Yet another security flaw from a company that is trumpeting its "dedication to security" in its marketing hype. What is it about MS that makes people think they'll ever get this sort of thing right? Not only do they have compromises in current products, but their on-the-drawing-board "Longhorn" project promises to be a tar pit of security issues.
MS needs to realize that making everything from file handling to Internet browsing an intrinsic part of an OS is not the way to achieve either security or stability. With OS architectures that resemble a bowl of spaghetti it's no wonder that the list of security problems continues to get longer every day. There is evidently no way that MS can remove, or even limit the effect of, the security problems that their products are subject to.
Before you MS apologists start pointing out that Open Source software has problems, too, I'll gladly stipulate that. However, there are several ways in which those problems differ from the ones that MS inflicts on Joe Average computer user. First, given the loosely coupled nature of UNIX/Linux a security problem in an application does not affect the operation of the OS itself. Even problems within the kernel itself are generally easy to fix as the OS doesn't try to do everything under the sun. Fixing those is much easier (and faster) than when a problem is part of a piece of an application that is part of something else, that is connected to the OS via a lot of tightly-wrapped code.
Also, the Open Source community has not, that I'm aware of, ever claimed that "security is job one." Instead, by releasing the code and allowing others to make changes and re-distribute the modified code, a lot of potential problems are taken care of early in the release cycles. In keeping with the philosophy that code should be available the Open Source community doesn't waste time denying the existence of problems or trying to cover them up. Instead, the problems are quickly fixed, the modified code is rapidly made available, and systems are patched, generally without having to schedule downtime as, for most fixes, the machines, be they desktop or server, don't need to be rebooted once the patch is applied. I dare say, that because of the "transparency" of the patch process, the average UNIX/Linux system is more current with patches than the average Windows machine. I don't have hard number for that, but my experience in mixed MS and UNIX/Linux shops gives me that impression.
The bottom line is that MS can keep its products as fas as I'm concerned. People, albeit slowly, seem to realizing that MS is not capable of producing software that is reliable, secure, and easy to patch when fixes are needed. I suspect that realization has a lot to do with the growing popularity of Linux and other Open Source OSes and products.
Evidently Microsoft thinks it's very difficult or impossible. Given their track record when it comes to being truly innovative, instead of just buying or stealing the technology, I believe their assertion to be true for MS. This is one area where I think that the Open/Free Software community can make a telling case against MS. Our products are known, anecdotally if nothing else, for being much more stable and reliable than those of the Redmond monopoly. Given the recent study that showed far fewer errors in the Linux kernel TCP/IP stack, we now have some facts to back up our claims.
I think that it behooves us to push for greater software reliability. I'm sick and tired of the proprietary software concerns that can get away with a warranty that essentially limits their liability, even when the software fails to function, to "we'll replace the CD or floppy if it's defective." It's time that the software industry be forced to live up to the reliability and liability laws that other industries must abide by. I would prefer, given my libertarian leanings, to see this done without resort to new laws and some new government department. However, given the monopoly conditions that most of the industry operates under that may not be possible to achieve.
I thought it rather ironic that the main ad on this page, when I loaded it, was for the MS.Net developers kit. Somehow I just think that the sentence fragment "reliable Microsoft software" makes no sense on any level.
Your P.S. makes a very good point. Linux has improved greatly as people have contributed changes and built applications to make it work better for them. There are people (mostly so-called "industry pundits") that maintain that Linux won't take over the desktop because it's missing feature X or application Y. They then go on to say that the Open/Free Software community will never develop that feature or application "because Open Source programmers aren't interested in that area of computing." I've never believed that argument because as the use of Linux grows the community adds to its population of talented people who are interested in some previously obscure area of computing.
Those who have been using Linux for a long time will remember when there was considerable discussion over whether or not the OS needed a purpose built windowing system. At the same time the "industry pundits" were writing that Linux would never become popular because there wasn't a dedicated windowing system for the OS and furthermore, there weren't enough programmers interested in developing such a thing. Well, that prediction turned out to be wrong and now people have a choice of two very capable windowing systems in the form of KDE and GNOME. The windowing systems developed gradually as more people joined our community and took up the task of developing the software.
As Linux continues to grow we will see more and more applications being developed that replace similar applications in the Windows(tm) world. For each such app we gain some number of new adherents. Eventually one or more of those new adherents decides that he or she needs an application that does X "like I used to be able to do in Windows(tm)." The development of that application starts the accretion process again.
The people that are demanding that Linux make change W or add application Z need to relax a bit. If you can't write the application or make the kernel change yourself then someone else will sonner or later. I've always thought that part of the fun of Linux is the daily visit to Freshmeat to see what's new today. The more people that join our club the more fun we'll have.
We can only hope that more libraries take action like this. Far too many people and organizations are rolling over or worse, hiding their heads in the sand, when it comes to voicing objections to many provisions of the horribly mis-named USA PATRIOT ACT. It has suddenly become dangerous in this country to openly espouse views at odds with those of the government. Doing so results in one's patriotism being called into question; that's assuming that the Department of Injustice doesn't brand you a "terrorist" and imprison you without trial, legal counsel, or charges being brought. After all, we all know that John Ashcroft is God's gift to the American people to keep them safe from all those nasty "terrorists" out there.
Personally, I'm going down to my local library tomorrow and ask what their policy is regarding the retention of patron borrowing records, etc. If they don't have one I'll definitely urge them to adopt a policy such as Santa Cruz's. I'll volunteer to shred the records if they plead lack of manpower. It is time to start fighting back against Big Brother while we still stand a chance. If enough people start protesting about the provisions of the PATRIOT ACT the Congress may take notice and repeal that particular abomination.
Bush is out of control. Cheney is out of control. Ashcroft is out of control.
I'm afraid that this isn't a new item. The NCIC database has been the source of trouble for a number of innocent people, whose names happen to be "like" those of convicts or suspects, ever since it was established. The problem is that now the FBI will no longer be obliged to clean up any errors in the data; which is what the old procedure was supposed to be. It won't be long before a lot more people find themselves hauled into police stations because of errors in the database. The concept of "innocent until proven guilty" has just taken another shot to the head.
Given the current administrations' penchant for closed trials, secret widespread wiretaps, and its desire to tie any criminal activity to terrorism, the U.S. just got a lot less free. The new regulation must be causing John Ashcroft to have wet dreams. Now the Department of Injustice will have all the excuse they needs to haul in anybody that they want. All that has to be done is to insinuate false data into the NCIC and voila, the local police will take care of the problem without the people in Washington having to dirty their hands.
The use of falsified police records is not new nor is it confined to this country. When Hitler wanted to depose the chief of the German General Staff, Generaloberst Werner von Fritsch, in 1936 the SS trumped up the evidence. However, they did not produce the "evidence" of von Fritsch's alleged homosexuality out of thin air. Instead, a "mistake" was made and the confession of one Otto Schmidt was used to incriminate von Fritsch (see _The German Army 1933-1945_, by Matthew Cooper for more details.) I'm afraid that we'll start seeing the same thing in this country to silence those whom the administration finds troubling.
Bush is out of control, Ashcroft is way out of control, Chaney is out of control.
I'm glad that someone is finally taking this system to court. American corporations have been abusing this system ever since it was introduced in the late 1990's. Is it a coincidence that Sun was applying to bring in 2,400 H1-B workers at the same time it was laying off American engineers? I doubt it.
The truth is that H1-B workers not only work for less than their American counter-parts, they are also much less likely to complain about working conditions, number of hours worked, etc. because they know that they can easily be sent back to wherever they came from. Far too many companies bring in H1-B workers rather than investing in re-training their current employees. It's time that American high tech workers started fighting back against a system that is designed solely to enrich corporations at the expense of American workers and the communities they live in.
Then, there is the national security aspect of the situation. Are these H1-B applicants subjected to background checks prior to being allowed into the country? Not that I have ever heard of and I've worked with a number of H1-B workers over the years. Do we really want to entrust the electronic infrastruture of this nation to depend on people whose first loyalty is not to the U.S.?
BTW, I have no quarrel with the people who apply for H1-B vaisa. Everyone has, or should have, the right to try to improve their position in life, and H1-B workers are trying to do that. My quarrel is with those corporations who use H1-B workers to fill positions for which qualified Americans are available.
My big question is - who do the corporations that abuse the H1-B system expect to purchase their products when they are busy laying off anybody who can afford to do so?
Wow!! Well said, my friend. However, don't overlook the threat that mandatory DRM poses to the freedom of all of us to listen to or watch what we want, when we want, where we want. The RIAA and MPAA remind me of the loggers in the NW or the fisherman of the NE who, simply because they'd always been fishermen or loggers figured that the government should arrange things so that they could continue to live as they used to.
Unfortunately, for the loggers and fishermen, they didn't have the deep pockets the RIAA and MPAA have, so the government paid them little mind. The real problem that we face here is the corruption of our political system by the sheer amounts of money that float through it in the guise of "campaign contributions." Until the voters of this nation decide that they've had enough of corrupt politicians who line their pockets with corporate largess to an extent that would make even a "Golden Age" politician embarassed, we have little hope of winning this struggle.
The RIAA and MPAA will get their DRM legislation and the hardware vendors will stop making general purpose PCs because they will essentially be illegal. Instead, everything with a chip in it will end up with DRM hardware and software and our freedoms will be that much more limited. It's time for the people of the U.S. to stand up and make the corporate toadies in Wasington remember that they were sent to Washington to serve the people not some corporation. Whether this will happen soon enough is really up in the air right now.
A wonderful assessment of the situation. However, you forgot to mention some of the other reasons why the "War on Drugs" is so popular with the government. There has been a whole infrastructure of people and organizations that have grown up around the "War on Drugs", each of whom has an interest in continuing the "War." Let's start with the Federal DOJ, they love the "War" because they can justify hiring more lawyers since "there is such an increase in the number of drug arrests."
Along with an increase in the size of the DOJ fiefdom has come an expansion of the police powers of the state. The government just loves being able to sieze the property of "suspects." AFAIK, they don't even have to prove that the suspect committed a crime before being able to sieze and sell any property that "may" have been obtained with illegal drug money. And let's not forget little things like civil rights, that have eroded under pressure from the "War."
Then the various police agencies have good reason to carry on with the "War." They get all sorts of new toys to play with; reasons to have SWAT teams; trained dogs; high-tech bugging gear, etc. Who'd want to give that up?
Then there are the drug "rehab" centers. They didn't even really exist until the "War" came along. Now they get all sorts of money for "treating" people with drug problems. A lot of folks have jobs because of the "War." People who would ordinarily have to get out and earn an honest living.
But, the biggest winner is the government as a whole. They get to develop more agencies, more budget items, more employees. But, the really scary thing is the precedents that have been set under the "War" that are now being used to restrict the rights of those the government decides may be "dangerous" in the "War on Terrorism." Many of the legal tactics from the "War on Drugs" are being used to detain, harass, and intimidate anyone that the government sees fit to view as a danger. The USA PATRIOT ACT is a direct out-growth of lessons learned by the government in the "War on Drugs." The police power of the state has increased out of all reason and it started when somebody decided that smoking pot ought to be a crime.
I'm sure that I've missed a few others that have a vested interest in continuing the "War on Drugs." Please feel free to add to the list.
When are the record companies going to figure out that the reason that people so assiduously trade MP3s is that they perceive that the price of the "real thing", i.e. the CD is not worth the value received? The recording industry has no one to blame but themselves for the situation that has been created regarding MP3s, a much lower quality product, from an audio perspective. People know when they're being ripped off and CDs priced at $15 and up is definitely a rip off when you consider what the actual cost of production is.
Even including studio costs, which are generally charged back to the artist, along with promotion costs and virtually any other "cost" associated with the product the recording houses are rolling in money. They're upset about MP3 trading, not because they have any great love for copyright law, except when it benefits them, but because they perceive each MP3 trade as a lost sale. Which is probably not the case in real life.
The recording industry is vainly trying to put the technological genie back in the bottle. The problem is that they are being aided by governments in this attempt. Rather than the government taking the view that the marketplace should be let alone to resolve its own problems of pricing, distribution, etc. they are bowing to the wishes of the wealthy and powerful and passing laws to prevent the marketplace from evolving as it would otherwise.
It is unfortunate that the very technology that has made MP3 trading possible may very well be used to shut down access to anything that isn't paid for up-front. The various DRM recommendations and proposals from folks like our friends at Microsoft are nothing but an attempt to limit the freedom of people to listen to or view what they want when they want after they've purchased a product. The days of pay-per-play are not far off if the entertainment industry has its way.
They do own the rights to the material contained on the CD or DVD that I just bought at Best Buy. But, I own that piece of plastic and if I feel like taking it to a friend's house and playing it or watching it there that is no business of the industry or anyone else. But, the industry would have us live in a world in which they control everything we see or hear, including when and under what conditions we may do so. So keep on trading those MP3s. Civil disobedience is one way of fighting back against those who would limit our freedom simply because they feel entitled to continue to make a living in the same old way. Toss sand in the gears folks, slow things down or ten years from now we may not be able to say what we're saying today because it's "not approved."
Sorry my friend. While I agree with your general point that laws should be obeyed, for without that society will fall apart in a very ugly way, there are some laws that are so irresponsible in their intent and usage that it is the right and responsiblilty of the citizenry to disobey that law and campaign against that law and shout messages against that law from the rooftops, ere their freedoms be lost. This campaign by the rich and powerful corporations to "patent" every possible aspect of software art and science is but part of a campaign aimed at obtaining total control over what you can see, hear, say, or do, at least here in America.
The whole thing started with the DMCA, which has effectively removed the "fair use" concept from copyright law. That and other legislation has now made it generally illegal to "reverse-engineer" electronics or software to find out how it works. Researchers are effectively gagged when they try to publish their scientific findings if they in any way involve shedding light on copy-protection schemes and cryptography. Now we see patents being issued for software ideas that are so trivial and obvious that the only reason they are being patented is so that the patents can be used as weapons. I hate to be paranoid, but I suspect that the Open Source and Free Software movements are the eventual targets of many of these patents. If the companies can't beat us on ideas, quality, speed of response to problems, etc. they will take everyone they can get to into court over the patents.
The worst part is that they don't even really have to go to trial in order for their patent claims to end up being legitimate. The Open Source and Free Software communities probably don't have the legal and financial resources that will be needed to fight the years of court fights that will result from just one or two patent infringement cases. Let alone the hundreds that will soon be possible if the USPTO continues on its current destructive path.
So, by all means protest these actions. Disobey the laws that seek to restrict your rights to knowledge and freedom. Rain down letters upon your Congressmen and Senators; there are still a few left that haven't been bought and paid for. Talk to your non-geek friends about the threat that these patents and laws pose. Do whatever you can to throw sand into the machinery of the USPTO until it starts acting as it is supposed to. Don't let the corporations and the politicians use the cover of "intellectual property protection" to remove and limit your freedoms.
An excellent idea. While we're at it make the violations under the GPL so that the violations will quickly spread around the world. That would play hell with any attempts to squash the violators. I agree, the USPTO is doing nothing about its responsibility to make sure that patents (of whatever type) are non-intuitive, etc. Seems like all they're interested in collecting the fees for the filings.
I don't care who it is that files for patents on things of this nature. Whatever became of the idea that, in order for something to be patentable, some "non-obvious to those versed in the field" improvement be made to some product or process? It seems to me that the government is using the Patent Office solely as a means of revenue generation and is accepting anything if someone or some company is willing to pony up the money for the filing fees, etc.
This is simply further evidence of how out of hand the patent process has gotten. I won't be surprised to see MS or Apple or Amazon, etc. file a patent for "a substance that allows for computer users to remain conscious for long periods of time while using their machines for any purpose" and discover that the SOBs are filing for a patent on oxygen. Something has got to be done to stop this lunacy or the software industry in this country is going to strangle itself in licenses, court battles, etc. and only our overseas competitors and the lawyers will profit.
IIRC patents are good for seventeen years or thereabouts. Because software patents are being used to discourage competition (and not just by MS) they are now failing to do what the Constitution set them up for, i.e. "to promote the useful arts." I have a suggestion for software patents, since it seems that they are here for good or evil.
The tech world, it is widely recognized runs on "Internet time", which passes much more quickly than normal time. Therefore I propose that software patents and copyrights be good for a term specified in "Internet time." I'm sure that somebody can figure out the needed conversion factor, but I would think that a term of six months or so would be a good starting point. That way the patent holder can gain the benefits of being first to market without being able to stop competition for an unreasonable period of time.
Try explaining that to the person behind the counter. I dare say that most music shop employees have no idea that the industry is making copy-protected CDs. The store policy says no returns and that's what they'll stand on. The only way to demonstrate your case would be to have a portable CD duplicator (a laptop PC) so you could demonstrate that you couldn't have dopied the CD. Good luck convincing the sale person that you haven't "messed with the thing" to make it look like you can't copy the CD.
It would be interesting and probably entertaining to watch you try such a demonstration, but I think you'll be SOL when all is said and done. However, it might be worth thinking about how to come up with a demonstration of the situation that would fit into a two or three minute spot on the local news. Something like that would be worth pursuing in the name of edcating the masses before it's too late.
This is the sort of thing that concerns me. IIRC at least one of the recent articles about RFID devices indicated that they will soon be, or already are, capable of transmitting information about their location. You know that the next step will be for the government to start embedding these goodies in things like your driver's and vehicle licenses. Combine these with the fast approaching ubiquity of "public area" security cameras and you can kiss any idea of public "privacy" goodbye. Privacy in general won't be far behind if people like AG John Ashcroft have their way.
It seems to me that those who are concerned about the effect that RFID devices may have on civil liberties need to get ahead of the curve on this issue and start those petitions and protests now. Bear in mind that the DMCA will prevent us from legally reverse engineering the devices in order to develop countermeasures. Also, I'm sure that some aspect of the PATRIOT ACT will be construed to prohibit disabling any government issued RFIDs. It's looking more and more like Orwell was right, he just misjudged the rate of technology growth.
Ahhh! It's so nice when a relatively low-tech solution appears to cure a potential threat to "Life As We Know It"(tm). Now if only we can come up with something as simple for Palladium and Sen. Hollings' proposed DRM legislation. Maybe microwave the legislators?
I'm afraid it's not quite that simple anymore. When VCRs first came out our political system wasn't so corrupted as it is now. Doing the will of "the people" no longer matters to most of our congresscritters because they know that "the people" don't care enough to vote anymore. All they really need to do is convince ~25% (50% of the roughly 50% of eligible voters who bother to do so) of the voters to vote for them and they'll win the election. Given how heavily the current election system favors the incumbents once a politician gets an office it's very unlikely that he'll lose an election unless he does something incredibly stupid, like piss off the special interests with the deep pockets.
The recent so-called election reforms won't make any real difference as both parties have lawyers figuring out where the loop-holes are. Anyway, I've digressed some. The point is that given the way Washington now works it is doubtful that the VCR rulings will be extended to the new technology, even though those of us who care about freedom know they should be. There's just too much money involved for the MPAA, RIAA, and others not to be out busily buying politicians. Just take a look at Sen. Hollings DRM bill, IIRC it was written with a lot of "technical assistance" from Disney Corp. lawyers. Until the Supreme Court decides that money does not equal speech, the fiction under which so-called "soft money" may not be limited, I'm afraid that the situation won't really change. However, there's nothing better than to lose in a good cause so keep up the fight; miracles do happen sometimes.
Right on! We're going to continue to have controversy about DRM until the MPAA and its ilk realize that anti-piracy technology cannot win. Someone will always be able to figure out how to beat the latest Hollywierd money-making scheme. Besides, how are they going to act if, for instance, the EU decides that consumers do have fair-use rights under copyright law and forbids the use of DRM hardware/software in consumer electronic equipment sold within its boundaries? Will Hollywood simply stop selling its products there? As someone remarked earlier in this discussion this whole area is about control not money per se.
Those of us who use and value Linux and Open Source in general had better start getting serious about fighting this initiative or we may see the day come when Linux, BSD, etc. are illegal in the U.S. because end-users can modify the operating system software. IIRC, Sen. Hollings' bill covering DRM makes the provision that no part of any device capable of storing, reproducing, or playing digital content may contain user modifiable hardware or software within the DRM system. It would almost serve them right if we didn't say anything, let the bill pass, and then shut down the Internet by pulling the plugs on all the "illegal" Linux systems.
The real problem with the stand taken by the MPAA and their allies is that they seem to think that simply because they've been able to make money in a certain line of business in the past that society owes them the right to continue to make money in that business no matter who else might get hurt. I find the situation analagous to what might have happened had buggy-whip makers colluded with the makers of the new-fangled "horseless carriages" to make sure that the market for buggy whips didn't go away. What the MPAA is proposing is the equivalent of the Standard Buggy Whip Co. going to Congress and getting a bill passed to force the Ford Motor Co. to put limits on how, when, and where Model T owners could use their machines. "After all," said a buggy whip spokesman, "we're merely acting to protect our share of the market for transportation devices and services."
One of the other things that concerns me about DRM is the ease with which the new networked devices could report back to the movie makers information about when a movie is watched, any attempts made to copy the media, etc. From there it's only a short step to having your new high-definition TV and DVD setup report you to law enforcement if you break any of the "rules" the content providers put in place. Yes indeed, you too can have your very own NARC-TV. The potential for government abuse of DRM technology should be of grave concern.
Let's hope that the courts don't side with the content providers in the forthcoming lawsuits. I don't think that the legal principle that the courts established some years ago of allowing people to make copies, for their own use, of media that they purchased should be abrogated simply because the technology now allows "perfect" copies to be made.
I know one thing I'm going to do - buy a couple of current technology CD players, etc. and store them against the day when the latest machines won't let me play my extensive collection of "old technology" CDs.
I could darn near cry when I think of the opportunity this country wasted by not maintaining a vigorous manned spaceflight program during the 1970's and later. If we had carried on after the last Apollo flight by now some of us would be posting to SlashDot from a permanent lunar colony. It is most unfortunate that the congresscritters couldn't see beyond the next election and decided to cut NASA spending because we had "won" the space race.
There is so much potential to space that only short-sighted and self-interested political policies keep us from enjoying the fruits of plenty. To paraphrase Robert Heinlein "It's raining soup out there, all we have to do is build a bowl." I think that anyone truly interested in maintaining a good environment here on earth should be pushing for an aggressive space policy. IMHO. the best way to cure pollution is to move as much industry off the earth as possible. Don't know what to do with your industrial waste? Just park it at a LaGrange point until you can figure something out or set the obnoxious payload to spiral into the sun. As things stand now I think that the scenario outlined in _The Mote in God's Eye_ may come true; except that we'll be the Moties.
I agree and I think it's time we start writing letters to news organizations and others who misuse the term hacker. Those of us in the hacker community have let others misuse the term because we know what the real meaning is and not enough of us got upset about the first incorrect uses of the term. Now we need to start fighting back before it really is too late. To paraphrase "Alice's Resturant" if a million people a day walk in use the right definition of hacker and walk out...they may get the point.
Slashdot Mirror
Yet another security flaw from a company that is trumpeting its "dedication to security" in its marketing hype. What is it about MS that makes people think they'll ever get this sort of thing right? Not only do they have compromises in current products, but their on-the-drawing-board "Longhorn" project promises to be a tar pit of security issues.
MS needs to realize that making everything from file handling to Internet browsing an intrinsic part of an OS is not the way to achieve either security or stability. With OS architectures that resemble a bowl of spaghetti it's no wonder that the list of security problems continues to get longer every day. There is evidently no way that MS can remove, or even limit the effect of, the security problems that their products are subject to.
Before you MS apologists start pointing out that Open Source software has problems, too, I'll gladly stipulate that. However, there are several ways in which those problems differ from the ones that MS inflicts on Joe Average computer user. First, given the loosely coupled nature of UNIX/Linux a security problem in an application does not affect the operation of the OS itself. Even problems within the kernel itself are generally easy to fix as the OS doesn't try to do everything under the sun. Fixing those is much easier (and faster) than when a problem is part of a piece of an application that is part of something else, that is connected to the OS via a lot of tightly-wrapped code.
Also, the Open Source community has not, that I'm aware of, ever claimed that "security is job one." Instead, by releasing the code and allowing others to make changes and re-distribute the modified code, a lot of potential problems are taken care of early in the release cycles. In keeping with the philosophy that code should be available the Open Source community doesn't waste time denying the existence of problems or trying to cover them up. Instead, the problems are quickly fixed, the modified code is rapidly made available, and systems are patched, generally without having to schedule downtime as, for most fixes, the machines, be they desktop or server, don't need to be rebooted once the patch is applied. I dare say, that because of the "transparency" of the patch process, the average UNIX/Linux system is more current with patches than the average Windows machine. I don't have hard number for that, but my experience in mixed MS and UNIX/Linux shops gives me that impression.
The bottom line is that MS can keep its products as fas as I'm concerned. People, albeit slowly, seem to realizing that MS is not capable of producing software that is reliable, secure, and easy to patch when fixes are needed. I suspect that realization has a lot to do with the growing popularity of Linux and other Open Source OSes and products.
Just my $.02,
Ron
Evidently Microsoft thinks it's very difficult or impossible. Given their track record when it comes to being truly innovative, instead of just buying or stealing the technology, I believe their assertion to be true for MS. This is one area where I think that the Open/Free Software community can make a telling case against MS. Our products are known, anecdotally if nothing else, for being much more stable and reliable than those of the Redmond monopoly. Given the recent study that showed far fewer errors in the Linux kernel TCP/IP stack, we now have some facts to back up our claims.
I think that it behooves us to push for greater software reliability. I'm sick and tired of the proprietary software concerns that can get away with a warranty that essentially limits their liability, even when the software fails to function, to "we'll replace the CD or floppy if it's defective." It's time that the software industry be forced to live up to the reliability and liability laws that other industries must abide by. I would prefer, given my libertarian leanings, to see this done without resort to new laws and some new government department. However, given the monopoly conditions that most of the industry operates under that may not be possible to achieve.
Just my $.02,
Ron
I thought it rather ironic that the main ad on this page, when I loaded it, was for the MS .Net developers kit. Somehow I just think that the sentence fragment "reliable Microsoft software" makes no sense on any level.
Just my $.02,
Ron
Your P.S. makes a very good point. Linux has improved greatly as people have contributed changes and built applications to make it work better for them. There are people (mostly so-called "industry pundits") that maintain that Linux won't take over the desktop because it's missing feature X or application Y. They then go on to say that the Open/Free Software community will never develop that feature or application "because Open Source programmers aren't interested in that area of computing." I've never believed that argument because as the use of Linux grows the community adds to its population of talented people who are interested in some previously obscure area of computing.
Those who have been using Linux for a long time will remember when there was considerable discussion over whether or not the OS needed a purpose built windowing system. At the same time the "industry pundits" were writing that Linux would never become popular because there wasn't a dedicated windowing system for the OS and furthermore, there weren't enough programmers interested in developing such a thing. Well, that prediction turned out to be wrong and now people have a choice of two very capable windowing systems in the form of KDE and GNOME. The windowing systems developed gradually as more people joined our community and took up the task of developing the software.
As Linux continues to grow we will see more and more applications being developed that replace similar applications in the Windows(tm) world. For each such app we gain some number of new adherents. Eventually one or more of those new adherents decides that he or she needs an application that does X "like I used to be able to do in Windows(tm)." The development of that application starts the accretion process again.
The people that are demanding that Linux make change W or add application Z need to relax a bit. If you can't write the application or make the kernel change yourself then someone else will sonner or later. I've always thought that part of the fun of Linux is the daily visit to Freshmeat to see what's new today. The more people that join our club the more fun we'll have.
Just my $.02,
Ron
So, this is a problem with the current Department of Injustice?
Just my $.02,
Ron
What I find particularly frightening about this is that there are "Windows enthusiast groups." Maybe the writer of the article mis-spelled euthanasia?
Just my $.02,
Ron
We can only hope that more libraries take action like this. Far too many people and organizations are rolling over or worse, hiding their heads in the sand, when it comes to voicing objections to many provisions of the horribly mis-named USA PATRIOT ACT. It has suddenly become dangerous in this country to openly espouse views at odds with those of the government. Doing so results in one's patriotism being called into question; that's assuming that the Department of Injustice doesn't brand you a "terrorist" and imprison you without trial, legal counsel, or charges being brought. After all, we all know that John Ashcroft is God's gift to the American people to keep them safe from all those nasty "terrorists" out there.
Personally, I'm going down to my local library tomorrow and ask what their policy is regarding the retention of patron borrowing records, etc. If they don't have one I'll definitely urge them to adopt a policy such as Santa Cruz's. I'll volunteer to shred the records if they plead lack of manpower. It is time to start fighting back against Big Brother while we still stand a chance. If enough people start protesting about the provisions of the PATRIOT ACT the Congress may take notice and repeal that particular abomination.
Bush is out of control. Cheney is out of control. Ashcroft is out of control.
Just my $.02,
Ron
I'm afraid that this isn't a new item. The NCIC database has been the source of trouble for a number of innocent people, whose names happen to be "like" those of convicts or suspects, ever since it was established. The problem is that now the FBI will no longer be obliged to clean up any errors in the data; which is what the old procedure was supposed to be. It won't be long before a lot more people find themselves hauled into police stations because of errors in the database. The concept of "innocent until proven guilty" has just taken another shot to the head.
Given the current administrations' penchant for closed trials, secret widespread wiretaps, and its desire to tie any criminal activity to terrorism, the U.S. just got a lot less free. The new regulation must be causing John Ashcroft to have wet dreams. Now the Department of Injustice will have all the excuse they needs to haul in anybody that they want. All that has to be done is to insinuate false data into the NCIC and voila, the local police will take care of the problem without the people in Washington having to dirty their hands.
The use of falsified police records is not new nor is it confined to this country. When Hitler wanted to depose the chief of the German General Staff, Generaloberst Werner von Fritsch, in 1936 the SS trumped up the evidence. However, they did not produce the "evidence" of von Fritsch's alleged homosexuality out of thin air. Instead, a "mistake" was made and the confession of one Otto Schmidt was used to incriminate von Fritsch (see _The German Army 1933-1945_, by Matthew Cooper for more details.) I'm afraid that we'll start seeing the same thing in this country to silence those whom the administration finds troubling.
Bush is out of control, Ashcroft is way out of control, Chaney is out of control.
Just my $.02,
Ron
I'm glad that someone is finally taking this system to court. American corporations have been abusing this system ever since it was introduced in the late 1990's. Is it a coincidence that Sun was applying to bring in 2,400 H1-B workers at the same time it was laying off American engineers? I doubt it.
The truth is that H1-B workers not only work for less than their American counter-parts, they are also much less likely to complain about working conditions, number of hours worked, etc. because they know that they can easily be sent back to wherever they came from. Far too many companies bring in H1-B workers rather than investing in re-training their current employees. It's time that American high tech workers started fighting back against a system that is designed solely to enrich corporations at the expense of American workers and the communities they live in.
Then, there is the national security aspect of the situation. Are these H1-B applicants subjected to background checks prior to being allowed into the country? Not that I have ever heard of and I've worked with a number of H1-B workers over the years. Do we really want to entrust the electronic infrastruture of this nation to depend on people whose first loyalty is not to the U.S.?
BTW, I have no quarrel with the people who apply for H1-B vaisa. Everyone has, or should have, the right to try to improve their position in life, and H1-B workers are trying to do that. My quarrel is with those corporations who use H1-B workers to fill positions for which qualified Americans are available.
My big question is - who do the corporations that abuse the H1-B system expect to purchase their products when they are busy laying off anybody who can afford to do so?
Wow!! Well said, my friend. However, don't overlook the threat that mandatory DRM poses to the freedom of all of us to listen to or watch what we want, when we want, where we want. The RIAA and MPAA remind me of the loggers in the NW or the fisherman of the NE who, simply because they'd always been fishermen or loggers figured that the government should arrange things so that they could continue to live as they used to.
Unfortunately, for the loggers and fishermen, they didn't have the deep pockets the RIAA and MPAA have, so the government paid them little mind. The real problem that we face here is the corruption of our political system by the sheer amounts of money that float through it in the guise of "campaign contributions." Until the voters of this nation decide that they've had enough of corrupt politicians who line their pockets with corporate largess to an extent that would make even a "Golden Age" politician embarassed, we have little hope of winning this struggle.
The RIAA and MPAA will get their DRM legislation and the hardware vendors will stop making general purpose PCs because they will essentially be illegal. Instead, everything with a chip in it will end up with DRM hardware and software and our freedoms will be that much more limited. It's time for the people of the U.S. to stand up and make the corporate toadies in Wasington remember that they were sent to Washington to serve the people not some corporation. Whether this will happen soon enough is really up in the air right now.
Just my $.02,
Ron
A wonderful assessment of the situation. However, you forgot to mention some of the other reasons why the "War on Drugs" is so popular with the government. There has been a whole infrastructure of people and organizations that have grown up around the "War on Drugs", each of whom has an interest in continuing the "War." Let's start with the Federal DOJ, they love the "War" because they can justify hiring more lawyers since "there is such an increase in the number of drug arrests."
Along with an increase in the size of the DOJ fiefdom has come an expansion of the police powers of the state. The government just loves being able to sieze the property of "suspects." AFAIK, they don't even have to prove that the suspect committed a crime before being able to sieze and sell any property that "may" have been obtained with illegal drug money. And let's not forget little things like civil rights, that have eroded under pressure from the "War."
Then the various police agencies have good reason to carry on with the "War." They get all sorts of new toys to play with; reasons to have SWAT teams; trained dogs; high-tech bugging gear, etc. Who'd want to give that up?
Then there are the drug "rehab" centers. They didn't even really exist until the "War" came along. Now they get all sorts of money for "treating" people with drug problems. A lot of folks have jobs because of the "War." People who would ordinarily have to get out and earn an honest living.
But, the biggest winner is the government as a whole. They get to develop more agencies, more budget items, more employees. But, the really scary thing is the precedents that have been set under the "War" that are now being used to restrict the rights of those the government decides may be "dangerous" in the "War on Terrorism." Many of the legal tactics from the "War on Drugs" are being used to detain, harass, and intimidate anyone that the government sees fit to view as a danger. The USA PATRIOT ACT is a direct out-growth of lessons learned by the government in the "War on Drugs." The police power of the state has increased out of all reason and it started when somebody decided that smoking pot ought to be a crime.
I'm sure that I've missed a few others that have a vested interest in continuing the "War on Drugs." Please feel free to add to the list.
Take care,
Ron
When are the record companies going to figure out that the reason that people so assiduously trade MP3s is that they perceive that the price of the "real thing", i.e. the CD is not worth the value received? The recording industry has no one to blame but themselves for the situation that has been created regarding MP3s, a much lower quality product, from an audio perspective. People know when they're being ripped off and CDs priced at $15 and up is definitely a rip off when you consider what the actual cost of production is.
Even including studio costs, which are generally charged back to the artist, along with promotion costs and virtually any other "cost" associated with the product the recording houses are rolling in money. They're upset about MP3 trading, not because they have any great love for copyright law, except when it benefits them, but because they perceive each MP3 trade as a lost sale. Which is probably not the case in real life.
The recording industry is vainly trying to put the technological genie back in the bottle. The problem is that they are being aided by governments in this attempt. Rather than the government taking the view that the marketplace should be let alone to resolve its own problems of pricing, distribution, etc. they are bowing to the wishes of the wealthy and powerful and passing laws to prevent the marketplace from evolving as it would otherwise.
It is unfortunate that the very technology that has made MP3 trading possible may very well be used to shut down access to anything that isn't paid for up-front. The various DRM recommendations and proposals from folks like our friends at Microsoft are nothing but an attempt to limit the freedom of people to listen to or view what they want when they want after they've purchased a product. The days of pay-per-play are not far off if the entertainment industry has its way.
They do own the rights to the material contained on the CD or DVD that I just bought at Best Buy. But, I own that piece of plastic and if I feel like taking it to a friend's house and playing it or watching it there that is no business of the industry or anyone else. But, the industry would have us live in a world in which they control everything we see or hear, including when and under what conditions we may do so. So keep on trading those MP3s. Civil disobedience is one way of fighting back against those who would limit our freedom simply because they feel entitled to continue to make a living in the same old way. Toss sand in the gears folks, slow things down or ten years from now we may not be able to say what we're saying today because it's "not approved."
just my $.02,
Ron
Sorry my friend. While I agree with your general point that laws should be obeyed, for without that society will fall apart in a very ugly way, there are some laws that are so irresponsible in their intent and usage that it is the right and responsiblilty of the citizenry to disobey that law and campaign against that law and shout messages against that law from the rooftops, ere their freedoms be lost. This campaign by the rich and powerful corporations to "patent" every possible aspect of software art and science is but part of a campaign aimed at obtaining total control over what you can see, hear, say, or do, at least here in America.
The whole thing started with the DMCA, which has effectively removed the "fair use" concept from copyright law. That and other legislation has now made it generally illegal to "reverse-engineer" electronics or software to find out how it works. Researchers are effectively gagged when they try to publish their scientific findings if they in any way involve shedding light on copy-protection schemes and cryptography. Now we see patents being issued for software ideas that are so trivial and obvious that the only reason they are being patented is so that the patents can be used as weapons. I hate to be paranoid, but I suspect that the Open Source and Free Software movements are the eventual targets of many of these patents. If the companies can't beat us on ideas, quality, speed of response to problems, etc. they will take everyone they can get to into court over the patents.
The worst part is that they don't even really have to go to trial in order for their patent claims to end up being legitimate. The Open Source and Free Software communities probably don't have the legal and financial resources that will be needed to fight the years of court fights that will result from just one or two patent infringement cases. Let alone the hundreds that will soon be possible if the USPTO continues on its current destructive path.
So, by all means protest these actions. Disobey the laws that seek to restrict your rights to knowledge and freedom. Rain down letters upon your Congressmen and Senators; there are still a few left that haven't been bought and paid for. Talk to your non-geek friends about the threat that these patents and laws pose. Do whatever you can to throw sand into the machinery of the USPTO until it starts acting as it is supposed to. Don't let the corporations and the politicians use the cover of "intellectual property protection" to remove and limit your freedoms.
Just my $.02,
Ron
An excellent idea. While we're at it make the violations under the GPL so that the violations will quickly spread around the world. That would play hell with any attempts to squash the violators. I agree, the USPTO is doing nothing about its responsibility to make sure that patents (of whatever type) are non-intuitive, etc. Seems like all they're interested in collecting the fees for the filings.
Just my $.02,
Ron
I don't care who it is that files for patents on things of this nature. Whatever became of the idea that, in order for something to be patentable, some "non-obvious to those versed in the field" improvement be made to some product or process? It seems to me that the government is using the Patent Office solely as a means of revenue generation and is accepting anything if someone or some company is willing to pony up the money for the filing fees, etc.
This is simply further evidence of how out of hand the patent process has gotten. I won't be surprised to see MS or Apple or Amazon, etc. file a patent for "a substance that allows for computer users to remain conscious for long periods of time while using their machines for any purpose" and discover that the SOBs are filing for a patent on oxygen. Something has got to be done to stop this lunacy or the software industry in this country is going to strangle itself in licenses, court battles, etc. and only our overseas competitors and the lawyers will profit.
Just my $.02,
Ron
IIRC patents are good for seventeen years or thereabouts. Because software patents are being used to discourage competition (and not just by MS) they are now failing to do what the Constitution set them up for, i.e. "to promote the useful arts." I have a suggestion for software patents, since it seems that they are here for good or evil.
The tech world, it is widely recognized runs on "Internet time", which passes much more quickly than normal time. Therefore I propose that software patents and copyrights be good for a term specified in "Internet time." I'm sure that somebody can figure out the needed conversion factor, but I would think that a term of six months or so would be a good starting point. That way the patent holder can gain the benefits of being first to market without being able to stop competition for an unreasonable period of time.
Just my $.02,
Ron
Try explaining that to the person behind the counter. I dare say that most music shop employees have no idea that the industry is making copy-protected CDs. The store policy says no returns and that's what they'll stand on. The only way to demonstrate your case would be to have a portable CD duplicator (a laptop PC) so you could demonstrate that you couldn't have dopied the CD. Good luck convincing the sale person that you haven't "messed with the thing" to make it look like you can't copy the CD.
It would be interesting and probably entertaining to watch you try such a demonstration, but I think you'll be SOL when all is said and done. However, it might be worth thinking about how to come up with a demonstration of the situation that would fit into a two or three minute spot on the local news. Something like that would be worth pursuing in the name of edcating the masses before it's too late.
Just my $.02,
Ron
I can just see it now. The latest product from your local Internet porn distributor...print your own porn star will take on a whole new meaning.
Just my $.02,
Ron
This is the sort of thing that concerns me. IIRC at least one of the recent articles about RFID devices indicated that they will soon be, or already are, capable of transmitting information about their location. You know that the next step will be for the government to start embedding these goodies in things like your driver's and vehicle licenses. Combine these with the fast approaching ubiquity of "public area" security cameras and you can kiss any idea of public "privacy" goodbye. Privacy in general won't be far behind if people like AG John Ashcroft have their way.
It seems to me that those who are concerned about the effect that RFID devices may have on civil liberties need to get ahead of the curve on this issue and start those petitions and protests now. Bear in mind that the DMCA will prevent us from legally reverse engineering the devices in order to develop countermeasures. Also, I'm sure that some aspect of the PATRIOT ACT will be construed to prohibit disabling any government issued RFIDs. It's looking more and more like Orwell was right, he just misjudged the rate of technology growth.
Just my $.02,
Ron
Ahhh! It's so nice when a relatively low-tech solution appears to cure a potential threat to "Life As We Know It"(tm). Now if only we can come up with something as simple for Palladium and Sen. Hollings' proposed DRM legislation. Maybe microwave the legislators?
I'm afraid it's not quite that simple anymore. When VCRs first came out our political system wasn't so corrupted as it is now. Doing the will of "the people" no longer matters to most of our congresscritters because they know that "the people" don't care enough to vote anymore. All they really need to do is convince ~25% (50% of the roughly 50% of eligible voters who bother to do so) of the voters to vote for them and they'll win the election. Given how heavily the current election system favors the incumbents once a politician gets an office it's very unlikely that he'll lose an election unless he does something incredibly stupid, like piss off the special interests with the deep pockets.
The recent so-called election reforms won't make any real difference as both parties have lawyers figuring out where the loop-holes are. Anyway, I've digressed some. The point is that given the way Washington now works it is doubtful that the VCR rulings will be extended to the new technology, even though those of us who care about freedom know they should be. There's just too much money involved for the MPAA, RIAA, and others not to be out busily buying politicians. Just take a look at Sen. Hollings DRM bill, IIRC it was written with a lot of "technical assistance" from Disney Corp. lawyers. Until the Supreme Court decides that money does not equal speech, the fiction under which so-called "soft money" may not be limited, I'm afraid that the situation won't really change. However, there's nothing better than to lose in a good cause so keep up the fight; miracles do happen sometimes.
Being really cynical tonight,
Ron
Right on! We're going to continue to have controversy about DRM until the MPAA and its ilk realize that anti-piracy technology cannot win. Someone will always be able to figure out how to beat the latest Hollywierd money-making scheme. Besides, how are they going to act if, for instance, the EU decides that consumers do have fair-use rights under copyright law and forbids the use of DRM hardware/software in consumer electronic equipment sold within its boundaries? Will Hollywood simply stop selling its products there? As someone remarked earlier in this discussion this whole area is about control not money per se.
Those of us who use and value Linux and Open Source in general had better start getting serious about fighting this initiative or we may see the day come when Linux, BSD, etc. are illegal in the U.S. because end-users can modify the operating system software. IIRC, Sen. Hollings' bill covering DRM makes the provision that no part of any device capable of storing, reproducing, or playing digital content may contain user modifiable hardware or software within the DRM system. It would almost serve them right if we didn't say anything, let the bill pass, and then shut down the Internet by pulling the plugs on all the "illegal" Linux systems.
Just my $.02,
Ron
The real problem with the stand taken by the MPAA and their allies is that they seem to think that simply because they've been able to make money in a certain line of business in the past that society owes them the right to continue to make money in that business no matter who else might get hurt. I find the situation analagous to what might have happened had buggy-whip makers colluded with the makers of the new-fangled "horseless carriages" to make sure that the market for buggy whips didn't go away. What the MPAA is proposing is the equivalent of the Standard Buggy Whip Co. going to Congress and getting a bill passed to force the Ford Motor Co. to put limits on how, when, and where Model T owners could use their machines. "After all," said a buggy whip spokesman, "we're merely acting to protect our share of the market for transportation devices and services."
One of the other things that concerns me about DRM is the ease with which the new networked devices could report back to the movie makers information about when a movie is watched, any attempts made to copy the media, etc. From there it's only a short step to having your new high-definition TV and DVD setup report you to law enforcement if you break any of the "rules" the content providers put in place. Yes indeed, you too can have your very own NARC-TV. The potential for government abuse of DRM technology should be of grave concern.
Let's hope that the courts don't side with the content providers in the forthcoming lawsuits. I don't think that the legal principle that the courts established some years ago of allowing people to make copies, for their own use, of media that they purchased should be abrogated simply because the technology now allows "perfect" copies to be made.
I know one thing I'm going to do - buy a couple of current technology CD players, etc. and store them against the day when the latest machines won't let me play my extensive collection of "old technology" CDs.
Just my $.02,
Ron
I could darn near cry when I think of the opportunity this country wasted by not maintaining a vigorous manned spaceflight program during the 1970's and later. If we had carried on after the last Apollo flight by now some of us would be posting to SlashDot from a permanent lunar colony. It is most unfortunate that the congresscritters couldn't see beyond the next election and decided to cut NASA spending because we had "won" the space race.
There is so much potential to space that only short-sighted and self-interested political policies keep us from enjoying the fruits of plenty. To paraphrase Robert Heinlein "It's raining soup out there, all we have to do is build a bowl." I think that anyone truly interested in maintaining a good environment here on earth should be pushing for an aggressive space policy. IMHO. the best way to cure pollution is to move as much industry off the earth as possible. Don't know what to do with your industrial waste? Just park it at a LaGrange point until you can figure something out or set the obnoxious payload to spiral into the sun. As things stand now I think that the scenario outlined in _The Mote in God's Eye_ may come true; except that we'll be the Moties.
Just my $.02,
Ron
I agree and I think it's time we start writing letters to news organizations and others who misuse the term hacker. Those of us in the hacker community have let others misuse the term because we know what the real meaning is and not enough of us got upset about the first incorrect uses of the term. Now we need to start fighting back before it really is too late. To paraphrase "Alice's Resturant" if a million people a day walk in use the right definition of hacker and walk out...they may get the point.
Just my $.02,
Ron