Not really scum. For capitalism to work you need things like this - by installing mal/spy/adware on to the computers of users who don't know enough about malware to stop it, jobs are created for people who charge to clean out your computer, at the same time, the malware company is making money from the advertising before the computer is cleaned, this means that work has been 'created' and as we know work -> profit through supply and demand - the users who object to the advertising will mostly pay for its removal, while the users who like the advertising (which may be quite small) buy the advertised products. Removing yourself from the low end of this system (the poor malware infested user) is simple - you just need the knowledge to install a firewall, quit IE, install regular patches, run adware removal software or switch OS. Its a beautiful ecosystem of money with complex interactions and circles, while it may make absolutely no sense to the technically minded that stupid advertising and malware can create good, to the business minded person it means money! Oddly enough I never really understood things like this until I sold out and started learning things like Flash and C#.NET, also i think my student debt helped too.
Think of it from their view - imagine you had invented the technology to beam adverts directly to peoples heads and also found the legal loophole to charge them for it - you could be rich! and all it would take would be a little selling out...
Some of what hes said isnt entirely true - you could certainly find any rigging from looking at the binary, it might take allot of work but it would always be possible. What you really need is to have the program stored on a memory card in the machine, you could then design it to write over the incriminating parts of itself after the election. You would need two versions of the source code - one would be the dirty original which you would want to keep secret and the other would be the 'public' version which would compile to the identical binary that was in the machine after it had over-written itself, obviously you would have to prevent inspection of the binary in the machines until after the election and the whole thing would be very difficult to design, but do-able. Come to think of it, the diebold machines stored their programs on flash didnt they?
IE is a good stabiliser if nothing else, because they (or at least they used to) have a pretty much total share of the browser market, they controlled the basic default browser configuration. They kept the entire net advertising industry stable for years because most people are too lazy to install ad-blockers or change their settings. But a mass migration to firefox will change all that, Mozilla will then control the default configuration and pretty much have the power to shut down the entire net advertising industry overnight. Of course an industry like that wont go down easily: they will adapt and find new ways to push adverts, you would probably have to answer a specific question about an advert to get into a site or maybe something even more obtrusive than even the worst pop ups. Which is why we should probably bite the bullet and keep the market stable - obviously we don't have to look at adverts, but for the sake of making some advertisers happy, we might have to make sure everyone else does?
But really the OS wars are down to two: POSIX/*nix/whatever you want to call it and Windows Technology(r), and there are two wars, one for the desktop and one for the server (lets ignore embedded for the moment).
Well whoever does the censoring at the moment will just be put incharge of flagging certain bits of the program, infact, let the PTC do it if they want! Who cares if they flag the whole thing! the point is, everyone will have the choice of turning it on or off.
The stupid thing is that the entire issue of TV censorship could be solved with bloody technology: you either have a V-chip device that looks for a signal to block content or you scramble the censored bits and have a cheap device to unscramble them. The worst thing is that the transition to digital would have been the _perfect_ time to fix this stupid thing once and for all, people are falling over themselves to get a 'broadcast' flag but no-one wants a 'censor' flag? why? it would be so insanely easy to build into the specs and you could even censor a tv image on a dct block scale! it would be a perfect system: if you want censorship you select it and set a password, if not you dont, problem solved, half the FCCs time saved. WTF isnt this happening?? unlike internet filters this would be pretty much perfect, you could even have different flags for say 18 vs PG etc!
Countries that dont have a Data Protection Act like *cough* the USA need to get one, and countries that do need to add a clause to stop any stupid loop-holes. Oh and also kick people like Blunkett out who want to shit all over the DPA for no reason.
Totally - Before the net people used to have recipe books, know basic calculations and be able to use a phone book to call various places for timetables or even go out and ask someone. Now we have become a generation who doesnt even know how to buy hardcore porn from the top shelf of the local shop! i don't think ive ever phoned a cinema to find out a film time, i dont think ive ever even opened the offline yellow pages! And in my entire life, ive never written and posted a letter!
The only good vigilantes have ever done is to hold someone and wait for the police to get there, not tie them to the back of their trailor and drag them accross town to the police station.
The government is an elected body that (in theory anyway) represents everyone and has to act as the highest power in the land or else there is chaos, that doesnt give groups of people the right to act as the highest power and do what they like. Terrorists are vigilantes! you think they are killing people for fun? they have reasons behind what they do and thats exactly what is wrong with them - they are judge jury and exicutioner vigilantes.
Vigilante really means "someone who thinks they are above everyone else and the law" which is basically the same definition as a criminal. In fact I would even go as far as to say Lycos are worse than spammers in principle - spammers don't target individuals they mail everyone they can find, and separate spam groups don't collaborate to fill your box, they are all independently adding their contribution. Vigilantes often make mistakes and because of their revenge attitude their punishment is often worse than the original crime. Take the recent Mexico City lynch mob, not only did they get the wrong people, but their burning someone to death demonstrated that they were far sicker than even the worst of those they were trying to target. Vigilantes are just wrong. Lycos should be prosecuted if they've broken the law on this, otherwise the law needs to be revised.
We can find a solution to spam and it doesn't need to involve stupidity.
How about just downloading everything on the net? You can get any decent show online (ie people watch the crap and filter it out for you) ad-free and at any time you want, with tactics like repeating the same brainless irritating advert with annoying music, breaks every few minutes, and sticking sucky station logos all over the screen and then charging you, and extra for special events and porn, its a wonder why anyone watches it in the first place? Just stop watching and switch your cable subscription to a fast net connection and ignore tv for now. Sure they will go out of business and shows will stop being made, then you can watch a few repeats until they get their act together and start giving customers a better deal.
Is this basically the same as the Data Protection Act except limited to only 3 organisations? In the UK and Europe (maybe since the '80s?) you have access at any time to any information that any organisation keeps on you for any reason (including the police) and you have the right to know the reason and how the data will be used and that it will be kept secure from others..
Just attach a high-powered rifle on a robotic rig (from that recent 'web cam gun') to this baby and stick it in a blimp and you could solve a city's crime problems in a day! (yeah im anti gun rights, sue me).
Why would you even need a single sign-on? most browsers have password managers (for people who are happy to use them) and anyone who is too paranoid to store things on their own machine probably isnt going to be to happy trusting a 3rd party. Microsoft Passport is _not_ going to catch on unless companies can have it for free and on their platform. If systems like Worldpay started using it (they would have to trust it) then maybe it would work out, but most stores dont ask to store your card number and most people dont want to. Plus no single-sign-on system will ever be free of the two major problems: 1) don't put all your eggs in one basket and 2) just like credit cards there will always be more than one passport system and not all stores will take them all so you will have to sign up with most of them.
Why would any government actually want to pay Microsoft any money when they could pirate the software instead? whats Microsoft going to do? come and sue them? yes I know its more complicated than that and there are all sorts of WTO issues not to mention plain diplomacy, but if were talking about a country that doesnt care, then seriously? why not just open up big government-run CD presses and start churning out copies of Windows for your country?
Yes, I'm sure this will help the whole legal case; defacement has always been such a valued piece of input in court *cough*.
Actually, if you managed to kill their revenue enough from defacing like this, they would have to fire all their lawyers and hence would loose the case.
P2P going towards a friends network
on
Skype + Kazaa = ?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I guess it makes it into more of a friends network. In the end the RIAA is going to have to sue real friends who swap CDs, send music over their IM file-transfer and listen to eachothers streams. Hows it going to look the next time they sue someone who's been sharing songs with his sister on Kazaa?
For fucks sake, why are they even considering wireless chips? what is the mother fucking point? if these incompetent fools are the people in charge of security then we're all screwed. Someone please explain why they are doing it this way instead of with old tried and tested smart card chips? and don't bother spouting crap about 'contacts wearing out' thats bull and you know it, i use my debit smart-card every day and it works fine, and when it does wear out ill just bloody well get off my ass and get a new one instead of being a lazy prick and having my card on offer to anyone with a reader. This is probably the same thing that fuck-face David Blunkett is going to use for our little nanny cards, it makes me sick that we live in a world full of idiots.
Anyone see a problem with ISPs just implementing challenge-response systems on their servers?? (i.e if you send an email to someone for the first time the server will send a reply with some kind of human-prooving question, then if you get it right your emails will always go through to that address). I don't see why everyone is going nuts with stupid laws and DDoS'ing (it is a DDoS at heart no matter how they try and phrase it). Why isnt this done? - plus gmails anti-spam system works like a dream:)
The problem is how do you handle all the things it can build? Anyone would be able to create explosives, weapons, dangerous chemicals or even biological things! One thing you absolutely cannot do is rely on the system 'restricting' what you can build because thats just not going to work. so whats going to happen? anyone?
Slashdot Mirror
Not really scum. For capitalism to work you need things like this - by installing mal/spy/adware on to the computers of users who don't know enough about malware to stop it, jobs are created for people who charge to clean out your computer, at the same time, the malware company is making money from the advertising before the computer is cleaned, this means that work has been 'created' and as we know work -> profit through supply and demand - the users who object to the advertising will mostly pay for its removal, while the users who like the advertising (which may be quite small) buy the advertised products. Removing yourself from the low end of this system (the poor malware infested user) is simple - you just need the knowledge to install a firewall, quit IE, install regular patches, run adware removal software or switch OS. Its a beautiful ecosystem of money with complex interactions and circles, while it may make absolutely no sense to the technically minded that stupid advertising and malware can create good, to the business minded person it means money! Oddly enough I never really understood things like this until I sold out and started learning things like Flash and C#.NET, also i think my student debt helped too.
Think of it from their view - imagine you had invented the technology to beam adverts directly to peoples heads and also found the legal loophole to charge them for it - you could be rich! and all it would take would be a little selling out...
Someone should point out to Apple that Nov. 7 2000 is a smaller date than Dec 8 2000, case closed, Apple go home.
Some of what hes said isnt entirely true - you could certainly find any rigging from looking at the binary, it might take allot of work but it would always be possible. What you really need is to have the program stored on a memory card in the machine, you could then design it to write over the incriminating parts of itself after the election. You would need two versions of the source code - one would be the dirty original which you would want to keep secret and the other would be the 'public' version which would compile to the identical binary that was in the machine after it had over-written itself, obviously you would have to prevent inspection of the binary in the machines until after the election and the whole thing would be very difficult to design, but do-able. Come to think of it, the diebold machines stored their programs on flash didnt they?
IE is a good stabiliser if nothing else, because they (or at least they used to) have a pretty much total share of the browser market, they controlled the basic default browser configuration. They kept the entire net advertising industry stable for years because most people are too lazy to install ad-blockers or change their settings. But a mass migration to firefox will change all that, Mozilla will then control the default configuration and pretty much have the power to shut down the entire net advertising industry overnight. Of course an industry like that wont go down easily: they will adapt and find new ways to push adverts, you would probably have to answer a specific question about an advert to get into a site or maybe something even more obtrusive than even the worst pop ups. Which is why we should probably bite the bullet and keep the market stable - obviously we don't have to look at adverts, but for the sake of making some advertisers happy, we might have to make sure everyone else does?
But really the OS wars are down to two: POSIX/*nix/whatever you want to call it and Windows Technology(r), and there are two wars, one for the desktop and one for the server (lets ignore embedded for the moment).
Well whoever does the censoring at the moment will just be put incharge of flagging certain bits of the program, infact, let the PTC do it if they want! Who cares if they flag the whole thing! the point is, everyone will have the choice of turning it on or off.
The stupid thing is that the entire issue of TV censorship could be solved with bloody technology: you either have a V-chip device that looks for a signal to block content or you scramble the censored bits and have a cheap device to unscramble them. The worst thing is that the transition to digital would have been the _perfect_ time to fix this stupid thing once and for all, people are falling over themselves to get a 'broadcast' flag but no-one wants a 'censor' flag? why? it would be so insanely easy to build into the specs and you could even censor a tv image on a dct block scale! it would be a perfect system: if you want censorship you select it and set a password, if not you dont, problem solved, half the FCCs time saved. WTF isnt this happening?? unlike internet filters this would be pretty much perfect, you could even have different flags for say 18 vs PG etc!
If you read the small print you would see that all the money is going to a special single-task probe to search for images of Jesus on Mars.
Countries that dont have a Data Protection Act like *cough* the USA need to get one, and countries that do need to add a clause to stop any stupid loop-holes. Oh and also kick people like Blunkett out who want to shit all over the DPA for no reason.
Totally - Before the net people used to have recipe books, know basic calculations and be able to use a phone book to call various places for timetables or even go out and ask someone. Now we have become a generation who doesnt even know how to buy hardcore porn from the top shelf of the local shop! i don't think ive ever phoned a cinema to find out a film time, i dont think ive ever even opened the offline yellow pages! And in my entire life, ive never written and posted a letter!
The only good vigilantes have ever done is to hold someone and wait for the police to get there, not tie them to the back of their trailor and drag them accross town to the police station.
The government is an elected body that (in theory anyway) represents everyone and has to act as the highest power in the land or else there is chaos, that doesnt give groups of people the right to act as the highest power and do what they like. Terrorists are vigilantes! you think they are killing people for fun? they have reasons behind what they do and thats exactly what is wrong with them - they are judge jury and exicutioner vigilantes.
Vigilante really means "someone who thinks they are above everyone else and the law" which is basically the same definition as a criminal. In fact I would even go as far as to say Lycos are worse than spammers in principle - spammers don't target individuals they mail everyone they can find, and separate spam groups don't collaborate to fill your box, they are all independently adding their contribution. Vigilantes often make mistakes and because of their revenge attitude their punishment is often worse than the original crime. Take the recent Mexico City lynch mob, not only did they get the wrong people, but their burning someone to death demonstrated that they were far sicker than even the worst of those they were trying to target. Vigilantes are just wrong. Lycos should be prosecuted if they've broken the law on this, otherwise the law needs to be revised.
We can find a solution to spam and it doesn't need to involve stupidity.
4000 people dead? why didnt someone declare a "War on Corporate Ignorance of Safety"? oh wait they were Indian deaths...
I took it to mean everyone having too much sex...
How about just downloading everything on the net? You can get any decent show online (ie people watch the crap and filter it out for you) ad-free and at any time you want, with tactics like repeating the same brainless irritating advert with annoying music, breaks every few minutes, and sticking sucky station logos all over the screen and then charging you, and extra for special events and porn, its a wonder why anyone watches it in the first place? Just stop watching and switch your cable subscription to a fast net connection and ignore tv for now. Sure they will go out of business and shows will stop being made, then you can watch a few repeats until they get their act together and start giving customers a better deal.
Is this basically the same as the Data Protection Act except limited to only 3 organisations? In the UK and Europe (maybe since the '80s?) you have access at any time to any information that any organisation keeps on you for any reason (including the police) and you have the right to know the reason and how the data will be used and that it will be kept secure from others..
Just attach a high-powered rifle on a robotic rig (from that recent 'web cam gun') to this baby and stick it in a blimp and you could solve a city's crime problems in a day! (yeah im anti gun rights, sue me).
Why would you even need a single sign-on? most browsers have password managers (for people who are happy to use them) and anyone who is too paranoid to store things on their own machine probably isnt going to be to happy trusting a 3rd party. Microsoft Passport is _not_ going to catch on unless companies can have it for free and on their platform. If systems like Worldpay started using it (they would have to trust it) then maybe it would work out, but most stores dont ask to store your card number and most people dont want to. Plus no single-sign-on system will ever be free of the two major problems: 1) don't put all your eggs in one basket and 2) just like credit cards there will always be more than one passport system and not all stores will take them all so you will have to sign up with most of them.
Why would any government actually want to pay Microsoft any money when they could pirate the software instead? whats Microsoft going to do? come and sue them? yes I know its more complicated than that and there are all sorts of WTO issues not to mention plain diplomacy, but if were talking about a country that doesnt care, then seriously? why not just open up big government-run CD presses and start churning out copies of Windows for your country?
Yes, I'm sure this will help the whole legal case; defacement has always been such a valued piece of input in court *cough*.
Actually, if you managed to kill their revenue enough from defacing like this, they would have to fire all their lawyers and hence would loose the case.
I guess it makes it into more of a friends network. In the end the RIAA is going to have to sue real friends who swap CDs, send music over their IM file-transfer and listen to eachothers streams. Hows it going to look the next time they sue someone who's been sharing songs with his sister on Kazaa?
For fucks sake, why are they even considering wireless chips? what is the mother fucking point? if these incompetent fools are the people in charge of security then we're all screwed. Someone please explain why they are doing it this way instead of with old tried and tested smart card chips? and don't bother spouting crap about 'contacts wearing out' thats bull and you know it, i use my debit smart-card every day and it works fine, and when it does wear out ill just bloody well get off my ass and get a new one instead of being a lazy prick and having my card on offer to anyone with a reader. This is probably the same thing that fuck-face David Blunkett is going to use for our little nanny cards, it makes me sick that we live in a world full of idiots.
Sounds abit like the war on terror..
:)
Anyone see a problem with ISPs just implementing challenge-response systems on their servers?? (i.e if you send an email to someone for the first time the server will send a reply with some kind of human-prooving question, then if you get it right your emails will always go through to that address). I don't see why everyone is going nuts with stupid laws and DDoS'ing (it is a DDoS at heart no matter how they try and phrase it). Why isnt this done? - plus gmails anti-spam system works like a dream
..but they could have made much more if it wasnt for those pirates eh?
The problem is how do you handle all the things it can build? Anyone would be able to create explosives, weapons, dangerous chemicals or even biological things! One thing you absolutely cannot do is rely on the system 'restricting' what you can build because thats just not going to work. so whats going to happen? anyone?