Public servants? Those bozos in Washington? Excuse me while I die laughing.
99.9% of them either seek to funnel wealth into their own pockets, or make it impossible for them to lose power or influence. We've gone from representatives who actually try to represent our interests to a new aristocracy demanding tribute.
1. We are at war, whether we like it or not; that we were more or less forced or coerced into it by the White House is besides the point (in case you contest whether we're at war). 2. Every office of government in this country, from the municipal to the federal, rests on the ability of the voters to choose who represents them. By tampering with the electoral process, the PES CEO can conceivably be aiding those who oppose us in this time of war. So in other words, you'd goddamn better believe it's treason!
... from the Bush DOJ? "We'll nab 'em and hang 'em"? Doesn't the man know why AG Alberto Gonzales resigned, or the fact that the VP office stuck its fingers into the DOJ's hiring process? There is absolutely nothing that the politicized DOJ and castrated Congress will do, so he had better air the politicians' and plutocrats' dirty laundry across the 'net and mass media.
Better yet, take up a collection and buy some ad space from Fox. "Did your elected official win fair and square?"
I know there are tens of thousands of computers hosting websites all over the world that, likewise, are running dozens of 100% free programs. According to groups like the "don't copy that floppy" BSA, there is no such thing as free software.
Enjoin the BSA with the media cartels (RIAA, MPAA, international equivalents), and you have an entity who would like nothing more than to control or sufficiently influence governments in order to maintain a continuous racketeering scheme.
"And that's not funny, because it's probably true!"
You're talking about taxation, not extortion, and the investigation hardly sounds anything like what you're describing. In fact, Japan and Korea already found Intel in violation of anti-trust laws, and the US trial is still in discovery phase. The overriding theme: Intel gave discounts to customers who agreed not to use AMD chips.
Every time we are developing software we issue a requests for functional descriptions, alpha and beta testers respond with their comments on functional features. If by "functional descriptions" you mean "requirements", the QA team doesn't enter into it yet unless they're also part of the design team. If you're talking about QA testing proper (alpha and beta testing early implementations), then I fail to see what that has to do with user demand.
There is plenty of opportunities for the user to intervene, for the developer just to go off on their own and develop unwarranted or requested features is irresponsible and usually represents a poor developer just writing code for the sake of code (read newbie VB coder wannabe). Not to say they are not out there, but MS is not a one man show. None of this absolves Microsoft or any other developer of the responsibility to keep a consistent process. If X.org, MySQL, and countless other large projects can manage code check-in integrity, surely Microsoft can do it with Media Player. I seriously doubt, unless the management is hopelessly inept, that Microsoft would allow a novice developer, let alone a third party, to muck around with the code or the design. If they allowed something like that to happen, we'd be all over them like flies on a turd.
Seldom do I ever see a client asking the developer what he wants! usually it is spelled out very clearly and expensively what the client wants in features and ability, the developer will code to those specs... Is it not the developer's responsibility to inform the client, "You asked for this feature, but it will open these security risks."?
Suffice it to say, I doubt anyone here would even consider going back to MS-DOS or giving up 1/10 of the features their choice of OS provides, it doesn't matter, what O/S they all have their vulnerabilities due to feature creatures... Isn't it odd that you're effectively saying, "If you want a really secure OS, go back to the CLI" when this really misses the point that Microsoft went ahead with a design that tries to impose new features at the cost of more attack vectors on the user (read: red herring, straw man)? Isn't it a little pretentious to blame all users for security woes based on a bad design decision?
The thing about tech journalists is, they love shiny things as much as most of us here on Slashdot. No one bothers to turn down the latest beta or prototype in return for the quid pro quo review, because:
1) The other rags would otherwise have a leg up on them should they refuse, and 2) No one has the balls to show the salesmen the door for what amounts to bribery. Especially if they're owned by pointy-haired MBAs in marketing and sales, who have no idea what "journalistic integrity" means, and have no compunction against taking bribes if it means tripling their ad revenue.
And beware blogs owned by companies (Gizmodo comes to mind). Sure, they have a free hand now, but wait until those at the top become greedy, or announce an IPO.
I would advise against speaking about Icahn as if he were a long-time investor in YHOO. He only becomes interested in companies if there's an opportunity to conquer the board of directors and steering the company in a direction that makes him the most money. It's like a pump-and-dump scam, only slow enough that the regulators don't notice. Carl Icahn only started massively buying YHOO stock when they turned down MSFT's offer.
I've never coded for embedded systems (which most residential networking hardware is), but here's my guess, based on what little I've learned about software.
If the system was like a server (simplistically, a kernel and a bunch of processes), one would overwrite a configuration file and restart the process controlling the feature you want changed*. They could stuff some Flash chips into the device and run a stripped-down server OS on the thing, and you wouldn't need to hard reboot the router every time you changed a port number (some mid-range D-Links are like this, and I'm sure the famed WRT54G Linux version was like this as well).
If they're exceedingly cheap on the hardware end, they probably would allow only a single process to exist in memory to save on costs. In this case, every time you change a configuration, you would have to restart the controlling process-- namely, the whole enchilada. Seems Apple went with this route.
* Some programs work fine in real-time after a config change without restarting, others panic, still others are unpredictable. Blame Turing.
That's actually a good point, and possibly a solid class-action case. The best way that EA and the Warhammer developers could avoid one altogether is give an estimate or deadline for when the cut features would be released, and without additional charge (or a discount on the subscription fee).
This is why MBA marketers (EA) should never run a technology company without listening to the developers.
Ultimately, the parent shoulders the entire responsibility for their children's behavior, but at some point the kid has got to learn that she, too, is responsible for her actions. What 15-year-old nowadays clears the stuff they post online (if they post at all) with her parents?* If she's the typical teenager, she would've posted far outside her parent's supervision, like a friend's house or a library.
*Okay, I know a few, but they're all homeschooled.
So now they're afraid that because they were so easily 0wn'd by Microsoft and their cronies, they would lose face if they admitted it? Isn't this the same BS politics that CEOs, Presidents and Congressmen are famous for: "Never admit wrong because you're always right, and never apologize unless you're caught, and then only that you weren't careful enough in covering it up"? Who died and made them deities?
Solar: In order to construct large-scale thermal collectors, one would need to counter the FUD being spread about the desert tortoise habitat. Residential photovoltaics would take off if it became cost-effective (the recent MIT work looks very promising).
Nuclear: As long as people equate nuclear power with the WMDs, we will never be able to put newer, cleaner reactor technology into action (thorium, for example). Because politicians and lobbyists still use fear to put the kibosh on nuke technology, it will still be a while before anyone in DC will have the nuts to start funding this, and the brains to evaluate choices other than the traditional U235-based reactors.
Hydro: Hydro is clean and reliable energy, BUT we can't build more large dams. Aside from potential habitat destruction at the dam and downstream, large dams have diminishing returns because of sediment that collects in the reservoir. This sediment displaces the water in the reservoir, reducing its capacity, and therefore its potential energy. A possibly more sensible approach would be to use turbines similar to wave and tidal generators in rivers.
Politicians are striving for "looks" rather than the best interest of our country on both sides.
I think the more reasonable target is not the candidate who is doing what the majority of voters want, but changing the focus of the majority from the surface to the substance. There is a reason why politicians today go for appearances over actions.
The lesson Obama no doubt already learned is, "you can't please everyone, especially if you are President|running for President." He made a strong statement, and it's coming back to bite him (perhaps Rove managed to fool the left-wing media into making a bigger ruckus than necessary over non-domestic wiretapping-- this is a classic Rove maneuver).
The lesson his former supporters need to learn is, "you can't enact change by fiat and not expect resistance from everyone, because that would be a dictatorship, AKA the Bush administration."
Try it yourself: stick two leads from a 9V battery into water in a jar and watch bubbles of oxygen and hydrogen arise from the two leads. Now place a flame over the top of the jar.
Nah, I'll opt for shooting the can off a stack of Pringles...
Why not contact every Judge who has a lawsuit from the RIAA on their docket and just tell them?
It's called an amicus curiae ("Friend of the Court") brief, and yes, Mr. Beckerman has filed those. So has the EFF.
The thing is, the legal system takes much time and process to establish stuff like legal precedent and the counsel's conduct in previous cases. Once that history is established and a pattern is easily drawn, NYCL and others will have a much easier time convincing the judges presiding over new cases that they are a bunch of confidence men. In a similar vein, case history was very useful in demonstrating to a Florida judge that Jack Thompson is unable to conduct himself in a professional manner as a lawyer.
The downside, of course, is that such lawyers can do considerable damage before they are sanctioned or disbarred for their conduct, and it's up to the appeals courts to reverse rulings made by bamboozled judges. The good news is that most lawyers who behave badly in court find that they can't run away from bar association oversight. From what NYCL has told us, there aren't that many bad lawyers, but they're loud, visible, and have the delusion that they're admirably representing their profession.
Slashdot Mirror
Public servants? Those bozos in Washington? Excuse me while I die laughing.
99.9% of them either seek to funnel wealth into their own pockets, or make it impossible for them to lose power or influence. We've gone from representatives who actually try to represent our interests to a new aristocracy demanding tribute.
1. We are at war, whether we like it or not; that we were more or less forced or coerced into it by the White House is besides the point (in case you contest whether we're at war).
2. Every office of government in this country, from the municipal to the federal, rests on the ability of the voters to choose who represents them. By tampering with the electoral process, the PES CEO can conceivably be aiding those who oppose us in this time of war. So in other words, you'd goddamn better believe it's treason!
... from the Bush DOJ? "We'll nab 'em and hang 'em"? Doesn't the man know why AG Alberto Gonzales resigned, or the fact that the VP office stuck its fingers into the DOJ's hiring process? There is absolutely nothing that the politicized DOJ and castrated Congress will do, so he had better air the politicians' and plutocrats' dirty laundry across the 'net and mass media.
Better yet, take up a collection and buy some ad space from Fox. "Did your elected official win fair and square?"
I know there are tens of thousands of computers hosting websites all over the world that, likewise, are running dozens of 100% free programs.
According to groups like the "don't copy that floppy" BSA, there is no such thing as free software.
Is slashdot doing a joint story with the Daily WTF today?
Enjoin the BSA with the media cartels (RIAA, MPAA, international equivalents), and you have an entity who would like nothing more than to control or sufficiently influence governments in order to maintain a continuous racketeering scheme.
"And that's not funny, because it's probably true!"
You're talking about taxation, not extortion, and the investigation hardly sounds anything like what you're describing. In fact, Japan and Korea already found Intel in violation of anti-trust laws, and the US trial is still in discovery phase. The overriding theme: Intel gave discounts to customers who agreed not to use AMD chips.
Either you're new, or you haven't noticed the rabid Apple critics in the comments lately.
Every time we are developing software we issue a requests for functional descriptions, alpha and beta testers respond with their comments on functional features.
If by "functional descriptions" you mean "requirements", the QA team doesn't enter into it yet unless they're also part of the design team. If you're talking about QA testing proper (alpha and beta testing early implementations), then I fail to see what that has to do with user demand.
There is plenty of opportunities for the user to intervene, for the developer just to go off on their own and develop unwarranted or requested features is irresponsible and usually represents a poor developer just writing code for the sake of code (read newbie VB coder wannabe). Not to say they are not out there, but MS is not a one man show.
None of this absolves Microsoft or any other developer of the responsibility to keep a consistent process. If X.org, MySQL, and countless other large projects can manage code check-in integrity, surely Microsoft can do it with Media Player. I seriously doubt, unless the management is hopelessly inept, that Microsoft would allow a novice developer, let alone a third party, to muck around with the code or the design. If they allowed something like that to happen, we'd be all over them like flies on a turd.
Seldom do I ever see a client asking the developer what he wants! usually it is spelled out very clearly and expensively what the client wants in features and ability, the developer will code to those specs...
Is it not the developer's responsibility to inform the client, "You asked for this feature, but it will open these security risks."?
Suffice it to say, I doubt anyone here would even consider going back to MS-DOS or giving up 1/10 of the features their choice of OS provides, it doesn't matter, what O/S they all have their vulnerabilities due to feature creatures...
Isn't it odd that you're effectively saying, "If you want a really secure OS, go back to the CLI" when this really misses the point that Microsoft went ahead with a design that tries to impose new features at the cost of more attack vectors on the user (read: red herring, straw man)? Isn't it a little pretentious to blame all users for security woes based on a bad design decision?
The thing about tech journalists is, they love shiny things as much as most of us here on Slashdot. No one bothers to turn down the latest beta or prototype in return for the quid pro quo review, because:
1) The other rags would otherwise have a leg up on them should they refuse, and
2) No one has the balls to show the salesmen the door for what amounts to bribery. Especially if they're owned by pointy-haired MBAs in marketing and sales, who have no idea what "journalistic integrity" means, and have no compunction against taking bribes if it means tripling their ad revenue.
And beware blogs owned by companies (Gizmodo comes to mind). Sure, they have a free hand now, but wait until those at the top become greedy, or announce an IPO.
Icahn't has Microsoft cash? Boo hoo.
I would advise against speaking about Icahn as if he were a long-time investor in YHOO. He only becomes interested in companies if there's an opportunity to conquer the board of directors and steering the company in a direction that makes him the most money. It's like a pump-and-dump scam, only slow enough that the regulators don't notice. Carl Icahn only started massively buying YHOO stock when they turned down MSFT's offer.
I've never coded for embedded systems (which most residential networking hardware is), but here's my guess, based on what little I've learned about software.
If the system was like a server (simplistically, a kernel and a bunch of processes), one would overwrite a configuration file and restart the process controlling the feature you want changed*. They could stuff some Flash chips into the device and run a stripped-down server OS on the thing, and you wouldn't need to hard reboot the router every time you changed a port number (some mid-range D-Links are like this, and I'm sure the famed WRT54G Linux version was like this as well).
If they're exceedingly cheap on the hardware end, they probably would allow only a single process to exist in memory to save on costs. In this case, every time you change a configuration, you would have to restart the controlling process-- namely, the whole enchilada. Seems Apple went with this route.
* Some programs work fine in real-time after a config change without restarting, others panic, still others are unpredictable. Blame Turing.
That's like saying NES Track & Field is an Olympic sport.
That's actually a good point, and possibly a solid class-action case. The best way that EA and the Warhammer developers could avoid one altogether is give an estimate or deadline for when the cut features would be released, and without additional charge (or a discount on the subscription fee).
This is why MBA marketers (EA) should never run a technology company without listening to the developers.
"So, what do you think of my program?"
"I wouldn't buy this."
"You wouldn't buy it, because it's designed for engineers."
"Engineers think the same as marketeers."
"If that were true, we would still be in caves wondering if rocks were edible."
"You know, you could keep recipes on this."
If OASIS doesn't tell Microsoft to keep their mitts off of the standard, the world's documents would be locked back into Office.
Thankfully, PDF is an ISO standard, but all Microsoft has to do is buy Adobe and/or muscle its way into maintaining that one as well.
Ultimately, the parent shoulders the entire responsibility for their children's behavior, but at some point the kid has got to learn that she, too, is responsible for her actions. What 15-year-old nowadays clears the stuff they post online (if they post at all) with her parents?* If she's the typical teenager, she would've posted far outside her parent's supervision, like a friend's house or a library.
*Okay, I know a few, but they're all homeschooled.
So now they're afraid that because they were so easily 0wn'd by Microsoft and their cronies, they would lose face if they admitted it? Isn't this the same BS politics that CEOs, Presidents and Congressmen are famous for: "Never admit wrong because you're always right, and never apologize unless you're caught, and then only that you weren't careful enough in covering it up"? Who died and made them deities?
Expanding on your suggestions:
Solar: In order to construct large-scale thermal collectors, one would need to counter the FUD being spread about the desert tortoise habitat. Residential photovoltaics would take off if it became cost-effective (the recent MIT work looks very promising).
Nuclear: As long as people equate nuclear power with the WMDs, we will never be able to put newer, cleaner reactor technology into action (thorium, for example). Because politicians and lobbyists still use fear to put the kibosh on nuke technology, it will still be a while before anyone in DC will have the nuts to start funding this, and the brains to evaluate choices other than the traditional U235-based reactors.
Hydro: Hydro is clean and reliable energy, BUT we can't build more large dams. Aside from potential habitat destruction at the dam and downstream, large dams have diminishing returns because of sediment that collects in the reservoir. This sediment displaces the water in the reservoir, reducing its capacity, and therefore its potential energy. A possibly more sensible approach would be to use turbines similar to wave and tidal generators in rivers.
I think the more reasonable target is not the candidate who is doing what the majority of voters want, but changing the focus of the majority from the surface to the substance. There is a reason why politicians today go for appearances over actions.
The lesson Obama no doubt already learned is, "you can't please everyone, especially if you are President|running for President." He made a strong statement, and it's coming back to bite him (perhaps Rove managed to fool the left-wing media into making a bigger ruckus than necessary over non-domestic wiretapping-- this is a classic Rove maneuver).
The lesson his former supporters need to learn is, "you can't enact change by fiat and not expect resistance from everyone, because that would be a dictatorship, AKA the Bush administration."
Nah, I'll opt for shooting the can off a stack of Pringles...
(if their argument is shot down)
Wouldn't this be a great time for a piece of rhubarb pie? Nothing gets the taste of shame and humiliation out of your mouth...
It's called an amicus curiae ("Friend of the Court") brief, and yes, Mr. Beckerman has filed those. So has the EFF.
The thing is, the legal system takes much time and process to establish stuff like legal precedent and the counsel's conduct in previous cases. Once that history is established and a pattern is easily drawn, NYCL and others will have a much easier time convincing the judges presiding over new cases that they are a bunch of confidence men. In a similar vein, case history was very useful in demonstrating to a Florida judge that Jack Thompson is unable to conduct himself in a professional manner as a lawyer.
The downside, of course, is that such lawyers can do considerable damage before they are sanctioned or disbarred for their conduct, and it's up to the appeals courts to reverse rulings made by bamboozled judges. The good news is that most lawyers who behave badly in court find that they can't run away from bar association oversight. From what NYCL has told us, there aren't that many bad lawyers, but they're loud, visible, and have the delusion that they're admirably representing their profession.