The article is valid when applied to individuals, but businesses need email and they need it without whitelist restrictions. This is especially true for small contractors and consultants, because so many rely on the internet to generate more work. So their need will help drive the email filtering systems, which may not be perfect, but they work.
Can I see this for Joe with the private account, but not where it really counts.
--
Plug for an example of a consulting website that won't use whitelists: Seliger + Associates
I also found the bit about Internet Explorer, so instead of slinking by closing my tab, I wrote this email and tried sending it to help, admin, helpdesk, root and movielink @movielink.com, all to no avail. Anyone have an email address for these guys?:
Dear Movielink:
I am writing to express my dissatisfaction that I cannot enter your site using Mozilla version 1.1, an open source browser freely available at http://www.mozilla.org. Although I wish to purchase movies directly over the internet, I cannot support a site that only accepts Internet Explorer.
In the future, I hope you change your site to accept all standards-compliant browsers.
Sincerely,
--My Name--
--My Email Address--
Instead of merely noting that Movielink won't accept Mozilla, I advocate doing something about it! If no one ever complains, nothing will ever be done.
Speaking as someone who uses Acrobat to create.pdf files on a regular basis, I bet that Microsoft will win this battle with ease. As much as I dislike it, everyone I know uses Office. As a result, if a.pdf-like can be created automatically with Office, there will be a greatly reduced need for Acrobat.
Furthermore, When I distribute.pdf files to people around my campus (I'm involved in a couple student groups) I invariably find someone without Acrobat Reader, and I then must explain how to download and install it. And while most people use computers vastly overpowered for their needs, they rarely understand the idea of document files. One guy asked why "Word can't open it." So if Microsoft releases a.pdf killer that comes standard on Windows computer and a free program to make it backwards compatible, I can see Adobe being shoved out of the market in a hurry.
It may not be a popular opinion but it's true. Yeah, I'm not a huge Microsoft fan either, and this will be abusing their monopoly power, but it will also make life easier for many people. I don't include myself in that group of people since I primarily use Lotus WordPro and PageMaker.
I attend Clark University, which also limits p2p bandwidth. Although they haven't outright banned P2p applications, I get slower speeds than I did at home using an ISDN line. While I'd like the music advantage of a college connection, it's obvious why the school started filtering.
Most students here leave KaZaA running 24/7. This means that even if they only download, say, 30 megs per day, they're trying to upload hundreds of megs. To make things worse, they don't even use KaZaA Lite - so they get plenty of spyware with their p2p apps. (Yesterday I brought KaZaA Lite with Speedup to a neighboring dorm room. For kicks, on the same CD I tossed Mozilla and Exact Audio Copy. The latter was a pain to set up, as usual, but they loved the combination of new software.) Schools have no choice because most students don't understand the issues ITS faces. I hear plenty of them complaining about how slow the "internet" is, because they use the net almost exclusively for p2p apps. And I've stopped trying to explain the reasons WHY p2p is so slow, because they never want to hear them.
But the connection is plenty fast to download the occsional mp3. It just means that people become extremely happy when I bring Exact Audio Copy over; yesterday I also installed CDex on my computer because EAC has issues on some CD drives. The article a few days ago about a CD with open source Windows software was of great interest to me, since I've already given out half a dozen CDs with various programs.
As a regular reader of WSJ, I can't ever remember the editorial page offering computer advice. Companies are in the business of making money; if Linux is competitive, stories about it would probably appear in the Marketplace section.
Business != politics
Besides, Linux's various problems make it impractical for widespread use in business applications right now - refer to the GUI, poor peripheral support, compatibility with MS products and lack of quality fonts. I'm not trying to a be a troll, but I don't see Linux on the desktop any time soon. Especially because I've never seen the WSJ making political statements about software.
Like much of America, I'm moderately lazy with regards to computers, and my present Windows98 machine works reasonably well. You switched to Linux and StarOffice - what inspired you to change, and how/why should inspire me, like much of the country, to change?
I think the button anecdote demonstrates exactly how cruel these guys would be for money. While people can argue (correctly) that spam and other nasty things happen to computers and not people, their statement shows their total disregard for life, something that even almost all of us can agree is sacred and special. Mostly, the button reinforces a stereotype that we would all like to hold - that spammers are bad, bad people. This bunch certainly is, and it can all be encapsulated by the button.
I fail to see how this even the slightest bit of relevence on/. Sure, my 16 year old sister loves the show, but the aol and outlook express (much love between these and this community) are the extent of her nerdiness.
Besides, I doubt anyone here watches buffy, except perhaps because the girl on it is undoubtedly really hot.
Of course, maybe I'm about to modded as a troll and flamed in a thousand replies by/. reading buffy fans, but I'd put money against it.
I think you missed part of the guy's article - the "l33t" cheaters WILL find a way to hack. It only takes a few people, or even one person, to totally wreck the economy of the game. Giving out the cards in real life makes this doubly true, because then people with cards obtained illictly can trade for an actual objects with actual value.
Yes, they can hire more coders, but even the best coders in the world sometimes make mistakes, especially on extremely complicated products like Online Magic. If this weren't the case, we wouldn't have the endless stream of/. articles decrying Outlook and IE.
Besides the above, the paragraphs on the social issues make sense. I've seen friends of mine in Diablo II and others act totally idiotic in a manner they never would in real life. Once you put a friendly game online, all the stigma that comes with being a jackass in real life disappears. MTG:OL is going to suck, and you'd have to be stupid, insane, rediculously optimistic, foolishly trusting, or free with your money to try it.
The big question . . .
on
Mapping the Spam
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Now, where are the unidentifiable beef parts and the little finger of old Joe, the guy who stuck his hand into the grinder?
Or, better yet, where is the guy straight out of Dilbert who actually falls for this garbage?
Eight humans, crowded together for almost three Terran years, had better get along much better than humans usually did... four married couples were considered optimum.
And naturally, this being science fiction, four could be found with the requisite skills. Here in reality, though, I don't think four married couples would work so well because of the possibility of cheating, devious alliances, people falling out of love, etc.
Of course, the potential for fun in a gravity reduced environment might help fix that issue.
No offense, but anybody who believes a charlatan like the one offering a mystery box deserves to have their money taken. Nobody should be stupid enough to believe in any miracle product without being able to check out it's guts.
The Bill of Rights and Constitution protect individual liberties from the government, not the "right" to steal music, so even considering constitutional arguments with regard to copying music makes no sense.
Reasonable people agree that the creator of a work should compensated for his efforts, hence copyright - but it has no basis in the constitution. The real question deals with practical issues surrounding the rise of the internet. With the possibility of instaneous distribution and infinite, perfect replication, how can creators be compensated for their work? MegaCorp Inc. wants everything regulated, which is never going to happen. Slashdot types want everything free as in beer, which doesn't encourage creation. So until someone finds a decent way of paying artists aside from CDs, books, etc. people are going to keep stealing digital things because it is a better way to distribute.
As usual, the extremes on either side of the argument need to be tempered to find a workable solution. And it isn't going to be found in the Constitution.
The nice part about evil, soulless facist governments is that they play by no rules, with no rules, with no consideration of the negative potential for science
I agree that stem cells hold tremendous potential for good, but without pondering the Brave New World/Gattaca/(insert cliche book here) consequences, the future might turn out an ugly place.
It is dangerous to wave flags and say we should follow in their footsteps. One cannot use the dark side of the force/The One Ring/etc. without becoming Darth Vader/Sauron/CowboyNeal.
Maybe all that marketing backfires sometimes: people become so saturated that they feel the need to try something new.
Of course, I could just have weird friends.
While the article brings up an interesting point, most of my friends who are still in college actually aren't interested in Microsoft for a different reason. As bright, motivated, hard working people, they see Microsoft as a place that has had its moment of glory in the sun; true growth will spring from other, more innovative companies with new ideas. While Microsoft guarentees plenty of money, I see CS people as wanting to be with the next big thing, not the last big thing.
I'm not in CS, but if I were, I wouldn't want to be a Microserf either.
I certainly agree - many of my wealthier friends ski, and the resort prices they pay often astounds me. These are frequently also the people slightly on the larger, lazier side, less inclined toward the difficult skiing likely to warm them. Any additional convience would be worth their money.
Aside from that, everyone wants to be the first to say "I not only have my three condos and courtside seats and season passes, but I also have a self warming jacket." Beat that, Joneses!
Now we'll get to see the three stodges remade with Cowboy Neal, John Katz, and CmrdTaco punching each other using computer physics.
What a great world.
The servers that play the game belong to Mythic. Mythic created the software, tested and owns the game and everything in it. No user of the game "owns" anything in the game, just like no one actually owns their Stone of Jordan in Diablo 2.
Yet someone else, who did not invest in creating the game or maintaining the environment tries to sue to make new rules about how the game should be played. Somehow, regardless of whether it is a supposed "virtual economy" or not, I doubt litigation is going to work.
Slashdot Mirror
Since when is hell considered so stupendously hilarious that something can be funny as hell?
Way to go Sony! Increasing sales, one consumer at a time.
Can I see this for Joe with the private account, but not where it really counts.
--
Plug for an example of a consulting website that won't use whitelists: Seliger + Associates
Furthermore, When I distribute .pdf files to people around my campus (I'm involved in a couple student groups) I invariably find someone without Acrobat Reader, and I then must explain how to download and install it. And while most people use computers vastly overpowered for their needs, they rarely understand the idea of document files. One guy asked why "Word can't open it." So if Microsoft releases a .pdf killer that comes standard on Windows computer and a free program to make it backwards compatible, I can see Adobe being shoved out of the market in a hurry.
It may not be a popular opinion but it's true. Yeah, I'm not a huge Microsoft fan either, and this will be abusing their monopoly power, but it will also make life easier for many people. I don't include myself in that group of people since I primarily use Lotus WordPro and PageMaker.
Most students here leave KaZaA running 24/7. This means that even if they only download, say, 30 megs per day, they're trying to upload hundreds of megs. To make things worse, they don't even use KaZaA Lite - so they get plenty of spyware with their p2p apps. (Yesterday I brought KaZaA Lite with Speedup to a neighboring dorm room. For kicks, on the same CD I tossed Mozilla and Exact Audio Copy. The latter was a pain to set up, as usual, but they loved the combination of new software.) Schools have no choice because most students don't understand the issues ITS faces. I hear plenty of them complaining about how slow the "internet" is, because they use the net almost exclusively for p2p apps. And I've stopped trying to explain the reasons WHY p2p is so slow, because they never want to hear them.
But the connection is plenty fast to download the occsional mp3. It just means that people become extremely happy when I bring Exact Audio Copy over; yesterday I also installed CDex on my computer because EAC has issues on some CD drives. The article a few days ago about a CD with open source Windows software was of great interest to me, since I've already given out half a dozen CDs with various programs.
Business != politics
Besides, Linux's various problems make it impractical for widespread use in business applications right now - refer to the GUI, poor peripheral support, compatibility with MS products and lack of quality fonts. I'm not trying to a be a troll, but I don't see Linux on the desktop any time soon. Especially because I've never seen the WSJ making political statements about software.
Like much of America, I'm moderately lazy with regards to computers, and my present Windows98 machine works reasonably well. You switched to Linux and StarOffice - what inspired you to change, and how/why should inspire me, like much of the country, to change?
I thought reading slashdot caused decreased brain activity, especially considering how many dumb comments get moderated +5, funny.
I think the button anecdote demonstrates exactly how cruel these guys would be for money. While people can argue (correctly) that spam and other nasty things happen to computers and not people, their statement shows their total disregard for life, something that even almost all of us can agree is sacred and special. Mostly, the button reinforces a stereotype that we would all like to hold - that spammers are bad, bad people. This bunch certainly is, and it can all be encapsulated by the button.
Besides, I doubt anyone here watches buffy, except perhaps because the girl on it is undoubtedly really hot.
Of course, maybe I'm about to modded as a troll and flamed in a thousand replies by /. reading buffy fans, but I'd put money against it.
Yes, they can hire more coders, but even the best coders in the world sometimes make mistakes, especially on extremely complicated products like Online Magic. If this weren't the case, we wouldn't have the endless stream of /. articles decrying Outlook and IE.
Besides the above, the paragraphs on the social issues make sense. I've seen friends of mine in Diablo II and others act totally idiotic in a manner they never would in real life. Once you put a friendly game online, all the stigma that comes with being a jackass in real life disappears. MTG:OL is going to suck, and you'd have to be stupid, insane, rediculously optimistic, foolishly trusting, or free with your money to try it.
Or, better yet, where is the guy straight out of Dilbert who actually falls for this garbage?
Eight humans, crowded together for almost three Terran years, had better get along much better than humans usually did... four married couples were considered optimum.
And naturally, this being science fiction, four could be found with the requisite skills. Here in reality, though, I don't think four married couples would work so well because of the possibility of cheating, devious alliances, people falling out of love, etc.
Of course, the potential for fun in a gravity reduced environment might help fix that issue.
No offense, but anybody who believes a charlatan like the one offering a mystery box deserves to have their money taken. Nobody should be stupid enough to believe in any miracle product without being able to check out it's guts.
Reasonable people agree that the creator of a work should compensated for his efforts, hence copyright - but it has no basis in the constitution. The real question deals with practical issues surrounding the rise of the internet. With the possibility of instaneous distribution and infinite, perfect replication, how can creators be compensated for their work? MegaCorp Inc. wants everything regulated, which is never going to happen. Slashdot types want everything free as in beer, which doesn't encourage creation. So until someone finds a decent way of paying artists aside from CDs, books, etc. people are going to keep stealing digital things because it is a better way to distribute.
As usual, the extremes on either side of the argument need to be tempered to find a workable solution. And it isn't going to be found in the Constitution.
The nice part about evil, soulless facist governments is that they play by no rules, with no rules, with no consideration of the negative potential for science I agree that stem cells hold tremendous potential for good, but without pondering the Brave New World/Gattaca/(insert cliche book here) consequences, the future might turn out an ugly place. It is dangerous to wave flags and say we should follow in their footsteps. One cannot use the dark side of the force/The One Ring/etc. without becoming Darth Vader/Sauron/CowboyNeal.
Maybe all that marketing backfires sometimes: people become so saturated that they feel the need to try something new. Of course, I could just have weird friends.
While the article brings up an interesting point, most of my friends who are still in college actually aren't interested in Microsoft for a different reason. As bright, motivated, hard working people, they see Microsoft as a place that has had its moment of glory in the sun; true growth will spring from other, more innovative companies with new ideas. While Microsoft guarentees plenty of money, I see CS people as wanting to be with the next big thing, not the last big thing. I'm not in CS, but if I were, I wouldn't want to be a Microserf either.
I certainly agree - many of my wealthier friends ski, and the resort prices they pay often astounds me. These are frequently also the people slightly on the larger, lazier side, less inclined toward the difficult skiing likely to warm them. Any additional convience would be worth their money. Aside from that, everyone wants to be the first to say "I not only have my three condos and courtside seats and season passes, but I also have a self warming jacket." Beat that, Joneses!
Now we'll get to see the three stodges remade with Cowboy Neal, John Katz, and CmrdTaco punching each other using computer physics. What a great world.
The servers that play the game belong to Mythic. Mythic created the software, tested and owns the game and everything in it. No user of the game "owns" anything in the game, just like no one actually owns their Stone of Jordan in Diablo 2. Yet someone else, who did not invest in creating the game or maintaining the environment tries to sue to make new rules about how the game should be played. Somehow, regardless of whether it is a supposed "virtual economy" or not, I doubt litigation is going to work.