If outlook is broken such that it thinks that any line that begins with the word "begin" implies the presense of an attachment, that is not the fault of the person sending the message.
However, to deny access to an irc channel because of the client used IS rather immature. If the client conforms properly to the protocol, there should be no reason to bar it solely based on its origin OS. No more so than denying IE or Netscape based only on the User-Agent setting. If I code properly formed html code that breaks the browser though, thats not my problem.
And its the fault of website designers who create buggy code, be it by hand or by use of a faulty
webpage designer program (frontpage and the like).
Next step would be the computer so seamlessly integrated into the desktop that you don't even realize its there, unless you need it. I'm thinking touch sensitive membrane keyboard built right into the desk. An LCD monitor you have to fold up to see, otherwise its flush with the desk. CD and floppy drives encased behind hidden panels in the front of the desk. A designated surface of the desk would be the touchpad.
It could work. I would never use it. But it would be ideal when the computer gets in the way and you need more physical desk space to work with.
Isn't 33% of the showtime for commercials enough already? I guess not.
So which frames are they cutting, and do they plan to cut the audio too? I suppose during moments of intense silence, cutting a 24/th of a second of audio won't be a big problem, but still.
I just hope its not something that chirps..or is otherwise obvious what they're doing.
I used the text version of desqview. I tried desqview/X at the time, but the 386-25 with 3 megs of ram I had wasn't quite up to using it usefully.
I'm not POSITIVE about desqview/X's support of windows apps. If I remember correctly, it could export certain apps, but not those running in enhanced mode. Of course, I'm speaking about stuff I was playing with 10 years ago.
And as far as WiNE is concerned, they've pretty well gotten the 3.x API solid, and have for several years now.
They better make DAMN sure that nobody's cheating. It was bad enough when cheating ran rampant in games like Ultima Online, where in a few days some players were able to build up their characters and wealth when other players had to spend months to accomplish the same goals legitimately.
And just think about the PK'ing that will be going on. It used to be that people PK'ed because it gave them an ego boost. Now it can almost be equated to a real life mugging.
And in UO, items would mysteriously disappear. Close up your house one day and everything's there, then a server crash, come back in, its all gone. When frustrating things like this happen in a game where everything is virtual, about the most I can expect is to quit and deprive them of their $10 a month. But if I invested serious money in such a project and suddenly its all gone, that could be a serious problem.
To be ultimately viable, the company, however it works, has to somehow produce something, in such a way that they end up with more worth than what was put into it. I don't see this happening really, and at some point, when things peak out, there will be a falloff of revenue and things will slowly lose value and degrade.
However, if players can earn in-game dollars by completely real world tasks, then this could ultimately be a really cool way to offset employees. Instead of hiring employees, you have people play your game, and do your work in exchange for the privilage of playing. Think of all the source code projects you could crank out by gamers trying to one-up their in-game adversaries. There might be some potential here.
UO was the first, and only game I payed to play online. Granted, they kinda broke their teeth on the online rpg genre and probably got overwhelmed by a lot of gameplay issues that simply didn't come up in smaller scenarios. But the first 6 months I played it, it was a constant lagfest. Every feature of the game that made it worthwhile and playable, they kept getting rid of. They had a broken notoriety system and the few means we had to enforce rules against "good" players that played out of character they broke because a few players would whine.
I finally ended up quitting. I don't know if they ever fixed a lot of the problems or not. I would hope so after 3+ years, but you never can tell.
My point is, they needed a much longer and more thorough beta period to root out some of the big problems, especially with cheating, and get them fixed before releasing it to the paying public, after which you can't simply wipe the world to correct a problem. Then you have them offering silly amnesty policies to known cheaters who had been taking advantage of loopholes for months.
Forget the fact that other than names and landscape, the game had NOTHING to do with the series it was based on. That was the biggest travesty of all. I can see them wanting to appeal to a larger market, but I can assure you practically all the die hard Ultima fans had walked out within a year, when they were most likely the first to purchase the game when it was released, not to mention all those creating guilds years before the game was released.
Tis a shame.
-Restil
Blizzard had it right.
on
Pay to Play
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Sell a game in the stores, and allow online play for free. If as a company you excersize due diligence and keep creating new great games, the "lifetime play" for older games will be a non-issue as fewer and fewer users will play the older games to play the new ones. You keep a steady revenue stream from new games. This also keeps you from getting caught in the trap of wanting to milk old games for all eternity. Keeps you competitive.
However, if it gets to the point, where like with quake, I can't host my own server and have people play off of it for free, then we have issues. Blizzard's model (as far as I know) never supported any type of network play (other than local) except through their servers. There were free servers released for some games that permitted it, but the company itself never wanted to lose control of that.
Of course, I think they brought in SOME revenue from banner ads in the waiting rooms. I'm not sure what other software companies are doing.
If you're a developer, working with the latest hardware, how long does it take to recompile your code?
Probably not very long. Chances are good, if you're smart, everytime you compile you're recompiling one or two objects at a time. Not the entire codebase. Does it matter if it takes 2 seconds rather than one second? Do you ever notice? Would you care?
All this means, is that on one architecture, gcc has room for improvement. Yet gcc works on damn near everything. Intel's does not. Its all give and take.
While I'm sure the people involved were justified in their efforts, when you start playing games with credit cards, you're getting into some pretty murky legal waters yourself.
I personally feel that ebay should be insuring for the full value of the auction, and should charge a percentage on the sale for insurance costs. Of course, seller (or buyer) could choose to not purchase insurance, but at least it would put some pressure on ebay to handle huge cases of fraud if they happened.
Pay with credit cards if you can. Granted, there's a fee involved but the credit card companies in most cases will reimburse you if you're defrauded.
First of all, the scare that industries will vanish overnight due to newfangled technology is an unwarranted one. Granted, over time new technology will slowly replace older. Industries need to learn to adapt and grow. The market for horsedrawn carrages isn't what it used to be, but the introduction of the car wiped that industry out. But it didn't happen overnight. Even if cars are built that get 100 miles to the gallon, there will be a brief period of time when those cars cost more than the general variety. And not everybody is going to instantly trash their current cars and start buying up the new ones. The reduction in fuel requirements will be offset by the purchase of more vehicles now that people can afford it. It all works out. And if production is less, you lay off people. And natural resources last longer. Its all good.
Bandwidth is the same way. The dialup ISP will slowly go away, but "slowly" is the key word here. Business will adapt. And if they don't, they die. It happens. Tech related businesses are USED to going out of business. And the smart businesses will find a way to embrace the new technology before it destroys them. Then the next big thing will hit.
And there's always the possiblity that there are problems with the technology we aren't aware of when its more a theory than widespread in practice. Sounds cool to me. I can't wait to get 1gbps to my home!:)
-Restil
Re:You know, you don't have to bash Windows...
on
Lindows Reviewed
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I believe the original goal of Lindows was to provide an alternative to the users that don't want to constantly pay for upgrading the Windows operating system, as well as to provide a way to convert users from windows to linux by providing a medium. This means, the primary market are the users that don't want to, and probably haven't yet upgraded to 2000/XP yet and are probably still vulnerable.
As my friends who are diehard windows fanatics keep telling me, I am simply not familiar with the rock hard stability and unbreakable security of the latest Windows operating systems. I am not aware if a regular user is able to install any program on the system without that program comprimising system security or crashing the system.
However, if those users are still running 98, then they're still subject to the same security issues we've all been joking about for the last 5 years. And if they move over to Lindows, and assume the default root user for running all programs, they'll be no less vulnerable on that platform. My bash in this regard is appropriate.
And if after 15 years Microsoft finally got it perfect, well good for them. Move beyond that. If Lindows is supposed to help us replace it, it needs to provide all the good things that windows has provided over the years (primarily the userfriendliness and wealth of applications) and not drag with it all the bad things, that for the sake of not bashing windows constantly I will omit this time.
And remember, NT 3.51 was pretty stable in its own right, but they managed to screw it up on later operating systems, even in the NT line, and service packs have typically created more problems than they've solved. I'm glad you think the latest incarnation of windows is perfectly bugfree and secure. That doesn't mean I need to ignore their previous track record, even if now security is their topmost priority. If being secure and bugfree had been their goals from the beginning we wouldn't have had so many fun years worth of material justified bashing them over. Of course, that might have meant they would have had a slower production cycle, and competitors might have gotten the upper hand in some markets, and it was far more important to Microsoft that they remain the industry leader, product quality be damned.
It doesn't seem much more effective than Wine, with the exception of a more seamless installation process. Granted, its a beta, and if the problems are more lindows based than api based and can be easily fixed then things might work out better. I love the way it runs all the outlook worms. At least Windows users will feel comfortable in that regard. Now just need to rig up the occasional
bluescreen and things will be just peachy.:)
Part of the issue of running as root is probably for the simplicity of installing programs. While a non-root user can install programs on linux, he can't necessarily do it so its available for the entire system, and as a security issue, you don't want to. The installer might have suid privilages that can get around this problem, but then you risk installing infected files, and once again, working around the very security features that make linux a more secure choice over windows in the first place.
An option would be an installer that installs every program into its own directory structure, and no programs can be installed suid. Each program would need its own registry subset, etc. This would of course cause conflicts with programs such as norton virusscan that expect to be able to search the whole system, and programs that interact with other programs and expect the native insecurity of windows to operate.
And this isn't about the fox guarding the henhouse. They have a larger objective. They understand, for better or worse, that when the voting public gets irate enough with spam that the legislatures will eventually get involved and pass a law to restrict spam and that no matter how good intentioned it might be, it will adversely affect ALL marketers, even those that are doing their best to be nice about it.
Its happened before. Someone screams about people pirating movies by breaking encryption, and now it becomes illegal to even try breaking encryption. Just as many movies are pirated as before, because the people pirating movies were already breaking the law. Breaking another one doesn't change anything. But a lot of otherwise honest citizens are now restricted in a new way.
People scream about all the child porn. So what do the lawmakers do? They pass a law that doesn't only outlaw the possession of child porn (which I agree with), but also anything that APPEARS to be child porn, so loosely defined that a girl that LOOKS under 18 wearing a bikini is now defined as child porn. I believe this was overthrown or amended in the courts later, but the point stands.
The DMA would rather make the effort to get the spammers into some type of compliant mode where the voting public is no longer outraged with them. Since I believe, as I'm sure they do, that this will not actually be all that successful, they at least want to make sure that they, and the companies they represent, can offer a clear cut, honest, consumer friendly way to market via email so that good intentioned, but unaware and misguided legislators don't do something silly like outlawing ALL marketing via email or passing laws that would make something as legitimate as signup mailing lists illegal. It COULD happen, and its better for all involved that the involvement of the government is minimal.
Maybe I should just patent something extremely obvious. Of course, I need to make sure that while its extremely obvious and could bring me in a large quantity of revenue from extortion royalties, yet nobody I'd be extorting is big enough to be able to actually handle the court costs. So patenting the wheel would be definitely out (although I think someone already did that:).
Maybe I should patent popup banner ads. Then I can charge X10.com for the privilage of using my "technology". Of course, I contributed nothing to this cause, but I thought of it.. Its my idea (even though I got the idea from the rather obvious prior art).
All kidding aside, as long as this patent is specific and doesn't keep others from innovating, its probably ok. Still, while I feel that code can be copyrighted, and even maybe algorithm implementations, I certainly am against output being patented. I don't know, tough call.
I tried the monster.com thing. I had no responses and the few of the listings I decided to make the effort to contact by phone told me that the positions they were advertising for weren't even available.
Although it might encourage spamming, at least the companies you're sending resumes to did set themselves up for that exact purpose. Any corporation listing on monster.com, dice.com or others EXPECTS lots of resumes, and chances are good the resumes won't always match the job description. Probably the reason I never heard anything.
That there are people willing to do the ports practically for free, and still let the owner companies pocket all the revenue from the games, if only they'd be allowed to port it. And yet game companies are so worried about letting valuable secrets slip out that they won't let ANYONE see the code, NDA or otherwise. The silly notion is that even if someone picks up on a great idea, by the time that idea can be implemented into some other game, it'll be a good year later at least, and by then there will be new technologies and new hardware and the old stuff won't matter as much anymore. ID knows this, which is why they GPL the code for older games.
Perhaps the linux community isn't a huge source of revenue. WHO CARES? If the porting can be done for you for free, then its all gravy. Same with device drivers. Nobody sells device drivers, they sell the hardware the devices interface with. And if they can pick up a new market without any investment of time or money and not even have to support it, how can that be anything but a benefit.
And yet they hold on like there's some dangerous secret that might leak out and put them out of business. I must be missing something obvious here.
The cable companies are trying to achieve the same benefits that OS software companies enjoy. Just like you can't install one copy of Windows on multiple computers (legally anyways), the cable companies don't want you using more than one computer on the network at the same time. Does it increase the amount of bandwidth? Unlikely. Websurfing and gaming uses such a miniscule amount of bandwidth that even additional computers don't significantly add to the load, and any warez junkie will far outweigh the load that a multi-user network adds.
The point is, they want to be able to charge extra for multiple computers. Of COURSE there are technical ways to get around this, but those don't provide the cable company with extra revenue.
You say it doesn't cost the cable company any extra for you to host multiple computers on a single connection. This is true. Its also true that installing one copy of Windows onto more than one computer doesn't cost Microsoft more. But it deprives them of revenue they would have if you were legal. The cable company sees this the same way.
If its in the user agreement, and you signed on knowing this, you have nobody to blame but yourself. And cable companies are in a better position than Microsoft in this regard. Chances are, you probably signed an actual contract, not some EULA that you blindly clicked through without reading. You don't have to use them. Use a competitor. Vote with your wallet.
And now, you're going to tell me there ARE no other options. They're the only broadband provider in your area. Well, guess what. There are places that don't even have ONE broadband option. You at least HAVE a choice. Accept it, start an alternative service on your own, move somewhere there are more (or better) options, or keep cheating and hope you don't get away with it.
Personally, I don't get into this argument. The service I have allows me 16 static ip's and allows me to resell the bandwidth if I want. But I also pay for it, probably a lot more than you're paying. I could probably get away with far less, but I actually prefer the idea of having a service that I know is unrestricted. If you buy a service that comes with restrictions, you better make sure you can live with those restictions before you sign your name and start paying for it.
It would be interesting to test the legal ramifications of something like this. If I set up MY computer to call a 1-900 number that I own, and set it to do so automatically unless I manually disable it, that is perfectly legal.
If someone steals my computer and runs up their phone bill as a result, is this really my problem?
In one case, its an attempt to preemptively defraud someone who defrauded you, but on the other hand, its someone illegally using your property in such a way that happens to benefit you.
Its certainly an interesting twist on an insurance policy. If stolen, the thief will automatically reimburse you for the computer.:)
And set it so the effect is negligible, say $15-20 a month, and you could probably milk it for a LONG time.
Now, selling computers with the implication they're stolen with intent to defraud in this manner would NOT be legal, so I don't recommend it.
If the computer is legally yours, and it is even if it is stolen, then any evidence you collect with it in or out of your possession does not make that evidence illegal. If I have a camcorder set up in my house and it records someone breaking in, I can take that tape to the police and it is legal evidence. If the thief steals that camcorder, uses it, and later that camcorder is recovered, the tape can STILL be used as evidence.
I currently have winamp broadcasting from the mic on my computer at 24kbps to an icecast server on a fixed ip. Granted, this is intentional, and its also rather obvious, but if something like this was more covert, it would probably run safely in the background and nobody using the computer would ever know. The upstream would be a bit slow if they're on a modem, but I don't see any other downsides. I can easily record the stream at the server side and have a 24/7 (as long as the computer is on) audio stream of whats going on there.
Now if only I can get them to steal the webcam too... hmmmmmm
IANAL, but I have previous experience with issues like this as I used to sell used computers, and I didn't always purchase my stock from the most reputable sources.
If you buy from a store, or from an auction, you're probably safe. But if you buy from an individual, especially from someone you don't know, you might want to do some sanity checks. First, check for serial numbers. If there aren't any, DON'T BUY IT. This can be tough if the computer was self assembled as some clone cases don't have serial numbers on them, but practically all OEM computers will.
After purchasing it, WIPE IT. Reinstall the operating system from scratch at the very least. If you're a good samaritan, you might want do back up the system, especially if there seems to be any personal information on it. But you want the system itself to be clean.
Take the serial number on the computer and any other equipment you bought, and report it to the police. Pawn shops do this all the time. First of all, if any equipment you report comes back stolen, you can't be prosecuted for possession of stolen property, even if you had a pretty good idea it was stolen. Secondly, I'm not sure about every state, but in Texas even if it IS reported stolen, you're still the rightful owner of it and its the responsibility of the original owner to prove in court that they are the rightful owner before being able to reclaim it. Pawn shops usually get around this by offering to return the equipment for the price they paid for it (which is generally a small fraction of what the equipment is really worth). In many cases the equipment is insured and the original owner would easier collect on the insurance rather than spend a couple years in court trying to get a computer back that by the time they finally get it would need to be replaced anyways.
As for the lady in the article, it was probably one of those "look the other way" things. I'll get a good deal on a computer and I just won't pay attention to how I got it. If there was even the slight bit of legitimacy to her purchase she wouldn't have been so eagar to take a plea agreement.
If you donate stem cells from willing adults, you don't have all the ethical arguments you get with harvesting human embryos. Not really sure which side of that argument I fall on, but if we can avoid the argument altogether and concentrate on the science instead, things would move along faster.
Hopefully these stem cells are as useful as the embryonic ones are.
I would check the website so I know what I'm talking about when I comment. But since I can't access the site due to the (I assume) brutal slashdotting, I feel almost compelled to comment without any supporting information to base my wildly inaccurate opinions on. If at least the article summary had summarized (probably incorrectly) the article content beyond saying it was "interesting" then at least we could get the debate rolling, at least until the page became accessible again. At which time, everyone else would join the fray complaining that nobody reads the articles.
I think it was about a year ago, for a couple months I heard a bunch of radio ads about how popular the.tv TLD was going to be. Of course, I wrote it off as marketing hype and assumed at the time it was another.biz in the making that just hadn't quite been released yet. I didn't realize it was the TLD of a country. I never bothered to catch the name of any sponsoring corporation at the time, as it wasn't something I planned to invest a whole lot of effort researching, and I haven't heard the ads in a long time now.
Sounds to me like VeriSign, or perhaps some other bidder was attempting to hype up the potential for it before they were able to obtain it. Or perhaps it was the country doing it, in anticipation of a large sale. Who knows.
Slashdot Mirror
If outlook is broken such that it thinks that any line that begins with the word "begin" implies the presense of an attachment, that is not the fault of the person sending the message.
However, to deny access to an irc channel because of the client used IS rather immature. If the client conforms properly to the protocol, there should be no reason to bar it solely based on its origin OS. No more so than denying IE or Netscape based only on the User-Agent setting. If I code properly formed html code that breaks the browser though, thats not my problem.
And its the fault of website designers who create buggy code, be it by hand or by use of a faulty
webpage designer program (frontpage and the like).
-Restil
Glass houses that are golf-ball resistant.
And tornado resistant.
Heck, even crowbar resistant. That's right Milo, keep whacking on that window, we'll get in eventually!
-Restil
Next step would be the computer so seamlessly integrated into the desktop that you don't even realize its there, unless you need it. I'm thinking touch sensitive membrane keyboard built right into the desk. An LCD monitor you have to fold up to see, otherwise its flush with the desk. CD and floppy drives encased behind hidden panels in the front of the desk. A designated surface of the desk would be the touchpad.
It could work. I would never use it. But it would be ideal when the computer gets in the way and you need more physical desk space to work with.
-Restil
Isn't 33% of the showtime for commercials enough already? I guess not.
So which frames are they cutting, and do they plan to cut the audio too? I suppose during moments of intense silence, cutting a 24/th of a second of audio won't be a big problem, but still.
I just hope its not something that chirps..or is otherwise obvious what they're doing.
-Restil
I used the text version of desqview. I tried desqview/X at the time, but the 386-25 with 3 megs of ram I had wasn't quite up to using it usefully.
I'm not POSITIVE about desqview/X's support of windows apps. If I remember correctly, it could export certain apps, but not those running in enhanced mode. Of course, I'm speaking about stuff I was playing with 10 years ago.
And as far as WiNE is concerned, they've pretty well gotten the 3.x API solid, and have for several years now.
-Restil
They better make DAMN sure that nobody's cheating. It was bad enough when cheating ran rampant in games like Ultima Online, where in a few days some players were able to build up their characters and wealth when other players had to spend months to accomplish the same goals legitimately.
And just think about the PK'ing that will be going on. It used to be that people PK'ed because it gave them an ego boost. Now it can almost be equated to a real life mugging.
And in UO, items would mysteriously disappear. Close up your house one day and everything's there, then a server crash, come back in, its all gone. When frustrating things like this happen in a game where everything is virtual, about the most I can expect is to quit and deprive them of their $10 a month. But if I invested serious money in such a project and suddenly its all gone, that could be a serious problem.
To be ultimately viable, the company, however it works, has to somehow produce something, in such a way that they end up with more worth than what was put into it. I don't see this happening really, and at some point, when things peak out, there will be a falloff of revenue and things will slowly lose value and degrade.
However, if players can earn in-game dollars by completely real world tasks, then this could ultimately be a really cool way to offset employees. Instead of hiring employees, you have people play your game, and do your work in exchange for the privilage of playing. Think of all the source code projects you could crank out by gamers trying to one-up their in-game adversaries. There might be some potential here.
-Restil
UO was the first, and only game I payed to play online. Granted, they kinda broke their teeth on the online rpg genre and probably got overwhelmed by a lot of gameplay issues that simply didn't come up in smaller scenarios. But the first 6 months I played it, it was a constant lagfest. Every feature of the game that made it worthwhile and playable, they kept getting rid of. They had a broken notoriety system and the few means we had to enforce rules against "good" players that played out of character they broke because a few players would whine.
I finally ended up quitting. I don't know if they ever fixed a lot of the problems or not. I would hope so after 3+ years, but you never can tell.
My point is, they needed a much longer and more thorough beta period to root out some of the big problems, especially with cheating, and get them fixed before releasing it to the paying public, after which you can't simply wipe the world to correct a problem. Then you have them offering silly amnesty policies to known cheaters who had been taking advantage of loopholes for months.
Forget the fact that other than names and landscape, the game had NOTHING to do with the series it was based on. That was the biggest travesty of all. I can see them wanting to appeal to a larger market, but I can assure you practically all the die hard Ultima fans had walked out within a year, when they were most likely the first to purchase the game when it was released, not to mention all those creating guilds years before the game was released.
Tis a shame.
-Restil
Sell a game in the stores, and allow online play for free. If as a company you excersize due diligence and keep creating new great games, the "lifetime play" for older games will be a non-issue as fewer and fewer users will play the older games to play the new ones. You keep a steady revenue stream from new games. This also keeps you from getting caught in the trap of wanting to milk old games for all eternity. Keeps you competitive.
However, if it gets to the point, where like with quake, I can't host my own server and have people play off of it for free, then we have issues. Blizzard's model (as far as I know) never supported any type of network play (other than local) except through their servers. There were free servers released for some games that permitted it, but the company itself never wanted to lose control of that.
Of course, I think they brought in SOME revenue from banner ads in the waiting rooms. I'm not sure what other software companies are doing.
-Restil
If you're a developer, working with the latest hardware, how long does it take to recompile your code?
Probably not very long. Chances are good, if you're smart, everytime you compile you're recompiling one or two objects at a time. Not the entire codebase. Does it matter if it takes 2 seconds rather than one second? Do you ever notice? Would you care?
All this means, is that on one architecture, gcc has room for improvement. Yet gcc works on damn near everything. Intel's does not. Its all give and take.
-Restil
While I'm sure the people involved were justified in their efforts, when you start playing games with credit cards, you're getting into some pretty murky legal waters yourself.
I personally feel that ebay should be insuring for the full value of the auction, and should charge a percentage on the sale for insurance costs. Of course, seller (or buyer) could choose to not purchase insurance, but at least it would put some pressure on ebay to handle huge cases of fraud if they happened.
Pay with credit cards if you can. Granted, there's a fee involved but the credit card companies in most cases will reimburse you if you're defrauded.
-Restil
First of all, the scare that industries will vanish overnight due to newfangled technology is an unwarranted one. Granted, over time new technology will slowly replace older. Industries need to learn to adapt and grow. The market for horsedrawn carrages isn't what it used to be, but the introduction of the car wiped that industry out. But it didn't happen overnight. Even if cars are built that get 100 miles to the gallon, there will be a brief period of time when those cars cost more than the general variety. And not everybody is going to instantly trash their current cars and start buying up the new ones. The reduction in fuel requirements will be offset by the purchase of more vehicles now that people can afford it. It all works out. And if production is less, you lay off people. And natural resources last longer. Its all good.
:)
Bandwidth is the same way. The dialup ISP will slowly go away, but "slowly" is the key word here. Business will adapt. And if they don't, they die. It happens. Tech related businesses are USED to going out of business. And the smart businesses will find a way to embrace the new technology before it destroys them. Then the next big thing will hit.
And there's always the possiblity that there are problems with the technology we aren't aware of when its more a theory than widespread in practice. Sounds cool to me. I can't wait to get 1gbps to my home!
-Restil
I believe the original goal of Lindows was to provide an alternative to the users that don't want to constantly pay for upgrading the Windows operating system, as well as to provide a way to convert users from windows to linux by providing a medium. This means, the primary market are the users that don't want to, and probably haven't yet upgraded to 2000/XP yet and are probably still vulnerable.
As my friends who are diehard windows fanatics keep telling me, I am simply not familiar with the rock hard stability and unbreakable security of the latest Windows operating systems. I am not aware if a regular user is able to install any program on the system without that program comprimising system security or crashing the system.
However, if those users are still running 98, then they're still subject to the same security issues we've all been joking about for the last 5 years. And if they move over to Lindows, and assume the default root user for running all programs, they'll be no less vulnerable on that platform. My bash in this regard is appropriate.
And if after 15 years Microsoft finally got it perfect, well good for them. Move beyond that. If Lindows is supposed to help us replace it, it needs to provide all the good things that windows has provided over the years (primarily the userfriendliness and wealth of applications) and not drag with it all the bad things, that for the sake of not bashing windows constantly I will omit this time.
And remember, NT 3.51 was pretty stable in its own right, but they managed to screw it up on later operating systems, even in the NT line, and service packs have typically created more problems than they've solved. I'm glad you think the latest incarnation of windows is perfectly bugfree and secure. That doesn't mean I need to ignore their previous track record, even if now security is their topmost priority. If being secure and bugfree had been their goals from the beginning we wouldn't have had so many fun years worth of material justified bashing them over. Of course, that might have meant they would have had a slower production cycle, and competitors might have gotten the upper hand in some markets, and it was far more important to Microsoft that they remain the industry leader, product quality be damned.
But thats just my opinion.
-Restil
It doesn't seem much more effective than Wine, with the exception of a more seamless installation process. Granted, its a beta, and if the problems are more lindows based than api based and can be easily fixed then things might work out better. I love the way it runs all the outlook worms. At least Windows users will feel comfortable in that regard. Now just need to rig up the occasional :)
bluescreen and things will be just peachy.
Part of the issue of running as root is probably for the simplicity of installing programs. While a non-root user can install programs on linux, he can't necessarily do it so its available for the entire system, and as a security issue, you don't want to. The installer might have suid privilages that can get around this problem, but then you risk installing infected files, and once again, working around the very security features that make linux a more secure choice over windows in the first place.
An option would be an installer that installs every program into its own directory structure, and no programs can be installed suid. Each program would need its own registry subset, etc. This would of course cause conflicts with programs such as norton virusscan that expect to be able to search the whole system, and programs that interact with other programs and expect the native insecurity of windows to operate.
-Restil
And this isn't about the fox guarding the henhouse. They have a larger objective. They understand, for better or worse, that when the voting public gets irate enough with spam that the legislatures will eventually get involved and pass a law to restrict spam and that no matter how good intentioned it might be, it will adversely affect ALL marketers, even those that are doing their best to be nice about it.
Its happened before. Someone screams about people pirating movies by breaking encryption, and now it becomes illegal to even try breaking encryption. Just as many movies are pirated as before, because the people pirating movies were already breaking the law. Breaking another one doesn't change anything. But a lot of otherwise honest citizens are now restricted in a new way.
People scream about all the child porn. So what do the lawmakers do? They pass a law that doesn't only outlaw the possession of child porn (which I agree with), but also anything that APPEARS to be child porn, so loosely defined that a girl that LOOKS under 18 wearing a bikini is now defined as child porn. I believe this was overthrown or amended in the courts later, but the point stands.
The DMA would rather make the effort to get the spammers into some type of compliant mode where the voting public is no longer outraged with them. Since I believe, as I'm sure they do, that this will not actually be all that successful, they at least want to make sure that they, and the companies they represent, can offer a clear cut, honest, consumer friendly way to market via email so that good intentioned, but unaware and misguided legislators don't do something silly like outlawing ALL marketing via email or passing laws that would make something as legitimate as signup mailing lists illegal. It COULD happen, and its better for all involved that the involvement of the government is minimal.
-Restil
Maybe I should just patent something extremely obvious. Of course, I need to make sure that while its extremely obvious and could bring me in a large quantity of revenue from extortion royalties, yet nobody I'd be extorting is big enough to be able to actually handle the court costs. So patenting the wheel would be definitely out (although I think someone already did that :).
Maybe I should patent popup banner ads. Then I can charge X10.com for the privilage of using my "technology". Of course, I contributed nothing to this cause, but I thought of it.. Its my idea (even though I got the idea from the rather obvious prior art).
All kidding aside, as long as this patent is specific and doesn't keep others from innovating, its probably ok. Still, while I feel that code can be copyrighted, and even maybe algorithm implementations, I certainly am against output being patented. I don't know, tough call.
-Restil
I tried the monster.com thing. I had no responses and the few of the listings I decided to make the effort to contact by phone told me that the positions they were advertising for weren't even available.
Although it might encourage spamming, at least the companies you're sending resumes to did set themselves up for that exact purpose. Any corporation listing on monster.com, dice.com or others EXPECTS lots of resumes, and chances are good the resumes won't always match the job description. Probably the reason I never heard anything.
-Restil
Thats VOGONS and it was 10 minutes, not 5.
-Restil
That there are people willing to do the ports practically for free, and still let the owner companies pocket all the revenue from the games, if only they'd be allowed to port it. And yet game companies are so worried about letting valuable secrets slip out that they won't let ANYONE see the code, NDA or otherwise. The silly notion is that even if someone picks up on a great idea, by the time that idea can be implemented into some other game, it'll be a good year later at least, and by then there will be new technologies and new hardware and the old stuff won't matter as much anymore. ID knows this, which is why they GPL the code for older games.
Perhaps the linux community isn't a huge source of revenue. WHO CARES? If the porting can be done for you for free, then its all gravy. Same with device drivers. Nobody sells device drivers, they sell the hardware the devices interface with. And if they can pick up a new market without any investment of time or money and not even have to support it, how can that be anything but a benefit.
And yet they hold on like there's some dangerous secret that might leak out and put them out of business. I must be missing something obvious here.
-Restil
The cable companies are trying to achieve the same benefits that OS software companies enjoy. Just like you can't install one copy of Windows on multiple computers (legally anyways), the cable companies don't want you using more than one computer on the network at the same time. Does it increase the amount of bandwidth? Unlikely. Websurfing and gaming uses such a miniscule amount of bandwidth that even additional computers don't significantly add to the load, and any warez junkie will far outweigh the load that a multi-user network adds.
The point is, they want to be able to charge extra for multiple computers. Of COURSE there are technical ways to get around this, but those don't provide the cable company with extra revenue.
You say it doesn't cost the cable company any extra for you to host multiple computers on a single connection. This is true. Its also true that installing one copy of Windows onto more than one computer doesn't cost Microsoft more. But it deprives them of revenue they would have if you were legal. The cable company sees this the same way.
If its in the user agreement, and you signed on knowing this, you have nobody to blame but yourself. And cable companies are in a better position than Microsoft in this regard. Chances are, you probably signed an actual contract, not some EULA that you blindly clicked through without reading. You don't have to use them. Use a competitor. Vote with your wallet.
And now, you're going to tell me there ARE no other options. They're the only broadband provider in your area. Well, guess what. There are places that don't even have ONE broadband option. You at least HAVE a choice. Accept it, start an alternative service on your own, move somewhere there are more (or better) options, or keep cheating and hope you don't get away with it.
Personally, I don't get into this argument. The service I have allows me 16 static ip's and allows me to resell the bandwidth if I want. But I also pay for it, probably a lot more than you're paying. I could probably get away with far less, but I actually prefer the idea of having a service that I know is unrestricted. If you buy a service that comes with restrictions, you better make sure you can live with those restictions before you sign your name and start paying for it.
-Restil
It would be interesting to test the legal ramifications of something like this. If I set up MY computer to call a 1-900 number that I own, and set it to do so automatically unless I manually disable it, that is perfectly legal.
:)
If someone steals my computer and runs up their phone bill as a result, is this really my problem?
In one case, its an attempt to preemptively defraud someone who defrauded you, but on the other hand, its someone illegally using your property in such a way that happens to benefit you.
Its certainly an interesting twist on an insurance policy. If stolen, the thief will automatically reimburse you for the computer.
And set it so the effect is negligible, say $15-20 a month, and you could probably milk it for a LONG time.
Now, selling computers with the implication they're stolen with intent to defraud in this manner would NOT be legal, so I don't recommend it.
-Restil
If the computer is legally yours, and it is even if it is stolen, then any evidence you collect with it in or out of your possession does not make that evidence illegal. If I have a camcorder set up in my house and it records someone breaking in, I can take that tape to the police and it is legal evidence. If the thief steals that camcorder, uses it, and later that camcorder is recovered, the tape can STILL be used as evidence.
I currently have winamp broadcasting from the mic on my computer at 24kbps to an icecast server on a fixed ip. Granted, this is intentional, and its also rather obvious, but if something like this was more covert, it would probably run safely in the background and nobody using the computer would ever know. The upstream would be a bit slow if they're on a modem, but I don't see any other downsides. I can easily record the stream at the server side and have a 24/7 (as long as the computer is on) audio stream of whats going on there.
Now if only I can get them to steal the webcam too... hmmmmmm
-Restil
IANAL, but I have previous experience with issues like this as I used to sell used computers, and I didn't always purchase my stock from the most reputable sources.
If you buy from a store, or from an auction, you're probably safe. But if you buy from an individual, especially from someone you don't know, you might want to do some sanity checks. First, check for serial numbers. If there aren't any, DON'T BUY IT. This can be tough if the computer was self assembled as some clone cases don't have serial numbers on them, but practically all OEM computers will.
After purchasing it, WIPE IT. Reinstall the operating system from scratch at the very least. If you're a good samaritan, you might want do back up the system, especially if there seems to be any personal information on it. But you want the system itself to be clean.
Take the serial number on the computer and any other equipment you bought, and report it to the police. Pawn shops do this all the time. First of all, if any equipment you report comes back stolen, you can't be prosecuted for possession of stolen property, even if you had a pretty good idea it was stolen. Secondly, I'm not sure about every state, but in Texas even if it IS reported stolen, you're still the rightful owner of it and its the responsibility of the original owner to prove in court that they are the rightful owner before being able to reclaim it. Pawn shops usually get around this by offering to return the equipment for the price they paid for it (which is generally a small fraction of what the equipment is really worth). In many cases the equipment is insured and the original owner would easier collect on the insurance rather than spend a couple years in court trying to get a computer back that by the time they finally get it would need to be replaced anyways.
As for the lady in the article, it was probably one of those "look the other way" things. I'll get a good deal on a computer and I just won't pay attention to how I got it. If there was even the slight bit of legitimacy to her purchase she wouldn't have been so eagar to take a plea agreement.
-Restil
If you donate stem cells from willing adults, you don't have all the ethical arguments you get with harvesting human embryos. Not really sure which side of that argument I fall on, but if we can avoid the argument altogether and concentrate on the science instead, things would move along faster.
Hopefully these stem cells are as useful as the embryonic ones are.
-Restil
I would check the website so I know what I'm talking about when I comment. But since I can't access the site due to the (I assume) brutal slashdotting, I feel almost compelled to comment without any supporting information to base my wildly inaccurate opinions on. If at least the article summary had summarized (probably incorrectly) the article content beyond saying it was "interesting" then at least we could get the debate rolling, at least until the page became accessible again. At which time, everyone else would join the fray complaining that nobody reads the articles.
-Restil
I think it was about a year ago, for a couple months I heard a bunch of radio ads about how popular the .tv TLD was going to be. Of course, I wrote it off as marketing hype and assumed at the time it was another .biz in the making that just hadn't quite been released yet. I didn't realize it was the TLD of a country. I never bothered to catch the name of any sponsoring corporation at the time, as it wasn't something I planned to invest a whole lot of effort researching, and I haven't heard the ads in a long time now.
Sounds to me like VeriSign, or perhaps some other bidder was attempting to hype up the potential for it before they were able to obtain it. Or perhaps it was the country doing it, in anticipation of a large sale. Who knows.
-Restil