I disagree. I think I could make a good case (but IANAL) that discussion on Slashdot is not affected by a story's links being Slashdotted. If anything, Slashdotting a link forks the discussion a bit and generates more postings.
Now, if they were doing it to sell OSDN hosting services, that would be extortion.
My God! You're right, that's gotta be the Best Troll Ever, but you've got to read it a -1 to see all the replies. Quite a catch! Genius, whoever s/he is.
One CD has the capacity of 500 floppies. Now think about how much even a pack of 10 floppies costs when compared to that one CD.
We keep our checkbook (and other bank account info) on my wife's laptop. Every time we use it, it asks if we want to back up the files, and we always do. 1) The files easily fit on one floppy; if we used CDRs, 99.8% of the CDR would be blank. 2) Her laptop doesn't have a CD burner. Now please try to convince me that we're stupid to backup our bank data to floppies and talk me into upgrading her laptop to one with a CD burner and buying a blank CDR every two weeks.
You have a hammer, and everywhere you look you see nails. I have a full toolbox, and I see nails and bolts and molly fasteners and screws and picture hangers and etc. What's worse, you're telling the world that all they have are nails and they should get a hammer like yours. News flash: We're not all you.
By dropping floppy drives, Dell's making it really easy for me to choose Compaq or Gateway. Instead of dumping the floppy, why not improve it? Why not make a drive that reads/writes floppies 10 times faster than today's drives?
But the other issues are rather worrisome. Especially #2 - "The ten connection maximum includes any indirect connections made through "multiplexing"...". How the Hell are you going to know if someone's running NAT on their machine and their entire LAN of 500 PCs is accessing your machine?!? This one IS BULLSHIT.
Yes, what you say is indeed bullshit. You -- and Greg Edmiston -- misunderstand this completely. It's not that your XP workstation may only connect to a maximum of 10 other devices, it's that a maximum of 10 other workstations may connect to your XP workstation when it's acting as a server. Microsoft is more than clear about this, and have been since NT 4.0, when it first came up. People were buying NT Workstation and using it as a server; MS changed the ELUA to prevent this -- if you want to run a server, buy NT Server (or, now, Windows 2000 Server; there is no XP Server). This is old news, and you're over-reacting. There are other reasons to be upset about this, but chill.
And since they mention IIS in their clause, doesn't it mean that as a web-server running IIS under WinXP - YOU CAN ONLY SERVE 10 PAGES SIMULTANEOUSLY.
Again, you're over-reacting. You can only serve 10 other workstations (simultaniously). If you want to set up a department web server on your desktop PC, only 10 of your co-workers may connect at once. More than that and Microsoft wants you to run a real server, so buy a used PC for $100 and run Apache on OpenBSD or Linux.
A) How do you change Word's default save format? B) Why should you have to use Word at all? If the corporate "standard" is a file format (not an application), then you should be able and allowed to use any application that reads/writes that file format. Use Word Perfect if you wish, or Open Office -- or PC Write if it floats your boat.
If Word 5 could open Word 6 files, that would be forward compatibility. Word 6 opening and saving Word 5 files is backward compatibility. Offering backward compatibility while explicitly destroying forward compatibility is what forces users to upgrade -- not because they need the new features (or bug fixes) but because their co-worker got a new PC with the new software, and now nobody else can read that worker's files so the rest all must upgrade. This is planned obsolesence at its best, and it made Microsoft, Intel, and Dell very rich (the forced software upgrades also forced hardware upgrades because the new bloatware wouldn't run on the old hardware).
The Devil Spawned End User is the asshole with Word 6 who refuses to save in Word 5 format so her co-workers can share files. The real problem here is IT departments that "standardize" on an application rather than on a data file format. If the corporate standard file format was "MS Word 5" then the asshole with Word 6 would learn to "Save As" or lose his bonus.
Your ISP probably doesn't even know what VMware is. I'm with ATT^H^H^HComcast, and they don't know squat. I recently had a problem with email, and they asked, "Are you using Outlook Express?" When I said no, the reply was, "We only support Outlook Express." So, if they don't support VMware, you're probably not allowed to use it. I have a small (3-4 computer) network at my house, and I don't dare tell them I have a file server because, per the terms of my service agreement, I'm not allowed to run a server! I'm not hosting any web pages or anything, but technically if I want to share files among the computers in my house, I should do it peer-to-peer. OK, so I have 5 computers, and one of them is on all the time and it holds a lot of files but nobody ever sits at its keyboard and it runs OpenBSD but not X Windows and has no desktop apps, but it's not a server, I swear:-)
I would venture and say that Windows is closer to being secure than OpenBSD is to being useful to the general public.
That's why I use both: OpenBSD runs my firewall and server, Windows is on my desktop. If I ever get enough money to upgrade this PC (it's in desperate need of more disk space) and enough time to play with it, I'd like to have it dual-boot OpenBSD as well. I'm sure I could migrate off Windows (except for games), but it's just too damn easy to stay put, especially when I can sleep well knowing the OpenBSD firewall is doing the security job that Windows simply can't. So for now, when I want my unix fix I log onto the server.
We don't need MORE AUTHORITY, what we need is LESS AUTHORITY.
What we need is more RESPONSIBILITY. If you get infected and endanger my computers, and you haven't applied the latest OS patches or you've left open a known hole, then you should face criminal charges. We have existing laws -- "attractive nusanse" "reckless endangerment" etc. -- we just need to apply them to this new place called 'cyberspace'.
That's not at all the same as putting out the fire yourself. In your example, the fire department assumes responsibility for any damage they may cause to your neighbor's landscaping, driveway, etc. If you put out your neighbor's fire, you assume liablity for any such damage you cause. Same here: If you kill a "malicious" process on someone else's computer, you should assume responsibility for any unintended damage you may cause (such as killing the wrong process, erasing data, etc.). This means you shouldn't do it if you don't know exactly what you're doing.
If there were a "virus fire department" -- government authorized and funded -- that you could call to report a worm/virus on another computer that threatens your computer, then this discussion would be moot.
It's actually a great analogy, if you know the history of the fire department. Fire departments were originally established by insurance companies, and they only served their customers. If your neighbor's house caught fire, you depended on their insurance company's fire department (if they had one) to put out the fire and protect your house. The best you could do was call your insurance company so their fire department could stand by in case the neighbor's fire spread. Benjamin Franklin is the guy who came up with the idea of a (volunteer) fire department that would fight any fire, regardless of whose insurance you had (if any!).
The parallel here is that before we're ready for an official group authorized to fight worms and viruses, we first need the private "fire departments." I smell a business opportunity here -- offer worm/virus insurance, with the conditions that for coverage you must allow the insurance company to inspect your security processes, ensure you're up to code (have the latest patches), and have the authority to go in and kill viruses and worms if you get infected. Then if someone else gets infected and endangers your computers, you can sue their insurance company -- or sue them if they don't have insurance.
I used to work for GM, and I know for a fact that they insist on the "source code" for any equipment they buy. If it's a machine, they want the blueprints; if it's got electronics, they want the schematics. This is to protect GM in case the company folds; GM needs to keep making cars, even if Acme Machine Tools goes belly-up. Usually they do this by putting the designs in question in escrow, with specific terms for their release (chapter 11, whatever). I suppose you could do the same with shareware source.
Or you could release binaries and provide the source to registered users.
If the issue here is "crossing state lines" then two points: 1) The FCC already took care of the radio issue (as AC pointed out above). Even transmissions send and recieved within a single state fall under the "interstate commerce" clause of the Constitution, and thus under the FCC's jurisdiction. 2) Business licenses and taxes are another issue. You may need a business license, and you many need to pay sales or other taxes, in your customer's state. Seek local advice. There may be government agencies who provide free help to small businesses with just these issues -- ask.
(reality check: Finnish Taxi Drivers Must Pay Music Royalties)
While I'm sympathetic to your arguement, there's a slight difference between your living room and a taxi cab: you pay to ride in the cab. If you charged your neighbor to come over and watch TV, you'd be violating the terms of the current license on your personal DVDs and video tapes -- read the fine print that comes with the FBI warning, where it says something to the effect of "no commercial viewing." This is nothing new.
If anything, Mozilla would improve -- since Flash wouldn't work in Mozilla anymore, the developers might come to their senses and re-write it to igore Flash altogether. I mean, really, how many times do I have to say "NO!" when it asks if I want to load the plug-in before Mozilla/Phoenix/whatever realize that I don't want it and stop asking? And when are they going to block downloads from Flash servers the way they let us block downloads from ad servers?
Did you miss the part where I said "demo"? Or do you charge for your demos?
My point is that there is an un-tapped market for multiplayer non-First Person Shooters. OK, so maybe it's not as large as the FPS market, but has anyone even tried to tap it? Multiplayer non-FPS games seem to sell well enough for Xbox and PS2, so why not for the PC?
I'd love to do this with the family over the holidays, but with nieces and nephews (not to mention Grandma) all First Person Shooters are out. Any networked free (demos OK) sports or driving games out there? Anything without blood and guts will do -- violence (car crashes) is OK, but it can't have blood and guts and death. Thanks.
He wants something they can all quickly pick up. America's Army requires you to go through basic training and earn skills before you're allowed to multi-play.
What, are you too lazy to read the book? Talk about a spoiler!
Hey, did you know Gandalf was right about not killing Gollum? Did you know Frodo isn't so strong-willed in the end? Oops, I may have leaked a spoiler for the next movie!
My bad. My comments were based on reading the earlier story this morning, which did not mention set-top boxes. But the second question remains: Will we have to "upgrade" our cable subscriptions to digital cable just to watch TV? I'm skeptical.
I couldn't tell from the article: Will I be able to buy a cable-ready digital TV, and just connect the coax to the back? Or will this still require a subscription to "Digital Cable" plus a set-top-box?
If this is just a "standard" for getting all the extra-cost set-top-boxes to talk to all the government-mandated digital TVs, then it's not much of a victory for consumers. That will just mean the government is mandating we all "upgrade" our cable subscriptions to watch plain old TV.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, if they were doing it to sell OSDN hosting services, that would be extortion.
I think the real question is: "Do you need a license to give alcohol away?"
My God! You're right, that's gotta be the Best Troll Ever, but you've got to read it a -1 to see all the replies. Quite a catch! Genius, whoever s/he is.
You have a hammer, and everywhere you look you see nails. I have a full toolbox, and I see nails and bolts and molly fasteners and screws and picture hangers and etc. What's worse, you're telling the world that all they have are nails and they should get a hammer like yours. News flash: We're not all you.
By dropping floppy drives, Dell's making it really easy for me to choose Compaq or Gateway. Instead of dumping the floppy, why not improve it? Why not make a drive that reads/writes floppies 10 times faster than today's drives?
A) How do you change Word's default save format?
B) Why should you have to use Word at all? If the corporate "standard" is a file format (not an application), then you should be able and allowed to use any application that reads/writes that file format. Use Word Perfect if you wish, or Open Office -- or PC Write if it floats your boat.
The Devil Spawned End User is the asshole with Word 6 who refuses to save in Word 5 format so her co-workers can share files. The real problem here is IT departments that "standardize" on an application rather than on a data file format. If the corporate standard file format was "MS Word 5" then the asshole with Word 6 would learn to "Save As" or lose his bonus.
That's 3117, not ellt. You're obviously not 3117. Noone can teach you 3117-speak. When you become 3117, you just know it; until then, you're 1ma3.
Your ISP probably doesn't even know what VMware is. I'm with ATT^H^H^HComcast, and they don't know squat. I recently had a problem with email, and they asked, "Are you using Outlook Express?" When I said no, the reply was, "We only support Outlook Express." So, if they don't support VMware, you're probably not allowed to use it. I have a small (3-4 computer) network at my house, and I don't dare tell them I have a file server because, per the terms of my service agreement, I'm not allowed to run a server! I'm not hosting any web pages or anything, but technically if I want to share files among the computers in my house, I should do it peer-to-peer. OK, so I have 5 computers, and one of them is on all the time and it holds a lot of files but nobody ever sits at its keyboard and it runs OpenBSD but not X Windows and has no desktop apps, but it's not a server, I swear :-)
If there were a "virus fire department" -- government authorized and funded -- that you could call to report a worm/virus on another computer that threatens your computer, then this discussion would be moot.
It's actually a great analogy, if you know the history of the fire department. Fire departments were originally established by insurance companies, and they only served their customers. If your neighbor's house caught fire, you depended on their insurance company's fire department (if they had one) to put out the fire and protect your house. The best you could do was call your insurance company so their fire department could stand by in case the neighbor's fire spread. Benjamin Franklin is the guy who came up with the idea of a (volunteer) fire department that would fight any fire, regardless of whose insurance you had (if any!).
The parallel here is that before we're ready for an official group authorized to fight worms and viruses, we first need the private "fire departments." I smell a business opportunity here -- offer worm/virus insurance, with the conditions that for coverage you must allow the insurance company to inspect your security processes, ensure you're up to code (have the latest patches), and have the authority to go in and kill viruses and worms if you get infected. Then if someone else gets infected and endangers your computers, you can sue their insurance company -- or sue them if they don't have insurance.
Or you could release binaries and provide the source to registered users.
If the issue here is "crossing state lines" then two points:
1) The FCC already took care of the radio issue (as AC pointed out above). Even transmissions send and recieved within a single state fall under the "interstate commerce" clause of the Constitution, and thus under the FCC's jurisdiction.
2) Business licenses and taxes are another issue. You may need a business license, and you many need to pay sales or other taxes, in your customer's state. Seek local advice. There may be government agencies who provide free help to small businesses with just these issues -- ask.
If anything, Mozilla would improve -- since Flash wouldn't work in Mozilla anymore, the developers might come to their senses and re-write it to igore Flash altogether. I mean, really, how many times do I have to say "NO!" when it asks if I want to load the plug-in before Mozilla/Phoenix/whatever realize that I don't want it and stop asking? And when are they going to block downloads from Flash servers the way they let us block downloads from ad servers?
My point is that there is an un-tapped market for multiplayer non-First Person Shooters. OK, so maybe it's not as large as the FPS market, but has anyone even tried to tap it? Multiplayer non-FPS games seem to sell well enough for Xbox and PS2, so why not for the PC?
Hey, game developers! Here's an un-tapped market just waiting to be exploited!
I'd love to do this with the family over the holidays, but with nieces and nephews (not to mention Grandma) all First Person Shooters are out. Any networked free (demos OK) sports or driving games out there? Anything without blood and guts will do -- violence (car crashes) is OK, but it can't have blood and guts and death. Thanks.
He wants something they can all quickly pick up. America's Army requires you to go through basic training and earn skills before you're allowed to multi-play.
Hey, did you know Gandalf was right about not killing Gollum? Did you know Frodo isn't so strong-willed in the end? Oops, I may have leaked a spoiler for the next movie!
Missing? I just went there and the pages look the same. Slashdot posters on crack?
My bad. My comments were based on reading the earlier story this morning, which did not mention set-top boxes. But the second question remains: Will we have to "upgrade" our cable subscriptions to digital cable just to watch TV? I'm skeptical.
If this is just a "standard" for getting all the extra-cost set-top-boxes to talk to all the government-mandated digital TVs, then it's not much of a victory for consumers. That will just mean the government is mandating we all "upgrade" our cable subscriptions to watch plain old TV.