Mail it to himself? Why bother? All he's gotta do is encrypt it using his method then post it in a whole bunch of Usenet newsgroups. If his method is really as good as he says it is...
...how you'll be identified, tracked, and monitored online.
The post by Michael doesn't necessarily imply that Digital IDs are good or
bad. However, most discussions here on Slashdot tend to demonize Digital
IDs as an invasion of privacy. Consumers want Digital IDs so they
can be securely identified when making purchases or logging into a computer
network over the unsecured Internet. Do not confuse the issue of anonymity
with identification schemes. The Internet currently has no such IDs or
strict authentication, yet law enforcement can still track down perpetrators of
illegal activity.
What we want is the option of being completely secure or completely
anonymous. Neither task is a simple one.
Re:of course 15 coders makes for less bugs
on
Open Source Studies
·
· Score: 2
Do gas pumps with multiple nozzles freak you out too? Pepsi and Coke?
Who was making silly generalizations? Whoa, maybe you really should proofread.
Wanna bet I can use your "technique" on pictures of say, the statue of liberty, and still find at least two pictures that looks so close you'd swear they were taken at the same time by the same camera?
Copy protection is everyone's issue. I'd like to find an easy way to prove the artwork on my website were lifted and posted somewhere else. What about freelance photographers selling pictures to news organizations? It's not all corporate evil.
Re:of course 15 coders makes for less bugs
on
Open Source Studies
·
· Score: 2
Besides, integrating IE into Windows makes their development environment
LESS complex -- it allows them to reuse code between pieces of software MUCH
more efficiently. Your OS no longer needs software to display JPGs, GIFs, or to
even browse the filesystem. Why, because the browser does it for you.
Two things:
It's more complex from a design perspective since you have to take into
account not just the application at hand, but a whole slew of other apps
that can share the same codebase that may have nothing to do with the
Internet or web browsing, per se. By doing all that research up
front, you do save time in coding. Meanwhile, Linux users are
bickering over the GUI and whether it's a good idea to standardize KDE and
Gnome.
Code reuse is a GOOD thing. Hmmm...add that one to the closed source
software pile.
Re:of course 15 coders makes for less bugs
on
Open Source Studies
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Do you really think that projects like Apache, OpenOffice, Mozilla, Xfree86, and Linux are less complex than say, IIS, Word, IE, or Win98?
Yes. They are. Microsoft products don't just end at the product
itself. They try to integrate their products into the OS. Internet
Explorer just isn't a web browser. If it were, you'd never be able to have
the level of security holes as it does. Without getting into a debate over
whether or not it makes sense to integrate the browser into the OS, just realize
that part of IE development is the OS development itself. On the whole,
none of these projects are as complex.
It depends how you define successful.
Yes, Apache and Mozilla are great products, but if there are so great, why
aren't people dropping their closed source software and downloading their open
source counterparts in droves? Hell, the two examples given are not only
open source, but they're free!
Obviously it all can't be a success. How about the downsides? What about
time to market? How long did Mozilla take to deliver a 1.0? What about
lack of common features that customers want? (When I say customers, I mean
the target audience as a whole, not just the geek community.)
// Decide browser version var ns4 = (document.layers)? true:false; var ns6 = (document.getElementById)? true:false; var ie4 = (document.all)? true:false; var ie5 = false;
// Microsoft Stupidity Check(tm). if (ie4) { if ((navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') > 0) || (navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 6') > 0)) { ie5 = true; } if (ns6) { ns6 = false; } }
This is useful because IE 5 and IE 6.0 will pass the NS 6 check.
Perhaps you are implying that I shouldn't have relied on Taco's spelling
of the old name for a product whose history I know nothing about. In that case...I agree!
There are a few nifty little games you can play as well. The form factor of the device is fairly similiar to a Gameboy Advanced, and when held in that position, makes a reasonable gaming platform.
I'm assuming what was meant that when the sidekick is held as if it were a
Gameboy Advance, it has a similar feel and would make a reasonable gaming
platform. Is this just a comment on the ergonomics or did you actually
play any games for it? Are there any games yet?
You get a good keyboard, a web browser, and a remarkably bright screen.
How well did the web browser handle web sites? Is it XHTML 1.0 compliant?
Was it fast?
Isn't this supposed to be a review? Geez, getting information about this thing
it's like pulling teeth!
I'm nothing if not a toy junky, and when Danger sent me at long last, a review unit of their excellent little HoTop PDA/Cellphone, now known as the T-Mobile Sidekick. I jumped at the chance to get into the thing and get my opinions out there.
Jesus...let's try this again...
I'm a self-proclaimed toy junky. So when Danger finally sent me a review unit of their excellent little HoTop
PDA/Cellphone (now known as the T-Mobile Sidekick), I jumped at the chance to
try it out and get my opinions published.
Nope, that's called "bi-amping." That at least MIGHT be plausible assuming you could prove that the amplifier couldn't handle the load of both the woofer and tweeter simultaneously. If that's the case, just buy a better amplifer instead of doubling the cost by buying two inferior amps.
It's all moot since I've never seen anyone provide any actual PROOF that bi-amping actually works.
My brother got talked into "bi-wiring" his home speakers. What that means is two sets of wires going to the EXACT SAME CONTACT on the amplifier output that SOMEHOW is supposed to improve the sound quality. The cable had four very THIN wires in a huge casing. Uh...the THICKER the wire the BETTER. I convinced him to use an inexpensive alternative...Romex with gold platted bananna plugs! Now his speakers sound better than ever.
They probably would have if someone would have simply made a Firewire - USB hub. How else are you gonna plug that Intellimouse Explorer or USB keyboard into the firewire port? Sad. Yet another superior technology getting burned because of a lake of proper marketing.
You think they might have done this? I'm positive of it. I'll bet there's a concerted effort to cull these questions and answers and proliferate them to whatever group the students are associated with.
When I was an undergrad, I found that many cliques of students had access to past exams, answer keys, teacher's manuals, etc.
Pissed me off till no end that these bastards had an unfair advantage over me.
You cannot ever hope to complete even ONE level of any modern game on a single coin. (Okay, 50 cents.) The games are designed to make sure you get killed off quickly and must pump more quarters into the machine just to continue. I know this may seems like a great idea to get more income, but in the end it just frustrates the game player. And yeah, home consoles are right up there in graphics and sound with the "full blown" arcade machines, so why bother going to the arcade?
Sure you can. Sell it for a price that makes the act of piracy an unworthwhile endeavor.
If MS really wants to enforce a strict DRM policy, they've got to sell their product for a hell of a lot cheaper. Imagine if Windows XP only cost $20-$30 and MS enforced super-strict protection on the serial numbers? Who's going to bother using a cracked version of XP and take the risk of MS disabling their PC when the legal alternative is so cheap?
Perhaps the reason no one registered you product is because no one found it to be useful enough to pay
for. Your program offers less to the hardcore HTML coder than a fancy text editor and
is not nearly as robust as a full blown GUI product.
I'm sorry if this sounds like flamebait, but your complaint is the same one that
many other software developers cry when their product doesn't generate the
revenue they expected.
I always pictured Mike Jittlov as a good fit for Ford Prefect. Who is he? Ever see the "Wizard of Speed and Time?" Neither has most people.
Anyway, how about Howard Stern as good 'ol Zhaphod? Imagine two of those heads on the big screen. If this were twenty years ago, I'd have to say Eric Idle would be the perfect Arthur Dent. Besides him being too old, he's been typecast in that role so many times, I'd be sick of seeing him play it yet again.
Slashdot Mirror
Mail it to himself? Why bother? All he's gotta do is encrypt it using his method then post it in a whole bunch of Usenet newsgroups. If his method is really as good as he says it is...
...how you'll be identified, tracked, and monitored online.
The post by Michael doesn't necessarily imply that Digital IDs are good or bad. However, most discussions here on Slashdot tend to demonize Digital IDs as an invasion of privacy. Consumers want Digital IDs so they can be securely identified when making purchases or logging into a computer network over the unsecured Internet. Do not confuse the issue of anonymity with identification schemes. The Internet currently has no such IDs or strict authentication, yet law enforcement can still track down perpetrators of illegal activity.
What we want is the option of being completely secure or completely anonymous. Neither task is a simple one.
Do gas pumps with multiple nozzles freak you out too? Pepsi and Coke?
Who was making silly generalizations? Whoa, maybe you really should proofread.
Wanna bet I can use your "technique" on pictures of say, the statue of liberty, and still find at least two pictures that looks so close you'd swear they were taken at the same time by the same camera?
Copy protection is everyone's issue. I'd like to find an easy way to prove the artwork on my website were lifted and posted somewhere else. What about freelance photographers selling pictures to news organizations? It's not all corporate evil.
Besides, integrating IE into Windows makes their development environment LESS complex -- it allows them to reuse code between pieces of software MUCH more efficiently. Your OS no longer needs software to display JPGs, GIFs, or to even browse the filesystem. Why, because the browser does it for you.
Two things:
Do you really think that projects like Apache, OpenOffice, Mozilla, Xfree86, and Linux are less complex than say, IIS, Word, IE, or Win98?
Yes. They are. Microsoft products don't just end at the product itself. They try to integrate their products into the OS. Internet Explorer just isn't a web browser. If it were, you'd never be able to have the level of security holes as it does. Without getting into a debate over whether or not it makes sense to integrate the browser into the OS, just realize that part of IE development is the OS development itself. On the whole, none of these projects are as complex.
It depends how you define successful. Yes, Apache and Mozilla are great products, but if there are so great, why aren't people dropping their closed source software and downloading their open source counterparts in droves? Hell, the two examples given are not only open source, but they're free!
Obviously it all can't be a success. How about the downsides? What about time to market? How long did Mozilla take to deliver a 1.0? What about lack of common features that customers want? (When I say customers, I mean the target audience as a whole, not just the geek community.)
I use the following ripped from overlib:
// Decide browser version
var ns4 = (document.layers)? true:false;
var ns6 = (document.getElementById)? true:false;
var ie4 = (document.all)? true:false;
var ie5 = false;
// Microsoft Stupidity Check(tm).
if (ie4) {
if ((navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') > 0) || (navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 6') > 0)) {
ie5 = true;
}
if (ns6) {
ns6 = false;
}
}
This is useful because IE 5 and IE 6.0 will pass the NS 6 check.
Um, because I had no idea what the old name was.
Perhaps you are implying that I shouldn't have relied on Taco's spelling of the old name for a product whose history I know nothing about. In that case...I agree!
There are a few nifty little games you can play as well. The form factor of the device is fairly similiar to a Gameboy Advanced, and when held in that position, makes a reasonable gaming platform.
I'm assuming what was meant that when the sidekick is held as if it were a Gameboy Advance, it has a similar feel and would make a reasonable gaming platform. Is this just a comment on the ergonomics or did you actually play any games for it? Are there any games yet?
You get a good keyboard, a web browser, and a remarkably bright screen.
How well did the web browser handle web sites? Is it XHTML 1.0 compliant? Was it fast?
Isn't this supposed to be a review? Geez, getting information about this thing it's like pulling teeth!
There also is IM functionality, but no IRC.
Whose IM client is it compatible with? AOL?
I'm nothing if not a toy junky, and when Danger sent me at long last, a review unit of their excellent little HoTop PDA/Cellphone, now known as the T-Mobile Sidekick. I jumped at the chance to get into the thing and get my opinions out there.
Jesus...let's try this again...
I'm a self-proclaimed toy junky. So when Danger finally sent me a review unit of their excellent little HoTop PDA/Cellphone (now known as the T-Mobile Sidekick), I jumped at the chance to try it out and get my opinions published.
A little proofreading goes a long way.
Nope, that's called "bi-amping." That at least MIGHT be plausible assuming you could prove that the amplifier couldn't handle the load of both the woofer and tweeter simultaneously. If that's the case, just buy a better amplifer instead of doubling the cost by buying two inferior amps.
It's all moot since I've never seen anyone provide any actual PROOF that bi-amping actually works.
My brother got talked into "bi-wiring" his home speakers. What that means is two sets of wires going to the EXACT SAME CONTACT on the amplifier output that SOMEHOW is supposed to improve the sound quality. The cable had four very THIN wires in a huge casing. Uh...the THICKER the wire the BETTER. I convinced him to use an inexpensive alternative...Romex with gold platted bananna plugs! Now his speakers sound better than ever.
Distributing RedHat through the only P2P program that has a chance of actually working...and it only works with IE? I like the irony!
They probably would have if someone would have simply made a Firewire - USB hub. How else are you gonna plug that Intellimouse Explorer or USB keyboard into the firewire port? Sad. Yet another superior technology getting burned because of a lake of proper marketing.
Does each firewire device get assigned a unique TCP/IP address? What if you don't have DHCP installed?
<joke>I seem to remember a post about a year ago about a slashdot birthday! When will the double posts end?!</joke>
You think they might have done this? I'm positive of it. I'll bet there's a concerted effort to cull these questions and answers and proliferate them to whatever group the students are associated with.
When I was an undergrad, I found that many cliques of students had access to past exams, answer keys, teacher's manuals, etc.
Pissed me off till no end that these bastards had an unfair advantage over me.
You cannot ever hope to complete even ONE level of any modern game on a single coin. (Okay, 50 cents.) The games are designed to make sure you get killed off quickly and must pump more quarters into the machine just to continue. I know this may seems like a great idea to get more income, but in the end it just frustrates the game player. And yeah, home consoles are right up there in graphics and sound with the "full blown" arcade machines, so why bother going to the arcade?
Sure you can. Sell it for a price that makes the act of piracy an unworthwhile endeavor.
If MS really wants to enforce a strict DRM policy, they've got to sell their product for a hell of a lot cheaper. Imagine if Windows XP only cost $20-$30 and MS enforced super-strict protection on the serial numbers? Who's going to bother using a cracked version of XP and take the risk of MS disabling their PC when the legal alternative is so cheap?
Perhaps the reason no one registered you product is because no one found it to be useful enough to pay for. Your program offers less to the hardcore HTML coder than a fancy text editor and is not nearly as robust as a full blown GUI product. I'm sorry if this sounds like flamebait, but your complaint is the same one that many other software developers cry when their product doesn't generate the revenue they expected.
As a matter of fact, there are three roms that you can download legally. Just look on the official MAME homepage.
I always pictured Mike Jittlov as a good fit for Ford Prefect. Who is he? Ever see the "Wizard of Speed and Time?" Neither has most people.
Anyway, how about Howard Stern as good 'ol Zhaphod? Imagine two of those heads on the big screen. If this were twenty years ago, I'd have to say Eric Idle would be the perfect Arthur Dent. Besides him being too old, he's been typecast in that role so many times, I'd be sick of seeing him play it yet again.