...for two reasons. First, an infected website has never killed anyone. Second:
when food-poisoning is traced to a store or restaurant the health-department makes every effort to inform those who may be affected.
There is no such thing as a health department for your computer. There are virus tracking sites, spyware removal programs, sites that offer updates to your protection programs...lots of things to help kill active infections and keep you informed of current ones. But there is no "USDA stamp" for clean websites.
Nor can there be. The internet has bounds beyond a single country. Any office claiming to have jurisdiction over all websites would be ridiculous.
No no! You see they are not imposing Digital Restrictions Management systems on customers, they are only asking for copyright protection! And by law all works automatically get full copyright protection from the moment of creation! So what it really means is that they are FINALLY going to start selling DRM-free MP3 files!
Ah! I see it now! I'll admit, I was in a bit of a pessimistic mood when I read the original article.
So, what they're asking for is yet another assurance that copyright will remain intact. The existing law isn't clear enough. I gotcha. Kind of like saying the speed limit around here is 65, and oh yeah, that also means you can't go 75 either. I see it. Plain as day.
See, with all those expensive lawyers the RIAA likes to throw around, sometimes the subelties are lost on an average Joe like me.
PS: I'll contribute a little sarcasm to the pot, too. =) Isn't it crazy how panicky even larger businesses get when music rights get involved? "If anything goes wrong it's NOT our fault!" In times gone past, only the mafia could shake up businesses like that.
They're running a six-month test offering downloadable music through authorized sellers, who would have to 'ensure copyright protection for the content and meet service-level agreements.'
Well, since foolproof DRM is an impossibility...I take that to mean that they have no music for sale.
Also of note, 'music buyers won't be allowed to resell the files on eBay.'
...because they wouldn't be able to sell any in the first place under their DRM terms. QED.;^)
The whole recurring theme about man and machine? Ghost in the Shell? Tetsuo in Akira merging with all the machinery around him? How many other examples can you name? I've always wondered why that's such a common idea in anime. I have my answer now.
It's because the Japanese think it's a good idea, that's why.
You know, Slashdot is a great place to be a geek. Look at the new technologies coming out, marvel at their application...but sometimes you just gotta say enough is enough.
And I have to draw the line right before RFID tagging my children.
It's impressively geeky, but c'mon guys - sometimes "because you can" isn't the right answer!
I could almost feel my hair getting pointy just reading the blurb. And for some reason, I'm craving synergy. I think I'll go write a mission statement.
Wrong. Price does not trump style, or you'd have [old_argument]Linux On The Desktop[/old_argument]. IMHO, it's all about utility. How much you get, for how much you spend. If a Mac actually gave me $3000 or so dollars worth of advantage, I'd buy one. But it doesn't, at least it doesn't for me, so I don't have one.
Consider tweaking the utility/price ratio and Mac sales will soar. You don't have to make low-end Macs, just drop the price by a percentage. It's my guess that the rise in sales will offset it. Experiment with your price point a bit, Steve. People will pay for style, they're just not willing to pay through the nose for it.
It should stand as a shining example of What Not to Do for DIYers everywhere.
You betcha. Here are some gems:
When I returned, I smelled the distinct odor of something burning. -snip- Just for the heck of it, I checked the temperature of my motherboard with SiSoft Sandra.
Mistake number 1. If you smell smoke, go for the plug, not Sandra!!
You knocked off a "white doohickey" and didn't check to see if it was something that was soldered to the board?
Yeah, that could be a problem. Learn the names of your doohickeys, at least. Then post here - we could use the giggles.
Windows must query for the class type of each group member to assign an icon. This query can take a long time as groups grow in size; this is the reason for the default limit.
You can override this behavior in the registry. To do so, modify the GroupMemberQueryLimit REG_DWORD value in the following registry key:
You have to edit the freaking registry to change a simple icon's color??
How in the world do you expect the mythical "Joe Sixpack" to manage that? Every time you have a less-than-wizard user poke around in the registry you risk absolute ruin.
Folks, all you need to do is look at stuff like this to know that the MS studies on cost-of-ownership are complete bunk.
Look at how freaking many people they claim it took to come up with the idea of "grouping similar shit together".
Stoakley; Richard W. (Seattle, WA); Kurtz; James B. (Bellevue, WA); Springfield; James F. (Woodinville, WA); Green; Todd J. (Seattle, WA); Andrew; Suzan M. (Seattle, WA); Mann; Justin (Lake Forest, WA)
Kinda lets you know where your $300 bucks that they charge for Windows XP goes.
BTW, my grandpa had the same idea when he'd keep his roofing nails in one coffee can, and his finish nails in another coffee can. I wonder if I can get a patent for that.
Method and system for clustering and grouping construction nails...
Y'know, I've had the same thought. It'd make sense for them to do. Leak some code, but only 15%. Not enough to build anything, but plenty enough to pollute something.
I mean, how in the world do you have a 15% code security breach? Some bozo copied all of Half Life 2 off their own servers. Why didn't the same thing happen to MS? Either your security is breached, or it isn't. Did the guy copy 15% and then say, "No, dammit, this is wrong. Enough is enough!"
Perhaps your comment is the first of many, as "Micro-Soft supports Open Source" and "Shared Source and Open Source are the same thing" become the new frontiers in their reductio ad absurdem marketing campaigns that seem so successful with the gullible.
Agreed, AC. They've tailored the term "shared source" to sound very much like "open source". I assure you I have not swallowed the Kool Aid on this.
Open source is much much different than shared source. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to get the source to Internet Explorer, fix the bugs, and then release it on their own CD. It'd be an expensive way to prove the point that the two are not the same. Consider it a thought experiment, though.
My point was that MS knows that it's open source that will someday sink their boat. There is a motive here that remains to be discovered. Goliath sees David. He knows what's coming.
SCO's attack at least had the possibility to damage open source. The amount of open source people who jumped in to defend open source is proof enough of that. The problem is that SCO's claim simply had no teeth. Now, imagine for a moment if it did. What if Linus had put some foreign IP in the kernel? What then?
And MS knows that. So why not pollute the stream a bit? Loose some code, and see where it turns up over the next 5 or so years? With any luck, it'll turn up somewhere...important. And then MS will pull the same stunt, and heaven help us all. They can afford enough lawyers to where it would make sense to measure them in metric tons.
And that's my point, really. Avoid this code like the plague, folks. Do not look at it. Do not touch it. Do not download it. Do not acknowledge it. Do not give the pack of rabid IP lawyers that will be coming 5 or so years from now any stick to beat us with.
...ok, dumb jokes aside, this is probably not as good as it sounds. I'd advise the Wine guys to stay as far away from this code as possible!!
Remember, these are the guys who "recommended" Baystar to SCO. They are NOT open source friendly.
SCO caused Linux a lot of problems with their whole "code pollution" bit. I'll betcha they're planting seeds to do the same thing with their own code base later on down the road.
$143,000,000 (settlement) / 115,241 (cds) = $1240.87 (dollars per cd)
Wow! It's no wonder why piracy is so rampant!
But hey - good news. If you get sued, the average out-of-court settlement is $3000, and that's:
$3000 (settlement) / $1240.87 (dollars per cd) = 2.41 (cds per settlement)
So, when the RIAA shows up at your door, give them your Best of Men at Work cd, your Looney Tunes Christmas cd, and your second copy of Pearl Jam 10, and you're off the hook!
Oh yeah, don't forget to ask for your change. $722.61. =)
Linux has a long way to go before it can pass the Non-tech-spouse test.
Ask yourself honestly, does Windows pass this test?
I agree with your whole post, except for this old chestnut. No operating system that's having a "tech-savvy person present" type problem passes this test. Zippo. None. Not Windows, not Linux, not OS X, not even a Commodore 64.
Ever have a Windows box fail to talk to a USB printer? Or one that keeps reseting it's video settings? Hand that one to your spouse. And be prepared to sleep on the couch.
Linux may be harder to set up, I'll grant that... but it's not harder to work with.
Oddly enough, the article states that 'SCO's continuing Unix intellectual property lawsuits against IBM, Novell and others is apparently putting customers off.'
Well, whaddya know? Actions do have consequences, after all!
Almost all spammers are violating Federal law right now.
Truth. Plain and simple. Giving them another law to violate would do squat.
In fact, I've always wondered why the feds haven't used this fact to go after them. I know, I know - you can't track down the spammer, since they're mostly launching spam from bots in China.
But the point of all spam is to sell something, and that requires a somebody. And that somebody has to be able to take a payment, or the spam has no point, correct? Money is changing hands here. I don't think there's a single spammer in it for the love of the game.
The feds need to get in touch with that somebody and arrest them. Nail them as an accessory, or "conspiracy to".
Then, when they've got that hanging over their head, give them a break if they'll give up the spammer.
That'll fix the problem. Spam works because there's money there and no chance to get caught. Turn the industry against itself. Use the system they're using. The key lies in the money. The money idiots pay to the guy doing the selling, who in turn hires spammers. Follow the trail, guys.
Heck, if you don't want to do it, pay me. I'll betcha I can find me a spammer or two, no problem.
Imagine a world where PHBs can turn their office wall into a window onto any cube. Zero privacy.
I cannot believe that's your biggest worry.
Dude, if you're spending so much time on Slashdot that your PHB has to put a half a billion dollars worth of tech in your cube just to get an honest day's work outta you, then you have some serious issues.
Just do your job, man. And then your PHB won't have to have an entire Romulan Warbird keep a friggin eye on you.
Well, I'd say this is a bad thing because of the original payola laws. Think about that - the music industry was so corrupt that a very specific law had to be written to prevent them from exercising monopoly power over the entire broadcast medium.
Now, they've found a way around it. While it might be 100% legal, the behavior that the payola laws banned is happening again. Put another way, if the music industry is doing things correctly and not hurting anyone, why were the payola laws enacted in the first place? Giving them airtime seems to me like letting a junkie work in a pharmacy. They've already proven that they are incapable of keeping the public's best interest at heart.
Abusive monopolies are harmful. Our system works (ideally) on competition and consumer choice. Take that away, and product suffers.
And that's how you wind up with Avril Lavigne being played over 100 times in a single week like some sort of Chinese water torture.
Anymore, listening to Darl is like listening to Pee Wee Herman. "I know you are, but what am I???"
Examples:
"McBride said SCO has been diligent in providing the courts with samples of the code it believes IBM has contributed to Linux. He said IBM has not been as forthcoming."
"IBM is trying to slow the case down."
"Mark my words, there will be a day that will come when you all will see documents that will contradict IBM's public posturing."
"We have enough cash to get us to our destination. We've got the legal firepower and cash necessary."
BTW, thanks for the link. Best chuckle I've had all day.
Slashdot Mirror
...for two reasons. First, an infected website has never killed anyone. Second:
when food-poisoning is traced to a store or restaurant the health-department makes every effort to inform those who may be affected.
There is no such thing as a health department for your computer. There are virus tracking sites, spyware removal programs, sites that offer updates to your protection programs...lots of things to help kill active infections and keep you informed of current ones. But there is no "USDA stamp" for clean websites.
Nor can there be. The internet has bounds beyond a single country. Any office claiming to have jurisdiction over all websites would be ridiculous.
Amongst the more than 3,000 in this auction (1 of 10) are state and federal law books
...still in their shrink wrap.
Ba dump bump! Thanks, I'll be here all week. Try the veal.
No no! You see they are not imposing Digital Restrictions Management systems on customers, they are only asking for copyright protection! And by law all works automatically get full copyright protection from the moment of creation! So what it really means is that they are FINALLY going to start selling DRM-free MP3 files!
Ah! I see it now! I'll admit, I was in a bit of a pessimistic mood when I read the original article.
So, what they're asking for is yet another assurance that copyright will remain intact. The existing law isn't clear enough. I gotcha. Kind of like saying the speed limit around here is 65, and oh yeah, that also means you can't go 75 either. I see it. Plain as day.
See, with all those expensive lawyers the RIAA likes to throw around, sometimes the subelties are lost on an average Joe like me.
PS: I'll contribute a little sarcasm to the pot, too. =) Isn't it crazy how panicky even larger businesses get when music rights get involved? "If anything goes wrong it's NOT our fault!" In times gone past, only the mafia could shake up businesses like that.
They're running a six-month test offering downloadable music through authorized sellers, who would have to 'ensure copyright protection for the content and meet service-level agreements.'
Well, since foolproof DRM is an impossibility...I take that to mean that they have no music for sale.
Also of note, 'music buyers won't be allowed to resell the files on eBay.'
...because they wouldn't be able to sell any in the first place under their DRM terms. QED. ;^)
The whole recurring theme about man and machine? Ghost in the Shell? Tetsuo in Akira merging with all the machinery around him? How many other examples can you name? I've always wondered why that's such a common idea in anime. I have my answer now.
It's because the Japanese think it's a good idea, that's why.
You know, Slashdot is a great place to be a geek. Look at the new technologies coming out, marvel at their application...but sometimes you just gotta say enough is enough.
And I have to draw the line right before RFID tagging my children.
It's impressively geeky, but c'mon guys - sometimes "because you can" isn't the right answer!
I could almost feel my hair getting pointy just reading the blurb. And for some reason, I'm craving synergy. I think I'll go write a mission statement.
I disagree with one of his points.
1) Price trumps style in the computer market
Wrong. Price does not trump style, or you'd have [old_argument]Linux On The Desktop[/old_argument]. IMHO, it's all about utility. How much you get, for how much you spend. If a Mac actually gave me $3000 or so dollars worth of advantage, I'd buy one. But it doesn't, at least it doesn't for me, so I don't have one.
Consider tweaking the utility/price ratio and Mac sales will soar. You don't have to make low-end Macs, just drop the price by a percentage. It's my guess that the rise in sales will offset it. Experiment with your price point a bit, Steve. People will pay for style, they're just not willing to pay through the nose for it.
It should stand as a shining example of What Not to Do for DIYers everywhere.
You betcha. Here are some gems:
When I returned, I smelled the distinct odor of something burning. -snip- Just for the heck of it, I checked the temperature of my motherboard with SiSoft Sandra.
Mistake number 1. If you smell smoke, go for the plug, not Sandra!!
You knocked off a "white doohickey" and didn't check to see if it was something that was soldered to the board?
Yeah, that could be a problem. Learn the names of your doohickeys, at least. Then post here - we could use the giggles.
From the article, here's how you fix grey hair:
Windows must query for the class type of each group member to assign an icon. This query can take a long time as groups grow in size; this is the reason for the default limit.
You can override this behavior in the registry. To do so, modify the GroupMemberQueryLimit REG_DWORD value in the following registry key:
HKCU\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\Directory UI
So...I'll be the first to say it.
You have to edit the freaking registry to change a simple icon's color??
How in the world do you expect the mythical "Joe Sixpack" to manage that? Every time you have a less-than-wizard user poke around in the registry you risk absolute ruin.
Folks, all you need to do is look at stuff like this to know that the MS studies on cost-of-ownership are complete bunk.
If you can read this, you're probably:
So, worrying about data loss through physical media is pretty much a moot point, isn't it??
Look at how freaking many people they claim it took to come up with the idea of "grouping similar shit together".
Stoakley; Richard W. (Seattle, WA); Kurtz; James B. (Bellevue, WA); Springfield; James F. (Woodinville, WA); Green; Todd J. (Seattle, WA); Andrew; Suzan M. (Seattle, WA); Mann; Justin (Lake Forest, WA)
Kinda lets you know where your $300 bucks that they charge for Windows XP goes.
BTW, my grandpa had the same idea when he'd keep his roofing nails in one coffee can, and his finish nails in another coffee can. I wonder if I can get a patent for that.
Method and system for clustering and grouping construction nails...
Microsoft is demoing a robot that's run by SPOT.
Wow! That's some cutting edge stuff. Thank Bill we have Windows CE.
What? What's that you say? We've already done robots? Ah. *ahem*
There's also a pointer to an online video demo of a project to create a digital picture frame using Win CE.
Now there you go! Some real future tech. A picture...that hangs on the wall....that changes! Fantastic!
What? They've already done that too? Without CE? You mean that's possible? *ahem*
Ok, nevermind then.
Tiger Server will focus on open source, Windows, and ease of use.
Kinda reminds me of the old joke: Good, cheap and fast, pick any two.
Y'know, I've had the same thought. It'd make sense for them to do. Leak some code, but only 15%. Not enough to build anything, but plenty enough to pollute something.
I mean, how in the world do you have a 15% code security breach? Some bozo copied all of Half Life 2 off their own servers. Why didn't the same thing happen to MS? Either your security is breached, or it isn't. Did the guy copy 15% and then say, "No, dammit, this is wrong. Enough is enough!"
Perhaps your comment is the first of many, as "Micro-Soft supports Open Source" and "Shared Source and Open Source are the same thing" become the new frontiers in their reductio ad absurdem marketing campaigns that seem so successful with the gullible.
Agreed, AC. They've tailored the term "shared source" to sound very much like "open source". I assure you I have not swallowed the Kool Aid on this.
Open source is much much different than shared source. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to get the source to Internet Explorer, fix the bugs, and then release it on their own CD. It'd be an expensive way to prove the point that the two are not the same. Consider it a thought experiment, though.
My point was that MS knows that it's open source that will someday sink their boat. There is a motive here that remains to be discovered. Goliath sees David. He knows what's coming.
SCO's attack at least had the possibility to damage open source. The amount of open source people who jumped in to defend open source is proof enough of that. The problem is that SCO's claim simply had no teeth. Now, imagine for a moment if it did. What if Linus had put some foreign IP in the kernel? What then?
And MS knows that. So why not pollute the stream a bit? Loose some code, and see where it turns up over the next 5 or so years? With any luck, it'll turn up somewhere...important. And then MS will pull the same stunt, and heaven help us all. They can afford enough lawyers to where it would make sense to measure them in metric tons.
And that's my point, really. Avoid this code like the plague, folks. Do not look at it. Do not touch it. Do not download it. Do not acknowledge it. Do not give the pack of rabid IP lawyers that will be coming 5 or so years from now any stick to beat us with.
It's a trap!
...ok, dumb jokes aside, this is probably not as good as it sounds. I'd advise the Wine guys to stay as far away from this code as possible!!
Remember, these are the guys who "recommended" Baystar to SCO. They are NOT open source friendly.
SCO caused Linux a lot of problems with their whole "code pollution" bit. I'll betcha they're planting seeds to do the same thing with their own code base later on down the road.
Stay away from this, folks. FAR away.
$143,000,000 (settlement) / 115,241 (cds) = $1240.87 (dollars per cd)
Wow! It's no wonder why piracy is so rampant!
But hey - good news. If you get sued, the average out-of-court settlement is $3000, and that's:
$3000 (settlement) / $1240.87 (dollars per cd) = 2.41 (cds per settlement)
So, when the RIAA shows up at your door, give them your Best of Men at Work cd, your Looney Tunes Christmas cd, and your second copy of Pearl Jam 10, and you're off the hook!
Oh yeah, don't forget to ask for your change. $722.61. =)
Linux has a long way to go before it can pass the Non-tech-spouse test.
Ask yourself honestly, does Windows pass this test?
I agree with your whole post, except for this old chestnut. No operating system that's having a "tech-savvy person present" type problem passes this test. Zippo. None. Not Windows, not Linux, not OS X, not even a Commodore 64.
Ever have a Windows box fail to talk to a USB printer? Or one that keeps reseting it's video settings? Hand that one to your spouse. And be prepared to sleep on the couch.
Linux may be harder to set up, I'll grant that... but it's not harder to work with.
...they have such excellent backwards compatibility with their other product lines.
Oddly enough, the article states that 'SCO's continuing Unix intellectual property lawsuits against IBM, Novell and others is apparently putting customers off.'
Well, whaddya know? Actions do have consequences, after all!
Weaselmancer
The DAs with both jurisdictions refused to prosecute the case.
Kee-rist but that's depressing. Any reason why? Is your friend in any sort of law enforcement?
I can see not taking evidence from "just anyone", but yeah...you'd think given enough, they'd have some fed somewhere follow up.
All these spammers can be easily, EASILY tracked whether they go through a foreign country or not.
Yup, I know. That's why I'm offering to be paid to track 'em down. I could do with a nice cushy job. The karma wouldn't hurt either. =)
Weaselmancer
Almost all spammers are violating Federal law right now.
Truth. Plain and simple. Giving them another law to violate would do squat.
In fact, I've always wondered why the feds haven't used this fact to go after them. I know, I know - you can't track down the spammer, since they're mostly launching spam from bots in China.
But the point of all spam is to sell something, and that requires a somebody. And that somebody has to be able to take a payment, or the spam has no point, correct? Money is changing hands here. I don't think there's a single spammer in it for the love of the game.
The feds need to get in touch with that somebody and arrest them. Nail them as an accessory, or "conspiracy to".
Then, when they've got that hanging over their head, give them a break if they'll give up the spammer.
That'll fix the problem. Spam works because there's money there and no chance to get caught. Turn the industry against itself. Use the system they're using. The key lies in the money. The money idiots pay to the guy doing the selling, who in turn hires spammers. Follow the trail, guys.
Heck, if you don't want to do it, pay me. I'll betcha I can find me a spammer or two, no problem.
Weaselmancer
Imagine a world where PHBs can turn their office wall into a window onto any cube. Zero privacy.
I cannot believe that's your biggest worry.
Dude, if you're spending so much time on Slashdot that your PHB has to put a half a billion dollars worth of tech in your cube just to get an honest day's work outta you, then you have some serious issues.
Just do your job, man. And then your PHB won't have to have an entire Romulan Warbird keep a friggin eye on you.
Weaselmancer
Well, I'd say this is a bad thing because of the original payola laws. Think about that - the music industry was so corrupt that a very specific law had to be written to prevent them from exercising monopoly power over the entire broadcast medium.
Now, they've found a way around it. While it might be 100% legal, the behavior that the payola laws banned is happening again. Put another way, if the music industry is doing things correctly and not hurting anyone, why were the payola laws enacted in the first place? Giving them airtime seems to me like letting a junkie work in a pharmacy. They've already proven that they are incapable of keeping the public's best interest at heart.
Abusive monopolies are harmful. Our system works (ideally) on competition and consumer choice. Take that away, and product suffers.
And that's how you wind up with Avril Lavigne being played over 100 times in a single week like some sort of Chinese water torture.
Weaselmancer
Anymore, listening to Darl is like listening to Pee Wee Herman. "I know you are, but what am I???"
Examples:
"McBride said SCO has been diligent in providing the courts with samples of the code it believes IBM has contributed to Linux. He said IBM has not been as forthcoming."
"IBM is trying to slow the case down."
"Mark my words, there will be a day that will come when you all will see documents that will contradict IBM's public posturing."
"We have enough cash to get us to our destination. We've got the legal firepower and cash necessary."
BTW, thanks for the link. Best chuckle I've had all day.
Weaselmancer