There's some CD-burning shareware whose name escapes me, but I've always liked their anti-piracy measure. If you put in a pirated key (or perhaps just an invalid one), the program will work fine, say it's registered, but you'll find you're getting a lot of inexplicable write errors and burning a lot of useless coasters.
I agree-- if you want to screw with infringing users, just make sure that it's only your software and its inputs/outputs that you're screwing with. And if the user happens to save an anti-piratically corrupt file *over* their original... well... I don't have much sympathy.
Well, you've got to start somewhere, I suppose. The usual process where I work is to make 3 mockups in Illustrator, then present them as "sample pages", consisting of a giant image either placed as the background, or centered over a tiled background. It looks like a web page, but nothing happens. Once they select one, then it's down to actually trying to make it work in code.
Been there, done that. The host I was on started getting more and more downtimes, dropping features ("We got hacked, so your SSH is turned off. I know you paid for it, but it's not coming back. Thanks for using superuser.net!") and the one man in the one-man show started getting surlier and less responsive as time went on. It turns out, this guy's widely known to bad-mouth former customers who give him bad reviews on other sites, as well. Luckily, with the help of the registrar (http://www.dotreg.com - recommended) and the old dialup company I was on when I signed up for the domain name (http://www.triton.net - also recommended if, for some reason, you need dialup in the Grand Rapids, MI area), I ended up switching servers. I'm pretty happy with the one I'm on now (http://www.a2hosting.com), that I found on the Ruby on Rails list (of course, I still haven't done any RoR, but that's irrelevant), and it's an extra plus, since they're only located about 200mi away, so it's a fast connection for my fellow locals.
Visual beauty will only get you so far. The most visually beautiful site that lacks structure and informational layout would simply aggravate anyone who tried to use it. In fact, I would have to say that at least a small amount of interface design and structure is necessary for a site (or any other publication) to achieve beauty. The structured human mind finds beauty in geometry, structure, regularity, and ease. Now, wrap that with only as much graphic flashery as is needed, and you've got something respectable.
Actually, I find myself wary of the sites that are obvious templates, as those tend to be more fly-by-night. Decent layout, but peppered with irrelevant stock photos of power-businessfolk and boilerplate obtuse English phrases that should have been swapped before going live ("We are the company to make your success!"), and pointless Flash with flying dots and squares-- those are the ones to look out for.
Firewire is easily available off the shelf-- as well as stock on a number of computers. Even if Firewire was incompatible, there isn't much else hardware-wise that can't be found or interfaced with either a Mac or a PC. Apple's hardware is packaged more conveniently and simply than competitors', but the technologies used are pretty much commodity. They have to be, in order to have much use at all. I can't speak to the power management (to what do you refer?), but if you don't want to put an adapter on an Apple monitor, you can always get a huge LCD elsewhere.
The software is the largest unique difference. iLife, Safari, Final Cut, and OS X itself are only usable (legally and without hacks) on the Mac.
I don't know as if I'd go as far as developing for Lynx, but it's definitely good to see that your site maintains some sort of semantic sensibility when viewed in Lynx-- when you're using it, you get text and only text, and that's how screen readers and (most importantly) search engines will be reading your pages.
I didn't say it was a good long-term solution, but until you get the patches all up to date, and when all you're doing is installing the OS, it'll keep you free from RPC exploits and other outside-in attacks.
I mean, not every end user chooses to be infected, and it's not like it's easy to get a machine secured whilst online before it gets infected.
Windows, right? It's easy.
1.) Remove Internet connection. 2.) Install. 3.) Turn on Windows Firewall. 4.) Reconnect Internet connection. 5.) Download updates, install any security software you may wish to use depending upon your uses.
If you're behind a NAT with other secure computers, you don't have to do 1 or 2. Ditto (I believe) if you're installing from an XPSP2-slipstreamed source (is the Windows Firewall on immediately once network connectivity is available during the XP+SP2 install process?).
Now, for people who don't know how and are installing XPSP1 or below, this isn't intuitive, yes. But I put forth that most people installing XP from scratch would either be people who know what they're doing, or people who are reinstalling because of problems, and should have researched the process.
Obvious counter-argument: Bombs can be disguised as all manner of things. Should the bomb squad be detonating that car that's parked at an expired meter? How about the lunch bag someone threw away in the public trashcan? Is that an empty twelve-pack box someone threw out their window or... a bomb! Think of the shitstorms!
Obvious counter-counter-argument: The examples you describe are all rather ordinary events. The lightboards were anything but, being crude electrically-powered devices of no apparent use or reason for being there. Barring other logical explanation, the authorities were right to treat the devices with suspicion.
My Conclusion: Everyone involved should be ashamed of their lack of forethought and moderation. The bomb squad really needs to learn to chill out and better analyze the situation before saturating it with a bomb-proof material apparently consisting partially of shredded reprocessed post-consumer cash. The marketing company really needs to learn to think through the possible consequences of their actions, take reactionary idiots into account, and to provide reassuring factors in advance... say, a label saying who placed the device (hell, even a front-company name and an 800 number leading to a concerned-sounding recorded message and a voice-mailbox routed to/dev/null would suffice).
My bonus, director's cut, generalized offtopic rant: Personally, as both a marketer and a citizen, I'm annoyed by all these "guerrilla advertising" tactics of marketers who knowingly and willingly paste, post, and plaster their advertisements all over public property-- it's like the corporate version of uninspired felt-marker taggers, adding nothing worthwhile, just pissing on hydrants for their own pleasure.
Who says EMI's going to sell it DRM-free through iTMS? The "consistency" Apple needs to maintain is both to keep the end-user process uncomplicated (more of the "PR-friendly" reason, but it does hold some water), and to keep their labels happy-- no one label wants to choose between dropping DRM or having a visible lack of value when placed next to less-restricted files in the same store.
(Talking out my ass here, but I'd suspect...) The city needs more services to support the mass of temporary residents. By splitting it off into a distinct organization, they can more easily quantify and justify the cost, and make the college pay out for it. Instead of "the college should be paying for the 18% portion of extra police force needed to attend to students", it's "the college should oversee and maintain a campus security force of ___ size".
"This stack of paper says you're in the wrong. Remember, you signed it." "What about that stack of paper says I'm in the wrong?" (frantic whispering) "Okay, you won... this time. We'll be back-- and we're going to read this stack of paper first."
Or, a cop could see a request for child porn spew out of tor, followed by your order for viagra that you were so ashamed about. Have fun talking your way out of that.
Now, if I understand TOR correctly, wouldn't they see the child porn request, then just another indecipherably encrypted request (your order for Viagra) being sent off to some random TOR router?
Just curious-- if the law prohibits advertising to the point of even putting the game on the shelf, how does it permit vendors to even indicate that they even have copies of the game for sale? Are displayed but unadorned "we also carry" lists allowed?
The thing I find odd is that it (apparently, correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't cover simple cleanup/conversion re-releases of pub-dom work, and the cleaners can still assert copyright protection over the content. Can anyone cite me a "why"?
This may be true, and common sense will get you to the point of "This should be studied." It may even help the question of "if" there should be regulation. However, it isn't enough to answer the finer points of "what", "why", and "how" regarding either the problem or the best solution. Without further scientific examination, the problem will only be solved crudely and ignorantly, groping in the dark on the word of hunches and assumptions.
Slashdot Mirror
There's some CD-burning shareware whose name escapes me, but I've always liked their anti-piracy measure. If you put in a pirated key (or perhaps just an invalid one), the program will work fine, say it's registered, but you'll find you're getting a lot of inexplicable write errors and burning a lot of useless coasters.
I agree-- if you want to screw with infringing users, just make sure that it's only your software and its inputs/outputs that you're screwing with. And if the user happens to save an anti-piratically corrupt file *over* their original... well... I don't have much sympathy.
Well, you've got to start somewhere, I suppose. The usual process where I work is to make 3 mockups in Illustrator, then present them as "sample pages", consisting of a giant image either placed as the background, or centered over a tiled background. It looks like a web page, but nothing happens. Once they select one, then it's down to actually trying to make it work in code.
Been there, done that. The host I was on started getting more and more downtimes, dropping features ("We got hacked, so your SSH is turned off. I know you paid for it, but it's not coming back. Thanks for using superuser.net!") and the one man in the one-man show started getting surlier and less responsive as time went on. It turns out, this guy's widely known to bad-mouth former customers who give him bad reviews on other sites, as well. Luckily, with the help of the registrar (http://www.dotreg.com - recommended) and the old dialup company I was on when I signed up for the domain name (http://www.triton.net - also recommended if, for some reason, you need dialup in the Grand Rapids, MI area), I ended up switching servers. I'm pretty happy with the one I'm on now (http://www.a2hosting.com), that I found on the Ruby on Rails list (of course, I still haven't done any RoR, but that's irrelevant), and it's an extra plus, since they're only located about 200mi away, so it's a fast connection for my fellow locals.
Visual beauty will only get you so far. The most visually beautiful site that lacks structure and informational layout would simply aggravate anyone who tried to use it. In fact, I would have to say that at least a small amount of interface design and structure is necessary for a site (or any other publication) to achieve beauty. The structured human mind finds beauty in geometry, structure, regularity, and ease. Now, wrap that with only as much graphic flashery as is needed, and you've got something respectable.
Actually, I find myself wary of the sites that are obvious templates, as those tend to be more fly-by-night. Decent layout, but peppered with irrelevant stock photos of power-businessfolk and boilerplate obtuse English phrases that should have been swapped before going live ("We are the company to make your success!"), and pointless Flash with flying dots and squares-- those are the ones to look out for.
Building upon != simply reposting
Charge the content-providers money, and you've got Akamai. (Or am I misunderstanding you?)
Because they can't be bothered to take a real stand, and just forego the major-label music, right?
Firewire is easily available off the shelf-- as well as stock on a number of computers. Even if Firewire was incompatible, there isn't much else hardware-wise that can't be found or interfaced with either a Mac or a PC. Apple's hardware is packaged more conveniently and simply than competitors', but the technologies used are pretty much commodity. They have to be, in order to have much use at all. I can't speak to the power management (to what do you refer?), but if you don't want to put an adapter on an Apple monitor, you can always get a huge LCD elsewhere.
The software is the largest unique difference. iLife, Safari, Final Cut, and OS X itself are only usable (legally and without hacks) on the Mac.
I don't know as if I'd go as far as developing for Lynx, but it's definitely good to see that your site maintains some sort of semantic sensibility when viewed in Lynx-- when you're using it, you get text and only text, and that's how screen readers and (most importantly) search engines will be reading your pages.
I didn't say it was a good long-term solution, but until you get the patches all up to date, and when all you're doing is installing the OS, it'll keep you free from RPC exploits and other outside-in attacks.
The firewall was installed before SP2, but not turned on by default.
I mean, not every end user chooses to be infected, and it's not like it's easy to get a machine secured whilst online before it gets infected.
Windows, right? It's easy.
1.) Remove Internet connection.
2.) Install.
3.) Turn on Windows Firewall.
4.) Reconnect Internet connection.
5.) Download updates, install any security software you may wish to use depending upon your uses.
If you're behind a NAT with other secure computers, you don't have to do 1 or 2. Ditto (I believe) if you're installing from an XPSP2-slipstreamed source (is the Windows Firewall on immediately once network connectivity is available during the XP+SP2 install process?).
Now, for people who don't know how and are installing XPSP1 or below, this isn't intuitive, yes. But I put forth that most people installing XP from scratch would either be people who know what they're doing, or people who are reinstalling because of problems, and should have researched the process.
Obvious counter-argument: Bombs can be disguised as all manner of things. Should the bomb squad be detonating that car that's parked at an expired meter? How about the lunch bag someone threw away in the public trashcan? Is that an empty twelve-pack box someone threw out their window or... a bomb! Think of the shitstorms!
/dev/null would suffice).
Obvious counter-counter-argument: The examples you describe are all rather ordinary events. The lightboards were anything but, being crude electrically-powered devices of no apparent use or reason for being there. Barring other logical explanation, the authorities were right to treat the devices with suspicion.
My Conclusion: Everyone involved should be ashamed of their lack of forethought and moderation. The bomb squad really needs to learn to chill out and better analyze the situation before saturating it with a bomb-proof material apparently consisting partially of shredded reprocessed post-consumer cash. The marketing company really needs to learn to think through the possible consequences of their actions, take reactionary idiots into account, and to provide reassuring factors in advance... say, a label saying who placed the device (hell, even a front-company name and an 800 number leading to a concerned-sounding recorded message and a voice-mailbox routed to
My bonus, director's cut, generalized offtopic rant: Personally, as both a marketer and a citizen, I'm annoyed by all these "guerrilla advertising" tactics of marketers who knowingly and willingly paste, post, and plaster their advertisements all over public property-- it's like the corporate version of uninspired felt-marker taggers, adding nothing worthwhile, just pissing on hydrants for their own pleasure.
Fine for littering?
Who says EMI's going to sell it DRM-free through iTMS? The "consistency" Apple needs to maintain is both to keep the end-user process uncomplicated (more of the "PR-friendly" reason, but it does hold some water), and to keep their labels happy-- no one label wants to choose between dropping DRM or having a visible lack of value when placed next to less-restricted files in the same store.
Right, but even if you were an exit node, you wouldn't be routing your own Viagra request out through your own node, would you?
(Talking out my ass here, but I'd suspect...) The city needs more services to support the mass of temporary residents. By splitting it off into a distinct organization, they can more easily quantify and justify the cost, and make the college pay out for it. Instead of "the college should be paying for the 18% portion of extra police force needed to attend to students", it's "the college should oversee and maintain a campus security force of ___ size".
"This stack of paper says you're in the wrong. Remember, you signed it."
"What about that stack of paper says I'm in the wrong?"
(frantic whispering)
"Okay, you won... this time. We'll be back-- and we're going to read this stack of paper first."
OTOH, this gives you the obvious alibi when someone asks about the certain-to-occur (if you believe the above threads) child porn requests.
Or, a cop could see a request for child porn spew out of tor, followed by your order for viagra that you were so ashamed about. Have fun talking your way out of that.
Now, if I understand TOR correctly, wouldn't they see the child porn request, then just another indecipherably encrypted request (your order for Viagra) being sent off to some random TOR router?
Just curious-- if the law prohibits advertising to the point of even putting the game on the shelf, how does it permit vendors to even indicate that they even have copies of the game for sale? Are displayed but unadorned "we also carry" lists allowed?
Yep, that's the one they're chipping away at.
The thing I find odd is that it (apparently, correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't cover simple cleanup/conversion re-releases of pub-dom work, and the cleaners can still assert copyright protection over the content. Can anyone cite me a "why"?
Could they just put the "device" under the car and run an unobtrusive thin wire antenna along the trim?
This may be true, and common sense will get you to the point of "This should be studied." It may even help the question of "if" there should be regulation. However, it isn't enough to answer the finer points of "what", "why", and "how" regarding either the problem or the best solution. Without further scientific examination, the problem will only be solved crudely and ignorantly, groping in the dark on the word of hunches and assumptions.
Unfortunately, it's just not cost-effective.