For example, there is no legitimate reason for AutoRun to work on any device other than an optical disk (and even then, the rationale is debatable given the crap Sony pulled with the rootkit). Change the default to make AutoRun only work for optical disks.
Or that stupid "hide extensions for known file types" which just makes it harder to tell the difference between porn.jpg (harmless pornography) and porn.jpg.exe (malware pretending to be harmless pornography)
Also, lets disable the stuff in Outlook and Outlook Express (and other mail clients) that allows code to run just by reading an email. Better yet, introduce "show only text, not HTML" options ala SeaMonkey and others and encourage users to use those options. HTML email is only used for SPAM and other nasty stuff.
No, whats needed is a requirement to demonstrate what you want to patent. You must show that what you want to patentable is buildable by ANYONE with sufficient money and equipment and parts and skills (i.e. someone skilled in the relavent art) For example, if you want to patent an encryption algorithim, you have to show code, pseudo code, flow chart or otherwise showing enough for this algorithim to be implemented by anyone knowing enough about programming/encryption. If its a new widget that can make jet engines use half as much fuel, you should have to demonstrate that it can be built (that means a prototype, a mockup or failing that enough blueprints so that someone could actually build your widget If its a new drug or chemical or something you have to show production steps or something similar (e.g. "take chemical A and mix with chemical B to get chemical C, then heat to 1000 degrees to get the patented chemical" or something like that) If its a genetic patent (say, a new variety of corn), you need to demonstrate an example of your new organism.
If you cant demonstrate your patent with a prototype because you dont have the resources to make a prototype, make blueprints instead.
The ironic thing is that you have to use an illegal program (VLC) to skip warnings on a DVD that YOU bought, warnings telling you not to copy the DVD (that you already own and dont need to copy)
I dont remember any DRM that overwrote the CD/DVD drivers. I think some of the more nasty ones (like some of the stuff the RIAA was putting on its music CDs) did install hook drivers designed to detect that you were trying to access the red book CD audio part of the CD (most of these CDs contained the music in DRM locked WMA files for PC playback) and deny access (to prevent CD ripping programs from working)
Starforce (which I never had experience with) also did some nasty stuff aparently. But the Securom and Safedisk DRM I experienced on games including C&C3 Tiberium Wars, C&C3 Kane's Wrath, C&C Red Alert 2, Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 and Diablo II never did any of the nasty stuff.
Of course, the fact is, the DRM used on those older games is not perfect. It doesn't allow backups to be made of the disks. And more importantly for the companies that made it, it was becoming more and more vulnerable to the use of virtual drive software that emulated a CD/DVD drive and fed the game exactly what it expected to be fed (which were used in combination with hiding/obfuscation software so that the games couldn't detect it)
Another factor in the abandonment of CD based DRM is the number of people playing games on devices where they dont have an optical drive (MacBook AIR being the most well known) or in situations where carrying a pile of CDs or DVDs around with you is not an option.
The question, is there a better answer to DRM than the solution used in the current version of Securom (the one with the online activation and the hardware locks)? Is there something that helps make the game secure against piracy but doesn't require the obtrusive drivers and services to be loaded all the time.
Up until a year or 2 ago, many games (e.g. C&C3 Tiberium Wars) just had DRM that required the original CD or DVD to be in the drive for the game to work. The special drivers for the DRM were also only loaded when the game loaded (at least in the systems I saw like the one on Tiberium Wars and the one on Rollercoaster Tycoon 3) What I want to know is what was wrong with that kind of DRM and why they needed to move to DRM that requires web activation and other such crap.
Would you rather they didnt prioritize latency/time sensitive protocols like VoIP and that everyone on their network got crap VoIP service as a result?
Me, I want Guitar Hero AC/DC with all the good AC/DC songs. Only then they would need to release a Bagpipes instrument accessory for "Its a long way to the top if you want to rock and roll":)
That or a "Keyboard Hero" (with keyboard accessory)
Fact is, ISPs like Verizon, Comcast, Cox, AT&T and others currently pick and choose and only service the most profitable areas. There has to be some way to stop those ISPs doing that (since if you force the big boys to roll service out everywhere, you make broadband available to all the people who cant get it but want it) in a way that doesn't hurt the little guy.
1.Force any provider wishing to service a given region to service every customer. Regions would be defined by the government and the FCC. (so it might be "all customers in " or "all customers in ") There would be an exemption for co-ops (e.g. a group wanting to run a fat pipe into one members shed/barn/etc and then run something from there out to the rest of the co-op). Municipal efforts run by a local government would be required to service the entire local government area.
2.No provider (cable, DSL, fiber, wireless, whatever) would be allowed to have any monopoly agreements with anyone (state, local govt, residents association, owner of townhouse complex/apartment complex/etc). No authority (state, local govt, residents association, owner of townhouse complex/apartment complex/etc) would be allowed to have any kind of rules/laws/by-laws/whatever that granted monopolies to anyone. Oh and providers would be prohibited from making any kind of complaint or legal action (to the courts, to local authorities, to state PUCs or whatever) in an attempt to stop someone else from providing service. (no more "I dont want to provide service in because its not profitable for me but I dont want someone else running service either because it might become profitable for me in the future" like we have seen from some providers)
3.New rules would be put in place that define what constitutes "broadband". (with minimum speeds set at say 1.5Mbps) For rule #1, the requirement would be that everyone in the area be served by "broadband" as defined by this rule (so no running 256Kbps DSL to some customers and 20Mbps FTTH to other more profitable customers in the same city or town). ISPs WOULD be allowed to apply traffic shaping and bandwidth quotas (i.e. "you get 50GB per month on your plan, once thats gone your speed gets cut back for the rest of the month unless you pay more money"). Net neutrality law would ensure such shaping didnt discriminate (so no shaping of YouTube or BitTorrent whilst allowing CNN videos or netflix movie downloads at full speed)
If all ISPs blocked port 25 from inside their residential connection network (i.e. preventing anyone running a mail server inside the network) it would shut out most of the zombies. Especially if corporations and universities followed suit and blocked email from coming out except from approved mail servers.
Corporations can go further and block all SMTP traffic from going into/out of their network unless it comes from the approved corporate mail servers.
For bots that try to send email through the approved email server (e.g. by reading it from outlook settings), you can filter that (and try to block it)
The reasons they dont abandon MSHTML/Trident and use gecko or webkit include: Licensing (webkit is LGPL, gecko is GPL/LGPL/MPL) and Microsoft doesn't want to use LGPL software in their OS for obvious reasons. Code ownership (Microsoft has no way to be 100% sure that the code in there is written by the people who claim to have written it and with Microsoft and Windows being such a HUGE target, its a risk Microsoft cant afford to take no matter how small it is) Application Compatibility (Many apps use and embed MSHTML/Trident including htmlhelp, MSDN library, the GameSpy Arcade frontend, at least one PC game I have and who knows how many more. Microsoft needs to maintain MSHTML/Trident for the benefit of these apps so that they keep running and aren't exposed to security flaws just because MS isn't fixing MSHTML anymore) Web Compatibility (Many web pages, especially on corporate intranets wont run in anything other than IE and Microsoft needs to maintain MSHTML/Trident so that those pages continue to work) Security (No current webkit or gecko browser supports any kind of network-wide lock down in the way that IE does with group policy, nor do these other browsers support any kind of "protected mode" ala IE7)
Basically its just not possible to replace MSHTML/Trident with gecko or webkit and not break a whole bunch of stuff that is VERY important to Microsoft customers.
Given how much it costs merchants when someone issues a chargeback (they loose the money they got paid for the goods, they likely loose the goods AND they have to pay fees to Visa/MC/etc), why aren't the merchants doing more to pick up on fraudulent transactions? And why aren't they doing more to apply pressure to Visa/MC/etc to change the rules (e.g. get rid of the rules that make it harder for them to do ID checks etc to pick up the fraud)
I have no clue how much money, say, Wal-Mart is out annually because of credit card fraud but they must be big enough to lobby Visa/MC for change. Or better yet, lobby the government to change the rules so that Visa/MC foot the bill for fraud instead of the merchants. Argue that since the merchants are prohibited by Visa/MC rules from taking these measures that would help prevent fraud, they shouldn't be liable for said fraud).
In any case, merchants on the receiving end of a chargeback are the losers when it comes to credit card fraud so it would be in their best interest to use their lobbying power to fight for a better deal (or can Visa/MC out-lobby even the might of Wal-Mart?)
Its a good bet that the machine or machines responding to the trafficconverter.biz domain name are either hacked (e.g. zombies) or obtained using stolen or fake credit cards and other ID.
The chances that the information listed for the account(s) owning trafficconverter.biz matches with the owners of this botnet is very little.
Clearly you havent priced the full costs of a full set of servers (and addons) for Exchange. AD etc. Not to mention all the client licenses you need (CALs or whatever they are).
I am sure there are quite a lot of people who would LOVE to be able to replace a windows server machine with a linux machine running Samba + OpenChange + whatever else
As an Australian, I can agree with this statement. Take the recent James Bond film for example, it was on the pirate sites weeks before the Australian theatrical release. Some films are available on DVD from US web shops like www.dvdpacific.com BEFORE they are even on cinema screens here.
The same is true with games to some extent (I wanted to buy one of the Rollercoaster Tycoon games or addons which was out or nearly out in the USA and the stores said that the local publisher couldn't even give them a release date)
Change the law so that they cant go to the ITC and ask for an import ban, they instead need to go to the courts and ask for an injunction. If they have to go to the courts, they presumably have to at least demonstrate something vaguely resembling evidence to back up their patent claims.
This is the exact opposite of what you want to do. IF you have lists of human verified child porn links, you dont block them. You find out who owns the machine and content and go kick in their door with some police with big guns. If the server is a hacked server or its otherwise impossible to find out who uploaded the porn or if the uploader of the porn is located in a country that isn't willing to go after the pornographers, you dont block it. You LOG every access to the URLs in question so that you can find out who was accessing the child porn (and collect enough evidence) so that you can send the police with the big guns over to THEIR house and bust them.
Blocking the porn just forces it deeper underground and makes it HARDER to catch the people who are actually uploading, downloading and sharing these files.
It should be possible to access the public record of all bills and see exactly which politician wrote, co-wrote, proposed or copied-from-instructions-given-to-them-by-a-major-contributor each of the sections in the bill.
Slashdot Mirror
For example, there is no legitimate reason for AutoRun to work on any device other than an optical disk (and even then, the rationale is debatable given the crap Sony pulled with the rootkit). Change the default to make AutoRun only work for optical disks.
Or that stupid "hide extensions for known file types" which just makes it harder to tell the difference between porn.jpg (harmless pornography) and porn.jpg.exe (malware pretending to be harmless pornography)
Also, lets disable the stuff in Outlook and Outlook Express (and other mail clients) that allows code to run just by reading an email. Better yet, introduce "show only text, not HTML" options ala SeaMonkey and others and encourage users to use those options. HTML email is only used for SPAM and other nasty stuff.
No, whats needed is a requirement to demonstrate what you want to patent. You must show that what you want to patentable is buildable by ANYONE with sufficient money and equipment and parts and skills (i.e. someone skilled in the relavent art)
For example, if you want to patent an encryption algorithim, you have to show code, pseudo code, flow chart or otherwise showing enough for this algorithim to be implemented by anyone knowing enough about programming/encryption.
If its a new widget that can make jet engines use half as much fuel, you should have to demonstrate that it can be built (that means a prototype, a mockup or failing that enough blueprints so that someone could actually build your widget
If its a new drug or chemical or something you have to show production steps or something similar (e.g. "take chemical A and mix with chemical B to get chemical C, then heat to 1000 degrees to get the patented chemical" or something like that)
If its a genetic patent (say, a new variety of corn), you need to demonstrate an example of your new organism.
If you cant demonstrate your patent with a prototype because you dont have the resources to make a prototype, make blueprints instead.
Is the identical model IBM are building in a secret bunker underneath the NSA headquarters so the NSA can read everyones encrypted communications.
Anyone that doesn't know its going to happen obviously doesn't watch enough TV that they will miss it when it goes away.
The ironic thing is that you have to use an illegal program (VLC) to skip warnings on a DVD that YOU bought, warnings telling you not to copy the DVD (that you already own and dont need to copy)
I dont remember any DRM that overwrote the CD/DVD drivers. I think some of the more nasty ones (like some of the stuff the RIAA was putting on its music CDs) did install hook drivers designed to detect that you were trying to access the red book CD audio part of the CD (most of these CDs contained the music in DRM locked WMA files for PC playback) and deny access (to prevent CD ripping programs from working)
Starforce (which I never had experience with) also did some nasty stuff aparently.
But the Securom and Safedisk DRM I experienced on games including C&C3 Tiberium Wars, C&C3 Kane's Wrath, C&C Red Alert 2, Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 and Diablo II never did any of the nasty stuff.
Of course, the fact is, the DRM used on those older games is not perfect. It doesn't allow backups to be made of the disks. And more importantly for the companies that made it, it was becoming more and more vulnerable to the use of virtual drive software that emulated a CD/DVD drive and fed the game exactly what it expected to be fed (which were used in combination with hiding/obfuscation software so that the games couldn't detect it)
Another factor in the abandonment of CD based DRM is the number of people playing games on devices where they dont have an optical drive (MacBook AIR being the most well known) or in situations where carrying a pile of CDs or DVDs around with you is not an option.
The question, is there a better answer to DRM than the solution used in the current version of Securom (the one with the online activation and the hardware locks)? Is there something that helps make the game secure against piracy but doesn't require the obtrusive drivers and services to be loaded all the time.
Up until a year or 2 ago, many games (e.g. C&C3 Tiberium Wars) just had DRM that required the original CD or DVD to be in the drive for the game to work. The special drivers for the DRM were also only loaded when the game loaded (at least in the systems I saw like the one on Tiberium Wars and the one on Rollercoaster Tycoon 3)
What I want to know is what was wrong with that kind of DRM and why they needed to move to DRM that requires web activation and other such crap.
Would you rather they didnt prioritize latency/time sensitive protocols like VoIP and that everyone on their network got crap VoIP service as a result?
Anyone that doesn't know its happening (and hasn't bought their box yet) deserves to loose their TV.
As long as the P2P apps and file transfers can run at full speed when nothing time sensitive is using the network, this is the RIGHT way to do things.
If only Intel would be as forthcoming with open code for their chipsets as they are with open code for their GPUs
Me, I want Guitar Hero AC/DC with all the good AC/DC songs. :)
Only then they would need to release a Bagpipes instrument accessory for "Its a long way to the top if you want to rock and roll"
That or a "Keyboard Hero" (with keyboard accessory)
Fact is, ISPs like Verizon, Comcast, Cox, AT&T and others currently pick and choose and only service the most profitable areas. There has to be some way to stop those ISPs doing that (since if you force the big boys to roll service out everywhere, you make broadband available to all the people who cant get it but want it) in a way that doesn't hurt the little guy.
1.Force any provider wishing to service a given region to service every customer. Regions would be defined by the government and the FCC. (so it might be "all customers in " or "all customers in ")
There would be an exemption for co-ops (e.g. a group wanting to run a fat pipe into one members shed/barn/etc and then run something from there out to the rest of the co-op). Municipal efforts run by a local government would be required to service the entire local government area.
2.No provider (cable, DSL, fiber, wireless, whatever) would be allowed to have any monopoly agreements with anyone (state, local govt, residents association, owner of townhouse complex/apartment complex/etc). No authority (state, local govt, residents association, owner of townhouse complex/apartment complex/etc) would be allowed to have any kind of rules/laws/by-laws/whatever that granted monopolies to anyone. Oh and providers would be prohibited from making any kind of complaint or legal action (to the courts, to local authorities, to state PUCs or whatever) in an attempt to stop someone else from providing service. (no more "I dont want to provide service in because its not profitable for me but I dont want someone else running service either because it might become profitable for me in the future" like we have seen from some providers)
3.New rules would be put in place that define what constitutes "broadband". (with minimum speeds set at say 1.5Mbps) For rule #1, the requirement would be that everyone in the area be served by "broadband" as defined by this rule (so no running 256Kbps DSL to some customers and 20Mbps FTTH to other more profitable customers in the same city or town). ISPs WOULD be allowed to apply traffic shaping and bandwidth quotas (i.e. "you get 50GB per month on your plan, once thats gone your speed gets cut back for the rest of the month unless you pay more money"). Net neutrality law would ensure such shaping didnt discriminate (so no shaping of YouTube or BitTorrent whilst allowing CNN videos or netflix movie downloads at full speed)
If all ISPs blocked port 25 from inside their residential connection network (i.e. preventing anyone running a mail server inside the network) it would shut out most of the zombies. Especially if corporations and universities followed suit and blocked email from coming out except from approved mail servers.
Corporations can go further and block all SMTP traffic from going into/out of their network unless it comes from the approved corporate mail servers.
For bots that try to send email through the approved email server (e.g. by reading it from outlook settings), you can filter that (and try to block it)
Radiation does not make stuff (including people) glow green, thats an invention of TV and movies.
The reasons they dont abandon MSHTML/Trident and use gecko or webkit include:
Licensing (webkit is LGPL, gecko is GPL/LGPL/MPL) and Microsoft doesn't want to use LGPL software in their OS for obvious reasons.
Code ownership (Microsoft has no way to be 100% sure that the code in there is written by the people who claim to have written it and with Microsoft and Windows being such a HUGE target, its a risk Microsoft cant afford to take no matter how small it is)
Application Compatibility (Many apps use and embed MSHTML/Trident including htmlhelp, MSDN library, the GameSpy Arcade frontend, at least one PC game I have and who knows how many more. Microsoft needs to maintain MSHTML/Trident for the benefit of these apps so that they keep running and aren't exposed to security flaws just because MS isn't fixing MSHTML anymore)
Web Compatibility (Many web pages, especially on corporate intranets wont run in anything other than IE and Microsoft needs to maintain MSHTML/Trident so that those pages continue to work)
Security (No current webkit or gecko browser supports any kind of network-wide lock down in the way that IE does with group policy, nor do these other browsers support any kind of "protected mode" ala IE7)
Basically its just not possible to replace MSHTML/Trident with gecko or webkit and not break a whole bunch of stuff that is VERY important to Microsoft customers.
Given how much it costs merchants when someone issues a chargeback (they loose the money they got paid for the goods, they likely loose the goods AND they have to pay fees to Visa/MC/etc), why aren't the merchants doing more to pick up on fraudulent transactions? And why aren't they doing more to apply pressure to Visa/MC/etc to change the rules (e.g. get rid of the rules that make it harder for them to do ID checks etc to pick up the fraud)
I have no clue how much money, say, Wal-Mart is out annually because of credit card fraud but they must be big enough to lobby Visa/MC for change. Or better yet, lobby the government to change the rules so that Visa/MC foot the bill for fraud instead of the merchants. Argue that since the merchants are prohibited by Visa/MC rules from taking these measures that would help prevent fraud, they shouldn't be liable for said fraud).
In any case, merchants on the receiving end of a chargeback are the losers when it comes to credit card fraud so it would be in their best interest to use their lobbying power to fight for a better deal (or can Visa/MC out-lobby even the might of Wal-Mart?)
Its a good bet that the machine or machines responding to the trafficconverter.biz domain name are either hacked (e.g. zombies) or obtained using stolen or fake credit cards and other ID.
The chances that the information listed for the account(s) owning trafficconverter.biz matches with the owners of this botnet is very little.
Clearly you havent priced the full costs of a full set of servers (and addons) for Exchange. AD etc. Not to mention all the client licenses you need (CALs or whatever they are).
I am sure there are quite a lot of people who would LOVE to be able to replace a windows server machine with a linux machine running Samba + OpenChange + whatever else
As an Australian, I can agree with this statement.
Take the recent James Bond film for example, it was on the pirate sites weeks before the Australian theatrical release. Some films are available on DVD from US web shops like www.dvdpacific.com BEFORE they are even on cinema screens here.
The same is true with games to some extent (I wanted to buy one of the Rollercoaster Tycoon games or addons which was out or nearly out in the USA and the stores said that the local publisher couldn't even give them a release date)
Change the law so that they cant go to the ITC and ask for an import ban, they instead need to go to the courts and ask for an injunction. If they have to go to the courts, they presumably have to at least demonstrate something vaguely resembling evidence to back up their patent claims.
This is the exact opposite of what you want to do. IF you have lists of human verified child porn links, you dont block them. You find out who owns the machine and content and go kick in their door with some police with big guns. If the server is a hacked server or its otherwise impossible to find out who uploaded the porn or if the uploader of the porn is located in a country that isn't willing to go after the pornographers, you dont block it. You LOG every access to the URLs in question so that you can find out who was accessing the child porn (and collect enough evidence) so that you can send the police with the big guns over to THEIR house and bust them.
Blocking the porn just forces it deeper underground and makes it HARDER to catch the people who are actually uploading, downloading and sharing these files.
It should be possible to access the public record of all bills and see exactly which politician wrote, co-wrote, proposed or copied-from-instructions-given-to-them-by-a-major-contributor each of the sections in the bill.
I have a Motorola Z6 that contains QT binaries (most likely QT embedded) on it so they are already using it on their linux phones at least.