From the article: "In fact, the Free Software Foundation runs a lot of these "enforcement actions." There are 30 to 40 going on right now, and there were 50 last year, Kuhn says. There have been hundreds since 1991, when the current version of the GPL was published, he says. Tracking down bad guys has become such a big operation that the Free Software Foundation has created a so-called Compliance Lab to snoop out violators and bust them.
Who pays for this? The 12-employee Free Software Foundation has limited resources. So it seeks donations. And sometimes it collects money from companies it has busted. "
Gee, sounds just like the BSA, doesn't it? Except that the BSA extorts -- uh -- I mean collects -- hundreds of millions of dollars from companies that are guilty of various software licensing violations. Funny that the FSF is portrayed as evil and communistic for doing the same exact thing as the BSA.
What version of MSIE ships with Windows 2000 (I don't know). Is it MSIE 7.x or 6.x? Please list some of the new features that are found in the version of MSIE that ships with Windows 2003.
Not counting patches to fix security holes, please list some of the new features that have been introduced in MSIE -- AFTER the initial release of Windows XP.
Windows XP was released a little over 2 years ago.
Since that time, browsers like Mozilla and Opera have put out many new releases of their programs, each one containing many bug fixes and new features.
Microsft has released no new versions of Internet Explorer. No new features. No bug fixes.
The only "improvement" has been a haphazard series of patches, each one only released several months after somebody discovers a major security hole.
All of SCO's executives, from King Darl on down, just keep charging forward, as if everything they're doing and saying makes perfect sense. It's almost like some sort of wierd Saturday Night Live parody of a business.
I hate spammers, but this law is meaningless, as are ALL anti-spam laws:
1. Spammers will ignore the law. Which leads to the next point:
2. Laws are meaningless unless enforced. How will it be enforced? When I get hit with spam that violates this law, who do I complain to? Who will investigate my complaint and then pursue and punish the spammers?
3. Where will all the money and resources come from to enforce this law (see point #2 above) -- to actually enforce this law will take FAR more money and resources than anyone realizes or will admit.
And even if significant money and resources are allocated to enforce the law:
4. What about all the spam originating from servers outside the U.S.
1. In Internet Explorer, go to the "Tools" menu and select "Internet Options..."
2. Click on the "Advanced" tab
3. Scroll down to the section "Search from the Address Bar"
4. Select the radio button labelled "Do not search from the Address Bar"
5. Click the "OK" button to dismiss the dialog
6. Test using a URL like http://www.dsafgwadbee.co.uk [dsafgwadbee.co.uk], as this will avoid the Verisign thing (which only applies to.com and.net TLDs)
7. You should now get a standard IE "The page cannot be displayed" notification, with "Cannot find server or DNS error" at the bottom
I always thought these stories were mostly just urban legends, until a year ago when my wife was trying to transfer pictures from our digital camera to the computer. She connected the camera to the computer's USB port but was stuck at that point.
When she came and got me I immediately saw the problem - the camera wasn't turned on.
When I pointed this out to her, she looked at me with this absolute disbelief and said "it has to be turned on?"
Having to fix a security flaw in a closed source program is proof than closed source is bad. Fixing a security flaw in an open source program is proof that open source is good.
Nothing personal against Scott McCloud, I wish him the best, but he and other micropayment proponents think micropayments are a good idea for 2 reasons:
1. It's good for them (i.e., they get money)
2. They desperately WANT micropayments to work because it would be good for them
(aka "Wishful Thinking")
A year from now, when BitPass has joined a dozen other companies on the micropayment scrapheap, Scott's wishful thinking will continue to prevent him from recognizing the fundamental flaws that doom micropayments to failure.
Clay Shirkey's pieces on micropayments have their share of flaws, but overall he's done a good job of describing why micropayments don't work.
" You haven't read any of the literature about micropayments, have you? Overhead costs are not just a solved problem but they've been solved a half-dozen different ways."
Oh really? Then why has every attempt at micropayments failed?
Back in the mid 80's, long before the World Wide Web, Case Western University in Cleveland, Ohio started a free dial-up Bulletin Board System, paid for by the University and donations from local businesses. Soon, it was so popular that their budget just wasn't enough to pay for the expansion that the system so badly needed.
So they figured out how much it cost to run the system and divided that by the number of users. The number they came up with was quite small -- literally a few cents per user per month -- no profit, just enough to cover the actual cost. Certainly no one would be opposed to paying such a small amount.
Then they discovered a problem. The cost of creating, operating and maintaining some sort of payment collection system was greater than the amount of money they were trying to collect. And that's the fundamental flaw in micropayments.
By the time you build a system that's fast, reliable, secure, can handle thousands (or tens of thousands) of transactions a day, and has a settlements system so the proper people get paid the proper amount, the cost per transaction of running that system is more than the micropayments themselves.
In other words, every time somebody pays you 10 cents to view your online comic strip, it costs you 15 cents to process the transaction. So you're losing money, and what's the point of that?
Everyone keeps saying "It is certainly well within SOE's rights to do what they want with their boards". While technically this is true, owning the forum and/or the equipment it runs on should not be used as an excuse to behave like a dicatator.
People get so caught up in their petty power struggles that they lose sight of the bigger picture. It's just like a business -- you may own the building and equipment, but your customers own you, because without customers you have no business. The same applies to on-line forums: Without users you have no forum.
Considering that Michael Dell loves to suck Microsoft cock, it is not surprising that Dell is a scumbag company.
Just for the hell of it, I went to Dell's website a couple of weeks ago and tried to custom configure a system with the same (or comparable) components as I have in my current system, which I built myself. When I was done, the Dell would have cost me $400 more than the system I'm currently using.
Yes very true. I printed several pictures on glossy "photo" paper using a run-of-the-mill Hewlett-Packard inket printer. I hung the picutee on a bulletin board with absolutely no exposure to sunlight and within 4 months the pictures were very very faded.
Slashdot Mirror
The earth is not flat.
At Warp 9 we'll be there in 38,000 years!
From the article: "In fact, the Free Software Foundation runs a lot of these "enforcement actions." There are 30 to 40 going on right now, and there were 50 last year, Kuhn says. There have been hundreds since 1991, when the current version of the GPL was published, he says. Tracking down bad guys has become such a big operation that the Free Software Foundation has created a so-called Compliance Lab to snoop out violators and bust them.
Who pays for this? The 12-employee Free Software Foundation has limited resources. So it seeks donations. And sometimes it collects money from companies it has busted. "
Gee, sounds just like the BSA, doesn't it? Except that the BSA extorts -- uh -- I mean collects -- hundreds of millions of dollars from companies that are guilty of various software licensing violations. Funny that the FSF is portrayed as evil and communistic for doing the same exact thing as the BSA.
BSA = Good
FSF = Bad
What a moron.
Domo oragato Mr. Roboto
Windows 2003 is a server OS used by few people.
What version of MSIE ships with Windows 2000 (I don't know). Is it MSIE 7.x or 6.x? Please list some of the new features that are found in the version of MSIE that ships with Windows 2003.
Not counting patches to fix security holes, please list some of the new features that have been introduced in MSIE -- AFTER the initial release of Windows XP.
Windows XP was released a little over 2 years ago.
Since that time, browsers like Mozilla and Opera have put out many new releases of their programs, each one containing many bug fixes and new features.
Microsft has released no new versions of Internet Explorer. No new features. No bug fixes.
The only "improvement" has been a haphazard series of patches, each one only released several months after somebody discovers a major security hole.
I wish Steve Ballmer would just be quiet.
Cell phone companies essentially force you to change carriers every couple of years anyway because of their ridiculous pricing polices:
You sign up with a carrier and get a good deal that requires a 1 or 2 year contract.
At the end of that contract you have to switch to a different rate plan.
All the good (cheap) rate plans are limited to "new subscribers only"
You're faced with the choice of paying substantially more or switching to a different carrier who is offering good deals to new subscribers.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
All of SCO's executives, from King Darl on down, just keep charging forward, as if everything they're doing and saying makes perfect sense. It's almost like some sort of wierd Saturday Night Live parody of a business.
Now we can enjoy the horrible dialog and painfully bad acting of ST:NG in full digital glory!!
Many Net swappers "think it is their God-given right to steal music," Whitmore says. "They don't know any better. We have to teach them."
Sharing is not stealing.
Copy protection is meaningless, all CDs are "rippable": : CD player output --> Soundcard input
I hate spammers, but this law is meaningless, as are ALL anti-spam laws:
1. Spammers will ignore the law. Which leads to the next point:
2. Laws are meaningless unless enforced. How will it be enforced? When I get hit with spam that violates this law, who do I complain to? Who will investigate my complaint and then pursue and punish the spammers?
3. Where will all the money and resources come from to enforce this law (see point #2 above) -- to actually enforce this law will take FAR more money and resources than anyone realizes or will admit.
And even if significant money and resources are allocated to enforce the law:
4. What about all the spam originating from servers outside the U.S.
or
1. Don't use MSIE
See, wasn't that easier?
I always thought these stories were mostly just urban legends, until a year ago when my wife was trying to transfer pictures from our digital camera to the computer. She connected the camera to the computer's USB port but was stuck at that point.
When she came and got me I immediately saw the problem - the camera wasn't turned on.
When I pointed this out to her, she looked at me with this absolute disbelief and said "it has to be turned on?"
MOD this UP!!
It makes more sense than any SCO press release!!
I think this belongs with the story from a few days ago about typing with one hand.
400 years in the future I would think that the Enterprise would use something more advanced than PHP.
Having to fix a security flaw in a closed source program is proof than closed source is bad. Fixing a security flaw in an open source program is proof that open source is good.
Nothing personal against Scott McCloud, I wish him the best, but he and other micropayment proponents think micropayments are a good idea for 2 reasons:
1. It's good for them (i.e., they get money)
2. They desperately WANT micropayments to work because it would be good for them
(aka "Wishful Thinking")
A year from now, when BitPass has joined a dozen other companies on the micropayment scrapheap, Scott's wishful thinking will continue to prevent him from recognizing the fundamental flaws that doom micropayments to failure.
Clay Shirkey's pieces on micropayments have their share of flaws, but overall he's done a good job of describing why micropayments don't work.
" You haven't read any of the literature about micropayments, have you? Overhead costs are not just a solved problem but they've been solved a half-dozen different ways."
Oh really? Then why has every attempt at micropayments failed?
Back in the mid 80's, long before the World Wide Web, Case Western University in Cleveland, Ohio started a free dial-up Bulletin Board System, paid for by the University and donations from local businesses. Soon, it was so popular that their budget just wasn't enough to pay for the expansion that the system so badly needed.
So they figured out how much it cost to run the system and divided that by the number of users. The number they came up with was quite small -- literally a few cents per user per month -- no profit, just enough to cover the actual cost. Certainly no one would be opposed to paying such a small amount.
Then they discovered a problem. The cost of creating, operating and maintaining some sort of payment collection system was greater than the amount of money they were trying to collect. And that's the fundamental flaw in micropayments.
By the time you build a system that's fast, reliable, secure, can handle thousands (or tens of thousands) of transactions a day, and has a settlements system so the proper people get paid the proper amount, the cost per transaction of running that system is more than the micropayments themselves.
In other words, every time somebody pays you 10 cents to view your online comic strip, it costs you 15 cents to process the transaction. So you're losing money, and what's the point of that?
Everyone keeps saying "It is certainly well within SOE's rights to do what they want with their boards". While technically this is true, owning the forum and/or the equipment it runs on should not be used as an excuse to behave like a dicatator.
People get so caught up in their petty power struggles that they lose sight of the bigger picture. It's just like a business -- you may own the building and equipment, but your customers own you, because without customers you have no business. The same applies to on-line forums: Without users you have no forum.
1. Junk
2. Not Junk
Whay more do you need?
They'll release a couple of interim versions of Windows XP. There will be Service Pack 2 and then maybe Windows XP Special Edition.
Considering that Michael Dell loves to suck Microsoft cock, it is not surprising that Dell is a scumbag company.
Just for the hell of it, I went to Dell's website a couple of weeks ago and tried to custom configure a system with the same (or comparable) components as I have in my current system, which I built myself. When I was done, the Dell would have cost me $400 more than the system I'm currently using.
Yes very true. I printed several pictures on glossy "photo" paper using a run-of-the-mill Hewlett-Packard inket printer. I hung the picutee on a bulletin board with absolutely no exposure to sunlight and within 4 months the pictures were very very faded.