Don't forget that the vast majority of people working for Microsoft don't code.
Also, that their corporate culture has been known to be sucky for almost 2 decades (hint: nobody likes being shuted at).
And that you can make as much or more money elsewhere (Microsoft stock options are no longer a real incentive)
You can enjoy more autonomy at almost any other company
People want to have a life outside of work (follow-up to #2)
Its more fun being a larger part of a small project than a faceless cog in a large project (follow-up to #4)
A lot of the interesting stuff just isn't being done by Microsoft
Clueless VPs spouting bullshit:
Corporate Vice President of Development Ben Fathi is already discussing features for the next OS: "We're going to look at a fundamental piece of enabling technology. Maybe its hypervisors, I don't know what it is... Maybe it's a new user interface paradigm for consumers. It's too early for me to talk about it... But over the next few months I think you're going to start hearing more and more."
A perfect example of someone who should be kept locked away from the media until they have something concrete to say.
Windows and Microsoft aren't seen as being cool any more, and haven't been for a decade.
Who wants to be associated with crap products that are responsible for most of the zombies/worms/viruses?
I mean, really... Ben Fathi is supposed to be the guy overseeing everything, and he says "I don't know what it is" about what's next, and this is news????
Ben Fathi serves as corporate vice president of development for the Windows Core Operating System Division (COSD) at Microsoft Corp. He oversees the development of core components of Microsoft Windows, including the kernel, and technologies associated with security, networking, virtualization, setup and deployment.
Fathi previously served as corporate vice president of the Security Technology Unit (STU), where he was responsible for delivery of all core security technologies, including the authentication, authorization and audit capabilities (AAA) of Microsoft products; Windows Rights Management Services (RMS); BitLocker drive encryption; and anti-virus, anti-spyware and network security protocols. Fathi also managed the Security Engineering and Communications team, the Security Response Center and the Security Outreach team, all of which focus on helping protect customers from online security threats.
So, he says he doesn't know what the next big thing in Windows is going to be... here's a suggestion - new graphics and artwork to make it look more like OSX, a new startup sound that cost a billion instead of a few measly million to "enhance the user experience some more", a Duke Nukem Forever interactive screen-saver, and ribbons with dropdowns with flyouts with popups with menus, so that the user has at least 10 different ways to get to any particular option. And not one, not 2, but FOUR new programming languages - D minus (to replace C sharp), DOT NOT (a.net replacement that is ultra secure by refusing to do ANYTHING), J-Script/XML+J-Script/CSS for those who want to continue to build non-standard web sites, as well as Internet Explorer 9 - will only allow you to visit microsoft-signed sites, and a revamped cmd.exe and windows kernel that will only allow access to 640k of ram per process so that no application can ever be a resource hog. This last spec will be known as "Microsoft Dynacode Operating System 1", or MS-DOS 1.0. Plans call for an optional text interface sometime by 2012, and the removal of mouse support by 2015, because they can sell ms keyboards for more than mice.
Oh, and their engineering slogan will be "Windows ain't done until Wine won't run."
"After Windows is finished, the dev team proceeds to work on the next version, while a team called Windows Sustained Engineering takes over the released version."
And therein lies the problem. There is zero incentive to do it right the first time. After all, once its' out the door, its someone else's problem.
The people who actually wrote it should be responsible for fixing it - not writing the next-gen fuckup.
"Seeds stay fertile only for a limited time. You can stretch that somewhat by keeping them frozen - provided that the particular seeds can survive freezing, of course. But short of cryonic preservation (after perfusing them with cryoprotectants) you're not going to get them to last more than a few years."
At first, I thought from the heading "convert trash to electricity" that the military had put Britney Spears and Kevin Federline on bicycles with generators, and they were merrily pedalling away. But, nooo, you had to go and spoil it.
No, that's their next headline - "Purdue Makes Electricity To Trash Generator"
This way, they can have a closed-loop system when they send Bush to Mars.
Actually, its because there's no such country as "America." There's the continents of North America (Canada, US, Mexico), South America, and that part where they join - Central America. Mexicans are just as much "Americans" as are USians, or Brazilians, or Argentinians.
Even your list goes well beyond what many people think of when they think "Internet."
o IRC, no e-mail, no IM, no social networking, no WWW, no online games, no gopher, no browsing the internet at the library, no internet anything over the cellphone,... Skype, Ventrillio or x-box live,
There are a lot of people who still think "Internet" means "Internet Explorer"
Quick question to put it all into context: Can you even buy a cell phone or laptop that *doesn't* have internet connectivity (browser, email, IM, etc) built in? The internet is getting hard to avoid nowadays...
"No, because you don't get to be a judge if you're an autistic fucktard with an overly literal interpretation of everything that lands in your docket. Grow the fuck up."
This is an American court we're talking about. You can be a judge in the US with NO special qualifications beyond some well-connected friends.
Justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the courts of appeals and the district courts, and judges of the Court of International Trade, are appointed under Article III of the Constitution by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate. Article III judges are appointed for life, and they can only be removed through the impeachment process. Although there are no special qualifications to become a judge of these courts, those who are nominated are typically very accomplished private or government attorneys, judges in state courts, magistrate judges or bankruptcy judges, or law professors. The judiciary plays no role in the nomination or confirmation process.
So even YOU could in theory become a judge. Just brown-nose Mr. Chimp.
Try again. The article was quite clear - this is a ban from accessing the Internet, not the web.
and he is banned from accessing the internet for personal reasons
The Internet is much more than just a bunch of www addresses.
As for those who say its safe to ignore what was written because it wasn't the "real intent of the judge" - consider all the people who are convicted of assault with a deadly weapon because they used running shoes (the "deadly weapon") to kick someone.
http://www.legalwritingprep.com/Cases/Burglary/Mum mey.htm
n Commonwealth v. Polydores (1987), 24 Mass.App.Ct. 923, 507 N.E.2d 775, rev. denied, (1987) 400 Mass. 1103, 509 N.E.2d 1202, the defendant, wearing running shoes, kicked the victim repeatedly, causing a fractured nose, black eyes and bruises. The court held that the evidence at trial was sufficient to support a conviction of assault with a dangerous weapon. In State v. Munoz (La.Ct.App.1991), 575 So.2d 848, cert. denied, (La.1991), 577 So.2d 1009, the defendant kicked the victim while wearing tennis shoes, causing serious injuries. The tennis shoes qualified as a dangerous weapon within the meaning of the aggravated battery statute.
Kicking with a tennis shoe clad foot presents a question for the jury whether Defendant employed a weapon, under all the circumstances surrounding the incident. See e.g. Hale, 292 N.W.2d at 205; Johnson, 230 So.2d at 811; Polydores, 507 N.E.2d at 776. To rule that a tennis shoe is not a weapon as a matter of law would deprive the jury of this important fact-finding function. The inquiry here is not whether the tennis shoe is a weapon per se, but whether, under the circumstances of the assault and the manner in which it was used, it was a weapon. Accordingly, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the ordinarily harmless footwear was used in such a way that rendered it readily capable of producing death or serious bodily injury.
(872) This holding is consistent with our prior decisions addressing weapons. In State v. Evans (1991), 247 Mont. 218, 806 P.2d 512, we affirmed the jury finding that a stun gun was a weapon. In State v. Howard (1981), 195 Mont. 400, 637 P.2d 15, we upheld a finding that pantyhose was a weapon where it was used to strangle the victim. In State v. Klemann (1981), 194 Mont. 117, 634 P.2d 632, a glass ashtray was properly found to be a weapon, when the victim was struck on the head with it repeatedly. In (279) State v. Matson (1987), 227 Mont. 36, 736 P.2d 971, a pellet gun qualified as a weapon when the defendant pointed it at the victims and threatened them.
Defendant refers to State v. Deshner (1977), 175 Mont. 175, 573 P.2d 172, in urging us to declare that a tennis shoe is not a weapon. In that case, the victim was struck in the face with a projectile while he was in his car. He testified that he was not aware of exactly what had hit him and was not sure if the projectile had been propelled by a slingshot; nor did he know who flung the projectile at him. The defendant stated that he had shot at the victim's car, but was not sure that he had actually struck the victim. No other witnesses were called to show that the victim had been struck by a projectile fired from a slingshot or that defendant had fired a projectile at the victim, even though there were two other individuals in the victim's car at the time of the incident. Neither the slingshot nor the projectile was introduced into evidence. The record was barren of any testimony that the slingshot- projectile combination was in fact a weapon capable of producing death or bodily injury, and the victim suffered only a bruise. We held that the testimony when taken as a whole failed to prove that the assault was committed with a weapon "capable of being used to produce death or serious bodily injury." Deshner, 573 P.2d at 174.
A LOT of voice traffic is carried, at least in part, over the internet. The only way he can be banned from the internet is if he never, among other things, uses a phone (landline OR cellphone).
It also means being banned from certain fast food drive-through windows, where the person who says "can I take your order" is actually sitting in a center in another state.
It also means not using a bank ATM card.
Or digital cable TV.
Or the self-serve scanners at the local Wallyworld, since they're connected to a local server, which is in turn connected to the net at large.
Or any pre-paid gift card/cash card, since they're validated via the net.
Or a speedpass to pay for his gas. Same problem - accessing the net to validate.
The "right to privacy" doesn't extend to evidence admitted in open court.
This is necessary to uphold the integrity of the courts. Otherwise, people won't know the basis on which a finding of guilt or innocence was made, leading to all sorts of accusations of favoritism and backroom deals, bribes, etc.
The BSA is concerned with issues of copyright infringement, not EULA violations.
Those copyright infringements are EULA violations, last I heard... that's why the BSA does audits on the # of copies, etc. but nowadays insists that you need more than just sales receipts and/or original media and keys.
What is software piracy? Like many politically charged phrases, the definition of software piracy is influenced by your financial interests and your viewpoint. The Business Software Alliance defines software piracy as:"The illegal use and/or distribution of software protected under intellectual property laws."
The Business Software Alliance specifically includes unintentional business overuse in its definition of software piracy as follows:
"End-user piracy occurs when an individual or organization reproduces and/or uses unlicensed copies of software for its operations."
Armed with this definition of software piracy, the Business Software Alliance pursues global "anti-piracy" campaigns that include the targeting of many small to medium sized companies. The Business Software Alliance accuses these companies of engaging in software piracy and threatens them with litigation unless they voluntarily undergo a self audit. In my experience, the vast majority of the companies targeted by the Business Software Alliance are not pirates under anyone's definition, they have merely failed to maintain financial records related to software purchases that no one, including the software companies, ever told them they were required to keep. In addition, the targets of Business Software Alliance audits are not pirates because they never intended to violate software licenses or copyright laws.
Scott & Scott's Definition of Software Piracy
"Software Piracy is the distribution of counterfeit software and/or use or distribution of authentic software constituting the intentional violation of intellectual property laws."
Our definition of software piracy differs from that used by the Business Software Alliance in that our definition adds emphasis to counterfeiting and expressly excludes the unintentional over deployment of software by end users. Piracy implies theft which under the law requires intent. Any definition of software piracy that includes unintentional over deployment should be rejected. The definition used by the software industry and the Business Software Alliance improperly characterizes software owners as thieves because they have been, at most, negligent in the management of their software assets and documents.
Lost your license key, but still have your original CD and sales receipt? Not good enough for the BSA. Read all the gripes that businesses have about having to over-buy "just in case" the BSA "requests" an audit.
I think I speak for all of us when I say you need to work on your Soviet-Russia jokes....
In Soviet Russia, joke works on YOU!
Just as in Microsoft Amerika, Windows breaks YOU!
Seriously, Microsoft wanted a "centrally-planned" soviet-style information economy, with them as the central planning commission and "Gates-keeper." These emails are just one (limited) view into that world.
I'm sorry, but suggesting that Microsoft could sue users is one of the most absurd things I've read this morning
Bullshit - Microsoft is one of the biggest funders of the BSA - and I don't mean the "Boy Scouts of America". They threaten their customers with audits all the time.
A legal system who shows so little self respect, letting these leaks happen, not investigating prosectuing and harshly punishing the source of such leaks, cannot expect others to respect it.
These aren't "illegal leaks" - they're evidence that has been made public - and rightfully so - because justice must not only be done, but seen to be done. Don't expect to be able to keep illegal anti-competitive activities secret because of some non-existent "corporate right to privacy."
Actually, my semester's textbooks total was more than a cost of a low level laptop. Plus, a gadget to read books would cost less than a laptop.
... and you would still have had to pay for your eTextBooks (the content). And, unlike your eTextBooks, you can sell your textbooks at the end of the semester (no DRM). In many cases, books are better. Way better.
Gee, I never saw any EULA... never had to click on any click-thru... and besides, its not like many of us don't have multiple legit copies of Windows that we don't do anything with anymore except for the odd game...
Slashdot Mirror
"The rumours of my death are somewhat exaggerated."
Clippy is alive and well - he's been ported to linux so that we can hate him too ...
http://vigor.sourceforge.net/screenshots/
10 reasons
A perfect example of someone who should be kept locked away from the media until they have something concrete to say.
I mean, really ... Ben Fathi is supposed to be the guy overseeing everything, and he says "I don't know what it is" about what's next, and this is news????
So, he says he doesn't know what the next big thing in Windows is going to be ... here's a suggestion - new graphics and artwork to make it look more like OSX, a new startup sound that cost a billion instead of a few measly million to "enhance the user experience some more", a Duke Nukem Forever interactive screen-saver, and ribbons with dropdowns with flyouts with popups with menus, so that the user has at least 10 different ways to get to any particular option. And not one, not 2, but FOUR new programming languages - D minus (to replace C sharp), DOT NOT (a .net replacement that is ultra secure by refusing to do ANYTHING), J-Script/XML+J-Script/CSS for those who want to continue to build non-standard web sites, as well as Internet Explorer 9 - will only allow you to visit microsoft-signed sites, and a revamped cmd.exe and windows kernel that will only allow access to 640k of ram per process so that no application can ever be a resource hog. This last spec will be known as "Microsoft Dynacode Operating System 1", or MS-DOS 1.0. Plans call for an optional text interface sometime by 2012, and the removal of mouse support by 2015, because they can sell ms keyboards for more than mice.
Oh, and their engineering slogan will be "Windows ain't done until Wine won't run."
"After Windows is finished, the dev team proceeds to work on the next version, while a team called Windows Sustained Engineering takes over the released version."
And therein lies the problem. There is zero incentive to do it right the first time. After all, once its' out the door, its someone else's problem.
The people who actually wrote it should be responsible for fixing it - not writing the next-gen fuckup.
"Seeds stay fertile only for a limited time. You can stretch that somewhat by keeping them frozen - provided that the particular seeds can survive freezing, of course. But short of cryonic preservation (after perfusing them with cryoprotectants) you're not going to get them to last more than a few years."
Some seeds can go over 1,000 years and still germinate. The current confirmed record (carbon dating) is 2,000 years http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed#Oldest_viable_se eds.
Seeds are tough. Here's a 120-year experiment: http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/content/abstract/89/8/12 85
No, that's their next headline - "Purdue Makes Electricity To Trash Generator"
This way, they can have a closed-loop system when they send Bush to Mars.
Actually, its because there's no such country as "America." There's the continents of North America (Canada, US, Mexico), South America, and that part where they join - Central America. Mexicans are just as much "Americans" as are USians, or Brazilians, or Argentinians.
"Hehe .. the French weren't hot about it because it wasn't in their fucking interest."
Maybe the french weren't hot about it because:
Or you could look at the latest polls http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/client/act_dsp_pdf.cf m?name=mr070122-2topline.pdf&id=3334
The majority of the US doesn't like Bush. It's not a "French thing." Get over it.
Even your list goes well beyond what many people think of when they think "Internet."
There are a lot of people who still think "Internet" means "Internet Explorer"
Quick question to put it all into context: Can you even buy a cell phone or laptop that *doesn't* have internet connectivity (browser, email, IM, etc) built in? The internet is getting hard to avoid nowadays ...
"No, because you don't get to be a judge if you're an autistic fucktard with an overly literal interpretation of everything that lands in your docket. Grow the fuck up."
This is an American court we're talking about. You can be a judge in the US with NO special qualifications beyond some well-connected friends.
http://www.uscourts.gov/understand03/content_5_0.h tml
So even YOU could in theory become a judge. Just brown-nose Mr. Chimp.
"The restitution was probably the cost of patching the vulnerability."
The vulnerability was in Internet Explorer and Opera, not in myspace code. Browsers aren't supposed to execute javascript found in css statements.
http://www.quirksmode.org/css/javascript.html
FYI, it doesn't work in Opera/linux or Internet Explorer 6/linux. As for Windows, I wouldn't know ...
"Can he call up a friend and ask them to Google something, and read back the results?"
Not if he or his friend is using VoIP :-)
Seriously, a ban on all net access would have been no big deal 20 years ago ... today its far-reaching.
Try again. The article was quite clear - this is a ban from accessing the Internet, not the web.
The Internet is much more than just a bunch of www addresses.
As for those who say its safe to ignore what was written because it wasn't the "real intent of the judge" - consider all the people who are convicted of assault with a deadly weapon because they used running shoes (the "deadly weapon") to kick someone. http://www.legalwritingprep.com/Cases/Burglary/Mum mey.htm
In the same vein ... he uses computers, they use the internet.
Think the judge would buy it?
A LOT of voice traffic is carried, at least in part, over the internet. The only way he can be banned from the internet is if he never, among other things, uses a phone (landline OR cellphone).
It also means being banned from certain fast food drive-through windows, where the person who says "can I take your order" is actually sitting in a center in another state.
It also means not using a bank ATM card.
Or digital cable TV.
Or the self-serve scanners at the local Wallyworld, since they're connected to a local server, which is in turn connected to the net at large.
Or any pre-paid gift card/cash card, since they're validated via the net.
Or a speedpass to pay for his gas. Same problem - accessing the net to validate.
So, if he gets a job writing spam, is he legal?
"Stop writing malicious scripts."
The whole "It takes a thief to catch a thief" thing. Hey, it worked for Kevin Mitnick ...
Jack Thompson - this is your future!
The "right to privacy" doesn't extend to evidence admitted in open court.
This is necessary to uphold the integrity of the courts. Otherwise, people won't know the basis on which a finding of guilt or innocence was made, leading to all sorts of accusations of favoritism and backroom deals, bribes, etc.
http://blawg.bsadefense.com/
Lost your license key, but still have your original CD and sales receipt? Not good enough for the BSA. Read all the gripes that businesses have about having to over-buy "just in case" the BSA "requests" an audit.
In Soviet Russia, joke works on YOU!
Just as in Microsoft Amerika, Windows breaks YOU!
Seriously, Microsoft wanted a "centrally-planned" soviet-style information economy, with them as the central planning commission and "Gates-keeper." These emails are just one (limited) view into that world.
It was originally attorneys-only.
Subsequent litigation .... different case .... documents admitted into evidence .... court ruled they can be made public in this instance.
Its the same as the original AT&T / BSD agreement. It *was* secret, but the world has changed, its no longer secret ...
Bullshit - Microsoft is one of the biggest funders of the BSA - and I don't mean the "Boy Scouts of America". They threaten their customers with audits all the time.
These aren't "illegal leaks" - they're evidence that has been made public - and rightfully so - because justice must not only be done, but seen to be done. Don't expect to be able to keep illegal anti-competitive activities secret because of some non-existent "corporate right to privacy."
Gee, I never saw any EULA ... never had to click on any click-thru ... and besides, its not like many of us don't have multiple legit copies of Windows that we don't do anything with anymore except for the odd game ...
AND the book can still be read when the batteries are dead ... or when you don't have a source of power ... or around a fireplace ...