But that would mean less power and money for them, and we can't have that. What gets me is how much the heads of other states are drooling over the prospect of the Russians assassinating people that work for Wikileaks. It's almost like they're too cowardly to take the next step into corruption that they so wish for, so are waiting for an already wholly corrupt government to do their dirty work for them.
No honor among thieves comes to mind. I don't think it would be an example of corruption any more than Wikileaks is an example of an international spy ring, with a clear intent to do harm to our foreign relations. Sometimes people just do things we don't understand, you know?
the only way he is alive, and there is wikileaks still, because he had done everything to put himself on the spotlight and keep people remembering him and wikileaks, so that assassinating him would be hard.
Does he hang garlic over his door to keep vampires out too? When has this ever been proven to make assassination HARD? I can think of dozens of cases it made things EASIER. The obvious ones being United States Presidents. If only they had brighter spotlights?
Governments, apparently, never learned the lesson of Napster. When Napster went, other free music sites were created. When those went, distributed torrent sites were created. When torrent sites go, another as yet unknown solution will occur.
Despite that, people are buying DRM locked music online now, and there is a healthy market for it. Had nobody intervened, would that be true?
Assange is a distraction and knows it. Chasing him wastes law enforcement resources and he knows that too. Wikileaks, the organization goes on while idiots chase their tails by chasing him. Moreover, if Wikileaks goes away, 10 more Wikileak clones will arise.
Really, no shit? Spies are as old as time. We STILL have to vigilantly protect secrets from ACTUAL SPIES. There is not much we can do about some douchebag conscientious objector with a clearance willingly handing over secrets to the like of Assange. If that becomes a systemic problem, the results will not not be pretty, and not good for those wanting more transparency. Wikileaks isn't the root problem, they are little abetting assholes.
In a wired world, the only way to do that is to play it straight, not lie and do what you say you'll do. As of yet, no political organization or movement in the USA is up to that task.
This whole "information should be free" crap makes me gag. Obviously, the only way we're to ever have world peace is if everyone... _stops doing bad things_. If only people knew the truth(TM) _bad things_ would stop happening!
This is sort of like your buddy getting pulled over by a cop, and when he asks "Do you know why I pulled you over?" You blurt out "speeding is bad!" Why do you supposed they would BOTH look at you with contempt? It's because this isn't your game to play. Circle jerking to "speeding is bad" doesn't change the game.
Or, we'll look back as Wikileaks being the end of the Internet.
By the way, does Wikileaks change anybody's mind on the importance of Net Neutrality? Does anyone think that Wikileaks would ever exist in AT&T's Internet? Or in Apple's Internet? Or in Comcast's Internet? The jury is still out on Google, but I don't see any of the big companies that are opposed to net neutrality really having room for Wikileaks in their universe. Anyway, interesting times...
How has Wikileak's Internet presence been central to how secret info got from Manning to them to the Times? It could just as well have been an email distribution list, a chatroom, a fax, a package, etc.
You're looking at this as if it were a tech problem, and it isn't. It's a people problem, and that's a real lame strawman for Net Neutrality.
The way I see it, governments kill all kinds of people directly and indirectly in secret--and the U.S. has a particularly rich history of this. As such, I want every government's secrets to be plastered everywhere. The number of people that may conceivably die as a result of these leaks is absolutely nothing compared to what has been done in secret for decades. Of course, I'm a pacifist and an anarchist, so I consider the idea of having to balance secrecy and disclosure so that the state can continue to exist in its preferred form (I believe it's called "national security") kind of moot. YMMV.
So you already know this to be true, and what, nobody believes you, or what's the goal of plastering these "secrets" everywhere? No, I get it.. then we'd all be really, really, really, sure we weren't just imagine these things happen, and others would take us seriously, and future assassinations will be never carried out in secrecy. Wait, or no assassinations? Should we openly do what we're accusing them of doing or should they not do what we openly think they're doing anyway. fuck me I'm lost.
No, I get you though, if we blow this thing wide open, then we'll be _certain_ what we think is happening really is. Then.. we'll well, we'll be sure of it, that's for sure.
Brazil could be a good place for him to hide out at the moment - they have currently have a Federal Congressman [camara.gov.br] who is wanted by Interpol [interpol.int] for financial crimes.
I missed the part where corrupt politician wants to harbor man who makes a business of indiscriminately exposing dirty secrets. Oh, you were being sarcastic, as in "Brazil could be a nice place to die", I get it.
It's by no means unreasonable for him to believe he'd find himself thrown in a cell somewhere in the custody of someone he's pissed off. The US, for instance, want him on espionage charges - apparently they're unlikely to stick, but for someone who's caused as much embarrassment as Assange I can quite easily see this resulting in two or three years in a cell while they come to a conclusion one way or another.
I can't believe everyone here still thinks the U.S. government is currently his biggest threat, only to be succeeded by "big scary pharma" and "big scary bank" when he just pissed off the King of Saudi Arabia, President of Yemen, President of Pakistan, and that's just for starters.
Is American diplomatic power REALLY the scariest you all can imagine... AFTER the leaks and all? Could its workings be more in the open? Hellllooooo! Some of you mention that he'd better not piss off Russia or China, but personally embarrassing the leader of a rich, conservative Muslim country is A-O-K. Go on fear mongering the United States folks, pay no attention to the likelihood he made it on dozens of hit-lists with no diplomatic arm twisting whatsoever.
Just saying that's all. There might come a time he'd really wish to be in an American jail cell, and I honestly don't think he'll be that fortunate. If I were him, I'd be praying the rest of the world he just pissed off was as corrupt as the US. Know what I mean?
Oooooooh, watch out for the big bad American boogyman, he'll put you in jaaaaaaail. The King over there that you outed making a reference to his nuke building neighbor as a snake who's head should roll, don't worry that he could buy your blood with one piece of his worst silverware.
If it is information about massive fraud and criminal enterprise against the public (and let's face it, that's exactly what it is going to be), it makes you an accomplice to a fucking hero.
And if it is another "oops, the camera DOES look like an RPG", what then? We all mentally masturbate to the "secret" information?
It's not like whistle blowing is ever merely about personal opinions, disagreement and grudges, right? Not evar.
If the secret actions and words of every "innocent person" were out for public scrutiny what would you expect? Most people cheat, steal, lie, oppress others, play dirty. Oh teh horrors of humanity. You can't change it, you can only make it more secret. How is that better? Sometimes that dirty little area between good and bad is all you're going to get. There is no good or bad. There is better and worse, but you need to figure out a system of measurement first. Morals & ethics have no measurements.
Humans are not anyone's definition of "perfect", get over it! This is small potatoes, somewhere out there, whole universes are eating each other. What about the children?!1
Just googling around, the penalty for shoplifting less than $50 worth of goods in California appears to be a mere "infraction" and $250 fine.
If you commandeer a vacant summer home for the summer, what is that worth? A criminal trespassing charge? Prorated mortgage payments? The average rental rate for the area? What if you illegally rent it out for a $beeeelion because of a rare Beatles reunion/Obama Bush boxing/NASA announces life on Moon event while the owners were on vacation in Tahiti. Is that owed to the owners?
If you steal a car, do you owe insurance costs, cab fare, difference in gasoline, refund for missed flight,cruise,shuttle trip to Mars,Obama Bush MMA bout when caught?
Whether the punishment is fair or not, clearly these are apples vs. oranges vs. avocados.
Good! Maybe one the shit blows up they can replace the 50 year old hardware that's been causing brownouts in California since the early 80s.
Really? This whole "liberally increase load until it breaks then blame them" attitude is a little mean. It's not fun at work when people unexpectedly double/triple load, be it CPU/RAM/storage/network/space, then blame the admins for lack of capacity. When I'm picking my jaw off the floor and explaining "you'll need a whole new disk array!!1, data center expansion, power run, switches... [head burst]" you're the type of asshole that would say "good for you." Do you guys really think it's appropriate to impose the frequent, unnecessary, invasive, break:fix "upgrade" cycles typical of IT on critical infrastructure? If anything, IT needs to be a lot more conservative,and calculating when introducing change.
I'm less concerned with these leaks than I am with the day to day constitutional trampling the feds do, using all three branches of the government to leverage their oath-breaking.
Wow, best Us vs. Them I've ever read. I have a picture in my head of a Ganon-looking "fed" wielding an unholy triforce of doom. I love the way you toss in "They" and "administration" as vague references to the entire federal government. You should have gone all the way with "fed" singular, as opposed to "feds", and try to make an Obama reference next time.
Apple will find some other area that is lacking a polished product, introduce a iWhatever with a polish that is missing, and the slashdot community will cry "lame" once again. The price will be higher than "comparable" whatever, and Apple will sell gazillions in spite of what slashdot community thinks.
Apple knows how to make a profit where none seems to exist, in a market that looks like it is wallowing, in an economy that sucks. Apple will become the largest market cap company in the next 12 - 18 months. And slashdotters will say "lame" and still not get it.
What I hope people take home from this is that their formula can be used for success anywhere. There is low quality muck all around us. I know this will come out the wrong way, but here goes.. forget the lowest economic class. We're all getting robbed by "cheap" goods with low value/$ ratio. The middle class is where it's at baby, get out there and start making nice things for THEM, spread the wealth, make jobs, make the middle class larger! We want nice things, and we'll spend more money. Win-win. Might want to target the mega-rich more too. You want to see high margins, think platinum clad laptops.
P.S.
I think FLOSS has it backwards. I rip on it a lot, but it's because of this. $free is a way to increase adoption of free - I get it. But free is valuable!!!!! Nobody is being robbed at $0 regardless of quality I know, but IT pros, and the business employing them don't need any $free deals. Trust me. It's better all around to put your efforts towards better quality software, and charge what you think it's worth. You can still be effectively free without being $free. In every sense but the "free to give it away" part, which is frankly, just another gimmick to increase adoption rate, like $free.
This is why I enjoy watching all the Steve Jobs keynotes. The whole culture and sect like mentality behind Apple and its fanbase is not only hilarious, but very interesting to watch. Apple use weasel words constantly to give people (and its fans especially) that they are still the underdog company (in comparison to Microsoft of course).
Notice how Jobs almost always says 'we think this solution is the best' and 'we think this phone is the best ever'. The whole manipulation of words is amazing to watch. You may think this is purely something that happens, I am certain that this has been undertaken carefully by Apples marketing department (which I have an idea that Jobs leads).
Remember when rumours was roaming everywhere that Jobs would no longer attends Apple-events? Gosh, it was like the worst nightmare to all Apple fans!
A shorter alternative to this way of thinking about Apple and predicting their results is to just assume consumers are stupid and they like shiny things. And if it has a real brand on it, even better. Microsoft, HP, Dell, Lenovo and so on are not regarded as 'real brands' to most consumers. Apple is in Gucci-league.
This is why I enjoy watching all the Slashdot forums. The whole culture and sect like mentality behind OSS and it's fanbase is not only hilarious, but very interesting to watch. They use weasel words constantly to give people (and it's fans especially) the impression that they are still the underdog community (in comparison to Microsoft/Apple/Sony of course).
Notice how they almost always say 'we think this solution is the best' and 'we think this phone is the best ever'. The whole manipulation of words is amazing to watch. You may think this is purely something that happens, I am certain that this has been undertaken carefully by OSI's marketing department (which I have an idea is festering with freetards).
Remember when rumors were roaming everywhere that RMS would no longer attend OSS-events? Gosh, it was like the worst nightmare to all OSS fans!
A shorter alternative to this way of thinking about OSS and predicting their results is to just assume consumers are practical and they like shiny things. If it has a real brand on it, even better. Microsoft, HP, Dell, Lenovo and so on are regarded as 'real brands' to most consumers. OSS is in Ghetto-league.
-- P.S.
I spent more time correcting your grammar than finding truthful substitutions.
Big, fat, juicy margins...nothing to do with start-ups.
Right, because selling high end products with high margins is such an obvious thing to do for a large, established business during a recession. Because you know, they aren't in the least bit traditionally conservative.
Maybe if you screamed "MOUNTAINS OF CASH" you'd be onto something, but they avoided a race to the bottom during a recession, that's something. Not like they're the ONLY ones trying or anything though, 3DTV, 3D movies, EVs, hybrids, etc...
Yes, a large portion of the visitors to slashdot use Windows. Then again, when compared to the general population, a large portion don't. That so many Windows users see value in, and frequent, a site that is definitely pro-linux/bsd/open source, and what is arguably, even with all the "web 2.0" junk, the most influential tech forum on the net, says that Ballmer is right when Microsoft tells the SEC that linux and open source are the biggest threat to Microsoft.
Wait, how does a pro-open source tech site having majority Windows using readers prove open source is the biggest threat to Microsoft? You don't know the proportion of Windows users that are interested in Linux, you only know the proportion of tech site readers that use Windows. Are you really extrapolating tech site readership out to the general population?!
Think about it - even with less than 1% of the desktop, and being distributed for free, it's more of a threat than Apple, who are worth more than Microsoft.
Because the site with an open source bias has a higher than average open source adoption rate, it is bigger threat than Apple?!
The alternative would be an echo chamber.
This site wouldn't exist if it weren't for the forum churn and flamebaiting headlines. There will always be Windows 7, Snow Leopard on 27" iMac, RHEL/OEL 5, Solaris 11 Express using individuals here that disagree that the IT world should revolve around your shitty free desktop software. I don't come here to be enlightened. I come for a fight. Don't be mislead by a fresh Safari hit that the person behind it is at all interested in "switching to" Linux.
This made me think about how funny it is that they tell us only criminals have something to hide when they screw our privacy. Now when we screw their privacy, they turn it all the way around and we are the criminals again.
I'm confused about who your 'they' and 'we' are. There are at least three sides to this scenario, government, Wikileaks, and you. What on Earth makes you think Wikileaks cares about _your_ privacy more than your government does? Not that either ultimately does, but one has a rule written in blood to protect it, and one openly doesn't give a shit. What is there to laugh about? Where do you think a log of all plates running under a red light camera would wind up? Information about a conflict of interest at work? A conflict of interest at home? Maybe your [future] employer would care to know if you smoked or drank. I know your insurance companies would kill to know how often you all stop at the liquor store.
My problem with all this Wikileaks nonsense is as long as someone else think's it's "bad", it's morally OK to air their dirty laundry now. Hell, it's even OK to sensationalize it and point out how clean it isn't.
Your government, right or wrong, does things considered good for the greater public. That is it's purpose. Can you say the same for Wikileaks? Please, think long and hard on that. What greater good do you hope it to accomplish for you and people of your country? Is it doing good things for international diplomacy? Is the good so danged long term I can't see it? Help me out.
If you are smart enough to quote Jefferson you should be smart enough to know how the US defines treason and why it wouldn't apply in this particular case....
Oh, I forgot the loophole where if you give someone else's secret information to another who then shares it with others, no treason was committed. Especially if it was done without coercion. Now I forgot what we call the folks on the receiving end? I'll try to put together the pieces I know. It's not treason on account of people from another country doing it... damn it... like treason, but committed by people from another state. Oh hell, I lost it again.
Sometimes I think if a foreign intelligence agency merely CC'd you all a copy of their reports you'd forgive their actions and lend them a hand. What a sick, sick place this is.
if a government is so scared of having something exposed; chances are it needs to be exposed
I read this as "If something is secret, it is bad" You should probably give this more thought. Please do.
I know geeks have a tendency to think EVERYTHING is a technology problem, and if there is no mathematical proof that something doesn't exist, it isn't properly secured. However, think about your personal security in the world right now, and the reasons for it. There is a lot more secrecy to it than science. Any private entity has reasons to keep secrets. So does your government. Remember, your public sector is a foreign, sovereign nation to someone else.
The "All information should be free" attitude attempts to devalue something inherently valuable. NO amount of giving something away makes it a zero-sum game. It has value, and that should be respected.
If Wikileaks can get this stuff, imagine what foreign intelligence agencies can do. The U.S. government needs security proportional to the value of the data.
I really like "If Wikileaks can get it..." like foreign intelligence is Serious Business (TM) and Wikileaks is not. If a foreign intelligence agency does it, poo on them, if Wikileaks does it, poo on us? Lets be clear. The scum giving information to Wikileaks are the same scum that does so for foreign agents. They are even lower scum for willingly doing so without coercion. This is a people problem. What drives Wikileaks to keep up the facade of a 'neutral' intelligence agency is beyond me. Is "We anonymously shuttle secrets to every foreign intelligence agency in the world." really a motto to be proud of? Does anyone think not being paid to do it lets the blood wash off their hands?
Why don't these people protest in front of a recruiting station or something? This will only get them scathing hatred from people who whether they favor their country's current state or not seek to defend it. You can't expect to be treated as anything other than a traitor by your countrymen and an enemy by others.
lol, did someone really just say that in the context of Objective-C? For all the things Apple has done right and does well, clinging on to Objective-C is not one of them.
Hey, I'll give you a chance for "Informative" points too.
It will be interesting to see if Apple respond to this and how. My feeling is that they might try and protect their assets and restrict developers' options. I haven't really thught this through but I just can't see Apple letting people develop apps for iPads and then recycling ostensibly the same code for some Sony gadget. It is not in their nature.
None of what you said makes any damned sense, but yah.. +1 interesting in the same way a crazy naked man screaming "the end of the world is near!" is I suppose.
BTW, the language & frameworks that iPad apps are built on is the same environment that most OS X apps are built on.
Not to say there shouldn't be any concerns, but Sony is a big boy with more lawyers than people reading this post...
Slashdot Mirror
But that would mean less power and money for them, and we can't have that. What gets me is how much the heads of other states are drooling over the prospect of the Russians assassinating people that work for Wikileaks. It's almost like they're too cowardly to take the next step into corruption that they so wish for, so are waiting for an already wholly corrupt government to do their dirty work for them.
No honor among thieves comes to mind. I don't think it would be an example of corruption any more than Wikileaks is an example of an international spy ring, with a clear intent to do harm to our foreign relations. Sometimes people just do things we don't understand, you know?
the only way he is alive, and there is wikileaks still, because he had done everything to put himself on the spotlight and keep people remembering him and wikileaks, so that assassinating him would be hard.
Does he hang garlic over his door to keep vampires out too? When has this ever been proven to make assassination HARD? I can think of dozens of cases it made things EASIER. The obvious ones being United States Presidents. If only they had brighter spotlights?
Governments, apparently, never learned the lesson of Napster. When Napster went, other free music sites were created. When those went, distributed torrent sites were created. When torrent sites go, another as yet unknown solution will occur.
Despite that, people are buying DRM locked music online now, and there is a healthy market for it. Had nobody intervened, would that be true?
Assange is a distraction and knows it. Chasing him wastes law enforcement resources and he knows that too. Wikileaks, the organization goes on while idiots chase their tails by chasing him. Moreover, if Wikileaks goes away, 10 more Wikileak clones will arise.
Really, no shit? Spies are as old as time. We STILL have to vigilantly protect secrets from ACTUAL SPIES. There is not much we can do about some douchebag conscientious objector with a clearance willingly handing over secrets to the like of Assange. If that becomes a systemic problem, the results will not not be pretty, and not good for those wanting more transparency. Wikileaks isn't the root problem, they are little abetting assholes.
In a wired world, the only way to do that is to play it straight, not lie and do what you say you'll do. As of yet, no political organization or movement in the USA is up to that task.
This whole "information should be free" crap makes me gag. Obviously, the only way we're to ever have world peace is if everyone... _stops doing bad things_. If only people knew the truth(TM) _bad things_ would stop happening!
This is sort of like your buddy getting pulled over by a cop, and when he asks "Do you know why I pulled you over?" You blurt out "speeding is bad!"
Why do you supposed they would BOTH look at you with contempt? It's because this isn't your game to play. Circle jerking to "speeding is bad" doesn't change the game.
Perhaps if governments stopped doing and saying such embarrassing things in written or recorded form this wouldn't be such an issue?
They should stop saying embarrassing things, or recording them? Which do you personally do?
What makes you all believe international diplomacy is so... mechanical?
Or, we'll look back as Wikileaks being the end of the Internet.
By the way, does Wikileaks change anybody's mind on the importance of Net Neutrality? Does anyone think that Wikileaks would ever exist in AT&T's Internet? Or in Apple's Internet? Or in Comcast's Internet? The jury is still out on Google, but I don't see any of the big companies that are opposed to net neutrality really having room for Wikileaks in their universe. Anyway, interesting times...
How has Wikileak's Internet presence been central to how secret info got from Manning to them to the Times? It could just as well have been an email distribution list, a chatroom, a fax, a package, etc.
You're looking at this as if it were a tech problem, and it isn't. It's a people problem, and that's a real lame strawman for Net Neutrality.
The way I see it, governments kill all kinds of people directly and indirectly in secret--and the U.S. has a particularly rich history of this. As such, I want every government's secrets to be plastered everywhere. The number of people that may conceivably die as a result of these leaks is absolutely nothing compared to what has been done in secret for decades. Of course, I'm a pacifist and an anarchist, so I consider the idea of having to balance secrecy and disclosure so that the state can continue to exist in its preferred form (I believe it's called "national security") kind of moot. YMMV.
So you already know this to be true, and what, nobody believes you, or what's the goal of plastering these "secrets" everywhere? No, I get it.. then we'd all be really, really, really, sure we weren't just imagine these things happen, and others would take us seriously, and future assassinations will be never carried out in secrecy. Wait, or no assassinations? Should we openly do what we're accusing them of doing or should they not do what we openly think they're doing anyway. fuck me I'm lost.
No, I get you though, if we blow this thing wide open, then we'll be _certain_ what we think is happening really is. Then.. we'll well, we'll be sure of it, that's for sure.
Brazil could be a good place for him to hide out at the moment - they have currently have a Federal Congressman [camara.gov.br] who is wanted by Interpol [interpol.int] for financial crimes.
I missed the part where corrupt politician wants to harbor man who makes a business of indiscriminately exposing dirty secrets. Oh, you were being sarcastic, as in "Brazil could be a nice place to die", I get it.
It's by no means unreasonable for him to believe he'd find himself thrown in a cell somewhere in the custody of someone he's pissed off. The US, for instance, want him on espionage charges - apparently they're unlikely to stick, but for someone who's caused as much embarrassment as Assange I can quite easily see this resulting in two or three years in a cell while they come to a conclusion one way or another.
I can't believe everyone here still thinks the U.S. government is currently his biggest threat, only to be succeeded by "big scary pharma" and "big scary bank" when he just pissed off the King of Saudi Arabia, President of Yemen, President of Pakistan, and that's just for starters.
Is American diplomatic power REALLY the scariest you all can imagine... AFTER the leaks and all? Could its workings be more in the open? Hellllooooo! Some of you mention that he'd better not piss off Russia or China, but personally embarrassing the leader of a rich, conservative Muslim country is A-O-K. Go on fear mongering the United States folks, pay no attention to the likelihood he made it on dozens of hit-lists with no diplomatic arm twisting whatsoever.
Just saying that's all. There might come a time he'd really wish to be in an American jail cell, and I honestly don't think he'll be that fortunate.
If I were him, I'd be praying the rest of the world he just pissed off was as corrupt as the US. Know what I mean?
Oooooooh, watch out for the big bad American boogyman, he'll put you in jaaaaaaail. The King over there that you outed making a reference to his nuke building neighbor as a snake who's head should roll, don't worry that he could buy your blood with one piece of his worst silverware.
If it is information about massive fraud and criminal enterprise against the public (and let's face it, that's exactly what it is going to be), it makes you an accomplice to a fucking hero.
And if it is another "oops, the camera DOES look like an RPG", what then? We all mentally masturbate to the "secret" information?
It's not like whistle blowing is ever merely about personal opinions, disagreement and grudges, right? Not evar.
If the secret actions and words of every "innocent person" were out for public scrutiny what would you expect? Most people cheat, steal, lie, oppress others, play dirty. Oh teh horrors of humanity. You can't change it, you can only make it more secret. How is that better? Sometimes that dirty little area between good and bad is all you're going to get. There is no good or bad. There is better and worse, but you need to figure out a system of measurement first. Morals & ethics have no measurements.
Humans are not anyone's definition of "perfect", get over it! This is small potatoes, somewhere out there, whole universes are eating each other. What about the children?!1
Just googling around, the penalty for shoplifting less than $50 worth of goods in California appears to be a mere "infraction" and $250 fine.
If you commandeer a vacant summer home for the summer, what is that worth? A criminal trespassing charge? Prorated mortgage payments? The average rental rate for the area? What if you illegally rent it out for a $beeeelion because of a rare Beatles reunion/Obama Bush boxing/NASA announces life on Moon event while the owners were on vacation in Tahiti. Is that owed to the owners?
If you steal a car, do you owe insurance costs, cab fare, difference in gasoline, refund for missed flight,cruise,shuttle trip to Mars,Obama Bush MMA bout when caught?
Whether the punishment is fair or not, clearly these are apples vs. oranges vs. avocados.
Good! Maybe one the shit blows up they can replace the 50 year old hardware that's been causing brownouts in California since the early 80s.
Really? This whole "liberally increase load until it breaks then blame them" attitude is a little mean. It's not fun at work when people unexpectedly double/triple load, be it CPU/RAM/storage/network/space, then blame the admins for lack of capacity. When I'm picking my jaw off the floor and explaining "you'll need a whole new disk array!!1, data center expansion, power run, switches ... [head burst]" you're the type of asshole that would say "good for you." Do you guys really think it's appropriate to impose the frequent, unnecessary, invasive, break:fix "upgrade" cycles typical of IT on critical infrastructure? If anything, IT needs to be a lot more conservative,and calculating when introducing change.
I'm less concerned with these leaks than I am with the day to day constitutional trampling the feds do, using all three branches of the government to leverage their oath-breaking.
Wow, best Us vs. Them I've ever read. I have a picture in my head of a Ganon-looking "fed" wielding an unholy triforce of doom.
I love the way you toss in "They" and "administration" as vague references to the entire federal government.
You should have gone all the way with "fed" singular, as opposed to "feds", and try to make an Obama reference next time.
Apple will find some other area that is lacking a polished product, introduce a iWhatever with a polish that is missing, and the slashdot community will cry "lame" once again. The price will be higher than "comparable" whatever, and Apple will sell gazillions in spite of what slashdot community thinks.
Apple knows how to make a profit where none seems to exist, in a market that looks like it is wallowing, in an economy that sucks. Apple will become the largest market cap company in the next 12 - 18 months. And slashdotters will say "lame" and still not get it.
What I hope people take home from this is that their formula can be used for success anywhere. There is low quality muck all around us. I know this will come out the wrong way, but here goes.. forget the lowest economic class. We're all getting robbed by "cheap" goods with low value/$ ratio. The middle class is where it's at baby, get out there and start making nice things for THEM, spread the wealth, make jobs, make the middle class larger! We want nice things, and we'll spend more money. Win-win. Might want to target the mega-rich more too. You want to see high margins, think platinum clad laptops.
P.S.
I think FLOSS has it backwards. I rip on it a lot, but it's because of this. $free is a way to increase adoption of free - I get it. But free is valuable!!!!! Nobody is being robbed at $0 regardless of quality I know, but IT pros, and the business employing them don't need any $free deals. Trust me. It's better all around to put your efforts towards better quality software, and charge what you think it's worth. You can still be effectively free without being $free. In every sense but the "free to give it away" part, which is frankly, just another gimmick to increase adoption rate, like $free.
This is why I enjoy watching all the Steve Jobs keynotes. The whole culture and sect like mentality behind Apple and its fanbase is not only hilarious, but very interesting to watch. Apple use weasel words constantly to give people (and its fans especially) that they are still the underdog company (in comparison to Microsoft of course).
Notice how Jobs almost always says 'we think this solution is the best' and 'we think this phone is the best ever'. The whole manipulation of words is amazing to watch. You may think this is purely something that happens, I am certain that this has been undertaken carefully by Apples marketing department (which I have an idea that Jobs leads).
Remember when rumours was roaming everywhere that Jobs would no longer attends Apple-events? Gosh, it was like the worst nightmare to all Apple fans!
A shorter alternative to this way of thinking about Apple and predicting their results is to just assume consumers are stupid and they like shiny things. And if it has a real brand on it, even better. Microsoft, HP, Dell, Lenovo and so on are not regarded as 'real brands' to most consumers. Apple is in Gucci-league.
This is why I enjoy watching all the Slashdot forums. The whole culture and sect like mentality behind OSS and it's fanbase is not only hilarious, but very interesting to watch. They use weasel words constantly to give people (and it's fans especially) the impression that they are still the underdog community (in comparison to Microsoft/Apple/Sony of course).
Notice how they almost always say 'we think this solution is the best' and 'we think this phone is the best ever'. The whole manipulation of words is amazing to watch. You may think this is purely something that happens, I am certain that this has been undertaken carefully by OSI's marketing department (which I have an idea is festering with freetards).
Remember when rumors were roaming everywhere that RMS would no longer attend OSS-events? Gosh, it was like the worst nightmare to all OSS fans!
A shorter alternative to this way of thinking about OSS and predicting their results is to just assume consumers are practical and they like shiny things. If it has a real brand on it, even better. Microsoft, HP, Dell, Lenovo and so on are regarded as 'real brands' to most consumers. OSS is in Ghetto-league.
-- P.S.
I spent more time correcting your grammar than finding truthful substitutions.
Do you know why they "don't care"? MARGINS!
Big, fat, juicy margins...nothing to do with start-ups.
Right, because selling high end products with high margins is such an obvious thing to do for a large, established business during a recession. Because you know, they aren't in the least bit traditionally conservative.
Maybe if you screamed "MOUNTAINS OF CASH" you'd be onto something, but they avoided a race to the bottom during a recession, that's something. Not like they're the ONLY ones trying or anything though, 3DTV, 3D movies, EVs, hybrids, etc...
Yes, a large portion of the visitors to slashdot use Windows. Then again, when compared to the general population, a large portion don't. That so many Windows users see value in, and frequent, a site that is definitely pro-linux/bsd/open source, and what is arguably, even with all the "web 2.0" junk, the most influential tech forum on the net, says that Ballmer is right when Microsoft tells the SEC that linux and open source are the biggest threat to Microsoft.
Wait, how does a pro-open source tech site having majority Windows using readers prove open source is the biggest threat to Microsoft? You don't know the proportion of Windows users that are interested in Linux, you only know the proportion of tech site readers that use Windows. Are you really extrapolating tech site readership out to the general population?!
Think about it - even with less than 1% of the desktop, and being distributed for free, it's more of a threat than Apple, who are worth more than Microsoft.
Because the site with an open source bias has a higher than average open source adoption rate, it is bigger threat than Apple?!
The alternative would be an echo chamber.
This site wouldn't exist if it weren't for the forum churn and flamebaiting headlines. There will always be Windows 7, Snow Leopard on 27" iMac, RHEL/OEL 5, Solaris 11 Express using individuals here that disagree that the IT world should revolve around your shitty free desktop software. I don't come here to be enlightened. I come for a fight. Don't be mislead by a fresh Safari hit that the person behind it is at all interested in "switching to" Linux.
This made me think about how funny it is that they tell us only criminals have something to hide when they screw our privacy. Now when we screw their privacy, they turn it all the way around and we are the criminals again.
I'm confused about who your 'they' and 'we' are. There are at least three sides to this scenario, government, Wikileaks, and you. What on Earth makes you think Wikileaks cares about _your_ privacy more than your government does? Not that either ultimately does, but one has a rule written in blood to protect it, and one openly doesn't give a shit. What is there to laugh about? Where do you think a log of all plates running under a red light camera would wind up? Information about a conflict of interest at work? A conflict of interest at home? Maybe your [future] employer would care to know if you smoked or drank. I know your insurance companies would kill to know how often you all stop at the liquor store.
My problem with all this Wikileaks nonsense is as long as someone else think's it's "bad", it's morally OK to air their dirty laundry now. Hell, it's even OK to sensationalize it and point out how clean it isn't.
Your government, right or wrong, does things considered good for the greater public. That is it's purpose. Can you say the same for Wikileaks? Please, think long and hard on that. What greater good do you hope it to accomplish for you and people of your country? Is it doing good things for international diplomacy? Is the good so danged long term I can't see it? Help me out.
If you are smart enough to quote Jefferson you should be smart enough to know how the US defines treason and why it wouldn't apply in this particular case....
Oh, I forgot the loophole where if you give someone else's secret information to another who then shares it with others, no treason was committed. Especially if it was done without coercion. Now I forgot what we call the folks on the receiving end? I'll try to put together the pieces I know. It's not treason on account of people from another country doing it... damn it... like treason, but committed by people from another state. Oh hell, I lost it again.
Sometimes I think if a foreign intelligence agency merely CC'd you all a copy of their reports you'd forgive their actions and lend them a hand. What a sick, sick place this is.
Don't want to end up red-faced?
Then don't engage in pointless wars started over lies. It's that simple.
Enjoy the red light cameras and downtown CCTV coverage. Don't do bad things, it's simple.
- The Gov't
"All information should be free" is a slippery slope.
if a government is so scared of having something exposed; chances are it needs to be exposed
I read this as "If something is secret, it is bad" You should probably give this more thought. Please do.
I know geeks have a tendency to think EVERYTHING is a technology problem, and if there is no mathematical proof that something doesn't exist, it isn't properly secured. However, think about your personal security in the world right now, and the reasons for it. There is a lot more secrecy to it than science. Any private entity has reasons to keep secrets. So does your government. Remember, your public sector is a foreign, sovereign nation to someone else.
The "All information should be free" attitude attempts to devalue something inherently valuable. NO amount of giving something away makes it a zero-sum game. It has value, and that should be respected.
If Wikileaks can get this stuff, imagine what foreign intelligence agencies can do. The U.S. government needs security proportional to the value of the data.
I really like "If Wikileaks can get it..." like foreign intelligence is Serious Business (TM) and Wikileaks is not. If a foreign intelligence agency does it, poo on them, if Wikileaks does it, poo on us? Lets be clear. The scum giving information to Wikileaks are the same scum that does so for foreign agents. They are even lower scum for willingly doing so without coercion. This is a people problem. What drives Wikileaks to keep up the facade of a 'neutral' intelligence agency is beyond me. Is "We anonymously shuttle secrets to every foreign intelligence agency in the world." really a motto to be proud of? Does anyone think not being paid to do it lets the blood wash off their hands?
Why don't these people protest in front of a recruiting station or something? This will only get them scathing hatred from people who whether they favor their country's current state or not seek to defend it. You can't expect to be treated as anything other than a traitor by your countrymen and an enemy by others.
lol, did someone really just say that in the context of Objective-C? For all the things Apple has done right and does well, clinging on to Objective-C is not one of them.
Hey, I'll give you a chance for "Informative" points too.
Why?
It will be interesting to see if Apple respond to this and how. My feeling is that they might try and protect their assets and restrict developers' options. I haven't really thught this through but I just can't see Apple letting people develop apps for iPads and then recycling ostensibly the same code for some Sony gadget. It is not in their nature.
None of what you said makes any damned sense, but yah.. +1 interesting in the same way a crazy naked man screaming "the end of the world is near!" is I suppose.
BTW, the language & frameworks that iPad apps are built on is the same environment that most OS X apps are built on.
Not to say there shouldn't be any concerns, but Sony is a big boy with more lawyers than people reading this post...
Of course, somebody sharp could submit a patch ... oh wait.
I made a 3rd party patch already, it's available for download at http://fileservz.it:8080/sd.kfg?freetard=true
You can trust me, I'm an open source community member.
T. Monkey
He says, on Slashdot, on the web, on the internet ...
Err... like we can't walk around and say our government sucks?