Time Warner Cable is no longer a subsidiary of Time Warner, Inc. They continue to use the name as part of the agreement created when the companies separated. Part of the big drive between the separation was that being both an operator and a content creator was seen as a conflict of interest with the shareholders.
Large corporations and comglomerates have lawyers, contacts, and money with which to pursuade industry leaders and law makers. If a few big companies lobby on a particular issue, chances are they will get their way, whether the issue benefits consumers or not (DCMA, et all).
Consumers do not (generally) have these resources availible. They can't buy marketing campaigns, they don't have dedicated lawyers, and they don't have large sums of money to spend on convincing people that their way is the right way. If twenty major corporations want something, they can usually get it. However, twenty consumers would have no effect whatsoever. My question is, what is the most effective way that consumers can voice their opinion in a way that they will be listened to? Obviously, if more people protested the laws, policies and other things that did not benefit the consumer, things might be changed. However, I think that most people (including myself) feel overwhelmed by the fact that their one voice makes little difference.
They do have a responsibility, and their parents are to blame partially.
Partially to blame? I don't know where you come from, but they way my parents taught it to me was that while I lived under their roof, they were responsible for my actions and therefore I would do as they told me to.
When I was younger (as in, like under 17) my parents wouldn't let me watch very violent things. They restricted the amount of time I could play 'violent' video games. If a parent thinks that the media is to blame, then they are responsible to remove said media from their children's presence.
Doesn't it make a bit more sense to say "If you don't want your kids playing my games, be a real parent and make sure your kids dont play them" than "Hey, you, the company that makes this. You must majestically enforce the fact that no minors may buy your games even though, theoretically, have you no power in this area, and why should you want to."
Re:Would you really recommend it for desktop use?
on
Ask Robert Young
·
· Score: 1
Mod this guy up!!
This is a real, non-biased question that can actually provide some good answers for the Linux community. The CEO of the top Linux distribution company telling us how ready (or un-ready) he thinks Linux is for the consumer desktop market, and what needs to be improved.
He did not address the larger concern - and the thrust of my question - which was how such ill-designed software got out the door in the first place.
Really. That was the thrust of your question? I guess you expect that no software should ever be released. Windows is not the only software in the world released with security bugs present...it's just one of the most publicised (and hated, amongst O/S ppl.). Whenever a Microsoft security flaw is made known to the public, people flock into the message boards and say "See, just another example of how the monopolistic bastards are allowed to release half-baked, bug riddled software into the grasps of the poor, un-educated and un-knowning public who are forced to deal with their stupidity."
However, whenever a Linux security bug, or a BIND security bug, or Apache, or has a bug published its more of a "See how our infinitely superior peer review system coupled with availble published source code allows us to squash bugs easily?".
Don't get me wrong...I am not a huge fan of Microsoft, I don't like the way they run their business and I think that often times they do stupid things that I don't agree with. But that doesnt mean their software is so inferior because it was released with security bugs. What about software like BIND. The thing is older than the planet earth practicly, but they are STILL finding security holes in it.
I am forced to agree with the guy that said somethign like Every time Slashdot posts an interview about "The Enemy" people seem to post questions asking them to admit that they suck and are stupid and would add to that that often times they think that their software is perfect and vastly superior.
Perhaps Linux is vastly superior for certain people and for certain particular purposes (indeed, in my eyes it is) but you would be a fool to think that it is superior in, per say, the home user desktop market. The uneducated in the computer world (or rather, those people who do not need to user computers on a high scale in their daily life, and therefore have no need to learn every in and out of them) would rather have a simple, easy to use, eye-candy riddled operating system where every type of application under the sun that could possibly be imagined for a home user exists. What operating systems fit this mold?
However, I digress. Think about the questions you ask in reference to everybody before you start blaming one particular entity for their lack of an answer towards it. You can't accurately measure the world if you use a ruler that changes based on what (or who) you are measuring.
The criticallity of BIND? I know that BIND is very very important software out there...but so are other things. How would you feel if tommorow morning all of the "critical" software packages made you sign NDA's and pay money for bugs. So, you don't get kernel bugs, you dont get inetd bugs, you dont get ssh bugs, you dont get FTP exploits, you dont get apache bugs. Why? Because these are all 'critical' pieces of software? I don't think that quite cuts it. As a million people have already stated, if the script kiddies are more on the ball than the admins are, they deserve to get hit.
Someone posted something about mods making a 'better version of the game' keep people from buying newer versions. I wasn't aware that there was a DragonballZ game, so I assumed he was referring to Q3.
How can you possibly say that Q3 mods restrict ID Software's IP? ID was kind enough to publicly publish its internal API and distribute it to developers along with the other information to create Q3 mods. Q3 mods are encouraged in the q3 community. The only restriction they placed was that they mods must be 100% free of charge.
Although PERLs syntax is fairly easy to learn, and syntacticly clean, much of the advanced functionality availible is implemented through hundreds of external modules. How is every sysadmin supposed to just instantly know what modules are availible for what purposes, or to another extent, which ones are the best.
You also mentioned man pages for PERL? Have you ever seen the monster? Even the FAQ is split between some 9 different man pages? All of the functions are on the same page, and even though they are split up into usefull categories they man page is less than intuitive.
Perhaps this book may not be well suited to _you_, however, I'm certain there are a whole host of sa's who have at least a strong foundation of PERL, but would like to extend that knowledge to allow for more advanced scripts to be written.
Slashdot Mirror
Time Warner Cable is no longer a subsidiary of Time Warner, Inc. They continue to use the name as part of the agreement created when the companies separated. Part of the big drive between the separation was that being both an operator and a content creator was seen as a conflict of interest with the shareholders.
Consumers do not (generally) have these resources availible. They can't buy marketing campaigns, they don't have dedicated lawyers, and they don't have large sums of money to spend on convincing people that their way is the right way. If twenty major corporations want something, they can usually get it. However, twenty consumers would have no effect whatsoever. My question is, what is the most effective way that consumers can voice their opinion in a way that they will be listened to? Obviously, if more people protested the laws, policies and other things that did not benefit the consumer, things might be changed. However, I think that most people (including myself) feel overwhelmed by the fact that their one voice makes little difference.
When I was younger (as in, like under 17) my parents wouldn't let me watch very violent things. They restricted the amount of time I could play 'violent' video games. If a parent thinks that the media is to blame, then they are responsible to remove said media from their children's presence.
Doesn't it make a bit more sense to say "If you don't want your kids playing my games, be a real parent and make sure your kids dont play them" than "Hey, you, the company that makes this. You must majestically enforce the fact that no minors may buy your games even though, theoretically, have you no power in this area, and why should you want to."
Mod this guy up!! This is a real, non-biased question that can actually provide some good answers for the Linux community. The CEO of the top Linux distribution company telling us how ready (or un-ready) he thinks Linux is for the consumer desktop market, and what needs to be improved.
Really. That was the thrust of your question? I guess you expect that no software should ever be released. Windows is not the only software in the world released with security bugs present...it's just one of the most publicised (and hated, amongst O/S ppl.). Whenever a Microsoft security flaw is made known to the public, people flock into the message boards and say "See, just another example of how the monopolistic bastards are allowed to release half-baked, bug riddled software into the grasps of the poor, un-educated and un-knowning public who are forced to deal with their stupidity."
However, whenever a Linux security bug, or a BIND security bug, or Apache, or has a bug published its more of a "See how our infinitely superior peer review system coupled with availble published source code allows us to squash bugs easily?".
Don't get me wrong...I am not a huge fan of Microsoft, I don't like the way they run their business and I think that often times they do stupid things that I don't agree with. But that doesnt mean their software is so inferior because it was released with security bugs. What about software like BIND. The thing is older than the planet earth practicly, but they are STILL finding security holes in it.
I am forced to agree with the guy that said somethign like Every time Slashdot posts an interview about "The Enemy" people seem to post questions asking them to admit that they suck and are stupid and would add to that that often times they think that their software is perfect and vastly superior.
Perhaps Linux is vastly superior for certain people and for certain particular purposes (indeed, in my eyes it is) but you would be a fool to think that it is superior in, per say, the home user desktop market. The uneducated in the computer world (or rather, those people who do not need to user computers on a high scale in their daily life, and therefore have no need to learn every in and out of them) would rather have a simple, easy to use, eye-candy riddled operating system where every type of application under the sun that could possibly be imagined for a home user exists. What operating systems fit this mold?
However, I digress. Think about the questions you ask in reference to everybody before you start blaming one particular entity for their lack of an answer towards it. You can't accurately measure the world if you use a ruler that changes based on what (or who) you are measuring.
And your problem with that would be what?
The criticallity of BIND? I know that BIND is very very important software out there...but so are other things. How would you feel if tommorow morning all of the "critical" software packages made you sign NDA's and pay money for bugs. So, you don't get kernel bugs, you dont get inetd bugs, you dont get ssh bugs, you dont get FTP exploits, you dont get apache bugs. Why? Because these are all 'critical' pieces of software? I don't think that quite cuts it. As a million people have already stated, if the script kiddies are more on the ball than the admins are, they deserve to get hit.
Someone posted something about mods making a 'better version of the game' keep people from buying newer versions. I wasn't aware that there was a DragonballZ game, so I assumed he was referring to Q3.
How can you possibly say that Q3 mods restrict ID Software's IP? ID was kind enough to publicly publish its internal API and distribute it to developers along with the other information to create Q3 mods. Q3 mods are encouraged in the q3 community. The only restriction they placed was that they mods must be 100% free of charge.
hevyd is absolutely right.
Although PERLs syntax is fairly easy to learn, and syntacticly clean, much of the advanced functionality availible is implemented through hundreds of external modules. How is every sysadmin supposed to just instantly know what modules are availible for what purposes, or to another extent, which ones are the best.
You also mentioned man pages for PERL? Have you ever seen the monster? Even the FAQ is split between some 9 different man pages? All of the functions are on the same page, and even though they are split up into usefull categories they man page is less than intuitive.
Perhaps this book may not be well suited to _you_, however, I'm certain there are a whole host of sa's who have at least a strong foundation of PERL, but would like to extend that knowledge to allow for more advanced scripts to be written.