Its a managed corporate desktop management service. Its like hiring maids instead of going out and buying a bucket, sponges and bleach and spending two hours on your knees every week.
I'm happy "renting" my maids. If you like cleaning your house, you certainly don't have to.
Is not to use those services. Generally speaking, if the country is that restrictive, they probably will not take kindly to a foreigner trying to bypass the restrictions.
A good rule of thumb to travel: obey local laws. If you don't like them, don't go there. As a foreigner, you are in a pretty risky spot to try to take matters into your own hand.
Microsoft is a company made up of hundreds of development groups working on hundreds of products in a dozen divisions.
Most of the people who are on those teams care about the work they're doing, care about the products they release and want to release the best products possible.
So, relative to IE9, what it Microsoft up to? If I had to guess, a hard-working team of engineers, program managers and test engineers are busting their asses to make the best browser they can. They care more about standards than I'd hazard a guess most people on Slashdot do, and they want to make something that gives the best experience there is on the web.
There isn't some grand Microsoft conspiracy. IE6 wans't about vendor lockin, it was about needing to support scenarios that customers were asking for. The younger crowd on here may not remember it, but back in the late 90's, IE was the best browser out there. Microsoft's dev tools were pushing intranet development long before open source tools caught up. These days its easy to look at what people want to do with browsers and say "jeez, I can use XmlHttpRequest, and JSON, and *insert buzzword here* to do it". But in 1998, those technologies *didn't exist*. And, you may be surprised, people weren't any dumber than today. Developers wanted to be able to do the same things people are doing today, and Microsoft provided them. IE6 was a point on that path where they needed to support their corporate customers while trying to match advancing standards. For every web developer griping about standards, there were *paying* enterprise developers who needed the backwards compatibility.
So why does Microsoft need a browser? Because, frankly, developers need the controls. They need the network-level APIs. Lots of parts of Windows need to display HTML content, and no sane OS vendor will leave the security of their system and the functionality of core parts of it to a 3rd party. You could just as easily ask why Apple bothers with Safari!
Thinking it was some thing nefarious is just falling blindly into the anti-Microsoft FUD on places like Slashdot, and doesn't reflect the reality of how IE has progressed over the years.
Well, we developed all of those technologies for the purposes of nuking someone... so, its not unreasonable, if somewhat irrational, to expect we'd believe the same of someone else doing it.
Not sure we've got the moral high ground to point fingers, though.
And in the last 30 years, much of the manned civilian space budget has been designed as a corporate welfare program to keep engineers at important defense contractors employed between DoD contracts.
Thats how we ended up with a Space Station that provides virtually no value as compared to the massive amounts spent on it, and a Space Shuttle that continued flying primarily just to build the space station. One requires the other and the combination keeps a lot of people employed.
Thanks, but I am already paying my ISP: I do not want to pay again for the right of playing online.
Anyway, I do not think that having a paying service or not makes a difference: you agree to the terms of PSN just like you do for XBL, even if it is free.
Then don't. Tens of millions of people find value in it. No one is holding a gun to your head.
No, but I can toss in another piece of anecdotal evidence -- I rarely can sustain streams to Netflix that fast, but I can easily pull data from other sources *much* faster than that.
Now, its possible my ISP is trottling Netflix, but I don't believe they are that sophisticated.
The problem with any of Netflix' information is that we can't tell if the problem is at the ISP or at peering points, or at Netflix itself. We also can't tell what speeds the customers in question actually are paying for. (Thus making the statistics basically useless beyond Netflix playing politics...)
Why would this be anybody's business other than the parents?
And why is any of this anyone's business other than the parents? The kid cheated. The company provided proof to the parents. Case closed. The proof, the parents response or the scenarios in question are none of your business either.
I don't know what people were expecting and didn't get from them. I find it as puzzling as the people who complained about Transformers 2. What did they expect from that? It was two hours of robots kicking the crap out of each other.
Matrix 2 and 3 were what you expected -- special effects, Keanu saying "woah" and pop-philosophy.
I think the problem is people read way too much into the first one.
I'd second this -- even if its not a full-fledged NAS, IMO its *critical* to have a mirrored external drive. Like it or not, drives can die just sitting in a closet. My parents lost a 500GB drive that way, we discovered recently. It'd been plugged in maybe 3 times total, and 350GB of converted family videos were lost. Thankfully we have DVD copies, but the original captures are gone. I'd been telling them to get a mirrored NAS for a year now, and they're finally breaking down and doing it.
That is still not sufficient -- data corruption can wipe out the mirror, so you really need to do exactly what you say -- online mirror, and an offline periodic backup. (I wish one of the online backup companies would partner with Synology or other NAS vendors for NAS-level support for it...
No, the correct analogy is that you aren't welcome to enter my house and take my microwave because I'm having an open house and have a plate of free cookies out.
Did you even RTFA? Or have you ever actually used Facebook?
No app can access information you haven't authorized. For an existing app to access that, you'd have to re-authorize it.
Facebook clearly believes there is some subset of apps in which that information is useful, and has made it available. Considering no one can access it if you (as I said) haven't a) added it and b) authorized it, I fail to see an issue.
If you a) put your address and phone number online and b) click to specifically allow an application to access them, too fucking bad if something bad happens.
I'm so tired of the complete lack of personal responsibility these days.
And? MS Security Essentials is a zero-cost option as long as the OS isn't pirated.
If you're not in a free-as-in-whatever-the-OSS-people-are-calling-free-like-beer-or-whatever OS, why do you need AV that is?
Not sure I get it. I can totally buy an OSS virus scanner for an OSS OS, or an OSS virus scanner for a non-OSS OS that has no free options, but Windows has a free option that comes from the people who wrote the OS.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone involved in that exchange failed basic math.
Assuming seven bit ANSI, that's not even five characters to get a billion combinations.
And a 2k e-mail would be 2^2048 combinations.
Rental?
Its a managed corporate desktop management service. Its like hiring maids instead of going out and buying a bucket, sponges and bleach and spending two hours on your knees every week.
I'm happy "renting" my maids. If you like cleaning your house, you certainly don't have to.
I refuse to support what I consider a complete waste of time and computing resources.
So can I have your /. account? I'd like to drop 200,000 or so from my UID. Impress the ladies, you know?
Ladies aren't impressed by low /. UIDs.
Unfortunately.
Speak for yourself ...
Is not to use those services. Generally speaking, if the country is that restrictive, they probably will not take kindly to a foreigner trying to bypass the restrictions.
A good rule of thumb to travel: obey local laws. If you don't like them, don't go there. As a foreigner, you are in a pretty risky spot to try to take matters into your own hand.
Microsoft is a company made up of hundreds of development groups working on hundreds of products in a dozen divisions.
Most of the people who are on those teams care about the work they're doing, care about the products they release and want to release the best products possible.
So, relative to IE9, what it Microsoft up to? If I had to guess, a hard-working team of engineers, program managers and test engineers are busting their asses to make the best browser they can. They care more about standards than I'd hazard a guess most people on Slashdot do, and they want to make something that gives the best experience there is on the web.
There isn't some grand Microsoft conspiracy. IE6 wans't about vendor lockin, it was about needing to support scenarios that customers were asking for. The younger crowd on here may not remember it, but back in the late 90's, IE was the best browser out there. Microsoft's dev tools were pushing intranet development long before open source tools caught up. These days its easy to look at what people want to do with browsers and say "jeez, I can use XmlHttpRequest, and JSON, and *insert buzzword here* to do it". But in 1998, those technologies *didn't exist*. And, you may be surprised, people weren't any dumber than today. Developers wanted to be able to do the same things people are doing today, and Microsoft provided them. IE6 was a point on that path where they needed to support their corporate customers while trying to match advancing standards. For every web developer griping about standards, there were *paying* enterprise developers who needed the backwards compatibility.
So why does Microsoft need a browser? Because, frankly, developers need the controls. They need the network-level APIs. Lots of parts of Windows need to display HTML content, and no sane OS vendor will leave the security of their system and the functionality of core parts of it to a 3rd party. You could just as easily ask why Apple bothers with Safari!
Thinking it was some thing nefarious is just falling blindly into the anti-Microsoft FUD on places like Slashdot, and doesn't reflect the reality of how IE has progressed over the years.
Well, we developed all of those technologies for the purposes of nuking someone ... so, its not unreasonable, if somewhat irrational, to expect we'd believe the same of someone else doing it.
Not sure we've got the moral high ground to point fingers, though.
And in the last 30 years, much of the manned civilian space budget has been designed as a corporate welfare program to keep engineers at important defense contractors employed between DoD contracts.
Thats how we ended up with a Space Station that provides virtually no value as compared to the massive amounts spent on it, and a Space Shuttle that continued flying primarily just to build the space station. One requires the other and the combination keeps a lot of people employed.
Never heard of Texas, have you?
Except this policy impacted users enormously.
When Apple jumped into the market for iBooks, Kindle books jumped in price. Some, not by a lot, but many by 50% or more.
Thanks, but I am already paying my ISP: I do not want to pay again for the right of playing online.
Anyway, I do not think that having a paying service or not makes a difference: you agree to the terms of PSN just like you do for XBL, even if it is free.
Then don't. Tens of millions of people find value in it. No one is holding a gun to your head.
No, but I can toss in another piece of anecdotal evidence -- I rarely can sustain streams to Netflix that fast, but I can easily pull data from other sources *much* faster than that.
Now, its possible my ISP is trottling Netflix, but I don't believe they are that sophisticated.
The problem with any of Netflix' information is that we can't tell if the problem is at the ISP or at peering points, or at Netflix itself. We also can't tell what speeds the customers in question actually are paying for. (Thus making the statistics basically useless beyond Netflix playing politics...)
Why would this be anybody's business other than the parents?
And why is any of this anyone's business other than the parents? The kid cheated. The company provided proof to the parents. Case closed. The proof, the parents response or the scenarios in question are none of your business either.
p>And THAT my friends is why intellectual property, and Facebook, are both absurd and terrible.
No, that's why friends are terrible.
Its funny because vanishingly few Slashdot readers have any idea how patents work or how to read and understand them.
He didn't realize he's the one that is funny.
IMO, the second two were better than the first.
I don't know what people were expecting and didn't get from them. I find it as puzzling as the people who complained about Transformers 2. What did they expect from that? It was two hours of robots kicking the crap out of each other.
Matrix 2 and 3 were what you expected -- special effects, Keanu saying "woah" and pop-philosophy.
I think the problem is people read way too much into the first one.
I'd second this -- even if its not a full-fledged NAS, IMO its *critical* to have a mirrored external drive. Like it or not, drives can die just sitting in a closet. My parents lost a 500GB drive that way, we discovered recently. It'd been plugged in maybe 3 times total, and 350GB of converted family videos were lost. Thankfully we have DVD copies, but the original captures are gone. I'd been telling them to get a mirrored NAS for a year now, and they're finally breaking down and doing it.
That is still not sufficient -- data corruption can wipe out the mirror, so you really need to do exactly what you say -- online mirror, and an offline periodic backup. (I wish one of the online backup companies would partner with Synology or other NAS vendors for NAS-level support for it...
Debit cards/banks, however, are not held to the same standard
Correct, most are capped at $0 liability.
Maybe your family of four should get up off the couch and go outside once in a while.
Inconceivable usage scenario? No.
Sad? Yes.
Comcast's caps are (soft) 250GB.
At 2GB per movie streamed (and in my experience its less than half that), that's 125 movies.
A month.
Four a day.
No, the correct analogy is that you aren't welcome to enter my house and take my microwave because I'm having an open house and have a plate of free cookies out.
No, to my original point, that is where you fail.
If people who don't read them get screwed, I couldn't care any less. *That*, sir, was the point of my post.
Did you even RTFA? Or have you ever actually used Facebook?
No app can access information you haven't authorized. For an existing app to access that, you'd have to re-authorize it.
Facebook clearly believes there is some subset of apps in which that information is useful, and has made it available. Considering no one can access it if you (as I said) haven't a) added it and b) authorized it, I fail to see an issue.
Stupid is as stupid does.
If you a) put your address and phone number online and b) click to specifically allow an application to access them, too fucking bad if something bad happens.
I'm so tired of the complete lack of personal responsibility these days.
And? MS Security Essentials is a zero-cost option as long as the OS isn't pirated.
If you're not in a free-as-in-whatever-the-OSS-people-are-calling-free-like-beer-or-whatever OS, why do you need AV that is?
Not sure I get it. I can totally buy an OSS virus scanner for an OSS OS, or an OSS virus scanner for a non-OSS OS that has no free options, but Windows has a free option that comes from the people who wrote the OS.