The vulnerability that this exploits in Outlook and Outlook Express has been patched since March 29, 2001.
Very true - and a good point. But it ignores one of the more underlying issues. Outlook is fundamentally flawed.
One of the most infamous "email viruses" was the Good Times Virus. It was the first email virus to be more social than technical - the warning message being relayed time and time again being more a virus than what it supposedly warned against. Good Times played on the fears of a vast body of new users who weren't aware of how email worked. It warned against a virus that spread by messages entitled "Good Times" and that reading the message did harm to the user's system (if not spread the virus). At the time, the idea that simply reading a message was enough to activate malicious code was preposterous.
Outlook has made this concept a reality.
But this is not a reference to this one specific vulnerability. Outlook has been the subject of numerous previous vulnerabilities - many of which can be exploited by an email that is viewed either by opening the message or via the message preview panel. Sure, they have been patched too. But the same concept keeps surfacing.
This doesn't even touch on how Outlook tends to hide the nature of file attachments, allowing malicious code to disguise code to appear as benign data. Microsoft's solution was not to make the nature of file attachments more defined... but to strip out "dangerous" types. Thus, they completely ignored the actual issue. While this is a minor point... it does show the mindset that has created an email client rife with security problems.
Stop whining about what programs other people choose to run, and encourage them to learn how to patch their systems. No matter what OS you run, patching it is going to be important.
More good advice. It has been said that bits don't rot. Software does not decay. But we have since found that over time, we discover mistakes in the creation of software. Thus we are faced with having to maintain the digital system with as much dedication as a mechanical system.
But again, this misses an important point.
Sometimes systems are created that have fundamental flaws. No matter how well maintained, these systems will always fail. And while even the best systems may fail eventually, these flawed systems will fail in spectacularly bad ways.
It is wise to advocate constant maintenance. But it is also just as worthwhile to point out systems that are flawed.
It's silly. I think very, very few people (non-geeks) even know that when they see the "little padlock" it means the company they are talking to is supposedly verified. I think everyone evaluates the business they are thinking about ordering from BEFORE they even go to the SSL stage.
I suspect many end users are more confused about the issue than even that.
Back when the PS2 came out, there was a number of scams popping up to feed the buying frenzy (and short supply) for the devices. I was rather amazed at how often people cited a Verisign certificate from a questionable website as verification that the business was legitimate. Granted - it could have been a kind of astroturf compaign by the scammers to further a false sense of legitimacy. But years of dealing with end-user issues has me believing that these were genuine users confused as to what a certificate does, and does not, mean.
Surround sound makes sense to MSFT employees because most of us [including wet behind the ears college hires like me] have their own office.
...
Of course, this all assumes having your own office. Cubicles or other shared spaces may not be as conducive for surround sound music listening as ones own office but I wouldn't just dismiss it out of hand as you have.
Thanks for the insight... it sounds like a very nice environment you have. However, this simply underscores the problem.
It has been my experience, reflected by the popularity of cultural icons like Office Space and Dilbert, that organizations (both corporate and US Government) tend not to have such a wealth of workspace. The average employee does not get their own office space. They're lucky if they get their own cube. Furthermore, management seems eager to explore ways to further share a shared workspace - witness the interest in "hoteling".
This leads to two points. First, sound is more a disruptive entity than enhancement of this shared space. Secondly, a business is not likely to invest in the extra money for a good set of surround sound speakers to further that disruption.
Scoffing at Microsoft's claims that surround sound will be an important part of the office is not simply dismissing the point out of hand. It is recognizing the current environment. And it might further question whether Microsoft's visionaries are too removed from the reality of that current environment.
So far we have several dozen posts complaining about licenses (so very Slashdot of you, really), and no one talking about why releasing the Releasing the Rendezvous source is so cool.
...
Oh, but I forgot -- bitching about the license is more important.
The story here is that Apple is releasing some technology Open Source. Since Open Source is an issue of licensing... you'll have to forgive everyone for naturally assuming the license in question might actually be both on-topic and important.
Do bring a large set of nail-clippers with you (not scissors, not a pocketknife - these will be considered dangerous and locked away). When you make it to your new bunk, you'll be faced with a lock still sealed in its stiff plastic packaging. You'll be tasked to open that puppy up quick while the TI paces around looking for someone having trouble with the task. Take your nail-clippers and clip a cut in to the side of the packaging. It'll make ripping open the package quick and easy.
Later on, those nail-clippers will come in handy while you're out and about and you notice a loose string you missed on your new BDUs. Strings seem to GROW on the things. And you don't want anybody to find one dangling off'a you. Take those nail-clippers everywhere with you except when you're out for PC.
KP is great. You loose some sleep to do it, but the work is stress-free. Plus you get to have meals unrushed or supervised by your TI. That usually means access to luxury foods like a cheeseburger, icecream, and soda. While it doesn't sounds like a big deal right now, consider that life is very different once you're there. You will come to consider a "patio break" (4 mins to spend your own money on a vending machine and wolf down some junkfood or possibly manage a call from a payphone) a great luxury.
If you do get KP, apply a thick layer of unbuffed shoe polish over your boots. It'll help protect the shine you've labored to create from MOST of the abuse your boots will get doing KP grunt work. A simple buffing will return your boots to most of their previous glory. A mirror-like shine can be accomplished with regular Kiwi, cottonballs, and a tiny bit of water (creme polish can add a nice touch but you want a good base first). Alchohol strips the polish - don't do that unless you've got a good reason to.
If you are required to fill out security background check paperwork, do not rush it. This paperwork tends to go in to considerable detail and you aren't expected to have all the required information available right away. Furthermore, only a few of your flight will need to do this and it'll come at a time in your training where you're trusted enough to go out on your own without TI supervision. This provides a couple of luxuries. You'll have plenty of quiet time to fill out paperwork and write letters to home. You will have unrestricted time at a payphone to call family, friends, etc. And when it is lunch time, you'll be taken to the nearest caffeteria - which if you're lucky, means another meal without your own TI to speed you along or restrict your diet (more cheeseburgers and soda). Security paperwork turned in to 3 days of relaxation for me without a comment from my TI.
At the foot of your bed will be a laundry bag. "Laundry" will consist of a set of dirty clothes and a set of clean clothes you will wear the following day. You will always refer to the contents as "laundry" and if pressed, claim that it is all dirty clothes. In reality, you will have several sets of clothes in your drawer that you have taken paintakingly carefull time to fold in to absolutely perfect squares (yes, underwear too). You will not wear these clothes (and will launder them once when you first get them), although you will keep them dusted so they don't actually appear to not ever be worn. When you leave Basic... you'll feel kinda funny about unfolding and wearing them the first time.
I completely agree on the briefcase - especially if your techschool is of any real length. My briefcase is actually in my closet somewhere. I've had it for 10+ years. The spare flashlight can be a lifesaver... though I never had one, myself.
Military life is indeed very different. You won't understand just how different until you experience it first-hand. You'll end up with an entire language and cultural identity that'll have your friends scratching their head in confusion when you go home on leave. Its not for everyone. But it was one of the best things I did (and a considerably tough decission to leave).
Isn't it entirely possible to make a device that demonstrates some principle, but have no understanding of the underlying principle?
Even when the underlying principle of a technology is fairly well understood, and put to substantial use, there is no guarentee that the techology will survive the ravages of time. Concrete is a good example.
The Romans had perfected concrete and used the substance to great effect. Many of the surviving Roman ruins today are concrete structures. Yet at the fall of the Roman empire, the knowedge of concrete was largely lost. It took several hundred years to simply begin regaining that knowledge. It took over a THOUSAND more years for the technology to reach simular levels as when it was used by the Romans.
Keep in mind that this was a technology with very obvious and... concrete... examples to demonstrate that the technology had existed and would provide considerable bennefit if rediscovered. This is very unlike tales of "greek fire", ancient batteries, or a piece of clockwork burried at the bottom of the sea.
History has shown many times that knowledge can be a precarious thing. It is little wonder that sometimes mankind has to redisover past discoveries. And I would think it takes little away from those inventors to have discovered simular technology had existed, unknown to them, elsewhere on the face of the earth in a very different time.
Quite a few years ago, I was thumbing through some entertainment magazine and an interview with some TV type. I think they were some executive from FOX back when FOX was shocking everyone with its out-of-nowhere hipness. There was some comment about ethnic cultures becoming pop-culture and how "black culture" was the current trend. Then the executive noted that Japanese culture would be the next big thing.
If this really pisses you off, I suggest you stop taking this silly game so seriously and go find some amusement that you can actually have some control over.
Ahhh. But I'm not pissed off. I don't even play UO anymore. I really don't care about UO.
If they decide to change the game, you're welcome to leave, but complaining about how OSI and Dalroth won't pander to your desires is just whining of the worst sort. If this really pisses you off, I suggest you stop taking this silly game so seriously and go find some amusement that you can actually have some control over.
I am not demanding OSI or Dalroth pander to my desires. Nowhere in my post did I mention OSI (what part of "...my comments weren't directed towards the company" escapes you?). And nowhere did I demand Dalroth entertain me.
It might have been unfair to Dalroth to have latched on to this point from his post. So let me state this clearly: the point has nothing to do with OSI or Dalroth personally.
The entire point of my post was highlighting a certain kind of attitude that I've noticed in many of the online games that I play, or have played in the past. Be it Quake, Counterstrike, UO, a MUD... or any other online game. More and more often I've seen individuals who try to shortcut their way to a hollow victory.
They seem hell-bent on some form of "winning" rather than enjoying the challenge of the game. They seem to think that, for one reason or another, they should be able to play the game with some kind of special rules. They deserve the handicap - everyone else should be fodder.
That is the attitude I find annoying.
One side note - when OSI sells me a ticket to their party, I become a customer. If they change the party on me, I have a right to be upset. And they should listen. I might have a good point. Or it might be time for me to collect my ticket price that month and stop coming to the party.
There would be no censorship, just classification.
Yes, yes. But the whole idea of this "classification" is to censor traffic. Who says what belongs to what group? Take a look at the net filter software being sold "to protect the children". The scandal with these products is that the block list is often hidden and when they come to light, they are full of some very questionable classifications.
Classification is the first step to censorship.
.kids,.com,.foo these are just three examples the.kids is regulated by some UN council which determins content based on worldwide suggestion.
The UN has that kind of authority? How about the EU? How about the US Government? What happens when local ideals conflict? Say... publishing the text of Hitler's Mein Kampf which is legal in the US but very illegal in Germany?
Really? Then what are they for? To separate the 1337 from those who don't "get it"?
Consider other social activities... say, a party. A party is for having fun. You, like everyone else attending, go to the party to have fun. But everyone at that party is not there for your personal enjoyment.
Unless you're throwing one wierd party.
Gaming is like a party. At a good party, most people have fun. A few don't like the scene and leave. Sometimes there's somebody that threatens to ruin everyone's fun and they're forced to leave.
It seems some forget there are people behind the pixels in an online game.
If you wish to be Emperor of the party and have an entire game devoted entirely to your amusement, online gaming is not for you. Stick to the console.
Hate to break it to you, pal, but these games aren't there for "other's fun", either. They're there for a company to make money from.
And over the years, they have made quite a bit of money from "clowns" like me (note - I have a job). Will they make money out of people like Dalroth once he's bought his electronic tourism ticket and has seen all the sights?
It is indeed these business' right to make money off of their product, the game (though you're being a bit silly with the 'moral imperitive' bit). But the game industry is tough. Part of the reason MMORPG environments have caught attention is their ability to maintain staying power far longer than most of the catch-their-attention-quick tittles that grace the shelves of your local software boutique. That staying power is dependant on a community of players - players who apparently enjoy the game. Change the game in a way that annoys enough of those players and your community disolves. Loose that community and you end up just like all the other games being written off as a loss in the bargain bin.
Having said that, my comments weren't directed towards the company. It was directed towards the shortcut / instant-gratification attitude Dalroth expressed.
I hate to break it to you but it is a game with rules written by people, people who reserve the right to change them at any point for whatever reason.
I'm sorry - I missed where I was ranting about OSI changing their rules. Or Verant. Or anybody else who runs any other form of character-building-MMORPG game. I think you've mis-posted on the wrong conversation tree.;)
You must have not really played the game. If you start a new character, you spend a hell of a lot of time building them up just to walk outside of town without getting PK'd.
Yep. I played. And I fully understand that frustration. I was new to the game once too. And I fell victom to dude PKers.
It seems to me, if I was waiting with a bucket of cold water outside your door every morning, you might get a little pissed off after getting drenched time after time.
I'd have to wonder about someone who spent every morning getting drenched the same way every time. If it were me, I'd look for another way out of the house. I'd look at how the bucket trap worked. I'd see if anybody was sharing information on how to avoid the bucket. I'd talk to people who seem to be dry every morning. In short... I would learn. I would improve. And eventually, I'd get out of my house most mornings without getting wet.
The learning process, and to a certain extent the building of a character, are part of this kind of game.
In any case, when your WIFE (if you have one) is saying you're getting bitchy after playing UO, you might want to think about that REAL LIFE you have.
Oddly enough, its my wife that still plays. I also have friends that still play. And they occasionally drag me back in to the game for awhile. But its just doesn't manage to hold my attention like it used to.
This is a GREAT idea. For somebody like me who simply DOES NOT have the time to build a level 50 character in Everquest (I hate to say this, but I have a fucking job) and would like to actually SEE the world (I did enjoy playing it afterall) this is a GREAT option...
Ahhh yes. The instant gratification option. Also the "I have a life, unlike you loosers" excuse. Its much the same line you hear from those who run various game cheats.
If you don't want to play the game, don't play it. If the game requires some degree of time and experience and you are either unwilling or unable to meet that requirement, go find another game to play.
Multiplayer games are not there for your own personal ammusement. Don't screw with other's fun. Or put another way... if you want to play the game, PLAY THE GAME. Stop whining and looking for a shortcut.
Hmmm. I'll have to play with these features a bit more out of curiosity.
I find public folders more of a half-hearted stab at groupware. I think I see what you're saying about it replacing a NAS system. But I find it hard to completely swallow.;) I'll chat up my local Exchange admins a bit more on the subject.
Still. Public folders are easily replaced. Arguably with better technology.
Forms still sounds like fluff. And although the journal might be a kind of cool feature to play around with, it still sounds like a feature that just isn't usefull to most people. Its something else I'll have to poke around my environment and see if I can't find users of these features.
I realize that many, myself included believes the net should be completely free from censorship. After growing up a little and having children and responsibilities I think that this may not be the case.
I've always believed in personal freedom and an Internet free of censorship too. I grew up. I started a family. I served in my country's military. I traveled a few areas of the world. And I saw what it is like when a culture embraces censorship.
And I can't disagree with you more. Your tiered system begins falls clearly in to the classic problem of censorship - who decides what goes where. By who's authority? By who's standards? And then... at what cost?
Worried about what your kids are doing? Be involved in their activities. Worried about what your employees are doing? Why? Are they failing to meet their expected performance? And if their performance is suffering - does it really matter if its because they spend all morning reading a newspaper, chatting with coworkers, or browsing the web?
If you want AOL - subscribe to AOL. Leave the Internet alone.
What if the US Calvary charged in to save the besieged settlers and instead of breathless thanks, they were greeted by a veteran settlers who simply replied "Thanks. We've got it covered."
In most of the traditional forms of security, the US Government tends to lead in expertise. The Government understands law. It understands espionage, counter-espionage and intelligence. It understands military issues. And it understands police forces. But information security is something new. It has lagged behind the civilian sector in this field. And no amount of wild hyperbole or cold-war era terminology will help.
This new policy simply demonstrates the issue even more. There is nothing new here. It is all very standard concepts from an industry that has been on the "front lines" of infosec for decades before the US Government decided to take an interest. By now, they have things fairly well covered.
That's not to say the US Government can't be of any help. They can add an air of legitimacy toward infosec issues for those who are foolish enough to ignore the current situation without a nod from the Government. They can support existing infosec infrastructure (and ensure that those programs they already run remain running). They can support further development of security applications and research.
It won't work with Exchange 5.5, it doesn't support forms, public folders, journals, or a heap of other things.
I always thought that the "killer app" for Exchange / Outlook was scheduling. That bit was done right.
Everything else looks like nice little addons - but who actually uses them? I've used public folders (and I know orgs in my center use them). But it seems to be something that was used "because it was there" more than it being a killer feature. I don't know anybody who uses journals or forms. In other words, all these other features seem far from compelling. And, in fact, may be easily replaced by other technologies.
Wait until Mom and Dad have to simply "open VI and edit lines out" to make something simple work.
Yes and no. Its a valid point, but not as clever a point as some Linux critics might think.
First, assuming you must use a text editor, there are more user-friendly editors out there. Many that are included as a standard install in many default distros. Simple default GUI editors will also work fine.
Secondly, there are some decent GUI configuration managers included on various distros. They'll handle the simple configs most home users will need to deal with - and handle it well. Mom and Dad may never have to know their configurations are stored as simple text files.
Finally, if Mom and Dad have ran in to a serious issue, they are beyond the point of phone tech support no matter what OS they're using. Sure. They'll try. But ultimately they're in for a good deal of frustration. Its much less painful for the end user, and less milage on their local friendly helpdesk, if they simply hire in an expert to handle the problem.
How often Mom and Dad end up in the third situation may or may not be an issue with their OS of choice.
Slashdot Mirror
But to handle the GUI aspects of
Kind of a vicious little circle, isn't it?
Very true - and a good point. But it ignores one of the more underlying issues. Outlook is fundamentally flawed.
One of the most infamous "email viruses" was the Good Times Virus. It was the first email virus to be more social than technical - the warning message being relayed time and time again being more a virus than what it supposedly warned against. Good Times played on the fears of a vast body of new users who weren't aware of how email worked. It warned against a virus that spread by messages entitled "Good Times" and that reading the message did harm to the user's system (if not spread the virus). At the time, the idea that simply reading a message was enough to activate malicious code was preposterous.
Outlook has made this concept a reality.
But this is not a reference to this one specific vulnerability. Outlook has been the subject of numerous previous vulnerabilities - many of which can be exploited by an email that is viewed either by opening the message or via the message preview panel. Sure, they have been patched too. But the same concept keeps surfacing.
This doesn't even touch on how Outlook tends to hide the nature of file attachments, allowing malicious code to disguise code to appear as benign data. Microsoft's solution was not to make the nature of file attachments more defined... but to strip out "dangerous" types. Thus, they completely ignored the actual issue. While this is a minor point... it does show the mindset that has created an email client rife with security problems.
More good advice. It has been said that bits don't rot. Software does not decay. But we have since found that over time, we discover mistakes in the creation of software. Thus we are faced with having to maintain the digital system with as much dedication as a mechanical system.
But again, this misses an important point.
Sometimes systems are created that have fundamental flaws. No matter how well maintained, these systems will always fail. And while even the best systems may fail eventually, these flawed systems will fail in spectacularly bad ways.
It is wise to advocate constant maintenance. But it is also just as worthwhile to point out systems that are flawed.
And Outlook IS flawed.
And this would be... because Slashcode is commonly bunded with Linux? Wait. No. It isn't. Huh.
I suspect many end users are more confused about the issue than even that.
Back when the PS2 came out, there was a number of scams popping up to feed the buying frenzy (and short supply) for the devices. I was rather amazed at how often people cited a Verisign certificate from a questionable website as verification that the business was legitimate. Granted - it could have been a kind of astroturf compaign by the scammers to further a false sense of legitimacy. But years of dealing with end-user issues has me believing that these were genuine users confused as to what a certificate does, and does not, mean.
And by the same token, one should not withhold support from the US Government's prosecution of Microsoft just because one likes Microsoft.
Now that we have that minor little point sewen up... mind if we remain focused on the topic at hand?
Thanks for the insight... it sounds like a very nice environment you have. However, this simply underscores the problem.
It has been my experience, reflected by the popularity of cultural icons like Office Space and Dilbert, that organizations (both corporate and US Government) tend not to have such a wealth of workspace. The average employee does not get their own office space. They're lucky if they get their own cube. Furthermore, management seems eager to explore ways to further share a shared workspace - witness the interest in "hoteling".
This leads to two points. First, sound is more a disruptive entity than enhancement of this shared space. Secondly, a business is not likely to invest in the extra money for a good set of surround sound speakers to further that disruption.
Scoffing at Microsoft's claims that surround sound will be an important part of the office is not simply dismissing the point out of hand. It is recognizing the current environment. And it might further question whether Microsoft's visionaries are too removed from the reality of that current environment.
The story here is that Apple is releasing some technology Open Source. Since Open Source is an issue of licensing... you'll have to forgive everyone for naturally assuming the license in question might actually be both on-topic and important.
Wow. Great advice. I'd add a few bits...
Do bring a large set of nail-clippers with you (not scissors, not a pocketknife - these will be considered dangerous and locked away). When you make it to your new bunk, you'll be faced with a lock still sealed in its stiff plastic packaging. You'll be tasked to open that puppy up quick while the TI paces around looking for someone having trouble with the task. Take your nail-clippers and clip a cut in to the side of the packaging. It'll make ripping open the package quick and easy.
Later on, those nail-clippers will come in handy while you're out and about and you notice a loose string you missed on your new BDUs. Strings seem to GROW on the things. And you don't want anybody to find one dangling off'a you. Take those nail-clippers everywhere with you except when you're out for PC.
KP is great. You loose some sleep to do it, but the work is stress-free. Plus you get to have meals unrushed or supervised by your TI. That usually means access to luxury foods like a cheeseburger, icecream, and soda. While it doesn't sounds like a big deal right now, consider that life is very different once you're there. You will come to consider a "patio break" (4 mins to spend your own money on a vending machine and wolf down some junkfood or possibly manage a call from a payphone) a great luxury.
If you do get KP, apply a thick layer of unbuffed shoe polish over your boots. It'll help protect the shine you've labored to create from MOST of the abuse your boots will get doing KP grunt work. A simple buffing will return your boots to most of their previous glory. A mirror-like shine can be accomplished with regular Kiwi, cottonballs, and a tiny bit of water (creme polish can add a nice touch but you want a good base first). Alchohol strips the polish - don't do that unless you've got a good reason to.
If you are required to fill out security background check paperwork, do not rush it. This paperwork tends to go in to considerable detail and you aren't expected to have all the required information available right away. Furthermore, only a few of your flight will need to do this and it'll come at a time in your training where you're trusted enough to go out on your own without TI supervision. This provides a couple of luxuries. You'll have plenty of quiet time to fill out paperwork and write letters to home. You will have unrestricted time at a payphone to call family, friends, etc. And when it is lunch time, you'll be taken to the nearest caffeteria - which if you're lucky, means another meal without your own TI to speed you along or restrict your diet (more cheeseburgers and soda). Security paperwork turned in to 3 days of relaxation for me without a comment from my TI.
At the foot of your bed will be a laundry bag. "Laundry" will consist of a set of dirty clothes and a set of clean clothes you will wear the following day. You will always refer to the contents as "laundry" and if pressed, claim that it is all dirty clothes. In reality, you will have several sets of clothes in your drawer that you have taken paintakingly carefull time to fold in to absolutely perfect squares (yes, underwear too). You will not wear these clothes (and will launder them once when you first get them), although you will keep them dusted so they don't actually appear to not ever be worn. When you leave Basic... you'll feel kinda funny about unfolding and wearing them the first time.
I completely agree on the briefcase - especially if your techschool is of any real length. My briefcase is actually in my closet somewhere. I've had it for 10+ years. The spare flashlight can be a lifesaver... though I never had one, myself.
Military life is indeed very different. You won't understand just how different until you experience it first-hand. You'll end up with an entire language and cultural identity that'll have your friends scratching their head in confusion when you go home on leave. Its not for everyone. But it was one of the best things I did (and a considerably tough decission to leave).
Even when the underlying principle of a technology is fairly well understood, and put to substantial use, there is no guarentee that the techology will survive the ravages of time. Concrete is a good example.
The Romans had perfected concrete and used the substance to great effect. Many of the surviving Roman ruins today are concrete structures. Yet at the fall of the Roman empire, the knowedge of concrete was largely lost. It took several hundred years to simply begin regaining that knowledge. It took over a THOUSAND more years for the technology to reach simular levels as when it was used by the Romans.
Keep in mind that this was a technology with very obvious and... concrete... examples to demonstrate that the technology had existed and would provide considerable bennefit if rediscovered. This is very unlike tales of "greek fire", ancient batteries, or a piece of clockwork burried at the bottom of the sea.
History has shown many times that knowledge can be a precarious thing. It is little wonder that sometimes mankind has to redisover past discoveries. And I would think it takes little away from those inventors to have discovered simular technology had existed, unknown to them, elsewhere on the face of the earth in a very different time.
...nor does the former yugoslav republic really have any historical claim to call itself Macedonia, from what I understand.
Quite a few years ago, I was thumbing through some entertainment magazine and an interview with some TV type. I think they were some executive from FOX back when FOX was shocking everyone with its out-of-nowhere hipness. There was some comment about ethnic cultures becoming pop-culture and how "black culture" was the current trend. Then the executive noted that Japanese culture would be the next big thing.
Ahhh. But I'm not pissed off. I don't even play UO anymore. I really don't care about UO.
I am not demanding OSI or Dalroth pander to my desires. Nowhere in my post did I mention OSI (what part of "...my comments weren't directed towards the company" escapes you?). And nowhere did I demand Dalroth entertain me.
It might have been unfair to Dalroth to have latched on to this point from his post. So let me state this clearly: the point has nothing to do with OSI or Dalroth personally.
The entire point of my post was highlighting a certain kind of attitude that I've noticed in many of the online games that I play, or have played in the past. Be it Quake, Counterstrike, UO, a MUD... or any other online game. More and more often I've seen individuals who try to shortcut their way to a hollow victory.
They seem hell-bent on some form of "winning" rather than enjoying the challenge of the game. They seem to think that, for one reason or another, they should be able to play the game with some kind of special rules. They deserve the handicap - everyone else should be fodder.
That is the attitude I find annoying.
One side note - when OSI sells me a ticket to their party, I become a customer. If they change the party on me, I have a right to be upset. And they should listen. I might have a good point. Or it might be time for me to collect my ticket price that month and stop coming to the party.
Yes, yes. But the whole idea of this "classification" is to censor traffic. Who says what belongs to what group? Take a look at the net filter software being sold "to protect the children". The scandal with these products is that the block list is often hidden and when they come to light, they are full of some very questionable classifications.
Classification is the first step to censorship.
The UN has that kind of authority? How about the EU? How about the US Government? What happens when local ideals conflict? Say... publishing the text of Hitler's Mein Kampf which is legal in the US but very illegal in Germany?
I see your point. And I find it flawed.
Consider other social activities... say, a party. A party is for having fun. You, like everyone else attending, go to the party to have fun. But everyone at that party is not there for your personal enjoyment.
Unless you're throwing one wierd party.
Gaming is like a party. At a good party, most people have fun. A few don't like the scene and leave. Sometimes there's somebody that threatens to ruin everyone's fun and they're forced to leave.
It seems some forget there are people behind the pixels in an online game.
If you wish to be Emperor of the party and have an entire game devoted entirely to your amusement, online gaming is not for you. Stick to the console.
And over the years, they have made quite a bit of money from "clowns" like me (note - I have a job). Will they make money out of people like Dalroth once he's bought his electronic tourism ticket and has seen all the sights?
It is indeed these business' right to make money off of their product, the game (though you're being a bit silly with the 'moral imperitive' bit). But the game industry is tough. Part of the reason MMORPG environments have caught attention is their ability to maintain staying power far longer than most of the catch-their-attention-quick tittles that grace the shelves of your local software boutique. That staying power is dependant on a community of players - players who apparently enjoy the game. Change the game in a way that annoys enough of those players and your community disolves. Loose that community and you end up just like all the other games being written off as a loss in the bargain bin.
Having said that, my comments weren't directed towards the company. It was directed towards the shortcut / instant-gratification attitude Dalroth expressed.
I'm sorry - I missed where I was ranting about OSI changing their rules. Or Verant. Or anybody else who runs any other form of character-building-MMORPG game. I think you've mis-posted on the wrong conversation tree.
Yep. I played. And I fully understand that frustration. I was new to the game once too. And I fell victom to dude PKers.
I'd have to wonder about someone who spent every morning getting drenched the same way every time. If it were me, I'd look for another way out of the house. I'd look at how the bucket trap worked. I'd see if anybody was sharing information on how to avoid the bucket. I'd talk to people who seem to be dry every morning. In short... I would learn. I would improve. And eventually, I'd get out of my house most mornings without getting wet.
The learning process, and to a certain extent the building of a character, are part of this kind of game.
Oddly enough, its my wife that still plays. I also have friends that still play. And they occasionally drag me back in to the game for awhile. But its just doesn't manage to hold my attention like it used to.
Ahhh yes. The instant gratification option. Also the "I have a life, unlike you loosers" excuse. Its much the same line you hear from those who run various game cheats.
If you don't want to play the game, don't play it. If the game requires some degree of time and experience and you are either unwilling or unable to meet that requirement, go find another game to play.
Multiplayer games are not there for your own personal ammusement. Don't screw with other's fun. Or put another way... if you want to play the game, PLAY THE GAME. Stop whining and looking for a shortcut.
Hmmm. I'll have to play with these features a bit more out of curiosity.
;) I'll chat up my local Exchange admins a bit more on the subject.
I find public folders more of a half-hearted stab at groupware. I think I see what you're saying about it replacing a NAS system. But I find it hard to completely swallow.
Still. Public folders are easily replaced. Arguably with better technology.
Forms still sounds like fluff. And although the journal might be a kind of cool feature to play around with, it still sounds like a feature that just isn't usefull to most people. Its something else I'll have to poke around my environment and see if I can't find users of these features.
I've always believed in personal freedom and an Internet free of censorship too. I grew up. I started a family. I served in my country's military. I traveled a few areas of the world. And I saw what it is like when a culture embraces censorship.
And I can't disagree with you more. Your tiered system begins falls clearly in to the classic problem of censorship - who decides what goes where. By who's authority? By who's standards? And then... at what cost?
Worried about what your kids are doing? Be involved in their activities. Worried about what your employees are doing? Why? Are they failing to meet their expected performance? And if their performance is suffering - does it really matter if its because they spend all morning reading a newspaper, chatting with coworkers, or browsing the web?
If you want AOL - subscribe to AOL. Leave the Internet alone.
Oh. And nice troll.
What if the US Calvary charged in to save the besieged settlers and instead of breathless thanks, they were greeted by a veteran settlers who simply replied "Thanks. We've got it covered."
In most of the traditional forms of security, the US Government tends to lead in expertise. The Government understands law. It understands espionage, counter-espionage and intelligence. It understands military issues. And it understands police forces. But information security is something new. It has lagged behind the civilian sector in this field. And no amount of wild hyperbole or cold-war era terminology will help.
This new policy simply demonstrates the issue even more. There is nothing new here. It is all very standard concepts from an industry that has been on the "front lines" of infosec for decades before the US Government decided to take an interest. By now, they have things fairly well covered.
That's not to say the US Government can't be of any help. They can add an air of legitimacy toward infosec issues for those who are foolish enough to ignore the current situation without a nod from the Government. They can support existing infosec infrastructure (and ensure that those programs they already run remain running). They can support further development of security applications and research.
But they can't lead the charge.
I always thought that the "killer app" for Exchange / Outlook was scheduling. That bit was done right.
Everything else looks like nice little addons - but who actually uses them? I've used public folders (and I know orgs in my center use them). But it seems to be something that was used "because it was there" more than it being a killer feature. I don't know anybody who uses journals or forms. In other words, all these other features seem far from compelling. And, in fact, may be easily replaced by other technologies.
If it weren't for scheduling.
Yes and no. Its a valid point, but not as clever a point as some Linux critics might think.
First, assuming you must use a text editor, there are more user-friendly editors out there. Many that are included as a standard install in many default distros. Simple default GUI editors will also work fine.
Secondly, there are some decent GUI configuration managers included on various distros. They'll handle the simple configs most home users will need to deal with - and handle it well. Mom and Dad may never have to know their configurations are stored as simple text files.
Finally, if Mom and Dad have ran in to a serious issue, they are beyond the point of phone tech support no matter what OS they're using. Sure. They'll try. But ultimately they're in for a good deal of frustration. Its much less painful for the end user, and less milage on their local friendly helpdesk, if they simply hire in an expert to handle the problem.
How often Mom and Dad end up in the third situation may or may not be an issue with their OS of choice.
If it lands on your property... doesn't that give you salvage rights?
But then... what you're doing is going after the technology, not the pirates. Again.