Bullshit. There's nothing arbitraty about a fine that can (and should) be given to any compagny that violates a specific law. Other compagnies got this fine for violating the law, Microsoft violated the same law and should therefore pay the same fine (which the law defines as a certain maximum percentage of the companies income).
There is nothing arbitrary at "violate the same law ==> pay the same fine".
It's not MS who've said that but four British MEPs, sadly unnamed, who show that they have the same grasp of technological issues as the average amoeba.
Well, they can read MS fud^H^HPR statements, so at least they outsmart the amoeba when it comes to having reading skills.
I'm sort of curious as to why this was placed under IT, and not YRO or Politics...
Because YRO means "your rights online", and this story is about "your rights offline".
B.t.w.: if the Denver Channel 7 News report is correct, then this watch list will become so huge it will make it useless because of it's size + bad signal/noise ratio. Stupid stupid stupid - I wonder which shit-for-brains government official came up with this brainfar^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hidea.
I think if you can decide what it is you want to manage, you'll be better able to find tools that you need.
Another questions that needs to be answered is: "what's your budget?" - both for the purchase of said tools and the training needed to use these tools.
A common pain in some business outfits is a mismatch between requirements and the budget needed to match these requirements. I hope you don't have a PHB....
How is it almost free? Web site says it costs $180...
$180 is peanuts for corporate users - for them $180 is 'almost free'. I've been at a Y2K project where we needed a Y2K scanning tool. I found a tool which had raving reviews, and our manager instantly bought 3 licenses at $20,000.- each.
Hiring a good Oracle specialist starts at about $80 / hour, so a time saving tool like PL/SQL Developer for only $180 / license is negligible for corporations.
SQL Developer is nice and free (as in beer), yet not as nice as PL/SQL Developer (by Allround Automations), which is almost free.
I've installed both tools; PL/SQL Developer has more features and is snappier than SQL Developer, at about 1/5th of the download and install size of SQL Developer.
I bought a second hand Grundy NewBrain for about 1000 guilders in 1983. Z80 CPU, I/O coprocessor, 32 kB RAM, 30 kB ROM and reasonable graphics - for those days. It's RAM was extendable to a whopping 2 MB - if you had very deep pockets:) .
It used a Basic semi-compiler: it interpreted a line of code into a kind of bytecode, executed the bytecode and kept the interpreted bytecode in memory - 'real' interpreters in the early 80ies trew away the bytecode after they ran it, but the NewBrain kept it memory. As a result the first execution of a loop was as 'fast' as any other Basic interpreter, and the next executions of the loop where a lot faster - almost as fast as a Basic compiler.
And it could be programmed to alter a running program - write lines of new code to a device, then MERGE the new code from that device into the running code, and you had changed your program during runtime. Nice if you wanted to plot an arbitrary mathematical function: enter the min and max values for both x and y axis, enter the equation, and the program merges the equation into the running program and plots it.
It seems likely that given the increasing complexity, the error rate is going to rise proportionally. I mean, how many errors do you expect in a 100,000 transistor chip vs a 100,000,000 transistor chip?
Given the fact that a very substantial part of the extra chip estate is being used as L1 and L2 chache, the error rate should increase less than proportionally. If you upgrade cache size from say 8 kB to 1 MB, then there is only a relative small increase in complexity of the cache controler, not of the cache itself.
Add the new chip design software and the use of hardware libraries for standard chip functionality, then the error rate should increase even slower.
One problem (increased usage of water) has already been addressed by another poster.
Another big problem with your idea is the way it affects the radiation balance. Earth receives sunlight, reflects a part of it and absorbs the rest. When plants grow, they turn sunlight into energy. This means leaves 'absorb' sunlight, changing the balance between incoming and reflected light. As a result of this the temperature could rise (when the effect of extra sunlight absorbtion is larger than the reduced greenhouse effect due to the binding of CO2 in vegetation).
This depends on a) the local micro climate and b) which plants you plant. Please analyse this carefully, or you end up with a 'cure' that's worse than the disease.
Yes, Microsofts security trackrecord sucks like a 1001-whores brothel - but if I remember correctly, mr Nash became security VP after most security "issues" had been coded into MS products. You can't blame him for the problems his predecessors left behind.
Uhm, yes, likely - ActiveX has seen many security advisories advising to disable it.
Maybe I should have phrased my question more carefully: what is the most regretted design decision, and why does Microsoft regret it so much?
Knowing why Microsoft regrets a design decision tells something about how Microsoft thinks about security issues. The why is for me as interesting and important as the what question.
Once again, iTunes, and I would assume other services might do the same, allow you to play a downloaded song on up to 5 different computers, as long as iTunes (or whatever software) is registered to you.
Sounds like a good deal, but it isn't. I have three computers right now. My old 500 MHz / 64 MB should have been replaced a year ago, when I replace it the iTunes 'machine-count' would hit 4.
And when I replace my 3 years old laptop, then the iTunes machine-count will hit 5.
So when I replace my other desktop PC, say two years from now, the iTunes machine-count will hit 6 - meaning I can't make new copies of songs I downloaded now.
The 5 different computers limit is a limit you will run into pretty soon - hey, someone I know has 7 computers, he'll never be able to play his iTunes songs on all his machines.
You really must love DRM technology - if you work for the record industry.
Maybe one possible scenario is that a digital tax will be added to all machines that can play digitized music/games/etc. in order to make up for the lost revenue.
This stupid and bad idea is already law in some countries - e.g. The Netherlands and Germany.
If I buy recordable/rewritable media in The Netherlands, then I pay some extra tax to 'compensate the record industry for lost sales due to illegal copying'. So every recordable/rewritable media I use will bring the record industry some extra much needed money.
I take some digital photos at a family party, and burn them on a CD for my sister - and pay copyright tax. I burn a backup of my own files to a CD - and pay copyright tax.
Just for your information - it completely pisses me off when I have to pay copyright tax to the phucking record industry when I burn my own files/photos to CD or DVD. I don't mind to pay copyright tax when I buy a prerecorded CD, but hey - paying them money for a private copy of my own works/material is IMHO legalised theft. Period.
RIAA and MPAA - another example of four-letter-words you really don't want to hear.
Do I have the right to buy DRMed music as a gift for somebody else?
When I buy DRMed music by downloading it to my own PC, then (some implementations of) DRM will bind the downloaded music to a licencing key on my machine. So if the bought and downloaded music is intended as a birthday gift for someone else, how will he/she be able to play it on his/her PC? Or how will I be able to play it on my laptop, if I downloaded it on my desktop?
While DRM is intended to increase music sales, the implementation of DRM technologies that binds a DRMed tracks to a license key on the downloading PC will prevent this track from playing on other (peoples) machines. So buying DRMed music as a gift for someone else won't be an option if DRM prevents playback on other PC - which isn't very good for music sales.
Rootkits and security holes are just one kinf of pain that comes with DRM. The inability to playback bought tracks on the OS of your choice (say Linux), or a different PC than the one used for the download, is another pain.
To be more precisely, Sony installed crappy DRM software, which was implemented with rootkit technology.
Norton has a hidden directoy to prevent certain files to be accidentally deleted by a user.
Sony's DRM has hidden files, to prevent the DRM software to be intentionally deleted by a user who doesn't want to have DRM crap on his/her PC. The Sony DRM software hides all files starting with a certain string. In Sony's case it is the software itself that's being hidden from view - this is rootkit specific.
Oh, hey! Anybody notice the M$ SQLServer add running beside the article? Say, didn't M$ have some security related article recently? I can't remember...
I remember a recent M$ security releated article - it came with a M$ security add running beside it "we don't give Trojan horses a change". Bwahahaha ROFLOL.
Microsoft might make a lot of money, but a billion dollars will get noticed.
Yes, it will get noticed, but it won't hurt. Opening up their documentation and getting real competition will hurt, because they can't continue their 80+ % profit margins on Windows and Office when they are faced with real competition.
Dropping the Windows and Office profit marging to the <10 % levels that are normal in ICT industry, that would hurt a lot.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe The Netherlands should become the next state of the USA - it already has the necessary e-voting infrastructure :-)
Bullshit. There's nothing arbitraty about a fine that can (and should) be given to any compagny that violates a specific law. Other compagnies got this fine for violating the law, Microsoft violated the same law and should therefore pay the same fine (which the law defines as a certain maximum percentage of the companies income).
There is nothing arbitrary at "violate the same law ==> pay the same fine".
Well, they can read MS fud^H^HPR statements, so at least they outsmart the amoeba when it comes to having reading skills.
No way. I made a wordplay by explaining YRO as "your rights offline". Thought it was obvious.
Try a less common name, like Franz Kafka or Don Quixote :) ...
Because YRO means "your rights online", and this story is about "your rights offline".
B.t.w.: if the Denver Channel 7 News report is correct, then this watch list will become so huge it will make it useless because of it's size + bad signal/noise ratio. Stupid stupid stupid - I wonder which shit-for-brains government official came up with this brainfar^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hidea.
Another questions that needs to be answered is: "what's your budget?" - both for the purchase of said tools and the training needed to use these tools.
A common pain in some business outfits is a mismatch between requirements and the budget needed to match these requirements. I hope you don't have a PHB ....
$180 is peanuts for corporate users - for them $180 is 'almost free'. I've been at a Y2K project where we needed a Y2K scanning tool. I found a tool which had raving reviews, and our manager instantly bought 3 licenses at $20,000.- each.
Hiring a good Oracle specialist starts at about $80 / hour, so a time saving tool like PL/SQL Developer for only $180 / license is negligible for corporations.
SQL Developer is nice and free (as in beer), yet not as nice as PL/SQL Developer (by Allround Automations), which is almost free.
I've installed both tools; PL/SQL Developer has more features and is snappier than SQL Developer, at about 1/5th of the download and install size of SQL Developer.
Maybe I should have the concept of 'awarding stupid patents' patented - it would make me filthy rich by collecting *lots* of royalties from the USPO.
It used a Basic semi-compiler: it interpreted a line of code into a kind of bytecode, executed the bytecode and kept the interpreted bytecode in memory - 'real' interpreters in the early 80ies trew away the bytecode after they ran it, but the NewBrain kept it memory. As a result the first execution of a loop was as 'fast' as any other Basic interpreter, and the next executions of the loop where a lot faster - almost as fast as a Basic compiler.
And it could be programmed to alter a running program - write lines of new code to a device, then MERGE the new code from that device into the running code, and you had changed your program during runtime. Nice if you wanted to plot an arbitrary mathematical function: enter the min and max values for both x and y axis, enter the equation, and the program merges the equation into the running program and plots it.
Given the fact that a very substantial part of the extra chip estate is being used as L1 and L2 chache, the error rate should increase less than proportionally. If you upgrade cache size from say 8 kB to 1 MB, then there is only a relative small increase in complexity of the cache controler, not of the cache itself.
Add the new chip design software and the use of hardware libraries for standard chip functionality, then the error rate should increase even slower.
Another big problem with your idea is the way it affects the radiation balance. Earth receives sunlight, reflects a part of it and absorbs the rest. When plants grow, they turn sunlight into energy. This means leaves 'absorb' sunlight, changing the balance between incoming and reflected light. As a result of this the temperature could rise (when the effect of extra sunlight absorbtion is larger than the reduced greenhouse effect due to the binding of CO2 in vegetation).
This depends on a) the local micro climate and b) which plants you plant. Please analyse this carefully, or you end up with a 'cure' that's worse than the disease.
Suppose global warming isn't real, then the British can sell these new crops to those countries that are dryer and hotter than the UK.
Hi "TimTheFoolMan" - I didn't moderate your comment, but err... /. moderators can't moderate and comment (to) the same /. article.
I don't envy mr. Nash's job - only his salary :) .
Maybe I should have phrased my question more carefully: what is the most regretted design decision, and why does Microsoft regret it so much?
Knowing why Microsoft regrets a design decision tells something about how Microsoft thinks about security issues. The why is for me as interesting and important as the what question.
What is the Windows / Internet Explorer design decision that MS does, from a security point of view, regret most?
Sounds like a good deal, but it isn't. I have three computers right now. My old 500 MHz / 64 MB should have been replaced a year ago, when I replace it the iTunes 'machine-count' would hit 4.
And when I replace my 3 years old laptop, then the iTunes machine-count will hit 5.
So when I replace my other desktop PC, say two years from now, the iTunes machine-count will hit 6 - meaning I can't make new copies of songs I downloaded now.
The 5 different computers limit is a limit you will run into pretty soon - hey, someone I know has 7 computers, he'll never be able to play his iTunes songs on all his machines.
You really must love DRM technology - if you work for the record industry.
This stupid and bad idea is already law in some countries - e.g. The Netherlands and Germany.
If I buy recordable/rewritable media in The Netherlands, then I pay some extra tax to 'compensate the record industry for lost sales due to illegal copying'. So every recordable/rewritable media I use will bring the record industry some extra much needed money.
I take some digital photos at a family party, and burn them on a CD for my sister - and pay copyright tax. I burn a backup of my own files to a CD - and pay copyright tax.
Just for your information - it completely pisses me off when I have to pay copyright tax to the phucking record industry when I burn my own files/photos to CD or DVD. I don't mind to pay copyright tax when I buy a prerecorded CD, but hey - paying them money for a private copy of my own works/material is IMHO legalised theft. Period.
RIAA and MPAA - another example of four-letter-words you really don't want to hear.
When I buy DRMed music by downloading it to my own PC, then (some implementations of) DRM will bind the downloaded music to a licencing key on my machine. So if the bought and downloaded music is intended as a birthday gift for someone else, how will he/she be able to play it on his/her PC? Or how will I be able to play it on my laptop, if I downloaded it on my desktop?
While DRM is intended to increase music sales, the implementation of DRM technologies that binds a DRMed tracks to a license key on the downloading PC will prevent this track from playing on other (peoples) machines. So buying DRMed music as a gift for someone else won't be an option if DRM prevents playback on other PC - which isn't very good for music sales.
Rootkits and security holes are just one kinf of pain that comes with DRM. The inability to playback bought tracks on the OS of your choice (say Linux), or a different PC than the one used for the download, is another pain.
To be more precisely, Sony installed crappy DRM software, which was implemented with rootkit technology.
Norton has a hidden directoy to prevent certain files to be accidentally deleted by a user.
Sony's DRM has hidden files, to prevent the DRM software to be intentionally deleted by a user who doesn't want to have DRM crap on his/her PC. The Sony DRM software hides all files starting with a certain string. In Sony's case it is the software itself that's being hidden from view - this is rootkit specific.
Making more binary stars is beyond our technological capabilities, however seeing more binary stars is within the capabilities of 2 gallons beer :)
I remember a recent M$ security releated article - it came with a M$ security add running beside it "we don't give Trojan horses a change". Bwahahaha ROFLOL.
Yes, it will get noticed, but it won't hurt. Opening up their documentation and getting real competition will hurt, because they can't continue their 80+ % profit margins on Windows and Office when they are faced with real competition.
Dropping the Windows and Office profit marging to the <10 % levels that are normal in ICT industry, that would hurt a lot.