I don't know the legality behind it either. It does seem like some kind of entrapment or something though. Perhaps they were issued some form of "digital warrant" to search the suspects hard drive through P2P apps or something? I don't know, but law enforcement can pretty much get away with anything "in the name of catching a criminal".
I'm sure any violation this would have been, has been avoided by some recent (BUSH administration) government "improvement" bill or another.
No it isn't a scam. And I really don't care how many anonymous fools call me an asshat. I'll be listening to my free ipod, watching my free tv while I get my last few referrals for my free minimac.
I am in no way hiding where this link leads...no tinyurl crap. Stright up, if you want to click it, then click it. If not, then don't it's as simple as that.
Who ever thought Google AdWords were any more effective than a pop up ad? The reason so many porn sites use pop ups is that often times they get paid on a "per view" or "per click" basis. Hmmm...if every user has to click the fake 'X' in the top corner, thus sending them to the advertiser, then the referring porn site makes money on a click through.
Same idea with AdWords. Why would anyone think click through ads are any better? Everyone remember the days when they had the little clients that would monitor when you were online and give you money for every hour you surfed? Ha, how long did it take you to set up a macro to run the mouse while you slept?:-)
The only advertising that makes you money, is advertising that sells your product. Tricking people into following a link or viewing a page they didn't want to doesn't do anyone any good in the long run. Pay per click can only last so long.
Ok, so what. Use DBPowerAmp to convert from WMA to Mp3. If the file has DRM, do a google search to find out how to remove the DRM. There's a way...even if it is burn the song to CD, and then rip it. (which I agree is not desireable) Usually there is a program to help you remove DRM...but not always.
Once you have a WMA or whatever format with no DRM, use DBPowerAmp to convert, and you're all set with an Mp3 to load onto the iPod using iTunes or third party tools from RedChairSoftware.com
So even if it is downloaded in WMA, you're still ok in most scenarios. You might have to do the digital->analog->digital shuffle is all. But really for music listened to on a portable device, that ain't gonna hurt much.
True, AllofMp3 is a bit sketchy and I don't use the site myself. I was just pointing out other sites, and to be honest I get my music from CD's so my list of examples is short.
But you can indeed put almost any Mp3 on the iPod, and who gives a shit about DRM? There is some great third party software from a company called red Chair Software (redchairsoftware.com) that can load and unload Mp3's from the iPod, thus getting rid of the requirement for using iTunes at all. This is what I do.
So, if you have a way to get the format into Mp3, it should play just fine assuming no DRM. Naturally, any site with DRM involved will make it difficult to get it on any player that doesn't support it. But DBPowerAmp is a good piece of software that converts between a lot of formats (AAC, OGG, MP3, WAV) and can likely help get you there.
People don't realize that the iPod is not as limited as a lot of people make it seem. iTunes is not the only site, or the only software, that can be used with the iPod.
I do concede that DRM can mess with the iPod, as well as WMA files. But WMA format is Microsoft's fault, not Apples fault. Why should anyone use WMA (other than a minor size difference) when Mp3 are playable on any system, and Wma are only playable on certain systems? DRM, I suppose the music industry will tell you. Bah...screw DRM, there will be a way to use Hymn soon with the latest iTunes...it's a cycle and Apple happens to be the most recent "update" to the cycle is all.
My parents have a Comcast cable modem here, and for the past 6 months or so they have had a 5Mbps connection at no extra charge. Mine is 3Mbps, so I was rather upset when I found out they are getting the higher transfer rate.
It was listed in the service agreement at 5Mbps down, and I think 512Kbps down, but I can't be sure. I did some speed tests, and it does indeed seem to match up.
Perhaps they were part of some sort of "beta" period for the higher rates, but they are in a smaller town in Michigan, not some large metropolitan area or anything...
Either Creative is wrong, or the dumbass that wrote the article is wrong...
iPod is limited to iTunes when it comes to purchasing music online
That's total BS, and I hope people don't think that this is true. You can purchase music anywhere online that has the Mp3 or AAC formats. Audible.com is a good example of where to get audio books. And allofmp3.com (although maybe not so much on the up-and-up) is another place to get music online. I'll leave the copy and paste of these sites as an exercise to the reader, since I'm not trying to pimp them or anything.
But come on folks, you can put almost ANY mp3 on your iPod, and it certainly doesn't mean you have to use only iTunes for your online music. It's also possible to buy music from iTunes and load it on ANY music player. There are programs out there (Hymn) to remove the security from the iTunes music, and them convert to Mp3. Google has your answers.
This is just a way for Creative to scare people away from the iPod, and it is crap.
Q: Why did you write them? A: To learn and innovate, not to harm.
Q: Should virus writers like you work for AV companies? A: Yes, of course. We know security the best.
Why is this an "interesting interview"? There is little to no content here. It's the same crap we've heard every virus writer say to every person who interviews them. While I agree that the best security people are probably the ones who used to break the system (aka virus writers and crackers) why does this need to be considered interesting news? I was more interested in the (FALSE) story about the fish from the tsunami.
I submitted this bug (as thousands of slashdot users probably did) and here is the response I got from Google.
Hello,
Thank you for your message. Today, Google was alerted to a security vulnerability affecting Gmail, and our engineers quickly resolved the issue. A very small number of Gmail users were affected, and all Gmail accounts are now protected from this vulnerability.
Google has the highest regard for the security of our users' information and we apologize for any concern this issue may have caused. Thank you for taking the time to contact us.
I have never had a case where I could actually see the RAM very well. It's useually hidden in behind cables (which a case modder would have fixed) and behind drives. Not to mention that it stands up in the RAM slots, so that the face of the RAM isn't even viewable.
It would be cool if there were a case with RAM mounted in the front (like in a drive bay) and had a window that showed through into the "RAM bay", I could see a lot of modders liking that, but the latency from the bay to the MoBo seems like it would hurt the performance of the RAM.
Seriously, did they think they were hired for their hard work and moral values? Ummm...no I think they were probably told outright that they would be eye candy for the masses of geeks there wandering around. And is that so bad? If you've got the assets, you'd be a fool not to use them right? Personally, I don't think a woman/man is degraded by modeling her/his body professionally.
Now maybe the moral problem comes in when you get paid by people stuffing dollar bills down your underwear...but who am I to decide what peoples' morals are?:-)
I have no problem with commercial articles on Slashdot. In fact, I enjoy reading about Apple's new toay, and I enjoy reading about Microsoft's promise of new and exciting technology just as much. The problem is the disproportionate amount of CERTAIN types of these commercially biased articles. I think if you read my original post, I wasn't so much complaining about the fact that these articles advertise, it was a complaint against the bias.
If you really want to get me on being a hypocrite, point out that I have an Apple advertisement in my signature...and yes I am well aware of this bit of irony. Unfortunately, Microsoft doesn't really have a competing product that I like better.
I'll risk the bad karma in agreeing with the parent. Slashdot is very slanted in most of its news. Anything new from Apple, Wired, or any piece of hardware running Linux is big news. Oh, and any flaw in an MS product is big news.
It's not quite as bad as Fox News yet though, so I can't complain too much. When I start seeing Bush/Cheney ads instead of Thinkgeek ads at the top of my page, I'm outta here.
Yeah, it did seem a little short on content. Although it does show an important side of Bezos, in that he know what the customer wants and what will drive his (amazon's) sales. The free shipping on Amazon is one reason I keep coming back there to buy stuff. When I need to order a DVD or book, or even electronics occasionally I will check Amazon first. Sometimes they just don't have the best price, so I go somewhere else, but often times the free shipping makes the difference in where I order from.
What they need to do is get more competitive on certain products, such as video games or whatever. Right now, it seems to me that all of the video games are actually sold through third party stores. Like Toys R Us for example. And they don't offer free shipping on games because of that. So when I need a game, I go somewhere else. That's a huge loss in business if there are a few thousand people like me who do the same, and all because they aren't following the sales model that gets me in the door for everything else I buy there at Amazon.
That's the exact problem. I highly doubt that anyone at MS feels personally responsible for the IE mess. The emberassment would hardly be bearable for a single person anyways...
You're making a very broad statement there. Just because a company is large it doesn't mean they don't take pride and responsibility in their code. I know a lot of people personally who work at MS, Google, Apple, Motorola etc who all take pride in what they do and work hard to do the best damn job they can. Just because it's not open source, doesn't mean it is bad, and I am guessing there are a lot of programmers working hard at fixing the bugs and security issues in both IE and Mozilla.
Gimme a break. Compare this to this. And be sure to look past the pretty pie charts for the actual vulnerability descriptions.
I checked both links...both programs have about 1/3 of their bugs left unpatched. Yes, IE has more bugs, that's no secret. There are more linux fanboy hackers out there trying to destroy MS, also a fact. I expect more bugs in a more widely used program with a known contingency of "enemies". The interesting thing to me is that both programs have 1/3 of the vulnerabilities unptched. While you're at it, take a look at the Firefox one as well. FireFox Nice job Firefox 1.X, only on the market for a few months and already 4/5 security flaws are unfixed? Cleary this is not an appropriate measure.
And SP2, with its improved security
Ok, nevermind. Why am I even talking...
You're a linux fanboy, why am I even talking...
Seriously though, SP2 is a security improvement for the people previously running with no firewall. I don't think you can logically argue against that. Those of us behind a firewall already, also running antivirus are probably not in any better situation, I agree.
But they're friggin browsers. That's software, not people, mmkay?
So the people who write the code for both places deserve no respect for the work they do? The software is a product of the "hard work" of the programmers. So yeah, it bothers me when some ass on Slashdot forgets that. mmkay? Yeah, there are bugs in both programs, and yes both of them have serious bugs at times. There is no perfect software out there, it all has bugs. The important thing is how the bugs are resolved, and both IE and Firefox have been doing ok lately at getting patches for them. And SP2, with its improved security, at least helps a little in making sure your machine is safe if you're running Windows.
Don't think I am an IE fan, I use Firefox whenever possible. I just think Slashdot posters need to treat the two browsers objectively as browsers, and not based on the company they come from.
And I have never seen a price tag on IE, but they do have to pay the people working on it so if the price of Windows is $1 higher because it has IE, then so be it.
Notice how every bug report about IE starts by saying how bad IE is, then saying MS sucks, and Mozilla doesn't have this bug because it's so great.
Now read the post about a Mozilla bug. No mention that IE does not have the bug. No mention that the coders who left this bug are crappy, and no mention that you could switch to IE to avoid this bug.
I know, IE has its bugs too, but it seems like we could be a bit more fair around here and at least either treat both browsers as if they suck, or treat them both with respect.
Actually, the previous Wired article was not an interview with him. It was an editorial on the "Dark Pyramid" of the pirating underground. There was no interview with Cohen in it if I remember.
I can't seem to get to this new one just now (thank you/.) but it sounds entirely different.
Is Apple really that stupid, or is this just a clever marketing tactic from them in order to boost advertising for their new product even more?
And since when am I not able to speculate on technology?
Here's a secret for you all...nVidia is working on a top secret graphics card right now. Rumor has it, it will cost around $500, and will be 30% faster than the top of the line cards on the market!
You heard it here first...I have insider contacts and know all of the secrets! No wait, I made that up. Can I still be sued when the card comes out?
Slashdot Mirror
Why not get a free one!
http://www.freeminimacs.com/?r=14101826
When I can Google the entire closed caption script of every epsiode of the Simpsons and Family Guy, I'll be a happy man!
(And yes, I realize that those sites are actually out there somewhere, but I want the text straight from the horse's mouth so to speak)
I run only knoppix Live CD, and I incinerate my RAM after I am done just to be sure there's nothing left on that RamDisk. Kingston loves me now!
Yeah, but click in my sig to get a free one for yourself!
I don't know the legality behind it either. It does seem like some kind of entrapment or something though. Perhaps they were issued some form of "digital warrant" to search the suspects hard drive through P2P apps or something? I don't know, but law enforcement can pretty much get away with anything "in the name of catching a criminal".
I'm sure any violation this would have been, has been avoided by some recent (BUSH administration) government "improvement" bill or another.
I once again have a ton of Gmail invites to give away. Visit the link below, to my Gmail giveaway page, there are over 40 right now...
http://www.jiggybyte.com/gmail.htm
Enjoy...
No it isn't a scam. And I really don't care how many anonymous fools call me an asshat. I'll be listening to my free ipod, watching my free tv while I get my last few referrals for my free minimac.
later, asshat.
I am in no way hiding where this link leads...no tinyurl crap. Stright up, if you want to click it, then click it. If not, then don't it's as simple as that.
Who ever thought Google AdWords were any more effective than a pop up ad? The reason so many porn sites use pop ups is that often times they get paid on a "per view" or "per click" basis. Hmmm...if every user has to click the fake 'X' in the top corner, thus sending them to the advertiser, then the referring porn site makes money on a click through.
Same idea with AdWords. Why would anyone think click through ads are any better? Everyone remember the days when they had the little clients that would monitor when you were online and give you money for every hour you surfed? Ha, how long did it take you to set up a macro to run the mouse while you slept?
The only advertising that makes you money, is advertising that sells your product. Tricking people into following a link or viewing a page they didn't want to doesn't do anyone any good in the long run. Pay per click can only last so long.
Ok, so what. Use DBPowerAmp to convert from WMA to Mp3. If the file has DRM, do a google search to find out how to remove the DRM. There's a way...even if it is burn the song to CD, and then rip it. (which I agree is not desireable) Usually there is a program to help you remove DRM...but not always.
Once you have a WMA or whatever format with no DRM, use DBPowerAmp to convert, and you're all set with an Mp3 to load onto the iPod using iTunes or third party tools from RedChairSoftware.com
So even if it is downloaded in WMA, you're still ok in most scenarios. You might have to do the digital->analog->digital shuffle is all. But really for music listened to on a portable device, that ain't gonna hurt much.
True, AllofMp3 is a bit sketchy and I don't use the site myself. I was just pointing out other sites, and to be honest I get my music from CD's so my list of examples is short.
But you can indeed put almost any Mp3 on the iPod, and who gives a shit about DRM? There is some great third party software from a company called red Chair Software (redchairsoftware.com) that can load and unload Mp3's from the iPod, thus getting rid of the requirement for using iTunes at all. This is what I do.
So, if you have a way to get the format into Mp3, it should play just fine assuming no DRM. Naturally, any site with DRM involved will make it difficult to get it on any player that doesn't support it. But DBPowerAmp is a good piece of software that converts between a lot of formats (AAC, OGG, MP3, WAV) and can likely help get you there.
People don't realize that the iPod is not as limited as a lot of people make it seem. iTunes is not the only site, or the only software, that can be used with the iPod.
I do concede that DRM can mess with the iPod, as well as WMA files. But WMA format is Microsoft's fault, not Apples fault. Why should anyone use WMA (other than a minor size difference) when Mp3 are playable on any system, and Wma are only playable on certain systems? DRM, I suppose the music industry will tell you. Bah...screw DRM, there will be a way to use Hymn soon with the latest iTunes...it's a cycle and Apple happens to be the most recent "update" to the cycle is all.
My parents have a Comcast cable modem here, and for the past 6 months or so they have had a 5Mbps connection at no extra charge. Mine is 3Mbps, so I was rather upset when I found out they are getting the higher transfer rate.
It was listed in the service agreement at 5Mbps down, and I think 512Kbps down, but I can't be sure. I did some speed tests, and it does indeed seem to match up.
Perhaps they were part of some sort of "beta" period for the higher rates, but they are in a smaller town in Michigan, not some large metropolitan area or anything...
Who know...
Either Creative is wrong, or the dumbass that wrote the article is wrong...
iPod is limited to iTunes when it comes to purchasing music online
That's total BS, and I hope people don't think that this is true. You can purchase music anywhere online that has the Mp3 or AAC formats. Audible.com is a good example of where to get audio books. And allofmp3.com (although maybe not so much on the up-and-up) is another place to get music online. I'll leave the copy and paste of these sites as an exercise to the reader, since I'm not trying to pimp them or anything.
But come on folks, you can put almost ANY mp3 on your iPod, and it certainly doesn't mean you have to use only iTunes for your online music. It's also possible to buy music from iTunes and load it on ANY music player. There are programs out there (Hymn) to remove the security from the iTunes music, and them convert to Mp3. Google has your answers.
This is just a way for Creative to scare people away from the iPod, and it is crap.
Q: How many viruses have you written?
A: A lot
Q: Why did you write them?
A: To learn and innovate, not to harm.
Q: Should virus writers like you work for AV companies?
A: Yes, of course. We know security the best.
Why is this an "interesting interview"? There is little to no content here. It's the same crap we've heard every virus writer say to every person who interviews them. While I agree that the best security people are probably the ones who used to break the system (aka virus writers and crackers) why does this need to be considered interesting news? I was more interested in the (FALSE) story about the fish from the tsunami.
I submitted this bug (as thousands of slashdot users probably did) and here is the response I got from Google.
Hello,
Thank you for your message. Today, Google was alerted to a security
vulnerability affecting Gmail, and our engineers quickly resolved the
issue. A very small number of Gmail users were affected, and all Gmail
accounts are now protected from this vulnerability.
Google has the highest regard for the security of our users' information
and we apologize for any concern this issue may have caused. Thank you for
taking the time to contact us.
Sincerely,
The Gmail Team
I have never had a case where I could actually see the RAM very well. It's useually hidden in behind cables (which a case modder would have fixed) and behind drives. Not to mention that it stands up in the RAM slots, so that the face of the RAM isn't even viewable.
It would be cool if there were a case with RAM mounted in the front (like in a drive bay) and had a window that showed through into the "RAM bay", I could see a lot of modders liking that, but the latency from the bay to the MoBo seems like it would hurt the performance of the RAM.
Seriously, did they think they were hired for their hard work and moral values? Ummm...no I think they were probably told outright that they would be eye candy for the masses of geeks there wandering around. And is that so bad? If you've got the assets, you'd be a fool not to use them right? Personally, I don't think a woman/man is degraded by modeling her/his body professionally.
Now maybe the moral problem comes in when you get paid by people stuffing dollar bills down your underwear...but who am I to decide what peoples' morals are?
I have no problem with commercial articles on Slashdot. In fact, I enjoy reading about Apple's new toay, and I enjoy reading about Microsoft's promise of new and exciting technology just as much. The problem is the disproportionate amount of CERTAIN types of these commercially biased articles. I think if you read my original post, I wasn't so much complaining about the fact that these articles advertise, it was a complaint against the bias.
If you really want to get me on being a hypocrite, point out that I have an Apple advertisement in my signature...and yes I am well aware of this bit of irony. Unfortunately, Microsoft doesn't really have a competing product that I like better.
I'll risk the bad karma in agreeing with the parent. Slashdot is very slanted in most of its news. Anything new from Apple, Wired, or any piece of hardware running Linux is big news. Oh, and any flaw in an MS product is big news.
It's not quite as bad as Fox News yet though, so I can't complain too much. When I start seeing Bush/Cheney ads instead of Thinkgeek ads at the top of my page, I'm outta here.
Yeah, it did seem a little short on content. Although it does show an important side of Bezos, in that he know what the customer wants and what will drive his (amazon's) sales. The free shipping on Amazon is one reason I keep coming back there to buy stuff. When I need to order a DVD or book, or even electronics occasionally I will check Amazon first. Sometimes they just don't have the best price, so I go somewhere else, but often times the free shipping makes the difference in where I order from.
What they need to do is get more competitive on certain products, such as video games or whatever. Right now, it seems to me that all of the video games are actually sold through third party stores. Like Toys R Us for example. And they don't offer free shipping on games because of that. So when I need a game, I go somewhere else. That's a huge loss in business if there are a few thousand people like me who do the same, and all because they aren't following the sales model that gets me in the door for everything else I buy there at Amazon.
That's the exact problem. I highly doubt that anyone at MS feels personally responsible for the IE mess. The emberassment would hardly be bearable for a single person anyways...
You're making a very broad statement there. Just because a company is large it doesn't mean they don't take pride and responsibility in their code. I know a lot of people personally who work at MS, Google, Apple, Motorola etc who all take pride in what they do and work hard to do the best damn job they can. Just because it's not open source, doesn't mean it is bad, and I am guessing there are a lot of programmers working hard at fixing the bugs and security issues in both IE and Mozilla.
Gimme a break.
Compare this to this.
And be sure to look past the pretty pie charts for the actual vulnerability descriptions.
I checked both links...both programs have about 1/3 of their bugs left unpatched. Yes, IE has more bugs, that's no secret. There are more linux fanboy hackers out there trying to destroy MS, also a fact. I expect more bugs in a more widely used program with a known contingency of "enemies". The interesting thing to me is that both programs have 1/3 of the vulnerabilities unptched. While you're at it, take a look at the Firefox one as well. FireFox Nice job Firefox 1.X, only on the market for a few months and already 4/5 security flaws are unfixed? Cleary this is not an appropriate measure.
And SP2, with its improved security
Ok, nevermind. Why am I even talking...
You're a linux fanboy, why am I even talking...
Seriously though, SP2 is a security improvement for the people previously running with no firewall. I don't think you can logically argue against that. Those of us behind a firewall already, also running antivirus are probably not in any better situation, I agree.
But they're friggin browsers. That's software, not people, mmkay?
So the people who write the code for both places deserve no respect for the work they do? The software is a product of the "hard work" of the programmers. So yeah, it bothers me when some ass on Slashdot forgets that. mmkay? Yeah, there are bugs in both programs, and yes both of them have serious bugs at times. There is no perfect software out there, it all has bugs. The important thing is how the bugs are resolved, and both IE and Firefox have been doing ok lately at getting patches for them. And SP2, with its improved security, at least helps a little in making sure your machine is safe if you're running Windows.
Don't think I am an IE fan, I use Firefox whenever possible. I just think Slashdot posters need to treat the two browsers objectively as browsers, and not based on the company they come from.
And I have never seen a price tag on IE, but they do have to pay the people working on it so if the price of Windows is $1 higher because it has IE, then so be it.
Notice how every bug report about IE starts by saying how bad IE is, then saying MS sucks, and Mozilla doesn't have this bug because it's so great.
Now read the post about a Mozilla bug. No mention that IE does not have the bug. No mention that the coders who left this bug are crappy, and no mention that you could switch to IE to avoid this bug.
I know, IE has its bugs too, but it seems like we could be a bit more fair around here and at least either treat both browsers as if they suck, or treat them both with respect.
Just my personal observations.
Actually, the previous Wired article was not an interview with him. It was an editorial on the "Dark Pyramid" of the pirating underground. There was no interview with Cohen in it if I remember.
I can't seem to get to this new one just now (thank you
Is Apple really that stupid, or is this just a clever marketing tactic from them in order to boost advertising for their new product even more?
And since when am I not able to speculate on technology?
Here's a secret for you all...nVidia is working on a top secret graphics card right now. Rumor has it, it will cost around $500, and will be 30% faster than the top of the line cards on the market!
You heard it here first...I have insider contacts and know all of the secrets! No wait, I made that up. Can I still be sued when the card comes out?