How about NOT contributing to the network effect that funds the removing of our rights, hm?
Infringing their crap provides a larger audience.
A larger audience equates to more money, money that fuels the crap they're doing.
Just. Say. NO.
The media and the artists that produce it aren't worth this and instead of infringing the stuff, just simply opt out of it all. Honest indie stuff is as good or better than the stuff the RIAA players are shovelling.
Companies like PayPlay and CD Baby happen to have a lot to offer people- and they don't sue people or any of the RIAA member labels' other antics. Rather than "waging a war" that you can't win by committing infringements (It doesn't hurt their bottom line anywhere near what they claim it does- never has probably never will in our collective lifetimes), why not do something productive like foster a media community that caters to our needs and has no intentions on the stupid crap.
There's limits to that clause, set by the state, since they're in Texas. I think a little discussion about realistic minimums, etc. with the PUC would go a long way, actually- because they'll have the same discussion with TWC about them, and TWC won't like it at all.:-D
The main reason why the ISPs in Stockholm are able to do that is that they don't see those subscribers as a revenue stream to be strip-mined for ever higher profits.
Most of the cable and telco players are publicly traded entities which don't do dividends and rely on their market capitalization to "deliver shareholder value". That comes from an ever growing, absolutely unsustainable profit growth model. In order to do it, unsustainable as it is, they have to come up with ways to either shed costs or get new takers without expending money on infrastructure. This is just yet another way to do it.
Yeah, there probably is. The big takeaway, though, is that the protections people thought we had against boot-sector attacks isn't quite what everyone thought it was.
Well, this one wires itself into the OS (In order to be useful, it kind of has to...)- so it'd be difficult to get a wide-spanning variant of this going, but a targeted one could actually zap any device in existence. You'd just have to target specific OSes in the x86 space, you'd have to figure out how to zap uboot and redboot stuff by remote, etc.
While I'm not going to say that it'd be impossible (It's not and it IS serious...)- only X86 systems would be easily targetable but they'd have to have 3 or so custom versions of the thing to make any impact. And, it'd be one of the only instances of something that I'd be concerning myself with on Linux. Most of the other stuff can't get good traction.
I would not say "mindless bashing"- it's just that the researchers in question did it to Vista, which is supposed to be "more secure" than this...:-D
Intersting idea. While the current version requires physical access, it doesn't strike me that one would need all that much to make it work via remote with a trojan or similar.
Basically, it's a revisit of the boot-sector virus of old, which will prove to be an issue for just about any OS, most likely.
It'd be as easy (different effort...but just as easy...) with Windows or MacOS- because of the nature of the exploit in question.
This isn't a Linux thing. It's an INTEL issue, of which there's an exploit in the wild under Linux that gets around much of the security in the system.
That's what I get for making a quick quip while trying to sort out a problem with an embedded distribution install (Day job...)- and not paying close enough attention. 912k...whoo...
Actually...they're probably afoul of the RICO statutes at this time; it matters little of the WHY they're doing- the WHAT they're doing is liable to be criminal.
Heh, I just want them to stop this nonsense so I can go back and buy some CDs
Why wait? PayPlay, CD Baby, and numerous others have NOTHING to do with the RIAA and they're more than happy to sell (and in at least some cases, HAND) you music galore. Some of the GOOD STUFF that the RIAA players have forgotten about.
They're not going to get a clue until they see they're seriously screwing themselves by these things or they up and die in a Chapter 7 filing.
I've never seen the truth be a problem for them- they go plowing right on with their stuff, never mind that they're suing kids that could never have done the things they're accusing them of, the elderly, and even the dead.
There's a reason I tell people to just not deal with anything that touches their crap. ANYTHING.
Any use contributes to the network effect that fuels this insanity. Just say no. Just like with drugs.
TI's still fabbin' stuff. In Richardson, Texas, even. And we won't get into IBM's facilities, which are jobbed out to varying fabless companies including some of those foreign vendors.
Now many companies don't have a clue and the biggest player making stuff is in Taiwan, but we're far from dead in the water- it's just that it's cheaper for many things right now and we all know that the almighty bottom line's more important.
It's getting pretty comical watching the people that call us "Linux Zealots" cling to the idea that Vista was anything remotely resembling "production quality" for the desktop or that really and truthfully the same could have been said about XP.
Before you remark on things too far, I've done quite a bit with both OSes and I got to see Vista in action and at a level most people wouldn't care to for a solid 5 months before the public got to it.
It wasn't production quality then.
It's not really production quality now.
Windows 7 MIGHT be that, but if it pulls from the codebase Vista did or from XP directly, it won't be either.
Enjoy all your quality, including the stuff like Conficker. You deserve only the best, after all.
Slashdot Mirror
How about NOT contributing to the network effect that funds the removing of our rights, hm?
Infringing their crap provides a larger audience.
A larger audience equates to more money, money that fuels the crap they're doing.
Just.
Say.
NO.
The media and the artists that produce it aren't worth this and instead of infringing the stuff, just simply opt out of it all. Honest indie stuff is as good or better than the stuff the RIAA players are shovelling.
Companies like PayPlay and CD Baby happen to have a lot to offer people- and they don't sue people or any of the RIAA member labels' other antics. Rather than "waging a war" that you can't win by committing infringements (It doesn't hurt their bottom line anywhere near what they claim it does- never has probably never will in our collective lifetimes), why not do something productive like foster a media community that caters to our needs and has no intentions on the stupid crap.
There's limits to that clause, set by the state, since they're in Texas. I think a little discussion about realistic minimums, etc. with the PUC would go a long way, actually- because they'll have the same discussion with TWC about them, and TWC won't like it at all. :-D
The main reason why the ISPs in Stockholm are able to do that is that they don't see those subscribers as a revenue stream to be strip-mined for ever higher profits.
Most of the cable and telco players are publicly traded entities which don't do dividends and rely on their market capitalization to "deliver shareholder value". That comes from an ever growing, absolutely unsustainable profit growth model. In order to do it, unsustainable as it is, they have to come up with ways to either shed costs or get new takers without expending money on infrastructure. This is just yet another way to do it.
Sorry... 10 DVD distributions of Linux.
And, yes, I DO that on an off and on basis, plus do streaming video, audio, etc.
Of course, I spend $170 a month on a business level connection with baseline SLA's, etc.
It's not unforseeable that someone COULD do it with legal content.
Excuse me...
If you can write the MBR or to BIOS, you don't need physical access.
The CURRENT PoC needs it, but the vectors to do it do NOT.
The only people that missed the point here are the people that seized on the PoC's need for physical access.
Yeah, there probably is. The big takeaway, though, is that the protections people thought we had against boot-sector attacks isn't quite what everyone thought it was.
Overwirte the MBR with your own after making a copy, placed somewhere else on the disk being attacked.
Point it to the place you copied the original on the disk.
Once done, you don't need physical access.
If you've got an exploit or a trojan, you can conceivably do those things by remote.
How did a boot-sector virus work?
Well, this one wires itself into the OS (In order to be useful, it kind of has to...)- so it'd be difficult to get a wide-spanning variant of this going, but a targeted one could actually zap any device in existence. You'd just have to target specific OSes in the x86 space, you'd have to figure out how to zap uboot and redboot stuff by remote, etc.
While I'm not going to say that it'd be impossible (It's not and it IS serious...)- only X86 systems would be easily targetable but they'd have to have 3 or so custom versions of the thing to make any impact. And, it'd be one of the only instances of something that I'd be concerning myself with on Linux. Most of the other stuff can't get good traction.
I would not say "mindless bashing"- it's just that the researchers in question did it to Vista, which is supposed to be "more secure" than this... :-D
It's actually not as low as you'd think. They only need local access for the proof of concept.
Think old-school boot-sector virus and you'd be thinking right. It's more of a new twist on that concept.
Think "yellow" to "orange" in your analogy and you'd have it pretty close.
Intersting idea. While the current version requires physical access, it doesn't strike me that one would need all that much to make it work via remote with a trojan or similar.
Basically, it's a revisit of the boot-sector virus of old, which will prove to be an issue for just about any OS, most likely.
No kidding...
It'd be as easy (different effort...but just as easy...) with Windows or MacOS- because of the nature of the exploit in question.
This isn't a Linux thing. It's an INTEL issue, of which there's an exploit in the wild under Linux that gets around much of the security in the system.
That's what I get for making a quick quip while trying to sort out a problem with an embedded distribution install (Day job...)- and not paying close enough attention. 912k...whoo...
As for my ID... Not swappin' it with anyone. ;-)
Actually...they're probably afoul of the RICO statutes at this time; it matters little of the WHY they're doing- the WHAT they're doing is liable to be criminal.
Ouch... Ray, I sense you're holding back on us, buddy... Tell us how you REALLY feel about 'em. :-D
Weeelll..
1) You've got a 91k range ID... ;-)
2) As far as this old fart (2k range ID...), you're not new here...
We could only be so lucky, Ray...
Why wait? PayPlay, CD Baby, and numerous others have NOTHING to do with the RIAA and they're more than happy to sell (and in at least some cases, HAND) you music galore. Some of the GOOD STUFF that the RIAA players have forgotten about.
They're not going to get a clue until they see they're seriously screwing themselves by these things or they up and die in a Chapter 7 filing.
No kidding, Ray.
I've never seen the truth be a problem for them- they go plowing right on with their stuff, never mind that they're suing kids that could never have done the things they're accusing them of, the elderly, and even the dead.
There's a reason I tell people to just not deal with anything that touches their crap. ANYTHING.
Any use contributes to the network effect that fuels this insanity. Just say no. Just like with drugs.
Big effin' deal.
Seriously.
Once you GPL/LGPL it, if people are interested in carrying it's development, it'll stay that way.
They're going to have a rough time putting that genie back in the bottle in the case of Java now.
In many cases, there'd be no room for them because there's already something there...
Ugh... That was bad enough to disARM you when you saw/heard it.
Wrong answer...
TI's still fabbin' stuff. In Richardson, Texas, even. And we won't get into IBM's facilities, which are jobbed out to varying fabless companies including some of those foreign vendors.
Now many companies don't have a clue and the biggest player making stuff is in Taiwan, but we're far from dead in the water- it's just that it's cheaper for many things right now and we all know that the almighty bottom line's more important.
That stuff wasn't free. You paid for it when you bought MCE. Heh... Seems like the pot was calling the kettle black there.
It's getting pretty comical watching the people that call us "Linux Zealots" cling to the idea that Vista was anything remotely resembling "production quality" for the desktop or that really and truthfully the same could have been said about XP.
Before you remark on things too far, I've done quite a bit with both OSes and I got to see Vista in action and at a level most people wouldn't care to for a solid 5 months before the public got to it.
It wasn't production quality then.
It's not really production quality now.
Windows 7 MIGHT be that, but if it pulls from the codebase Vista did or from XP directly, it won't be either.
Enjoy all your quality, including the stuff like Conficker. You deserve only the best, after all.