, anyway), Sklyarov is going to be treated as a suspected criminal. It can't properly end until a court declares the law is in violation of the consitution and the law is revoked.
---
we'll probably just be trading one tyrant for another because every manufacturer's main goal is profit and AOL is a household name.
Consumer advocates briefed on the proposals were unsettled by AOL's marketing techniques, comparing them to those used by Microsoft.
---
I had to read your post twice. The first time I agreed; MS might not understand or see the passive (and restrictive) power they posess. But thinking about it awhile I have to disagree. It's impossible for a corporation which hears attacks from other companies on an almost daily basis and is constantly under scrutiny by the federal government to not at least wonder about its power. If MS only heard small cries from others, but was basically able to go on its merry way without a sound, I could agree with you. But considering it was declared an abusive monopoly, and sends some of its representatives to open debate to hear complaints from others, I can't see how MS could be blind to its passive power.
---
Without studies (i.e. "scientific" proof), most people don't want to believe certain things. When the general feeling is that computer games cause problems in kids, and common sense is ignored (or maybe changed), then a study is needed to prove otherwise. I agree that a study is certainly not needed to know this information. But for the general population to swallow it, a study is absolutely necessary.
---
Any child who plays video games 18 hours a week probably owns a computer (or at least his family does). Thus his family is most likely to be upper-middle class or higher, socially speaking.
Ummm, Game Boy Advance: $100. Sony Playstation, $300. The poor family (near poverty) who used to live across the street had a console and more games than I did. Computer games != home computer, and therefore computer games != upper-middle class or higher.
---
One 16-year-old boy spent 70 hours a week at his computer...
...and suffered severe psychological problems.
At my company that's considered a dedicated employee.
Good thing we have a comprehensive mental health plan.
---
I don't think there should be any regulation on what companies can be allowed to ask, if that's what you're implying. If a person is willing to give out personal info, then so be it. But at the same time, people should be smart enough to know not to give just anyone their most personal info. If everyone said, "No, I'm not giving you my social security number; you're not the social security department of the US." then no companies would be asking for it. Companies require it because it's helpful to them (guaranteed unique ID) and people are willing to give it out. It's the general population's fault for giving out too much info and the company's fault for not being secure enough. But I'll bet neither problem is going to stop Verizon from making a lot of money selling phone service.
---
it's interesting to see a sudden interest in "interoperability."
This isn't a sudden interest. In fact, it's not an interest at all. For those who don't recall, this interoperability is a requirement of AOL's merger with Time-Warner. The FTC made it a requirement, supposedly to help prevent abuse of monopoly in the future.
---
I've used SQL Server for years... not because I want to, but because the company I work for prefers it. I've never seen such a problem of dropping every 1000 transactions. But there is one particular thing about this story that bugs me (no punn intended)... if the bug isn't in Microsoft's software, as they contend, then why did they tell the Russians to upgrade to a newer version to solve the problem???
---
Microsoft should have argued that they are really in the user interface market, and as such, the operating system and browser are naturally related.
But do you really believe that? Or should that have simply been Microsoft's tactic (true or otherwise)? Because if they had used that in court in the initial trial, I would hope that the government's experts could have shot down that argument. Otherwise every application could be considered part of the OS. And then the whole desktop really would be owned by MS.
---
One thing that really bothers me is MS's claim that users can un-install IE in XP. I couldn't give a crap about the technology, but to think that fixing it now implies past offences shouldn't be punished is insulting. Let's say you get caught driving through a red light. You decide to fight the ticket. A month later you're in court saying "I haven't run a red light in the last month. I've seen the evil of my ways. Please don't punish me." And the court breaks into laughter. You are punished for past crimes.
The "fact" that IE can be un-installed is completely irrelavent to this case... and I hope the court agrees.
---
How, exactly, did researchers reach their conclusions? For starters, by monitoring hundreds of thousands of Web surfers across dozens of sites from April to June, then randomly surveying them after their exposure to ads of all different types.
A pop-up poll after a pop-up ad. The first choice in the poll was probably already checked. And the Vote button was the largest button available to close the new annoying window. I can't believe companies will take this survey seriously. I would have hit Vote just to the get the window the hell out of my way. And the first choice was probably "Yes, I liked the ad! I will remember that company."
---
Unmetered? Never.
---