If Skynet has no "central core", then what exactly is it that they were agonizing over hooking up to the internet when Kate's father finally typed 'Y'? And if this was the first access Skynet had to the internet, how did it manage to start some massive computer virus in the first place?
Skynet had no "core", but I'm pretty sure it would have a management console somewhere.:-)
And Skynet didn't start the virus itself. Remember the beginning of the movie? The first thing the T-X did after acquiring clothes and a car was to dial up an analog modem somewhere and start "singing" to it. They make it obvious that she's looking up her targets. But right after that, a particularly nasty virus started spreading across the "civilian" Internet. The reason they activated Skynet in the first place was because the virus had penetrated the military networks.
What I got from that chain of events was that Skynet was brought up, encountered the virus, and promptly got 0wn3d like an unpatched IIS server. In this version of the timeline, Skynet itself wasn't the threat. It was only the carrier for the T-X's virus. Everybody in the film was concerned with the "grandfather paradox". Nobody considered the "version 1.0 paradox".
You're right. There is no technical reason why Microsoft can't offer the latest and greatest features in Windows 95. Just as there's no technical reason why the O(1) scheduler and/or preemptible kernel patches can't be ported from 2.5 as far back as you'd like.
There are more forces at work here than just kernel architecture. (And in the case of Windows 95, I use that phrase loosely.) Think of Joe Sixpack. He walks into his local Best Buy, and sees Windows 95, Windows 95 SE (now with USB!), Windows 95 GT (now with IEEE-1394!), Windows 95 GT-R V-spec (now with High Speed USB and IEEE-1394), and Windows 95 GT-R V-spec II (now with High Speed USB, 400 Mb/s IEEE-1394, 800 Mb/s IEEE-1394, WLAN, SATA, NGSCB, DRM, and many more baffling and sinister acronyms!). And right above that is an equally comprehensive and confusing row of Windows 98 variants! (What's the difference between Windows 95 GT-R and Windows 98 GTS again?) Not to mention ME, NT4, 2000, and XP! The Windows Variant section of the store would occupy more floor space than the refrigerators and projection TVs combined.
And how much would it cost Microsoft to manage that many kernels, shells, driver architectures, and browsers (integrated and non-integrated)? That's an awful lot of time and money to devote to SKUs that may only be of interest to someone who needs Mt. Ranier support on a Sinclair QL.
Here's another perspective. Can Red Hat convince CompUSA to stock a version of desktop Linux that combines a patched 2.0.x kernel with Bluecurve, on the same shelf as the latest and greatest 2.4.x-based Red Hat 9? Can Red Hat even convince themselves to build it?
It takes more than just engineers to build a profitable software product.
If I ever meet Michael Sims in real life...
on
Gates and Security
·
· Score: 0
Gates and Orwell: No matter how insidious you feel Microsoft's plans may be, they are nothing without force of law, and that can only come from the government. It's our duty to be vigilant, but this is just paranoid.
Gates and HomeSec: I agree wholeheartedly that Open Source systems are the only way to ensure the transparency our civil liberties require. In any other post, this would be an interesting point of debate. Too bad Michael chose to included it with the following trolls.
Gates and White House Security: Bill Gates visits the White House, but forgets his wallet in the car. This is front-page news for Slashdot? Sad. Truly sad.
"Meanwhile, Microsoft viruses continue unchecked.": Never before in my life has one sentence on a web page made me want to put my fist through a monitor. For those who didn't RTFA, Harvard got hit with Bugbear.b on 6 June 2003. Yet another worm that spreads by exploiting unpatched known vulnerabilities, inattentive admins, and clueless users.
You know, I have to say that this post is the most meaningless and shallow of all of Michael's weekly anti-Microsoft trolls. Stated without bias, these would be interesting topics for debate. (Except the wallet story. That would be too trivial for even the Inquirer.)
Instead, we get a rotten apple with a bully pulpit.
Alexander Wolfe's EmbeddedWatch.com has just dropped somewhere below the Inquirer on the credibility scale. First, Wolfe claims that a few piddly Microsoft patents cover the entirety of digital video-on-demand. Now, he sees Microsoft and Sony in the same working group, and concludes that it must be a DRM scheme that will retroactively lock down every file on your system.
Note to Timothy: You are being TROLLED! For free publicity, apparently. How else could you explain this block at the top of EmbeddedWatch's front page?
Don't forget to read "Microsoft gets video-on-demand patent",
our still-hot story, which has over 100,000 hits and links on Microsoft-Watch and Slashdot.
You'd be hard-pressed to find 5 people who would agree on what toppings to get on their pizza. How do you expect 650,000+ Slashdot readers to agree on the moral implications of sharing copyrighted material on P2P networks?
The last time I checked, Slashdot wasn't a hive mind.
Now, correct me if you've delved deeper into the details than I.
After reading the Claims and Summary of the Invention sections, it appears that the inventions Microsoft is claiming are:
A user-specific, persistent "favorites" list, to be stored at the headend
An auto-scrolling UI for managing that favorites list, provided by the STB.
That is all.
It may seem that Microsoft is claiming world+dog in the VOD realm, but that's only because they have to describe the entire system to provide the appropriate context for their claimed inventions. This is the mistake Mr. Wolfe makes in the linked article on Embedded Watch. He seems to think everything in the detailed description is part of the claim.
Actually, PalmOS does have a filesystem for removable memory, called VFS. It only abstracts the hardware, so the same API works with MS on Sonys and SD on Palms. Unfortunately, there's no common apps or UI panels for opening, saving, or managing files. Hence, crap like MS Gate, which is only good for Engrish messages like "Current folder is access inhibit."
That also means that, to keep their apps small, most developers use hardwired paths for VFS. Notice that Sony's audio player will only play MP3s if they're in \Palm\Programs\MSAudio? Just about everything's like that. My docreader looks in \Palm\Books. Most launcher apps have standardized on \Palm\Launcher.
You might want to invest a few bucks on a 3rd party launcher app. A good one will be much more customizable than the standard Palm launcher, and will make it easier to manage apps on memory cards. I use SilverScreen, and LauncherX, while I haven't tried it myself, is highly regarded.
How long is it going to take for companies like this to realize it? turn-around traffic is way too important to rental stores for disposable media to work. IIRC, Blockbuster claimed that a full 1/3 of their rental business comes from turn-arounds.
For those unfamiliar with the term, it refers to a customer returning one video and renting another, usually on impulse, in the same visit to the store. Obviously, if there's no returns, there's fewer opportunities to visit the store. Thus, fewer rentals, impulse or planned. Needless to say, that's a Bad Thing when rentals are your business. And how much of an impact is a constant flow of disposal DVDs going to have on inventory management?
It was a loser with Circuit City DIVX. Earlier generations of self-destructing media were losers. No matter how much they improve the materials, it won't stop being a loser until they can make up for the lost traffic at Blockbuster and Hollywood.
(sigh) Once again, somebody fails to recognize the segregation of editorial and advertising content. No biggie. It's just one of the fundamental principles of publishing. Hypothetical analogy follows:
Every issue, Car & Driver takes a moment to remind everybody that the Pontiac Aztek is the Ugliest Car On The Planet. Yet Pontiac doesn't seem to have a problem with buying a 4-page spread promoting the new Grand Prix.
Now, let's say General Motors has a hissy fit and withdraws their advertising from the magazine. The obvious message is "You won't get our advertising dollars..." with a thinly veiled "...unless you start writing good reviews of Pontiacs" in the fine print. Car & Driver is left with two choices. Either capitulate, praise the Aztek as the pinnacle of American design, and ruin their credibility for some filthy lucre; or tell GM "Bugger off. Chrysler wants that spread for a Pacifica ad." Either way, GM is screwed, because they're either denying themselves marketing opportunities in a key demographic, or they'll have to start paying for good reviews.
OK, now let's turn the scenario around. Say C&D refuses GM advertising because their cars suck. Who in the industry is going to try to buy space in C&D now? What's the point, if the ads can be refused on a whim? Now, C&D is screwed. Their ad space will become so devalued, the magazine will probably have to shut down, unless they can get by on ads for "magic" oil additives and gadgets that create turbulent air flow in manifolds designed for laminar flow.
Either way, somebody gets screwed. The only way to keep both parties happy is to keep editorial and advertising away from each other. Pontiac can still promote the Grand Prix, and C&D can still ridicule the Aztek, and neither interferes with the others' privilege to do so.
This is one of the few things Slashdot gets right. Microsoft gets the eyeballs of a large, diverse congregation of geeks, the Anyone But Microsoft crowd gets one more reason to add their two cents, and Michael gets to keep his job. See? Everybody's happy!
Re:But can it play MP3s
on
TiVo Basic
·
· Score: 2, Informative
According to the press release, if you upgrade it from Basic to full Series 2, you can add Home Media Option for the usual price: $99, one-time fee. That plays MP3s over your wireless network!
Re:will have to be carful
on
TiVo Basic
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The press release mentions that recurring time-and-channel recording is available, just like your VCR.
Why would I pay for a program guide and title searching when i have this inlcuded in my satellite/digicable service already?
Well, DirecTV's DVR service is from Tivo, and the service only costs $4.99/month, instead of the usual $12.95. It uses the built-in DirecTV program data, so that $5 pretty much subsidizes Tivo directly.
When your (hypothetical) older brother started teasing you during the family road trip, did sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "LA-LA-LA! I'M NOT LISTENING TO YOU! LA-LA-LA!" stop him? No. Of course not. What stopped him was Dad getting fed up with all the noise coming from the back seat and threatening to turn this car around and go back home.
So what makes you think that checking "Ignore Stories From: [x]Michael" will stop him from continually besmirching Slashdot's credibility with childish, vendetta motivated flamebait editorials disguised as "news"?
<spleen>Gee whiz. Microsoft and the new hp collaborate on a "concept car", and Taco makes it sound like Bill and Carly invaded Torvalds Manor and took Linus' family hostage. Is Michael ghost-writing your articles now, Rob?</spleen>
Is that really how you want your hot dog served to you?
NO! The Pirate Parrot has been using one of these to launch hot dogs for years. Once, back at ye olde Three Rivers Stadium, one landed just below my section. It hit the concrete and, um, well, liquified. So if you don't catch one, look around for someone with their jaw wired shut.
Individual patches are usually well under 5MB. When MS rolls all those little IE updates up into a service pack, they're usually around 10MB. Media Player updates weigh in around that size, too. Above that, you're looking at things like major DirectX revs and the.NET Framework. And I weep for those who try to download an OS service pack over a dial-up.
Remember Jose Padila? His case was in the media for what, 2-3 days?
Padilla was illegally detained for suspicion of building a dirty bomb. How many people do you know who combine hazardous radioactive materials and explosives in their basement? His civil liberties are being violated. He can't have access to counsel (the fight over which has been in the news lately, BTW). But a potential bomber won't get much public sympathy.
Hawash, OTOH, was illegally detained for contributing to a charitable organization, because that organization was later accused of "having links" to terrorists. Here's an educated family man and naturalized US citizen being incarcerated for doing something millions of Americans do, and are encouraged to do, each year. That's a cause the public can get behind.
Here's a far-fetched scenario for you. Comrade Ashcroft is cozy with RIAA and MPAA. What if he decides that the EFF is "aiding and abetting" theft of intellectual property? Have you given to the EFF? OK, that's a lot farther down the slippery slope than ties to Al Qaida. But religion and politics are the low-hanging fruit for oppressors.
"Are you, or have you ever been, a member of a group we don't like?"
How many Volkswagen bugs are there in one Library of Congress?
I wonder how many kilo-Big-Macs of heat energy were produced by atmospheric friction? BTW, does anyone know the conversion factor for Big-Mac <-> Fetuccini-Alfredo? I don't want to pull a NASA and get my Imperial and Metric layman units mixed up.
...so that customers aren't scared when they bring home their products and get the "unsigned driver" alert.
If this really is targeted at hardware (which I doubt, IMHO), then good luck to Office Depot. I've noticed an increasing number of hardware products whose quick install guides include a passage that says, in so many words:
While installing the drivers for this product, Windows is going to pop up an "error" message designed to scare the pants off of you. Well, screw Microsoft. We know damn well that our drivers work. We don't have time to wait for Microsoft to rubber-stamp them, and neither do you, so just click "Continue Anyway".
If Microsoft wants to combat that attitude, they're better off quietly tightening the screws on those hardware manufacturers who tell users to blow off the "unsigned driver" warning.
Hardware or software, if this is motivated by Microsoft, it can't be anything more than a trial balloon. This is most likely some middle-manager at Office Depot demonstrating symptoms of clue-deficiency. That's assuming The Inquirer report is accurate to begin with. I rank those guys somewhere between The Register and the Weekly World News on the journalistic integrity scale.
Isolinear chips. Lots of them. All over the ship. Even in places where a teenager intoxicated by a recycled plot device (cough!) can get to them and sabotage the ship. Hence the importance of locking the server room.
Slashdot Mirror
Skynet had no "core", but I'm pretty sure it would have a management console somewhere. :-)
And Skynet didn't start the virus itself. Remember the beginning of the movie? The first thing the T-X did after acquiring clothes and a car was to dial up an analog modem somewhere and start "singing" to it. They make it obvious that she's looking up her targets. But right after that, a particularly nasty virus started spreading across the "civilian" Internet. The reason they activated Skynet in the first place was because the virus had penetrated the military networks.
What I got from that chain of events was that Skynet was brought up, encountered the virus, and promptly got 0wn3d like an unpatched IIS server. In this version of the timeline, Skynet itself wasn't the threat. It was only the carrier for the T-X's virus. Everybody in the film was concerned with the "grandfather paradox". Nobody considered the "version 1.0 paradox".
You're right. There is no technical reason why Microsoft can't offer the latest and greatest features in Windows 95. Just as there's no technical reason why the O(1) scheduler and/or preemptible kernel patches can't be ported from 2.5 as far back as you'd like.
There are more forces at work here than just kernel architecture. (And in the case of Windows 95, I use that phrase loosely.) Think of Joe Sixpack. He walks into his local Best Buy, and sees Windows 95, Windows 95 SE (now with USB!), Windows 95 GT (now with IEEE-1394!), Windows 95 GT-R V-spec (now with High Speed USB and IEEE-1394), and Windows 95 GT-R V-spec II (now with High Speed USB, 400 Mb/s IEEE-1394, 800 Mb/s IEEE-1394, WLAN, SATA, NGSCB, DRM, and many more baffling and sinister acronyms!). And right above that is an equally comprehensive and confusing row of Windows 98 variants! (What's the difference between Windows 95 GT-R and Windows 98 GTS again?) Not to mention ME, NT4, 2000, and XP! The Windows Variant section of the store would occupy more floor space than the refrigerators and projection TVs combined.
And how much would it cost Microsoft to manage that many kernels, shells, driver architectures, and browsers (integrated and non-integrated)? That's an awful lot of time and money to devote to SKUs that may only be of interest to someone who needs Mt. Ranier support on a Sinclair QL.
Here's another perspective. Can Red Hat convince CompUSA to stock a version of desktop Linux that combines a patched 2.0.x kernel with Bluecurve, on the same shelf as the latest and greatest 2.4.x-based Red Hat 9? Can Red Hat even convince themselves to build it?
It takes more than just engineers to build a profitable software product.
Gates and Orwell: No matter how insidious you feel Microsoft's plans may be, they are nothing without force of law, and that can only come from the government. It's our duty to be vigilant, but this is just paranoid.
Gates and HomeSec: I agree wholeheartedly that Open Source systems are the only way to ensure the transparency our civil liberties require. In any other post, this would be an interesting point of debate. Too bad Michael chose to included it with the following trolls.
Gates and White House Security: Bill Gates visits the White House, but forgets his wallet in the car. This is front-page news for Slashdot? Sad. Truly sad.
"Meanwhile, Microsoft viruses continue unchecked.": Never before in my life has one sentence on a web page made me want to put my fist through a monitor. For those who didn't RTFA, Harvard got hit with Bugbear.b on 6 June 2003. Yet another worm that spreads by exploiting unpatched known vulnerabilities, inattentive admins, and clueless users.
You know, I have to say that this post is the most meaningless and shallow of all of Michael's weekly anti-Microsoft trolls. Stated without bias, these would be interesting topics for debate. (Except the wallet story. That would be too trivial for even the Inquirer.)
Instead, we get a rotten apple with a bully pulpit.
Alexander Wolfe's EmbeddedWatch.com has just dropped somewhere below the Inquirer on the credibility scale. First, Wolfe claims that a few piddly Microsoft patents cover the entirety of digital video-on-demand. Now, he sees Microsoft and Sony in the same working group, and concludes that it must be a DRM scheme that will retroactively lock down every file on your system.
Note to Timothy: You are being TROLLED! For free publicity, apparently. How else could you explain this block at the top of EmbeddedWatch's front page?
You'd be hard-pressed to find 5 people who would agree on what toppings to get on their pizza. How do you expect 650,000+ Slashdot readers to agree on the moral implications of sharing copyrighted material on P2P networks?
The last time I checked, Slashdot wasn't a hive mind.
Correction: A day without SCO is like a day without having your underwear set on fire! :-)
Now, correct me if you've delved deeper into the details than I.
After reading the Claims and Summary of the Invention sections, it appears that the inventions Microsoft is claiming are:
That is all.
It may seem that Microsoft is claiming world+dog in the VOD realm, but that's only because they have to describe the entire system to provide the appropriate context for their claimed inventions. This is the mistake Mr. Wolfe makes in the linked article on Embedded Watch. He seems to think everything in the detailed description is part of the claim.
I didn't do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't prove anything.
I think Linus was thinking less flightless waterfowl, and more pipe-hittin' mofos getting medieval on Darl's ass.
Actually, PalmOS does have a filesystem for removable memory, called VFS. It only abstracts the hardware, so the same API works with MS on Sonys and SD on Palms. Unfortunately, there's no common apps or UI panels for opening, saving, or managing files. Hence, crap like MS Gate, which is only good for Engrish messages like "Current folder is access inhibit."
That also means that, to keep their apps small, most developers use hardwired paths for VFS. Notice that Sony's audio player will only play MP3s if they're in \Palm\Programs\MSAudio? Just about everything's like that. My docreader looks in \Palm\Books. Most launcher apps have standardized on \Palm\Launcher.
You might want to invest a few bucks on a 3rd party launcher app. A good one will be much more customizable than the standard Palm launcher, and will make it easier to manage apps on memory cards. I use SilverScreen, and LauncherX, while I haven't tried it myself, is highly regarded.
How long is it going to take for companies like this to realize it? turn-around traffic is way too important to rental stores for disposable media to work. IIRC, Blockbuster claimed that a full 1/3 of their rental business comes from turn-arounds.
For those unfamiliar with the term, it refers to a customer returning one video and renting another, usually on impulse, in the same visit to the store. Obviously, if there's no returns, there's fewer opportunities to visit the store. Thus, fewer rentals, impulse or planned. Needless to say, that's a Bad Thing when rentals are your business. And how much of an impact is a constant flow of disposal DVDs going to have on inventory management?
It was a loser with Circuit City DIVX. Earlier generations of self-destructing media were losers. No matter how much they improve the materials, it won't stop being a loser until they can make up for the lost traffic at Blockbuster and Hollywood.
(sigh) Once again, somebody fails to recognize the segregation of editorial and advertising content. No biggie. It's just one of the fundamental principles of publishing. Hypothetical analogy follows:
Every issue, Car & Driver takes a moment to remind everybody that the Pontiac Aztek is the Ugliest Car On The Planet. Yet Pontiac doesn't seem to have a problem with buying a 4-page spread promoting the new Grand Prix.
Now, let's say General Motors has a hissy fit and withdraws their advertising from the magazine. The obvious message is "You won't get our advertising dollars..." with a thinly veiled "...unless you start writing good reviews of Pontiacs" in the fine print. Car & Driver is left with two choices. Either capitulate, praise the Aztek as the pinnacle of American design, and ruin their credibility for some filthy lucre; or tell GM "Bugger off. Chrysler wants that spread for a Pacifica ad." Either way, GM is screwed, because they're either denying themselves marketing opportunities in a key demographic, or they'll have to start paying for good reviews.
OK, now let's turn the scenario around. Say C&D refuses GM advertising because their cars suck. Who in the industry is going to try to buy space in C&D now? What's the point, if the ads can be refused on a whim? Now, C&D is screwed. Their ad space will become so devalued, the magazine will probably have to shut down, unless they can get by on ads for "magic" oil additives and gadgets that create turbulent air flow in manifolds designed for laminar flow.
Either way, somebody gets screwed. The only way to keep both parties happy is to keep editorial and advertising away from each other. Pontiac can still promote the Grand Prix, and C&D can still ridicule the Aztek, and neither interferes with the others' privilege to do so.
This is one of the few things Slashdot gets right. Microsoft gets the eyeballs of a large, diverse congregation of geeks, the Anyone But Microsoft crowd gets one more reason to add their two cents, and Michael gets to keep his job. See? Everybody's happy!
According to the press release, if you upgrade it from Basic to full Series 2, you can add Home Media Option for the usual price: $99, one-time fee. That plays MP3s over your wireless network!
The press release mentions that recurring time-and-channel recording is available, just like your VCR.
Well, DirecTV's DVR service is from Tivo, and the service only costs $4.99/month, instead of the usual $12.95. It uses the built-in DirecTV program data, so that $5 pretty much subsidizes Tivo directly.
When your (hypothetical) older brother started teasing you during the family road trip, did sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "LA-LA-LA! I'M NOT LISTENING TO YOU! LA-LA-LA!" stop him? No. Of course not. What stopped him was Dad getting fed up with all the noise coming from the back seat and threatening to turn this car around and go back home.
So what makes you think that checking "Ignore Stories From: [x]Michael" will stop him from continually besmirching Slashdot's credibility with childish, vendetta motivated flamebait editorials disguised as "news"?
Ignoring this problem won't make it go away.
<spleen>Gee whiz. Microsoft and the new hp collaborate on a "concept car", and Taco makes it sound like Bill and Carly invaded Torvalds Manor and took Linus' family hostage. Is Michael ghost-writing your articles now, Rob?</spleen>
Um, no.
NO! The Pirate Parrot has been using one of these to launch hot dogs for years. Once, back at ye olde Three Rivers Stadium, one landed just below my section. It hit the concrete and, um, well, liquified. So if you don't catch one, look around for someone with their jaw wired shut.
Individual patches are usually well under 5MB. When MS rolls all those little IE updates up into a service pack, they're usually around 10MB. Media Player updates weigh in around that size, too. Above that, you're looking at things like major DirectX revs and the .NET Framework. And I weep for those who try to download an OS service pack over a dial-up.
Padilla was illegally detained for suspicion of building a dirty bomb. How many people do you know who combine hazardous radioactive materials and explosives in their basement? His civil liberties are being violated. He can't have access to counsel (the fight over which has been in the news lately, BTW). But a potential bomber won't get much public sympathy.
Hawash, OTOH, was illegally detained for contributing to a charitable organization, because that organization was later accused of "having links" to terrorists. Here's an educated family man and naturalized US citizen being incarcerated for doing something millions of Americans do, and are encouraged to do, each year. That's a cause the public can get behind.
Here's a far-fetched scenario for you. Comrade Ashcroft is cozy with RIAA and MPAA. What if he decides that the EFF is "aiding and abetting" theft of intellectual property? Have you given to the EFF? OK, that's a lot farther down the slippery slope than ties to Al Qaida. But religion and politics are the low-hanging fruit for oppressors.
"Are you, or have you ever been, a member of a group we don't like?"
I wonder how many kilo-Big-Macs of heat energy were produced by atmospheric friction? BTW, does anyone know the conversion factor for Big-Mac <-> Fetuccini-Alfredo? I don't want to pull a NASA and get my Imperial and Metric layman units mixed up.
If this really is targeted at hardware (which I doubt, IMHO), then good luck to Office Depot. I've noticed an increasing number of hardware products whose quick install guides include a passage that says, in so many words:
If Microsoft wants to combat that attitude, they're better off quietly tightening the screws on those hardware manufacturers who tell users to blow off the "unsigned driver" warning.
Hardware or software, if this is motivated by Microsoft, it can't be anything more than a trial balloon. This is most likely some middle-manager at Office Depot demonstrating symptoms of clue-deficiency. That's assuming The Inquirer report is accurate to begin with. I rank those guys somewhere between The Register and the Weekly World News on the journalistic integrity scale.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/farscape/swearing/
Isolinear chips. Lots of them. All over the ship. Even in places where a teenager intoxicated by a recycled plot device (cough!) can get to them and sabotage the ship. Hence the importance of locking the server room.