Microsoft is taking a legal action against a website that is doing something wrong. If you read the context of the complaint, you'll quickly see what little "details" Lindows is leaving out of this site, and based off my exposure to episodes of Law and Order, probably give Microsoft a decent LEGAL reason for wanting this site removed.
So why don't you clarify this up a little bit... is it really YRO?
Entertainment is not really a transferable good that can easily be boycotted. Sure, you can boycott a brand of toilet paper, or a type of clothing line, because they are all easily replaceable by something else. The boycott would be effective on them because there ARE viable alternatives.
Entertainment on the other hand, is a creative product and if you crave the "specific" creativity, then your SOL. You hate the MPAA but love Star Wars. Do you want to sacrifice your love of the movie, when you know there isn't another company coming out with a Star Wars? My guess... not.
By buying into the brand you're already playing in their court. The only thing that would be effective would be a boycott on yourself. Not many people are willing to give up their passions for that, and these guys know it.
"Other technologies about which we should exercise caution include VOIP, Bluetooth, open source, automated patching, RFIDs and biometrics."
Slashdot reporting on something that says Open Source has security problems? Wow!
For all of you who's wondering what he's talking about, think: trojan in OpenSSL, trojan in libpcap, immediate disclosure of apache vulnerabilities... its not all peaches and cream just because its open. Closed source has some important inherant security benefits.
Thats fine, go for it. But don't be asking any of your US based networking companies or US based consultants of US based telcom's to help you build it.
You want to know WHY we monopolize it? Its because we INVENTED it, we COMMERCIALIZED it, and we bear the brunt of the effort needed to MAINTAIN it. How quickly you forget to thank the hand that feeds you.
Yeah, the world sucks, the US monopolizes everything, blah blah blah. We've heard it 1000 times. Bottom line is that we wouldn't monopolize anything if anybody else was competant enough to do something that could come close in competing with it. But hell, your welcome!
I highly doubt it. Ever hear of calligraphy? Its a process of hiding data into pictures, and lots of it.
You'll be really pissed off what the non-assuming 500k browser-cached picture off the Internet quietly hides a MEGA virus that will toast your entire machine, innocently awaken by a harmless worm you mistakenly opened up elsewhere.
As I read the McAfee press release, it didn't give the virus a severity, just an "FYI" stuff like this will be happening down the road (which it will). I guarantee we will see a virus like this eventually, given the massive amount of images on the web. Get your facts straight before you bash them.. without McAfee, I'd still be doing Klez cleaning off desktops...
It costs money to support infrastructure, and to get connected to the top level providers
Your right, it does. But isn't that the same infrastructure I'm supporting through my phone bill (for DSL), or cable bill (for cable modems), with the addition of some new fancy whiz-bang gadgets and some system improvements that should be considered part of basic upgrades (i.e cost of doing business)?
In terms of telephones, isn't that the same infrastructure that the government under-wrote to initially build (for the majority) and is continually improving upon via my "Universal Access" tax every month?
I understand your point in paying for support, but how much freaking support am I paying for? Its all using the same wires, whether its the Playboy channel, me calling my mom, or the occasional game of Counterstrike...
The problem I have is that they classify "Internet access" (or the packetizing of data transmission) as a totally new service, and then go out and build elaborate "digital" TV and phone services that use the exact same technology, and charge me 3 times for it! Eventually its all going to be "packets" going to/from my house (and it some cases it already is), why the 3 bills and the threats on tiering it? Will I start getting overage fee's for watching too much TV?
I have ATT Broadband, and at times is is slower than dial-up. In fact if I could pay $100 a month for a fix speed that I could depend up always having, I would do it in a second. I love and need my bandwidth... if that means paying more, as long as I'm assured to get it, I'll quickly fork it over.
Is that the term "monopoly" is changing a bit. I've read a few articles from Powell, and his basic stance is with the way things are going, everything is becoming an information service, and the traditional communications veritcals are disappearing.
Look at it this way... the overall product being delivered is broadband internet. Unlike a "traditional" monopoly, where one company controls all elements of one product, broadband internet is a product that can be delivered by several different means that go outside the normal definitions of a monopoly.
You can get broadband from telephone systems, cable systems, wireless systems, etc. Each of these systems are independant technologies with their own sets of regulations. Interestingly enough, they are also technologies where the broadband internet is a second use application, i.e. phone calls over DSL, television of cable internet, etc.
Its a new media, and an interesting era, and change is needed to diversify the methods that we are able to access the overall "information service". Personally I think its a good move... all of these dire predictions over regulation of content are ridiculous... no one would ever stand for it. The bottom line is that new rules are needed for a medium that doesn't apply to the old set. It may not be the best move, but at least its a move.
21 Dog Years: Doing Time @ Amazon.com, Daisey's hilarious, heartbreaking and surprisingly powerful recounting of life inside what may be the world's strangest, most ephemeral company -- a symbol of all that was exciting, misguided, and ultimately misunderstood about business online during the mad years. It's also one of the best books ever written about the Net, an unsparing, even brutal indictment not only of hubris, but of media and, of course, the corporate-spawned hype that shapes so much of American life--as characterized in the post Sept 11th American culture.:)
Being that IBM builds it own proprietary systems, platforms, and components, does it focus most of its development for Linux to run on IBM gear? Technologies, however advanced, like the Power4 processor or ChipKill, aren't exactly the kind of systems that I would guess the Linux "masses" actively develop and work on.
But I don't understand their lack in creativity and ingenuity.
Yes, people can skip your commercials. Yes, people can rip CD's into MP3's. Yes, the internet lets them easily share them.
But how about instead of sitting there, complaining about how technology changes and how its destroying your business model, here's a crazy idea... why don't you change your model?
Has this world lost ALL sense of invention and creativity? Christ, give me a job if your that dumb. I can think of about 10 ways right now you could use PVR's to your advantage. Hell, this article even mentions a couple.
The most definately lose on the price of the actual system, but all of that money is re-couped in game licensing. Or, in the case of M$FT, the chance for monopolizing your TV too:)
I don't think its that the average user isn't _intelligent_, but rather that their hobbies may lead them to activities that don't require a keyboard and a mouse.
I do agree with your point that the hard-core users should make it their responsibility to keep the general public informed, but isn't the entire point of the article discussing how these attempts fail miserably?
LoL. You make a good point, however I think the intent of the article was to demonstrate that for all of the hub-bub raised by the various privacy organizations, very little ever happens because of it.
Personally, I think all of the privacy/security issues are heating up to a boiling point that will eventually make it a very hot topic. Yahoo! threatens to call me, big deal, most of us get 2-4 telemarketer calls daily anyways. Post my browsing history on the web demonstrating my perpensity for hardcore porn, then people start to care... its just going to take something really big to get the flame going.
I just don't get these stories, or why they are even posted. Why is an article posted that is blantantly FACTUALLY incorrect in nearly all of its statements?
The ONLY reason I can see to keep this guy around is because his posts have HUGE moderations, inevitably attrack mammonth numbers of page views are users sift through the Katz flaming, which then relates to increased Ad revenue for banners based on impressions.
You might not admit it, but thats gotta be the answer. Using the old Vince McMahon tactic... if they love you, great, if they hate you, great, if they are indifferent, find a new job. Craziness.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft is taking a legal action against a website that is doing something wrong. If you read the context of the complaint, you'll quickly see what little "details" Lindows is leaving out of this site, and based off my exposure to episodes of Law and Order, probably give Microsoft a decent LEGAL reason for wanting this site removed.
So why don't you clarify this up a little bit... is it really YRO?
The FUD on this place is appauling.
Nothing like a post that points you to a site where all the articles are "offline for editing". Boy that was worth my time.
Entertainment is not really a transferable good that can easily be boycotted. Sure, you can boycott a brand of toilet paper, or a type of clothing line, because they are all easily replaceable by something else. The boycott would be effective on them because there ARE viable alternatives.
Entertainment on the other hand, is a creative product and if you crave the "specific" creativity, then your SOL. You hate the MPAA but love Star Wars. Do you want to sacrifice your love of the movie, when you know there isn't another company coming out with a Star Wars? My guess... not.
By buying into the brand you're already playing in their court. The only thing that would be effective would be a boycott on yourself. Not many people are willing to give up their passions for that, and these guys know it.
"Other technologies about which we should exercise caution include VOIP, Bluetooth, open source, automated patching, RFIDs and biometrics."
Slashdot reporting on something that says Open Source has security problems? Wow!
For all of you who's wondering what he's talking about, think: trojan in OpenSSL, trojan in libpcap, immediate disclosure of apache vulnerabilities... its not all peaches and cream just because its open. Closed source has some important inherant security benefits.
"Anyone can piss in a pool. The ability to taste it and say "Yuck!" does not alter the fact that you're swimming in piss."
What in the hell does that mean? How does tasting piss even relate to Tivo's?
Are you reply to this email on your RedHat Advanced Server OS...? Don't think so...
Thats fine, go for it. But don't be asking any of your US based networking companies or US based consultants of US based telcom's to help you build it.
You want to know WHY we monopolize it? Its because we INVENTED it, we COMMERCIALIZED it, and we bear the brunt of the effort needed to MAINTAIN it. How quickly you forget to thank the hand that feeds you.
Yeah, the world sucks, the US monopolizes everything, blah blah blah. We've heard it 1000 times. Bottom line is that we wouldn't monopolize anything if anybody else was competant enough to do something that could come close in competing with it. But hell, your welcome!
Music, blinds, awful colors, oh my!
Its greating seeing technology helping people keep fit. I just need to find something like this that I would like :)
Regardless of the word, the idea is still valid.
You'll be really pissed off what the non-assuming 500k browser-cached picture off the Internet quietly hides a MEGA virus that will toast your entire machine, innocently awaken by a harmless worm you mistakenly opened up elsewhere.
As I read the McAfee press release, it didn't give the virus a severity, just an "FYI" stuff like this will be happening down the road (which it will). I guarantee we will see a virus like this eventually, given the massive amount of images on the web. Get your facts straight before you bash them.. without McAfee, I'd still be doing Klez cleaning off desktops...
Maybe they should run this Onion story in an Afghani paper...
Your right, it does. But isn't that the same infrastructure I'm supporting through my phone bill (for DSL), or cable bill (for cable modems), with the addition of some new fancy whiz-bang gadgets and some system improvements that should be considered part of basic upgrades (i.e cost of doing business)?
In terms of telephones, isn't that the same infrastructure that the government under-wrote to initially build (for the majority) and is continually improving upon via my "Universal Access" tax every month?
I understand your point in paying for support, but how much freaking support am I paying for? Its all using the same wires, whether its the Playboy channel, me calling my mom, or the occasional game of Counterstrike...
The problem I have is that they classify "Internet access" (or the packetizing of data transmission) as a totally new service, and then go out and build elaborate "digital" TV and phone services that use the exact same technology, and charge me 3 times for it! Eventually its all going to be "packets" going to/from my house (and it some cases it already is), why the 3 bills and the threats on tiering it? Will I start getting overage fee's for watching too much TV?
I have ATT Broadband, and at times is is slower than dial-up. In fact if I could pay $100 a month for a fix speed that I could depend up always having, I would do it in a second. I love and need my bandwidth... if that means paying more, as long as I'm assured to get it, I'll quickly fork it over.
Holy crap! You actually BOUGHT an Aztek? I've made cars out of Lego's that look better than those!
Look at it this way... the overall product being delivered is broadband internet. Unlike a "traditional" monopoly, where one company controls all elements of one product, broadband internet is a product that can be delivered by several different means that go outside the normal definitions of a monopoly.
You can get broadband from telephone systems, cable systems, wireless systems, etc. Each of these systems are independant technologies with their own sets of regulations. Interestingly enough, they are also technologies where the broadband internet is a second use application, i.e. phone calls over DSL, television of cable internet, etc.
Its a new media, and an interesting era, and change is needed to diversify the methods that we are able to access the overall "information service". Personally I think its a good move... all of these dire predictions over regulation of content are ridiculous... no one would ever stand for it. The bottom line is that new rules are needed for a medium that doesn't apply to the old set. It may not be the best move, but at least its a move.
21 Dog Years: Doing Time @ Amazon.com, Daisey's hilarious, heartbreaking and surprisingly powerful recounting of life inside what may be the world's strangest, most ephemeral company -- a symbol of all that was exciting, misguided, and ultimately misunderstood about business online during the mad years. It's also one of the best books ever written about the Net, an unsparing, even brutal indictment not only of hubris, but of media and, of course, the corporate-spawned hype that shapes so much of American life--as characterized in the post Sept 11th American culture. :)
Its good to see the MSFT is further branching out its operations to soft pornography...
Being that IBM builds it own proprietary systems, platforms, and components, does it focus most of its development for Linux to run on IBM gear? Technologies, however advanced, like the Power4 processor or ChipKill, aren't exactly the kind of systems that I would guess the Linux "masses" actively develop and work on.
Anyone have a mirror, Google cache doesn't like the Flash. This actually sounds interesting!
Yes, people can skip your commercials. Yes, people can rip CD's into MP3's. Yes, the internet lets them easily share them.
But how about instead of sitting there, complaining about how technology changes and how its destroying your business model, here's a crazy idea... why don't you change your model?
Has this world lost ALL sense of invention and creativity? Christ, give me a job if your that dumb. I can think of about 10 ways right now you could use PVR's to your advantage. Hell, this article even mentions a couple.
The most definately lose on the price of the actual system, but all of that money is re-couped in game licensing. Or, in the case of M$FT, the chance for monopolizing your TV too :)
I do agree with your point that the hard-core users should make it their responsibility to keep the general public informed, but isn't the entire point of the article discussing how these attempts fail miserably?
Personally, I think all of the privacy/security issues are heating up to a boiling point that will eventually make it a very hot topic. Yahoo! threatens to call me, big deal, most of us get 2-4 telemarketer calls daily anyways. Post my browsing history on the web demonstrating my perpensity for hardcore porn, then people start to care... its just going to take something really big to get the flame going.
The ONLY reason I can see to keep this guy around is because his posts have HUGE moderations, inevitably attrack mammonth numbers of page views are users sift through the Katz flaming, which then relates to increased Ad revenue for banners based on impressions.
You might not admit it, but thats gotta be the answer. Using the old Vince McMahon tactic... if they love you, great, if they hate you, great, if they are indifferent, find a new job. Craziness.