No, but Morpheus, Neo, and Trinity will all be MCSEs, and the agents will wear penguin t-shirts and copyleft hats.
Or Morpheus, Neo, and Trinity will wear penguin t-shirts and copyleft hats and the agents will all be MCSEs in which case people resistance will be destroyed in great style.
Then I wonder what will be in in 3rd (in time sequence, not in release sequence) sequel - maybe after all those problems AIs will be succesfull in creating simulated "heaven" for people so they are not forced into this 20th century "peak of civilisation"?
If you want some software which is rented, either require some insurance or buy software "usual way" (i.e. not rented).
Example of such insurance: they will pay you say $1M if they fail to be available to you sooner than say 1 year after your last paid period of service ends.
Solution to your question is not responsibility of company, but yours as a customer and user. Either you trust the company and put yourself at risk or buy software which can be used even after manufacturer goes bankcrupt.
Sell them two harddrives at the same price, specify that one will allow you to store mp3's and the other won't, guess which one they're going to buy?
If it is presented to customers using above statement, than no wonder almost everybody will buy those "MP3 enabled" hard drives.
But if you tell them that this "new" drive contains "new MicroHardware feature which will protect you from software pirats/hackers/crackers/whoever" and "forgot" to tell them it means they will be unable to store MP3s, then I imagine almost nobody will buy those real storage devices - because almost everybody will buy "You are trying to do something nasty. You are bad guy! Pity on you!" devices.
Damn Straight! (Score:3, Funny)
by Greyfox (nride@uswest.net) on Tuesday March 20, @15:41 CET (#54)
(User #87712 Info)
http://www.paratheoanametamystikhood.net
It's like The Prisoner...
Web Designer: What do you want?
Customer: Information!
Web Designer: You won't get it!
If I can specify somewhere in browser settings, thet I want pages rendered for 14.4kbit modem, 640x480 resolution and 16 colors, than we can call it "negotiation".
But if browsers just takes my systems setting, assumes for me, that I'm browsing with windows maximized and that I like HEAVY graphics (because of my fat connection), then it is not negotiation.
You are talking about page setting based upon user's request.
'prizog' is talking about page settings based on what browser reveals to server.
Firts I consider "behaviour based on user's choises", second I consider "bahaviour based on server operator's choises" (because users ussualy can't easily change headers sent by browser nor they can predict how will server interpret them).
Thus first thing I consider good (as you too), second I consider "not that good and inpolite" (as prizog).
Yes, legislators have to understand the threat. But not only this one (this "open source") but also all other threats: Microsoft, global warming, nuclear waste, nature polution, over population, patent system abuse,...
''Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer,'' Allchin said. ''I can't imagine something that could be worse than this for the
software business and the intellectual-property business.''
If 'software business = Microsoft and alike' and 'intellectual-property
business = those fuckers which are abusing patent system with theire primitive software patents' than I'm realy happy that open source is doing
something about it and I'm happy even more that open source is doing that quite good (as "they" are calling it "destroyer").
Disclaimer (for those who need it): I'm not saying, that ALL software have to be onpen source and also I'm not saying that ALL intelectual property is bad.
Do underestimete the Power Of The Consumer Side - they ussualy do not realize they are paying all this (extra HW coders and decoders, extra SW coders and decoders, extra CPU cycles and other HW required to handle all previous).
And after paying all this infrastracture (which is intended to guard Dark Side "rights" for income, not consumenr's rights) consumers will pay FAT money for things which were till now not even free but legal and common too.
With this concrete example I come up with few ideas (note: I'm not that big and bright and equiped and... hacker/cracker):
mount "some" vires to "some" circuits in speakers and you get decrypted analog signal
reverse engineer HW decryptor in speaker and you can end up with decrypted digital signal
(I suppose by obtaning this signal we are going to be criminals so we do not bother with some anti-reverse-engineering law:)
As I think of it the only way to prevent piracy would be to make music and movies available only in specialized theaters, where people will be going (and paying for each entry) naked and without any equipment. This will work as long as:
there will be no way to retrieve some "records" direcrly from man's memory (in brain)
(does "I heard that new song from XXX in TheTheatre, I can sing it for you..." count as such way?)
those theaters are not compromised
So I end up with this: you can't prevent piracy by making it difficult to play movie/song which is just what many other readers alredy wrote here.
So I make another reduntant statement: They (so called "entertainment industry") are plain WRONG!!!
Is road usage illegal? (if you are comparing it to illegal copying of copyrighted data).
I would gladly pay an extra $6 on a CD burner if it meant more freedom to use the information I buy how I want.
Those extra $6 wont make illegal copying of copyrighted data legal again. Yes, you did not mean that but then, those extra $6 just MAYBE makes some RIA, MPPA or other guys less restrictive when regulating music, movies,... prices. (MAYBE because if they receive $6 now, it makes them content for say 1 year. But then they will want MORE!. Do you want to pay doble tax every new year?)
I still consider such tax strongly breaking rule "you are innocent until you are proved guilty". Thus I consider such tax beaking constitution of most countries (Germany too).
I send them links to descriptions of both cracker and hacker but the response was:
I made all the changes and deletions except
'hacker'. My editors and I don't think anyone would understand the term 'cracker'.
Well, if they (media) do not use word 'cracker' because nobody understand it then it is obvious nobody understands this word (I do not know much people which when absorbing information from general media use dictionary).
i'm expert in every IT field, i have little knowledge about law, i'm (maybe) pretty average MS hater (as almost everybody who saw PC at least once in his life) and linux supporter (as almost everyone who saw Linux at least once in his life) so i'm certain i will rule reasonably and fair in every case - especialy in "MS vs. DOJ" case.
sites are moving (or ceasing exist while new ones emerges) from time to time (some more often, som less).
browser can be there for a long time (longer than sites).
so to prevent broken built in bookmarks in browser it's reasonable to store redirectors in browser (URLs maintained by browser supplier which redirets you to desired functional site).
of course, there is another question whether special bookmars supplied by browser vendor are good especialy if they have some special advantages over user's bookmarks (i.e. non removeble, better positioned,...).
I'm using GnuPG because it is available under GPL and is not restricted by US laws.
As for usability: I didn't use PGP and GnuPG I'm using mostly for signing software packages and for verifying of signatures others produced on software packages (kernel, gnupg,...). From time to time I'm even signing and/or encrypting/decrypting e-mails.
And for now I didn't find any disadvantage in GnuPG functionality other than the cryptography itself being deployed very rarely in the wild (a lot of people do not know about things like that).
so: if you want, use PGP. if you want, use GnuPG. if you want, use any other OpenPGP implementation (if it exists). but defiitely, use some crypto!
AFAIK DMCA stands for "Digital..." so if it also protecs life from copyright infrigement than either life is digital or the name of act (or act as a whole) is even more incorrect than I think previously:)
but back to topic... i think that there is as much stupidity and absurdity in your example than in the cases with most of today's software patents, DMCA,...
I wonder whether those competent (or better to say: in right position) people just don't get it or they do it on purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
Or Morpheus, Neo, and Trinity will wear penguin t-shirts and copyleft hats and the agents will all be MCSEs in which case people resistance will be destroyed in great style.
Then I wonder what will be in in 3rd (in time sequence, not in release sequence) sequel - maybe after all those problems AIs will be succesfull in creating simulated "heaven" for people so they are not forced into this 20th century "peak of civilisation"?
... which is far less effective than threatening ISPs - one IPS can have hundereds or thousands of such customers.
But it does not mean they (studios, ...) wont do it - threatening users directly - they have a LOT of money.
Example of such insurance: they will pay you say $1M if they fail to be available to you sooner than say 1 year after your last paid period of service ends.
Solution to your question is not responsibility of company, but yours as a customer and user. Either you trust the company and put yourself at risk or buy software which can be used even after manufacturer goes bankcrupt.
... you spend N * $50 and performs N updates just to avoid *one* aditional purchase (or better exchange) of Office 97 and *one* downgrade.
Am I I right? If so, that's sad (as I alredy wrote).
What if blood is flowing (or is sucked) out of body?
How sad to throw away quite lots of money for something one do not need just because of "interoperability".
I wonder what if almost nobody upgrades from Word 6 or Word 95?
If it is presented to customers using above statement, than no wonder almost everybody will buy those "MP3 enabled" hard drives.
But if you tell them that this "new" drive contains "new MicroHardware feature which will protect you from software pirats/hackers/crackers/whoever" and "forgot" to tell them it means they will be unable to store MP3s, then I imagine almost nobody will buy those real storage devices - because almost everybody will buy "You are trying to do something nasty. You are bad guy! Pity on you!" devices.
by Greyfox (nride@uswest.net) on Tuesday March 20, @15:41 CET (#54)
(User #87712 Info)
http://www.paratheoanametamystikhood.net
It's like The Prisoner...
Web Designer: What do you want?
Customer: Information!
Web Designer: You won't get it!
That's not funny, that's real.
If I can specify somewhere in browser settings, thet I want pages rendered for 14.4kbit modem, 640x480 resolution and 16 colors, than we can call it "negotiation".
But if browsers just takes my systems setting, assumes for me, that I'm browsing with windows maximized and that I like HEAVY graphics (because of my fat connection), then it is not negotiation.
'prizog' is talking about page settings based on what browser reveals to server.
Firts I consider "behaviour based on user's choises", second I consider "bahaviour based on server operator's choises" (because users ussualy can't easily change headers sent by browser nor they can predict how will server interpret them).
Thus first thing I consider good (as you too), second I consider "not that good and inpolite" (as prizog).
Yes, legislators have to understand the threat. But not only this one (this "open source") but also all other threats: Microsoft, global warming, nuclear waste, nature polution, over population, patent system abuse, ...
''Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer,'' Allchin said. ''I can't imagine something that could be worse than this for the software business and the intellectual-property business.''
If 'software business = Microsoft and alike' and 'intellectual-property business = those fuckers which are abusing patent system with theire primitive software patents' than I'm realy happy that open source is doing something about it and I'm happy even more that open source is doing that quite good (as "they" are calling it "destroyer").
Disclaimer (for those who need it): I'm not saying, that ALL software have to be onpen source and also I'm not saying that ALL intelectual property is bad.
Do not underestimate the Power Of The Dark Side.
:) Well, here a look from other side:
Do underestimete the Power Of The Consumer Side - they ussualy do not realize they are paying all this (extra HW coders and decoders, extra SW coders and decoders, extra CPU cycles and other HW required to handle all previous).
And after paying all this infrastracture (which is intended to guard Dark Side "rights" for income, not consumenr's rights) consumers will pay FAT money for things which were till now not even free but legal and common too.
With this concrete example I come up with few ideas (note: I'm not that big and bright and equiped and ... hacker/cracker):
(I suppose by obtaning this signal we are going to be criminals so we do not bother with some anti-reverse-engineering law
As I think of it the only way to prevent piracy would be to make music and movies available only in specialized theaters, where people will be going (and paying for each entry) naked and without any equipment. This will work as long as:
(does "I heard that new song from XXX in TheTheatre, I can sing it for you
So I end up with this: you can't prevent piracy by making it difficult to play movie/song which is just what many other readers alredy wrote here.
So I make another reduntant statement: They (so called "entertainment industry") are plain WRONG!!!
Is road usage illegal? (if you are comparing it to illegal copying of copyrighted data).
I would gladly pay an extra $6 on a CD burner if it meant more freedom to use the information I buy how I want.Those extra $6 wont make illegal copying of copyrighted data legal again. Yes, you did not mean that but then, those extra $6 just MAYBE makes some RIA, MPPA or other guys less restrictive when regulating music, movies, ... prices. (MAYBE because if they receive $6 now, it makes them content for say 1 year. But then they will want MORE!. Do you want to pay doble tax every new year?)
I still consider such tax strongly breaking rule "you are innocent until you are proved guilty". Thus I consider such tax beaking constitution of most countries (Germany too).
I send them links to descriptions of both cracker and hacker but the response was:
I made all the changes and deletions except 'hacker'. My editors and I don't think anyone would understand the term 'cracker'.
Well, if they (media) do not use word 'cracker' because nobody understand it then it is obvious nobody understands this word (I do not know much people which when absorbing information from general media use dictionary).
"... getting hacked just as we face more and more legislation against hacking."
... while again someone used word "hack" instead of "crack".
i'm expert in every IT field, i have little knowledge about law, i'm (maybe) pretty average MS hater (as almost everybody who saw PC at least once in his life) and linux supporter (as almost everyone who saw Linux at least once in his life) so i'm certain i will rule reasonably and fair in every case - especialy in "MS vs. DOJ" case.
:>sites are moving (or ceasing exist while new ones emerges) from time to time (some more often, som less).
browser can be there for a long time (longer than sites).
so to prevent broken built in bookmarks in browser it's reasonable to store redirectors in browser (URLs maintained by browser supplier which redirets you to desired functional site).
of course, there is another question whether special bookmars supplied by browser vendor are good especialy if they have some special advantages over user's bookmarks (i.e. non removeble, better positioned, ...).
As for usability: I didn't use PGP and GnuPG I'm using mostly for signing software packages and for verifying of signatures others produced on software packages (kernel, gnupg, ...). From time to time I'm even signing and/or encrypting/decrypting e-mails.
And for now I didn't find any disadvantage in GnuPG functionality other than the cryptography itself being deployed very rarely in the wild (a lot of people do not know about things like that).
so: if you want, use PGP. if you want, use GnuPG. if you want, use any other OpenPGP implementation (if it exists). but defiitely, use some crypto!
http://www.megaloman.com/~hany/sof tware/pinepgp/
Why would anyone want to use an OS where you shouldn't install software because of fear of crashing the OS?
I agree with you.
Maybe we can say it even in other words:
Why would anyone want to call an OS 'stable' when it is possible to crash the OS with installing application software?
AFAIK DMCA stands for "Digital ..." so if it also protecs life from copyright infrigement than either life is digital or the name of act (or act as a whole) is even more incorrect than I think previously :)
but back to topic ... i think that there is as much stupidity and absurdity in your example than in the cases with most of today's software patents, DMCA, ...
I wonder whether those competent (or better to say: in right position) people just don't get it or they do it on purpose.
gun -> DeCSS
murderers -> pirates
gun is tool. DeCSS is tool. pirats are commiting crimes, murderers are comitting crimes (and far more serious crimes!).
BUT
producing guns, selling guns, talking about guns, having gun, ..., linking to information about gun is legal. (under some circumstances)
while linking to DeCSS is not legal (under any circumstances AFAIK)
strange, what a big fear from DeCSS. anybody knows about someone get killed or wounded by DeCSS?
i wrote my comment based not just on this article but also based on older one concerning creation of new TLD.
this one buy of one TLD is one illustration of general trend in todays buseness: ignore anything. care only for bigger profits.
(why i consider this buy be BAD? well, this and other country TLDs are supposed to be COUNTRY TLDs. that's why.)