> We've seen what they said about it, now all thats left is to see what they DO about it...
They will likely just keep patching it until it's so bloated from patches that the true reason it's holey will become realized. Showing support for a browser like IE, is Microsoft's way of demonstrating to companies (not individuals) that they support their products. It's beginning to backfire, and slowly but surely, Microsoft will have to introduce a browser that is not exploitable, which is impossible.
I don't want to say Microsoft should embrace the Open Source Standard, but they really could do it and still remain a profitable company.
They are learning what many others have learned a long time ago. To compete, you must be flexible enough to evolve with time and the changes in the market place. Microsoft has been trying to be the one making all the changes, and it's catching up to them because they have missed the boat on the sheer market potential for Open Source.
I saw this first on Fark quite some time ago. They even had a photoshop contest for it. After a little research, this is no hoax at all. I can't wait to see what Lucas does with this film, a film that lead to so many others like it, yet none were quite as good. Can't wait to see the final results!
Seems they finally figured out Dogbert's release system. In order to make more money, you need to make more products, and release them more frequently. Also it doesn't account for any crappiness in the product, just that more of any given line will produce more revenue to the company.
I think generally they live on buttered popcorn, huge fountain cokes, overpriced nachos and old greenish hotdogs. Of course they likely also eat the occasional caviar sandwich, with bottlenose dolphin snout, drenched in a secret saffron sauce. Don't forget the cold potato soup! Complete with a snifter of Pierre Ferrand 1962 Memoire Grande Champagne Single Vineyard Single Vintage Cognac later on.
Here is the website for The 2004 UK Big Brother Awards, for those of you who want to skip over that puny Register article. My thoughts on this subject is that it's a great idea to shine a huge spotlight on those who would infringe upon privacy, to give them a taste of their own medicine. Of course I don't condone tapping their phones, blackmailing the execs or sending boxes of poo to their doors (like on Six Feet Under's recent arc). This award show will do just fine, in an almost biblical manner of sinning the sinner.
You're laughing, but someone at Slate is going to lose their job over this article. It's reminiscent of nothing in my short term memory, related to Microsoft.
For a millisecond, I thought I was looking at a picture of an inhabitable world. That's one misleading photo, imho... Not to mention, heavily pixilated.
This truly is a first. I am quite pleased by Moore's decision to broaden his audience by allowing free downloads of the film.
I think this would be a great place to link all your Fahrenheit 9/11 torrents!
I already saw Fahrenheit 9/11 in theatre, and it was truly amazing. I don't care if some of it was not factual, because the bulk of it is just too damn funny to worry about trivial he-said, she-said crap. Think for yourself, but also see the movie... it's amazing, imho. Quite a catalyst for provocative thought and discussion. It's not just funny, it's moving and sad, terrifying at times. The funniest parts are when they look at bush in his candid moments, when his true hick nature seeps through the $5000 suits he wears. I won't spoil it. I will say that during the film, they play audio of the 9/11 attacks over a black screen and people in the audience were crying, it was soooo moving, and sad. Now watch this drive!
So much for the MPAA... gosh it's nice to see their hands tied for a change.
I saw a recent Slashdot poll that showed that most people here either like FPS or RPG games. I guess changing tack would mean more of these, if Nintendo wants to really crack the market better. I would like to see some better RPG games, myself.
This always happens when you have an estate controlling the interests of an artist or writer. Estate holders only consider the money side of things, but most artists alive wish only to impact the world, by sharing their life-blood with the public -- forget the bottom line. Either that, or the creative community is simply addicted to the process of creation that they don't recognize the business side of things as being very necessary or important. The spirit of art is passion, and sharing passion can make passion spread like a wildfire. I think that it's sacrilege for heirs of creative folks to block the art because of the almighty buck. Therefore, I too will miss our mighty Dalek overlords.
> WTF? Airlines MUST track your luggage. I want them to track it. Hell, this is common sense. I don't have any need for spyware to track me so it is completely different.
Yeah but what's stopping mixups with RFID tags? The thing about security is that the more you have, the more you need. Adding new layers of security does make it harder for mixups, but it also makes it harder to maintain, and airports are always on the edge when it comes to funding where I'm from. I'm not against RFIDs, but if they are going to do it, they should make sure they have the budget to do it right. I have a feeling they'll end up making a lot of extra work for people with only a marginal rate of success. RFIDs can fall off your luggage as easily as barcodes, or likely easier. I've seen luggage handled before, and it's not pretty at times. Big piles of suitcases, pressing against eachother. It's a wonder more people aren't on the show Airline, complaining about lost luggage... and they do show people losing luggage all the time on that show. My best guess is that RFIDs will make some people's luggage get there when it wouldn't have, but on the other hand it will also likely make some people lose their luggage when they wouldn't have. The more you rely on a system like this, the more it can hurt when a wrinkle comes along.
I wonder if the invite system used in Gmail was covered under this agreement. Mainly because Orkut operates with the same system as Gmail for bringing people into the community. Also, I think that bugs could be replicated due to programmer style. I'm a coder and source code is like a fingerprint, and mistakes could be repeated even with a total rewrite. And a total rewrite would likely be okay under this agreement. IANAL, but I read that non-competition agreements are *rarely* upheld in court because there usually exists some kind of unjust terms in there that lets everyone off the hook. My guess is that the plaintiff will have to prove Orkut took the exact code and used the exact code. They won't get much if he borrowed tidbits here and there, because he could claim that it was merely procedures linked to his style of coding, not the original code. Furthermore, the Orkut code has likely branched off enough to make the plaintiff's case extremely difficult.
> My ears -- yes! sue my ears. They faciliate hearing this music!
Now that you mention it, in the States, your ears would be sued by the RIAA for copyright infringement, along with the rest of your body, if you downloaded pirated music. In Canada, however, your ears could not be sued because it's legal to download pirated music, just illegal to distribute it to other people. No word out on Torrent files, as they do both by default. My guess would be that in Canada you could not be held liable for downloading with torrents, as you can't disable uploading, AFAIK.
> Any theatre refusing to run it is engaging in censorship and is therefore fascist? Riight.
Yeah but you didn't really read what I was saying. I didn't say they were fascist. I said censorship is facist, and the theatres run the risk of *looking* fascist if they don't show Moore's film. In the business, it likely doesn't matter what they look like, but the appearance of impropriety can be dangerous for future business, when there is heavy competition.
I don't believe the theatres should be forced to show anything they don't want to. I think they should think before quickly reacting.
> Vince Foster was killed by Bill Clinton conspiracy theory
Yeah but it's different when you have an Oscar winning director. Once a director wins and Oscar, you kinda have to tow the line and show their stuff... until their popularity hits the toilet, or you're kinda going against the Academy, which is really bad in terms of a number of reasons.
The studios control who can make movies, based on their numbers. The theatres should not have that power. If the studios put out a film, the theatres should simply put it up. I'm sure they could negotiate better contracts if they don't really want to show it for long. Y'know?
Personally, I think if an Oscar calibre director had made a movie about anything, it should be shown. Even if it was pure lies and videotape. People will always think for themselves, and any kind of censorship is wrong, really. The nubmers are what means future work... so if Moore doesn't hit the numbers, he will find himself in a rough spot to find funding for future films.
> hell White Chicks will probably be #2
Yeah, but for what reason? It's the dumbest movie I have seen a preview for since Scary Movie 3. Oh wait...:-)
> You Deaniacs made it #1 this weekend by all turning out for opening weekend. But who will be going next week? Nobody.
Well, I am going to see it on Wednesday. It hasn't opened in Canada yet....
> Theaters should do the smart thing and reject overly political films. Leave left wing conspiracy 'documentaries' where they belong. PBS.
Wrong. If you win an Oscar, you should be able to do any movie you want. Even blockbuster Porn with A list stars.
> Does anyone have the information about what each of those little images is or what they do, or which of them I can safely use the "End Process" on without having to e.g. re-install the printer?
Okay, I had the same problem, which I was complaining about in the grandparent, but I'll go into some more detail now, since you ask.
We have a really old system in the office that runs the printer hub. I've tried to get it replaced with a Mac and a nice colour copier attached, but the management didn't want to spend any money on it. It's a P2 400 with about 64 megs ram. So that's a hefty 17megs because of the HP drivers, and possibly more because we also had camera software on.
I was sick of everything going soooo slow, and I realized the HP background progs were crushing the system. They couldn't install more RAM for some reason. They just didn't want to spend the money when I was there. Anyway, I tried killing off the programs by using msconfig on the RUN thinggie. When I did, the computer responded beautifully and I'd have to switch them all back on if I need to print or use any HP product.
So basically, I don't think HP will run if you terminate any of those programs. One day I called in sick and nobody could get the computer to print. I tried to explain it to them, but they just put it off until the next business day.
The moral of the story, is that if you're going to use HP, you need the programs, and the programs eat a lot of RAM. I don't know if there's a way around it, but if there is a program that quickly lets you run different startup configs through msconfig, but dumbed down for everyday folk, that's the best bet if you're stuck with HP. Otherwise, I'd look at other companies for stuff. My Fuji camera works amazingly, and I only paid about $200 CAD for it. There is no need for the software because it just freaking works.
Another thing, I think that HP tries to add this obstruction for some kind of security over their products. Personally I think they are a bunch of control freaks who should be fired in disgrace for their moronic system and programming logic. Again I have nothing against their hardware, except the software you need to run the hardware.
> So it's fascism for the OWNER of a theater to decide what movies to show in that theater, but it's freedom to TELL the theater owner what they HAVE to show?
Yeah, but I didn't say that. I said that it's fascist to support censorship, so it would be wrong for them to not carry the movie because they were afraid of the message.
I guess my point was that if they decide to not pick up the movie, that's their choice, but people who want to see it, are going to remember the theatres as censoring the public.
It's really just market ecconomy, and No, I don't think that the government should force theatre owners to show any movie at all. I think that the market always works itself out.
Only one theatre in my town is showing F911, and they'll be pulling in a lot of cash doing so. So basically, Moore is making the right wing a lot of money on an anti-message about them. Remember; the right only cares about making money... everything else is just butter for the popcorn. Kind of a bitter pill to swallow, eh? I just hope Moore makes a film every year until he dies of old age.
Slashdot Mirror
... is that we don't find a giant face that looks like the comedy mask. I bet we find out that humans once lived there. Who will take my bet?
> We've seen what they said about it, now all thats left is to see what they DO about it...
They will likely just keep patching it until it's so bloated from patches that the true reason it's holey will become realized. Showing support for a browser like IE, is Microsoft's way of demonstrating to companies (not individuals) that they support their products. It's beginning to backfire, and slowly but surely, Microsoft will have to introduce a browser that is not exploitable, which is impossible.
I don't want to say Microsoft should embrace the Open Source Standard, but they really could do it and still remain a profitable company.
They are learning what many others have learned a long time ago. To compete, you must be flexible enough to evolve with time and the changes in the market place. Microsoft has been trying to be the one making all the changes, and it's catching up to them because they have missed the boat on the sheer market potential for Open Source.
I saw this first on Fark quite some time ago. They even had a photoshop contest for it. After a little research, this is no hoax at all. I can't wait to see what Lucas does with this film, a film that lead to so many others like it, yet none were quite as good. Can't wait to see the final results!
Stick with the coffee, guys.
Seems they finally figured out Dogbert's release system. In order to make more money, you need to make more products, and release them more frequently. Also it doesn't account for any crappiness in the product, just that more of any given line will produce more revenue to the company.
Bad for quality, great for the corporate stocks!
> They should enforce the patent and only license it to products who would implement PNG (correctly) as well as GIF. ;)
I fully agree. To avoid the charges, Billy Goat Gates would finally spring into action and provide us with PNG support in IE.
Standards folks... that's what this funny thing we call the net is really all about.
> How will they survive?
I think generally they live on buttered popcorn, huge fountain cokes, overpriced nachos and old greenish hotdogs. Of course they likely also eat the occasional caviar sandwich, with bottlenose dolphin snout, drenched in a secret saffron sauce. Don't forget the cold potato soup! Complete with a snifter of Pierre Ferrand 1962 Memoire Grande Champagne Single Vineyard Single Vintage Cognac later on.
"call jenny for a good time: 555-0634"
Isn't that 867-5309?
> Who else in the world would blame aliens because they cant open their garage door.
If you want to really know, try this guy.
Here is the website for The 2004 UK Big Brother Awards, for those of you who want to skip over that puny Register article. My thoughts on this subject is that it's a great idea to shine a huge spotlight on those who would infringe upon privacy, to give them a taste of their own medicine. Of course I don't condone tapping their phones, blackmailing the execs or sending boxes of poo to their doors (like on Six Feet Under's recent arc). This award show will do just fine, in an almost biblical manner of sinning the sinner.
You're laughing, but someone at Slate is going to lose their job over this article. It's reminiscent of nothing in my short term memory, related to Microsoft.
For a millisecond, I thought I was looking at a picture of an inhabitable world. That's one misleading photo, imho... Not to mention, heavily pixilated.
This truly is a first. I am quite pleased by Moore's decision to broaden his audience by allowing free downloads of the film.
I think this would be a great place to link all your Fahrenheit 9/11 torrents!
I already saw Fahrenheit 9/11 in theatre, and it was truly amazing. I don't care if some of it was not factual, because the bulk of it is just too damn funny to worry about trivial he-said, she-said crap. Think for yourself, but also see the movie... it's amazing, imho. Quite a catalyst for provocative thought and discussion. It's not just funny, it's moving and sad, terrifying at times. The funniest parts are when they look at bush in his candid moments, when his true hick nature seeps through the $5000 suits he wears. I won't spoil it. I will say that during the film, they play audio of the 9/11 attacks over a black screen and people in the audience were crying, it was soooo moving, and sad. Now watch this drive!
So much for the MPAA... gosh it's nice to see their hands tied for a change.
I saw a recent Slashdot poll that showed that most people here either like FPS or RPG games. I guess changing tack would mean more of these, if Nintendo wants to really crack the market better. I would like to see some better RPG games, myself.
If you can change your vote after you see a reaction to it from your financial backers, how is it a vote anymore?
Vote:
1. A formal expression of preference for a candidate for office or for a proposed resolution of an issue.
2. A means by which such a preference is made known, such as a raised hand or a marked ballot.
This always happens when you have an estate controlling the interests of an artist or writer. Estate holders only consider the money side of things, but most artists alive wish only to impact the world, by sharing their life-blood with the public -- forget the bottom line. Either that, or the creative community is simply addicted to the process of creation that they don't recognize the business side of things as being very necessary or important. The spirit of art is passion, and sharing passion can make passion spread like a wildfire. I think that it's sacrilege for heirs of creative folks to block the art because of the almighty buck. Therefore, I too will miss our mighty Dalek overlords.
> WTF? Airlines MUST track your luggage. I want them to track it. Hell, this is common sense. I don't have any need for spyware to track me so it is completely different.
Yeah but what's stopping mixups with RFID tags? The thing about security is that the more you have, the more you need. Adding new layers of security does make it harder for mixups, but it also makes it harder to maintain, and airports are always on the edge when it comes to funding where I'm from. I'm not against RFIDs, but if they are going to do it, they should make sure they have the budget to do it right. I have a feeling they'll end up making a lot of extra work for people with only a marginal rate of success. RFIDs can fall off your luggage as easily as barcodes, or likely easier. I've seen luggage handled before, and it's not pretty at times. Big piles of suitcases, pressing against eachother. It's a wonder more people aren't on the show Airline, complaining about lost luggage... and they do show people losing luggage all the time on that show. My best guess is that RFIDs will make some people's luggage get there when it wouldn't have, but on the other hand it will also likely make some people lose their luggage when they wouldn't have. The more you rely on a system like this, the more it can hurt when a wrinkle comes along.
The Cassini-Huygens spacecraft was launched from Cape Canaveral Air Station in Florida at 4:43 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time on October 15, 1997
I think they made pretty good time! Good thing I wasn't in the ship, cuz I'd be asking "Are we there yet?" every five minutes!!
> And I stole Slashster from Friendster, even though one is in PHP and the other in JSP
And you stole Slashster from Slashdot/Slashcode. Tisk, Tisk.
I wonder if the invite system used in Gmail was covered under this agreement. Mainly because Orkut operates with the same system as Gmail for bringing people into the community. Also, I think that bugs could be replicated due to programmer style. I'm a coder and source code is like a fingerprint, and mistakes could be repeated even with a total rewrite. And a total rewrite would likely be okay under this agreement. IANAL, but I read that non-competition agreements are *rarely* upheld in court because there usually exists some kind of unjust terms in there that lets everyone off the hook. My guess is that the plaintiff will have to prove Orkut took the exact code and used the exact code. They won't get much if he borrowed tidbits here and there, because he could claim that it was merely procedures linked to his style of coding, not the original code. Furthermore, the Orkut code has likely branched off enough to make the plaintiff's case extremely difficult.
> My ears -- yes! sue my ears. They faciliate hearing this music!
Now that you mention it, in the States, your ears would be sued by the RIAA for copyright infringement, along with the rest of your body, if you downloaded pirated music. In Canada, however, your ears could not be sued because it's legal to download pirated music, just illegal to distribute it to other people. No word out on Torrent files, as they do both by default. My guess would be that in Canada you could not be held liable for downloading with torrents, as you can't disable uploading, AFAIK.
> You know, it's only been within the last few years that I've heard any significant usage of the word "cracker" with regards to computer security.
It usually means dumbass white motherfucker where I'm from.
> Any theatre refusing to run it is engaging in censorship and is therefore fascist? Riight.
:-)
Yeah but you didn't really read what I was saying. I didn't say they were fascist. I said censorship is facist, and the theatres run the risk of *looking* fascist if they don't show Moore's film. In the business, it likely doesn't matter what they look like, but the appearance of impropriety can be dangerous for future business, when there is heavy competition.
I don't believe the theatres should be forced to show anything they don't want to. I think they should think before quickly reacting.
> Vince Foster was killed by Bill Clinton conspiracy theory
Yeah but it's different when you have an Oscar winning director. Once a director wins and Oscar, you kinda have to tow the line and show their stuff... until their popularity hits the toilet, or you're kinda going against the Academy, which is really bad in terms of a number of reasons.
The studios control who can make movies, based on their numbers. The theatres should not have that power. If the studios put out a film, the theatres should simply put it up. I'm sure they could negotiate better contracts if they don't really want to show it for long. Y'know?
Personally, I think if an Oscar calibre director had made a movie about anything, it should be shown. Even if it was pure lies and videotape. People will always think for themselves, and any kind of censorship is wrong, really. The nubmers are what means future work... so if Moore doesn't hit the numbers, he will find himself in a rough spot to find funding for future films.
> hell White Chicks will probably be #2
Yeah, but for what reason? It's the dumbest movie I have seen a preview for since Scary Movie 3. Oh wait...
> You Deaniacs made it #1 this weekend by all turning out for opening weekend. But who will be going next week? Nobody.
Well, I am going to see it on Wednesday. It hasn't opened in Canada yet....
> Theaters should do the smart thing and reject overly political films. Leave left wing conspiracy 'documentaries' where they belong. PBS.
Wrong. If you win an Oscar, you should be able to do any movie you want. Even blockbuster Porn with A list stars.
> Does anyone have the information about what each of those little images is or what they do, or which of them I can safely use the "End Process" on without having to e.g. re-install the printer?
Okay, I had the same problem, which I was complaining about in the grandparent, but I'll go into some more detail now, since you ask.
We have a really old system in the office that runs the printer hub. I've tried to get it replaced with a Mac and a nice colour copier attached, but the management didn't want to spend any money on it. It's a P2 400 with about 64 megs ram. So that's a hefty 17megs because of the HP drivers, and possibly more because we also had camera software on.
I was sick of everything going soooo slow, and I realized the HP background progs were crushing the system. They couldn't install more RAM for some reason. They just didn't want to spend the money when I was there. Anyway, I tried killing off the programs by using msconfig on the RUN thinggie. When I did, the computer responded beautifully and I'd have to switch them all back on if I need to print or use any HP product.
So basically, I don't think HP will run if you terminate any of those programs. One day I called in sick and nobody could get the computer to print. I tried to explain it to them, but they just put it off until the next business day.
The moral of the story, is that if you're going to use HP, you need the programs, and the programs eat a lot of RAM. I don't know if there's a way around it, but if there is a program that quickly lets you run different startup configs through msconfig, but dumbed down for everyday folk, that's the best bet if you're stuck with HP. Otherwise, I'd look at other companies for stuff. My Fuji camera works amazingly, and I only paid about $200 CAD for it. There is no need for the software because it just freaking works.
Another thing, I think that HP tries to add this obstruction for some kind of security over their products. Personally I think they are a bunch of control freaks who should be fired in disgrace for their moronic system and programming logic. Again I have nothing against their hardware, except the software you need to run the hardware.
> So it's fascism for the OWNER of a theater to decide what movies to show in that theater, but it's freedom to TELL the theater owner what they HAVE to show?
Yeah, but I didn't say that. I said that it's fascist to support censorship, so it would be wrong for them to not carry the movie because they were afraid of the message.
I guess my point was that if they decide to not pick up the movie, that's their choice, but people who want to see it, are going to remember the theatres as censoring the public.
It's really just market ecconomy, and No, I don't think that the government should force theatre owners to show any movie at all. I think that the market always works itself out.
Only one theatre in my town is showing F911, and they'll be pulling in a lot of cash doing so. So basically, Moore is making the right wing a lot of money on an anti-message about them. Remember; the right only cares about making money... everything else is just butter for the popcorn. Kind of a bitter pill to swallow, eh? I just hope Moore makes a film every year until he dies of old age.