Re:I'm not saying Mozilla is taking forever...
on
Mozilla M16 Released
·
· Score: 2
Didn't the entire old Netscape codebase get tossed about a year into the project? (Please correct me if I'm wrong on this; a really quick skim through mozilla.org during the writing of this didn't help much.) I'd say going from nothing to a fairly-usable browser in two years isn't a bad job, especially one that plans to compete with the "big boys".
Unlike ION Storm, the Mozilla crew acknowledges the problems and debate over their decisions - the Mozilla at One article seems to cover the high and lowlights of Mozilla's then-young life.
It still crashes more a bit than I'd like for daily use, and some useful features are missing. I've only been really trying it since late M13, but I've seen some definite progress in stability and features. It already renders pages more accurately than Netscape in Linux, so there's points in its favour right there:) I grabbed the last nightly build before M16 officially arrived; runs pretty fast compared to M13, though it still takes time to load.
If I could program worth a lick, I'd contribute in a second.
As it is, I'm happy.
Re:it is our fault heres why...
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
So do I...and while I'm not sure who the heck I'm supposed to write to (living in Toronto for university, but permananet address in Windsor), but I'm forwarding a link to this article to my family and friends. At least I can make them aware; maybe one of them will have the knowledge (and nuts) to raise hell.
Four years ago, I purchased the computer I'm typing this on now. It was pretty damn near top-of-the-line for its time; a Pentium II 266 with a 6.4 GB HD and Windows 95. (I didn't know any better at the time, and I was a heavy gamer back then, so Win95 to me was revolutionary. So shoot me.) I didn't get a CD with the computer, just a copy of the CD on the hard drive. I had to return the computer a few days later due to a defective hard drive, but the next HD also had the CD copy on it. Fast-forward two years, I'm interested in learning Linux, so I made a back-up copy of the CD files on a Zip disk. Last September, I used that backup disk to reinstall Windows after wiping and repartitioning the drive.
If I understand what I've learned over the past six months correctly, then the act of making that backup disk was illegal under the EULA that I never had to click through the first time I got the computer since Windows was already preinstalled!
Another thing; just before returning the computer due to the defective drive, I had an interesting phone conversation with the guy who built the computer. When I asked about reformatting and reinstalling, he asked if "I had bought the CD". This escaped me, as I said "Yes, I have Windows" - it was on the drive, remember. After a couple repetitions, it dawned on me what he meant. And now, something else dawns on me - didn't I already pay for one copy of Windows? Would I have had to pay for two copies of Windows in order to be able to legally reinstall the OS after exercising my right to format my hard drive and do with it as I wish?
If so...what a pile of stinking, smelly bullshit. I'm glad I switched almost completely over to a more free OS. As little as I trust government (I'm a Canadian; I know all about government contempt for citizens), it's a good thing the US judicial system is laying the smack down on MS; with Gates' tactics and ambitions, we could have been very close to a situation where the only choice was Microsoft and its self-serving, consumer-abusing licenses, whether we wanted alternatives or not.
This is also the reason I continue to mirror copies of DeCSS and CPHack (not the files Matt Skala wrote, Eddy Jansson's GPL'd software). I don't know who gave people with more money the right to limit my own freedoms. I'll respect copyrights; just don't put stupid, profit-serving restrictions on me.
I also forwarded this article to several of my friends and family, and encouraged them to do the same. I'll do what I can to spread the knowledge.
Also...can I mirror this article on my own site? I'd love to host it there for the rare visitor to see.
Re:it is our fault heres why...
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
If I were American, I would. Can't be any worse than the current choices:)
"It's all fair," an Offspring source said on Thursday. "We've already said you guys [can use] our stuff - we're gonna do yours, too. You shouldn't have any problem with that, should you?"
I'm not sure whether Holland's trying to make a point, or is dead serious, or both.
I understand Holland's actually kinda cool with Offspring music being traded/pirated/whatever over the Internet...and it wouldn't surprise me if he's trying to make a point while meaning every word. "It's good enough for you, it's good enough for me" type thing. Of course, Napster could be playing "do as I say, not as I do"...but that would be hypocritical, now wouldn't it?:)
Plat Now with nearly 100% legal mp3s! (except for the four Body Count mp3s - sorry Ice T.)
Didn't a bunch of Canadian Indians (Iraquois? Mohawk?) stage a revolt with semi-automatic weapons a few years ago?
That was the Oka crisis in the early 1990's. The Quebec government allowed a golf course to be built on some land near Oka, Que. A group of Mohawk claimed the land was sacred ground (may have been a burial ground, it was a long time ago). Mohawk Warriors showed up in support, set up barricades, and held a standoff. A second standoff took place on the Mercier Bridge. I believe those standoffs ended peacefully. Another standoff took place at the Ipperwash military base in Ontario; a group of natives claimed the land had been unlawfully taken from them. One native was shot and killed; there have been calls for an inquest into who gave the shooting order.
As for Quebec, even the Quebecois have become sick of the separation mess. The government there has been trying to incite separtist feeling time and time again, but I don't think they're going to pull it off anytime soon. Still, the Parti Quebecois (the ruling party) is pretty paranoid about English - ask a Canadian about the "tongue troopers" and Bill 101 sometime.
There's some East-West tension; Alberta, Saskatchewan and parts of Manitoba and B.C. tend to be more conservative than the rest of the country. Nothing vicious; the last really ugly conflict was during the last Quebec referendum (of course).
Beyond that, ethnic tensions aren't as bad here as it seems in the U.S. Perhaps I had a bad example in my early years; I used to live near Windsor, just across from good ol' Detroit. For the record, relations between the downtown area and the suburbs...stink. I'm pretty happy with Toronto. I feel perfectly safe walking downtown after dark, and people of different races and cultures do seem to mix peacefully. It feels weird going back home once in a while, because my home is nowhere near as ethnically diverse; I've actually become more comfortable in Toronto's ethnic mix than my old hometown's relative homogenaeity.
Re:The real purpose of DeCSS
on
DeCSS Update
·
· Score: 4
I've heard the argument that DeCSS isn't useful for piracy--this is mostly crap. Sure, professional pirates could already copy DVDs bit-for-bit, but home users can't since there's a small section that's pre-burned on most DVD-RAMS that prevents that.
And real blank DVDs (not DVD-Rs) cost upwards of $50 for a home user.
DeCSS is useful for ripping DVDs so they can be encoded in MPEG-(pick a number) format, and then distributed through your local warez d00d.
That would kinda defeat the purpose of ripping a DVD; I may as well go download a DivX video or rent a tape. I reiterate the words of Jim MIller, Warner Home Video president, back on Jan. 11 to CNN: "There is no economic incentive to pirate this product." Translation; a pirate wouldn't save any money using this method. A full MPEG-2 ripped DVD is several gigabytes, and an MPEG-1 downconversion is still nearly a gig in size. Even then, a movie burned to a VCD can easily span discs; keep in mind, there is no layering system for CDs like there is for DVDs, much less home-burned ones.
Until a good number of people get home access to the equivalent of T3s or greater, ripping DVDs and sending them out won't be a problem. It's a straw man created by people scared that their precious control method was figured out.
Refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in governmental policy or legislation, characterized by the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent means.
5.You may not use the Marks in a derogatory or defamatory manner, or in any negative context. Such use will terminate your license to use the Marks.
Then perhaps I should rephrase; do you know what active protest means? It's not the Apogee thing in particular that's getting my goat, but I can see where it might be the last straw for a few people. And the next action taken under UCITA to stifle free speech (the name "Duke Nukem" is trademarked, non?) will be the last straw for a few more. And the next one, etc., etc., ad nauseam. UCITA is a dangerous law for states to pass. I'm glad I live in Canada, though I fear our federal government would just buckle under and pass a similar law given the slightest pressure.
Having a company tell me I can't tell others on my site what I think of their products because it's in a "negative context" is utter bullshit. No one would accept it from their government; why should they accept it from a company they have no control over?
UCITA is a law by the big software lobby, for the big software lobby. I see no problem with protesting its possible passage or enforcement. Sometime soon, there may be server admins sufficiently whiffed off to get fired and risk jail to protest that law. The idea of a server outage was discussed during another UCITA (or was it DMCA?) conversation on Slashdot, so it's not as if this is a new idea.
I'm glad I live under a system where I won't be shot, killed and squashed simply for gathering to demand freedom to vote, but that doesn't mean I should sit down, shut up and take what people with more power and money give me. Maybe some day, when no one is trying to muzzle me for their benefit, I'll have no reason to complain. Until then, I may not like your opinion, but I'll die (or go to jail, or get sued) for your right to express it.
For the record...I'm not a server admin, so I'm most likely way off. I doubt an outage would take place without wide support among admins, some organization, and a few warnings first. Give the governments a chance to listen to someone other than lobbyists and maybe even back down before having to take an illegal step.
The cause: UCITA is dangerous. The clue: That's for you to decide if I have any...
Other than the gifts of God and Nature, that which is free is free only because someone else has paid for it. What of the extraordinary gifts of software and whole operating systems of which we sometimes read? They are rare, and sometimes they are loss leaders. Some of the donors may regret their generosity when later they are confronted with their children's college tuition and orthodontic bills, but yes, they have given, and they have given freely.
I don't know how to take this statement. Did he just brush off the entire open-source movement? Is he implying free/open source software authors will be poor because they do nothing else? Is he saying the only way to release good software is to charge (preferably high) prices for it?
In the appropriation of intellectual property, myMP3.com, Napster, and Gnutella (which has stolen from the breakfasts of 100 million European children even its name) are, in my opinion, the ringleaders, the exemplars of theft, of piracy, of the illegal and willful appropriation of someone else's property.
Well, two out of three ain't bad. You know and I know that myMP3.com was a way for people to listen to their own music in places where they couldn't play their CDs. It was irregular, probably required permission from the record companies, but no one was being stolen from. The subscriber had to buy a CD...and if I recall, mp3.com also bought the CDs. As for Gnutella's name, I don't suppose he's heard of Gnu's Not Unix? Or homage?
If this is a principle of the New World, it is suspiciously like the Old World principle called slavery.
On that topic...isn't there a brouhaha taking place in front of Congress right now, due to a law allowing record companies to appropriate ownership of artists' songs?
It is against this that we have initiated legal action. It is not, and will not be, because we wish to suppress ingenious methods by which our products may be delivered, but because we wish to maintain rightful control and receive fair compensation.
And then there's this comment...
It can devastate a musician who sells a few thousand copies of a homemade CD to his fans in some small and little known community. And these would only be the first casualties. The rest would follow as the very basis of the New Economy was undermined.
I nearly coughed up a lung laughing after reading that statement. Ed Bronfman doesn't give a rat's ass about a musician he's never heard about that's not raking in millions for his Universal holdings. He's more interested in maintaining control - note the previous comment - over the distribution channel. "It is not...because we wish to suppress ingenious products by which our products may be delivered."
I would never have heard the music of the Romergency, Twitch, Devin Townsend, the Evolution Control Committee, RaverFX, and other artists/groups without mp3s that those groups offered! And Bronfman's trying to tell people small musicians will be squashed? Oh, of course, they have to be protected by Universal, Sony, and the rest of the cartel! They need to sign contracts and hand over their ownership of songs if they want to see any money! After all, that's the only thing that matters in music, right?
Give me a fscking break.
On a related note...Metallica, Dr. Dre and the RIAA take one side. On the other side, there is Limp Bizkit, Chuck D, David Bowie, Elvis Costello, and Bob knows how many indie musicians. Ladies and gents, the music industry is about to go to war with itself over mp3. You heard it here first...or not.
New ad slogans from Slashdot's favorite company.
on
Advertising Via GPS
·
· Score: 1
Delivered straight to your cell phone or GPS receiver...
Nobody who has access to broadband internet access buys CD's anymore.
I have a cablemodem...yet I buy a couple CDs a month. Except for the Body Count mp3s I ripped off a friend's CD (who lives one floor above me), every mp3 I have comes from my own collection of CDs and legally-downloaded mp3s from bands offering them.
The reason why RIAA is going apeshit over Napster and similar services is that they are losing a fortune
Yeah, they lost a huge -$1.4 billion last year.
Wait...according to you, the industry is losing a fortune. The RIAA's claiming that too...and yet reports numbers like the above.
Every time I go to HMV, the aisles are full...of people buying CDs. I'm sure more than a few have decent broadband connections.
I'm a university student. I have no TV of my own. But I have a nice, 20" monitor that I've been using to watch TV for a few years. Add in a DVD-ROM, decoder card, and even a little surround sound system, and this thing is my home entertainment system until I graduate - and possibly beyond.
That's if you installed Pirhana, then actually ran it, then were dumb enough not to set your own password for the administration functions. In short, fixable in seconds, and should have been done in the first place. Bad programming, but easily patchable, and not an inherent OS flaw. Certainly something a user could knowingly repair.
Now, we come to the ability to use the Office assistant's programming to affect the system. What's the use of this? Would a user, or even sysadmin know this functionality existed? It's an inherent, inexcusable design flaw. Doubly inexcusable when you consider the lack of security on Windows 9x systems.
Most Linux/*NIX holes aren't so glaringly stupid, and are a hell of a lot harder to exploit. Why should arbitrary script code be able to affect the registry (only one of the most important files on a Windows 9x system), overwrite files, and e-mail itself without telling the user? And why in hell is the Office "assistant" usable in resetting security permissions?
"But, but, but, someone could write a script for Linux too! Ha, got ya there!"
No, you don't. If a user sets up sh to run scripts automatically in Netscape, or downloads and sets the executable bit, it would still only affect that user's files unless they were dumb enough to run Netscape or the script as root. The user would lose the files they own, but binaries and pretty much anything outside/home/$USER would remain unaffected. This is assuming the user didn't bother to at least read through the script first, or find out what the heck it actually is.
"But, but, but, there are bugs in Linux! And some can lead to a root compromise!"
No denying that; they still require some level of actual skill, either in programming or ingenuity, to take advantage. Once again; arbitrary code should not be able to affect anything; it should be contained (like the Java sandbox), and never run as an administrator. NT at least takes steps in this direction, though a cursory look through the Attrition page crack archives should show how much NT is like Swiss cheese.
The point: Windows 9x, and to a lesser extent NT, is inherently insecure, allowing arbitrary code and even scripts to affect important system files and take actions without the user's knowledge. The Morris Worm forced *NIX to shape up; perhaps dragging Windows into the light will force Microsoft to do the right thing for once.
Moderate this down if you like, but do so knowing that you're proving my point.
From now on, whenever I have moderator points and see a line like this, I'll give 'em what they're asking for - negative moderation. This was a great post until the "moderate me down, you know I'm right" act went up. It's just as obnoxious as Slashdot's random flareups of Linux zealotry, and I will treat it appropriately.
I'm not moderating people down because I disagree with their viewpoint - I'm moderating them down because they're being a jerk about it. Right or wrong, this reverse-psychology karma whoring has to stop. If you moderated this post up because you felt the argument was legit, more power to you - I'm just tired of the "I'm a martyr" attitude some posters like to take.
I stand corrected - forgot most of the details, just knew that Cassini had to come back by Earth, and the more hard-core environmentalists were having conniptions.
If you mean Cassini, yeah, people kinda went goofy over that. Even better - it actually had two chances to kill us all. After orbiting Venus for a little while for a gravitational boost, Cassini had to orbit Earth for a few days to do the same thing. Some were afraid the Saturn probe would somehow end up crashing through the atmosphere and spilling the plutonium all over the atmosphere and into our lungs.
It may be possible to determine, on your own, what TiVo really sends out. It runs Linux (2.1.42? that's what the README sez), and GNU tools were used in the development, so the source code for the modified kernel and the tools is available under the GPL. It *might* be possible to figure out exactly what's being sent using the tools...or, you can tap the phone line, record what goes through, do some black magic and see what's being sent.
On another subject...I think it's pretty cool that TiVo runs Linux, but doesn't trumpet their connection to the heavens like a lot of cash- and attention-starved operations are doing now. Also cool that they follow the GPL (I think).
As for ReplayTV, I can't dig up anything on what software it runs, but I'm willing to bet it's all proprietary and closed-source, based on their Technical Overview page. It pretty much says they "can't reveal everything."
There's a *slight* difference between being able to anonymously express opinions, and anonymously snitching on "different" people. One is the hallmark of a free society. The other is a hallmark of a fearful society.
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't the entire old Netscape codebase get tossed about a year into the project? (Please correct me if I'm wrong on this; a really quick skim through mozilla.org during the writing of this didn't help much.) I'd say going from nothing to a fairly-usable browser in two years isn't a bad job, especially one that plans to compete with the "big boys".
Unlike ION Storm, the Mozilla crew acknowledges the problems and debate over their decisions - the Mozilla at One article seems to cover the high and lowlights of Mozilla's then-young life.
It still crashes more a bit than I'd like for daily use, and some useful features are missing. I've only been really trying it since late M13, but I've seen some definite progress in stability and features. It already renders pages more accurately than Netscape in Linux, so there's points in its favour right there:) I grabbed the last nightly build before M16 officially arrived; runs pretty fast compared to M13, though it still takes time to load.
If I could program worth a lick, I'd contribute in a second.
As it is, I'm happy.
So do I...and while I'm not sure who the heck I'm supposed to write to (living in Toronto for university, but permananet address in Windsor), but I'm forwarding a link to this article to my family and friends. At least I can make them aware; maybe one of them will have the knowledge (and nuts) to raise hell.
Four years ago, I purchased the computer I'm typing this on now. It was pretty damn near top-of-the-line for its time; a Pentium II 266 with a 6.4 GB HD and Windows 95. (I didn't know any better at the time, and I was a heavy gamer back then, so Win95 to me was revolutionary. So shoot me.) I didn't get a CD with the computer, just a copy of the CD on the hard drive. I had to return the computer a few days later due to a defective hard drive, but the next HD also had the CD copy on it. Fast-forward two years, I'm interested in learning Linux, so I made a back-up copy of the CD files on a Zip disk. Last September, I used that backup disk to reinstall Windows after wiping and repartitioning the drive.
If I understand what I've learned over the past six months correctly, then the act of making that backup disk was illegal under the EULA that I never had to click through the first time I got the computer since Windows was already preinstalled!
Another thing; just before returning the computer due to the defective drive, I had an interesting phone conversation with the guy who built the computer. When I asked about reformatting and reinstalling, he asked if "I had bought the CD". This escaped me, as I said "Yes, I have Windows" - it was on the drive, remember. After a couple repetitions, it dawned on me what he meant. And now, something else dawns on me - didn't I already pay for one copy of Windows? Would I have had to pay for two copies of Windows in order to be able to legally reinstall the OS after exercising my right to format my hard drive and do with it as I wish?
If so...what a pile of stinking, smelly bullshit. I'm glad I switched almost completely over to a more free OS. As little as I trust government (I'm a Canadian; I know all about government contempt for citizens), it's a good thing the US judicial system is laying the smack down on MS; with Gates' tactics and ambitions, we could have been very close to a situation where the only choice was Microsoft and its self-serving, consumer-abusing licenses, whether we wanted alternatives or not.
This is also the reason I continue to mirror copies of DeCSS and CPHack (not the files Matt Skala wrote, Eddy Jansson's GPL'd software). I don't know who gave people with more money the right to limit my own freedoms. I'll respect copyrights; just don't put stupid, profit-serving restrictions on me.
I also forwarded this article to several of my friends and family, and encouraged them to do the same. I'll do what I can to spread the knowledge.
Also...can I mirror this article on my own site? I'd love to host it there for the rare visitor to see.
If I were American, I would. Can't be any worse than the current choices:)
"It's all fair," an Offspring source said on Thursday. "We've already said you guys [can use] our stuff - we're gonna do yours, too. You shouldn't have any problem with that, should you?"
I'm not sure whether Holland's trying to make a point, or is dead serious, or both.
I understand Holland's actually kinda cool with Offspring music being traded/pirated/whatever over the Internet...and it wouldn't surprise me if he's trying to make a point while meaning every word. "It's good enough for you, it's good enough for me" type thing. Of course, Napster could be playing "do as I say, not as I do"...but that would be hypocritical, now wouldn't it?:)
Plat
Now with nearly 100% legal mp3s! (except for the four Body Count mp3s - sorry Ice T.)
For the record, relations between the downtown area and the suburbs...stink.
I should clarify; that refers to Detroit.
Didn't a bunch of Canadian Indians (Iraquois? Mohawk?) stage a revolt with semi-automatic weapons a few years ago?
That was the Oka crisis in the early 1990's. The Quebec government allowed a golf course to be built on some land near Oka, Que. A group of Mohawk claimed the land was sacred ground (may have been a burial ground, it was a long time ago). Mohawk Warriors showed up in support, set up barricades, and held a standoff. A second standoff took place on the Mercier Bridge. I believe those standoffs ended peacefully. Another standoff took place at the Ipperwash military base in Ontario; a group of natives claimed the land had been unlawfully taken from them. One native was shot and killed; there have been calls for an inquest into who gave the shooting order.
As for Quebec, even the Quebecois have become sick of the separation mess. The government there has been trying to incite separtist feeling time and time again, but I don't think they're going to pull it off anytime soon. Still, the Parti Quebecois (the ruling party) is pretty paranoid about English - ask a Canadian about the "tongue troopers" and Bill 101 sometime.
There's some East-West tension; Alberta, Saskatchewan and parts of Manitoba and B.C. tend to be more conservative than the rest of the country. Nothing vicious; the last really ugly conflict was during the last Quebec referendum (of course).
Beyond that, ethnic tensions aren't as bad here as it seems in the U.S. Perhaps I had a bad example in my early years; I used to live near Windsor, just across from good ol' Detroit. For the record, relations between the downtown area and the suburbs...stink. I'm pretty happy with Toronto. I feel perfectly safe walking downtown after dark, and people of different races and cultures do seem to mix peacefully. It feels weird going back home once in a while, because my home is nowhere near as ethnically diverse; I've actually become more comfortable in Toronto's ethnic mix than my old hometown's relative homogenaeity.
I've heard the argument that DeCSS isn't useful for piracy--this is mostly crap. Sure, professional pirates could already copy DVDs bit-for-bit, but home users can't since there's a small section that's pre-burned on most DVD-RAMS that prevents that.
And real blank DVDs (not DVD-Rs) cost upwards of $50 for a home user.
DeCSS is useful for ripping DVDs so they can be encoded in MPEG-(pick a number) format, and then distributed through your local warez d00d.
That would kinda defeat the purpose of ripping a DVD; I may as well go download a DivX video or rent a tape. I reiterate the words of Jim MIller, Warner Home Video president, back on Jan. 11 to CNN: "There is no economic incentive to pirate this product." Translation; a pirate wouldn't save any money using this method. A full MPEG-2 ripped DVD is several gigabytes, and an MPEG-1 downconversion is still nearly a gig in size. Even then, a movie burned to a VCD can easily span discs; keep in mind, there is no layering system for CDs like there is for DVDs, much less home-burned ones.
Until a good number of people get home access to the equivalent of T3s or greater, ripping DVDs and sending them out won't be a problem. It's a straw man created by people scared that their precious control method was figured out.
Col. Sanders' Secret Blend of 11 Herbs and Spices
Determined by an "independent lab" to be four spices and no herbs.
Recipe for Big Mac Sauce
*AHHHHCHOO!* - *splat*
The Method for Filling Twinkies w/ Creme Filling
Black magic.
The precise number of licks to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop
*CRUNCH*
ok, my jokes suck...so shoot me:)
I stand corrected on the definition of civil disobedience.:)
civil disobedience (svl ds-bd-ns)
n.
Refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in governmental policy or legislation, characterized by the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent means.
5.You may not use the Marks in a derogatory or defamatory manner, or in any negative context. Such use will terminate your license to use the Marks.
Then perhaps I should rephrase; do you know what active protest means? It's not the Apogee thing in particular that's getting my goat, but I can see where it might be the last straw for a few people. And the next action taken under UCITA to stifle free speech (the name "Duke Nukem" is trademarked, non?) will be the last straw for a few more. And the next one, etc., etc., ad nauseam. UCITA is a dangerous law for states to pass. I'm glad I live in Canada, though I fear our federal government would just buckle under and pass a similar law given the slightest pressure.
Having a company tell me I can't tell others on my site what I think of their products because it's in a "negative context" is utter bullshit. No one would accept it from their government; why should they accept it from a company they have no control over?
UCITA is a law by the big software lobby, for the big software lobby. I see no problem with protesting its possible passage or enforcement. Sometime soon, there may be server admins sufficiently whiffed off to get fired and risk jail to protest that law. The idea of a server outage was discussed during another UCITA (or was it DMCA?) conversation on Slashdot, so it's not as if this is a new idea.
I'm glad I live under a system where I won't be shot, killed and squashed simply for gathering to demand freedom to vote, but that doesn't mean I should sit down, shut up and take what people with more power and money give me. Maybe some day, when no one is trying to muzzle me for their benefit, I'll have no reason to complain. Until then, I may not like your opinion, but I'll die (or go to jail, or get sued) for your right to express it.
For the record...I'm not a server admin, so I'm most likely way off. I doubt an outage would take place without wide support among admins, some organization, and a few warnings first. Give the governments a chance to listen to someone other than lobbyists and maybe even back down before having to take an illegal step.
The cause: UCITA is dangerous.
The clue: That's for you to decide if I have any...
Does the concept of civil disobedience mean anything to you?
Other than the gifts of God and Nature, that which is free is free only because someone else has paid for it. What of the extraordinary gifts of software and whole operating systems of which we sometimes read? They are rare, and sometimes they are loss leaders. Some of the donors may regret their generosity when later they are confronted with their children's college tuition and orthodontic bills, but yes, they have given, and they have given freely.
I don't know how to take this statement. Did he just brush off the entire open-source movement? Is he implying free/open source software authors will be poor because they do nothing else? Is he saying the only way to release good software is to charge (preferably high) prices for it?
In the appropriation of intellectual property, myMP3.com, Napster, and Gnutella (which has stolen from the breakfasts of 100 million European children even its name) are, in my opinion, the ringleaders, the exemplars of theft, of piracy, of the illegal and willful appropriation of someone else's property.
Well, two out of three ain't bad. You know and I know that myMP3.com was a way for people to listen to their own music in places where they couldn't play their CDs. It was irregular, probably required permission from the record companies, but no one was being stolen from. The subscriber had to buy a CD...and if I recall, mp3.com also bought the CDs. As for Gnutella's name, I don't suppose he's heard of Gnu's Not Unix? Or homage?
If this is a principle of the New World, it is suspiciously like the Old World principle called slavery.
On that topic...isn't there a brouhaha taking place in front of Congress right now, due to a law allowing record companies to appropriate ownership of artists' songs?
It is against this that we have initiated legal action. It is not, and will not be, because we wish to suppress ingenious methods by which our products may be delivered, but because we wish to maintain rightful control and receive fair compensation.
And then there's this comment...
It can devastate a musician who sells a few thousand copies of a homemade CD to his fans in some small and little known community. And these would only be the first casualties. The rest would follow as the very basis of the New Economy was undermined.
I nearly coughed up a lung laughing after reading that statement. Ed Bronfman doesn't give a rat's ass about a musician he's never heard about that's not raking in millions for his Universal holdings. He's more interested in maintaining control - note the previous comment - over the distribution channel. "It is not...because we wish to suppress ingenious products by which our products may be delivered."
I would never have heard the music of the Romergency, Twitch, Devin Townsend, the Evolution Control Committee, RaverFX, and other artists/groups without mp3s that those groups offered! And Bronfman's trying to tell people small musicians will be squashed? Oh, of course, they have to be protected by Universal, Sony, and the rest of the cartel! They need to sign contracts and hand over their ownership of songs if they want to see any money! After all, that's the only thing that matters in music, right?
Give me a fscking break.
On a related note...Metallica, Dr. Dre and the RIAA take one side. On the other side, there is Limp Bizkit, Chuck D, David Bowie, Elvis Costello, and Bob knows how many indie musicians. Ladies and gents, the music industry is about to go to war with itself over mp3. You heard it here first...or not.
Delivered straight to your cell phone or GPS receiver...
"We know where you're going today."
Nobody who has access to broadband internet access buys CD's anymore.
I have a cablemodem...yet I buy a couple CDs a month. Except for the Body Count mp3s I ripped off a friend's CD (who lives one floor above me), every mp3 I have comes from my own collection of CDs and legally-downloaded mp3s from bands offering them.
The reason why RIAA is going apeshit over Napster and similar services is that they are losing a fortune
Yeah, they lost a huge -$1.4 billion last year.
Wait...according to you, the industry is losing a fortune. The RIAA's claiming that too...and yet reports numbers like the above.
Every time I go to HMV, the aisles are full...of people buying CDs. I'm sure more than a few have decent broadband connections.
Well, I guess that argument is toast, non?
Wow, a free app that adds a shortcut to a porn site on my desktop and generiously tells all my friends coworkers. Thats not a bug!
Of course not. It's a feature.
I'm a university student. I have no TV of my own. But I have a nice, 20" monitor that I've been using to watch TV for a few years. Add in a DVD-ROM, decoder card, and even a little surround sound system, and this thing is my home entertainment system until I graduate - and possibly beyond.
But that's just my story...
That's if you installed Pirhana, then actually ran it, then were dumb enough not to set your own password for the administration functions. In short, fixable in seconds, and should have been done in the first place. Bad programming, but easily patchable, and not an inherent OS flaw. Certainly something a user could knowingly repair.
Now, we come to the ability to use the Office assistant's programming to affect the system. What's the use of this? Would a user, or even sysadmin know this functionality existed? It's an inherent, inexcusable design flaw. Doubly inexcusable when you consider the lack of security on Windows 9x systems.
Most Linux/*NIX holes aren't so glaringly stupid, and are a hell of a lot harder to exploit. Why should arbitrary script code be able to affect the registry (only one of the most important files on a Windows 9x system), overwrite files, and e-mail itself without telling the user? And why in hell is the Office "assistant" usable in resetting security permissions?
/home/$USER would remain unaffected. This is assuming the user didn't bother to at least read through the script first, or find out what the heck it actually is.
"But, but, but, someone could write a script for Linux too! Ha, got ya there!"
No, you don't. If a user sets up sh to run scripts automatically in Netscape, or downloads and sets the executable bit, it would still only affect that user's files unless they were dumb enough to run Netscape or the script as root. The user would lose the files they own, but binaries and pretty much anything outside
"But, but, but, there are bugs in Linux! And some can lead to a root compromise!"
No denying that; they still require some level of actual skill, either in programming or ingenuity, to take advantage. Once again; arbitrary code should not be able to affect anything; it should be contained (like the Java sandbox), and never run as an administrator. NT at least takes steps in this direction, though a cursory look through the Attrition page crack archives should show how much NT is like Swiss cheese.
The point: Windows 9x, and to a lesser extent NT, is inherently insecure, allowing arbitrary code and even scripts to affect important system files and take actions without the user's knowledge. The Morris Worm forced *NIX to shape up; perhaps dragging Windows into the light will force Microsoft to do the right thing for once.
Moderate this down if you like, but do so knowing that you're proving my point.
From now on, whenever I have moderator points and see a line like this, I'll give 'em what they're asking for - negative moderation. This was a great post until the "moderate me down, you know I'm right" act went up. It's just as obnoxious as Slashdot's random flareups of Linux zealotry, and I will treat it appropriately.
I'm not moderating people down because I disagree with their viewpoint - I'm moderating them down because they're being a jerk about it. Right or wrong, this reverse-psychology karma whoring has to stop. If you moderated this post up because you felt the argument was legit, more power to you - I'm just tired of the "I'm a martyr" attitude some posters like to take.
I stand corrected - forgot most of the details, just knew that Cassini had to come back by Earth, and the more hard-core environmentalists were having conniptions.
Thanks for the info!
Plat
If you mean Cassini, yeah, people kinda went goofy over that. Even better - it actually had two chances to kill us all. After orbiting Venus for a little while for a gravitational boost, Cassini had to orbit Earth for a few days to do the same thing. Some were afraid the Saturn probe would somehow end up crashing through the atmosphere and spilling the plutonium all over the atmosphere and into our lungs.
You figure the Army could have asked the Navy about Windows' reliability in mission-critical applications...
It may be possible to determine, on your own, what TiVo really sends out. It runs Linux (2.1.42? that's what the README sez), and GNU tools were used in the development, so the source code for the modified kernel and the tools is available under the GPL. It *might* be possible to figure out exactly what's being sent using the tools...or, you can tap the phone line, record what goes through, do some black magic and see what's being sent.
On another subject...I think it's pretty cool that TiVo runs Linux, but doesn't trumpet their connection to the heavens like a lot of cash- and attention-starved operations are doing now. Also cool that they follow the GPL (I think).
As for ReplayTV, I can't dig up anything on what software it runs, but I'm willing to bet it's all proprietary and closed-source, based on their Technical Overview page. It pretty much says they "can't reveal everything."
C'est la vie, I suppose.
There's a *slight* difference between being able to anonymously express opinions, and anonymously snitching on "different" people. One is the hallmark of a free society. The other is a hallmark of a fearful society.