To that end, the Defense Department is now prohibited from purchasing any software that has not undergone security testing by the NSA. Stenbit said he is unaware of any open-source software that has been tested.
From what I understand of the article, they have some open-source software, and its fine on their computers. It hasn't been tested however, so they have to wait until they test it to get any more of it. Thats my take anyway.
I notice that they talked about purchasing software. While you can "purchase" open source, i don't see any real need for the Defense Department to do it.
Either the choice of words is talking about something unsaid, or its a poor choice of words.
While Microsoft can lobby all they want, they are -
1. Outright lying 2. Spreading FUD
But whats new?
None of that, the real news is that the government is weighing up the options of open-source and closed source, and its a great time for people to lobby the representatives about this sorta thing.
Besides, i would of though an article about which type of software is running the defense software would be interesting.
No, they can't use it because it wasn't tested. I assume that they have tested some closed-source programs, but haven't tested any open-source due to the FUD flowing through, or they just haven't got around to it.
One major problem i can see is that you'll have a few "unauthorised" mp3's, and the decss.exe file, and it'll be sued to hell and back by the MPAA and the RIAA.
People cannot be trusted. Maybe some sort of signup, registered usage is needed. Though given the caution of most OS people, that won't happen.
But thats the exception, not the rule. How many people would have the following setup?
Compare to what the MPAA is doing to trample rights, the amount of users that actually pirate is negligent.
Anecdote: I know quite a few computer enthusiasts, and not one has the setup you prescribed. Computers just are not conducive to watching movies with great visuals and sound. The MPAA has draconially overreacted, and the American Senators hitched on for the ride.
Also, considering the age of the senators, they probably won't be around in 20 years to see the results of what they are doing. They're just securing the finacial future of their offspring, they don't really give a shit what they pass into legislation.
No it isn't, its just that Telstra (my broadband carrier) sucks ass.
You see, in Australia, there are two companies that give cable. Telstra and Optus. Telstra is a 51% owned government company, and while it may have good telephone service, its cable service is expensive, gets knocked out with regularity, and it has special software that doesn't run on Linux. Optus is waaay better, especially since there is an option for the cap to be X times what the average user uses. Excellent stuff.
Back to the point. I certainly wouldn't waste my time downloading a crappy movie (on my 15'), one which i can see with more enjoyment in front of a nice big tv, with good sound and clear picture.
Besides, I would find it strange sitting with a bunch of friends watching a movie on the PC, or for the few with GF's, how the hell are you mean to curl up with her if your infront of a computer???
Yet these MPAA and RIAA just want to keep enforcing more "protection", make us jump through more hoops, and do not give people the benefit of choice. I make sure i buy all my cd's, DVD second hand etc, and you should too. Its cheaper, anyway.
DVD is an excellent idea for storage and lots of files on the one medium, but due to the MPAA and RIAA's selfishness and oversight, and the corrupt american system (I am not american, Im an Aussie, but we stupidly adopt most american things about 6 months after),the high-tech, convienent uses for DVD is going down the drain.
If that law goes through (and then, undoubtedly, come here), its illegal for me to download Mandrake and burn it onto CD so I can do a install, and have the CD's there for booting or use on other computers. Quite frankly, its gh3y. So much for the tech revolution. More like the tech devolution.
Actually, thats a good point i haven't considered.
My father and I built both of our own computers about a year back, and we build a lot of computers for our relatives as well. So i really don't have much of an idea about bundled software.
I've only recently started reading slashdot, and since i've started reading it, i've installed Mozilla and Trillian on my computer, as well as downloading OO right now. The next step is to try out linux. But thats where i need help. Any suggestions on good tutorials about -
1. Partitioning my hard drive effectively in Windoze 2. And getting the most user-friendly Linux flavour so i can learn it?
The only real problem i can see is this is going to be hard to get to the average masses. I know quite a few people who think that they need MS Office, mainly because they have an ME or XP.
If in they're advertising, say it works the same as MS Office, and supports all their documents etc etc, then they might see a little change. The problem is, MS has had such a monopoly, its hard to breakthrough to a non-technical users level.
I mean, imagine having a joystick-like thing in your pocket, walking to a friends house down the street?
Sounds like this whole thing has been a fiasco
on
More .us Domain Problems?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
First there was the problem with neustar not putting aside some domain names for public use, and now this crap. Its all to do with the dollar sign being flashed first and service coming a distance second. The.us domain has been around for a while AFAIK. Its just that these compaines are new to handling it. Their incompetence, nothing to do with it being new.
But what can we expect on the domain-registering front nowadays? Look at verisign and bulkregister. Instead of spending money upgrading quality and customer service, they're going to use it to run sleazy campaigns and sue the living daylights out of each other.
Its got to go back to the non-profit organization model. This sorta stuff really stinks.
As i pointed out before, there is an alternative to the RIAA. The RIAA, by and by, mass produces and markets the Pop songs of the world. THere are lots of good bands, with good songs that are with independant labels, and/or distribute themselves. Trawl through a through music forums, get a few band names, go to their websites, download the mp3's, and listen. The only band i support through the RIAA nowadays is Metallica, my other "new music" is from independants or online buying schemes.
You're absolutely correct. Bands that give away free mp3's on their websites, and use these websites and free sharing networks as publicity, are growing stronger. I recently downloaded some songs from bands mentioned in various forums, directly from their websites. While i didn't like some, the others I liked, I went out and bought their Cd, or ordered directly from them.
The only thing holding back complete distribution through net is the fact the more "popular" artists are not doing anything like that. While their is a sizable market for non-mainstream bands, this is nothing compared to the Britney Spears, N'Syncs of the world.
What needs to happen, IMO, is much like what Steven King did with books. Steven King tried to distribute online, and just him trying that got a fair amount of publicity about the ways of using the internet for books etc. IF one well known artist decides to do the online distribution thing, IT will get publicity, and that could get the ball rolling.
While I find the RIAA practices despicable to say the least, I can't exactly bring myself to trust Verizon or Kazaa, especially the latter.
Im not sure of whether a case of the lesser evil is really going to change things in the music industry.
The RIAA doesn't want the music control being handled by someone else, for obvious reasons. At the same time, they afraid to go into the online market properly for the fear of competition, thus they think that by suing the living crap out of anything online, it will eventually go away.
But trusting Kazaa to provide a music service? The same guys that have done a deal with brilliant digital entertainment?
Why can't a group of artists, group together, make their own online service, and provide it a lower cost than the RIAA? By being legal, this will literally force the RIAA to react with an online service thats cheaper, and thats good for consumers.
But until the RIAA have competition from the artist's themselves (and popular ones), they will continue to fight in the courts. The Kazaa/Verizon idea is a bad idea from the getgo.
So, if a consumer can choose whether they recieve ads via phone, sms, mail (there are some services to prevent you getting ads via mail I believe) - why shouldnt they be able to choose whether they recieve the TV ads too?
Two things. The Tv companies have money, and thus can buy judges and legislators and sue small companies.
Secondly, its actually quite different. They're not just sending out ads nilly-willy, but thats how they provide their service. Ie its like using a a scumware infected program like Kazaa. You get the product for free, but the company you get it from is making a money from the product being watched/used.
Now all the types you listed are spam, and do not provide a service. Tv "needs" ad to provide the content for "free".
Slashdot Mirror
Let me guess: you never talk to people in Marketing, do you?
Marketing? The only people i talk to are the ones that call me a "buisness partner" and provide wonderful "solutions".
To that end, the Defense Department is now prohibited from purchasing any software that has not undergone security testing by the NSA. Stenbit said he is unaware of any open-source software that has been tested.
From what I understand of the article, they have some open-source software, and its fine on their computers. It hasn't been tested however, so they have to wait until they test it to get any more of it. Thats my take anyway.
I notice that they talked about purchasing software. While you can "purchase" open source, i don't see any real need for the Defense Department to do it.
Either the choice of words is talking about something unsaid, or its a poor choice of words.
Or more to the point, working out ways to hide the symptoms of known security flaws.....
While Microsoft can lobby all they want, they are -
1. Outright lying
2. Spreading FUD
But whats new?
None of that, the real news is that the government is weighing up the options of open-source and closed source, and its a great time for people to lobby the representatives about this sorta thing.
Besides, i would of though an article about which type of software is running the defense software would be interesting.
No, they can't use it because it wasn't tested. I assume that they have tested some closed-source programs, but haven't tested any open-source due to the FUD flowing through, or they just haven't got around to it.
He also said Microsoft did not focus on potential security flaws.
:)
I wonder why?
One major problem i can see is that you'll have a few "unauthorised" mp3's, and the decss.exe file, and it'll be sued to hell and back by the MPAA and the RIAA.
People cannot be trusted. Maybe some sort of signup, registered usage is needed. Though given the caution of most OS people, that won't happen.
/Announcer Voice
The parent sponsored by Mods on Crack!!
/really quick announcer voice
Tm Pty LTD All rights reserved, copyright 2002 Slashdot.org
But thats the exception, not the rule. How many people would have the following setup?
Compare to what the MPAA is doing to trample rights, the amount of users that actually pirate is negligent.
Anecdote: I know quite a few computer enthusiasts, and not one has the setup you prescribed. Computers just are not conducive to watching movies with great visuals and sound. The MPAA has draconially overreacted, and the American Senators hitched on for the ride.
Also, considering the age of the senators, they probably won't be around in 20 years to see the results of what they are doing. They're just securing the finacial future of their offspring, they don't really give a shit what they pass into legislation.
No it isn't, its just that Telstra (my broadband carrier) sucks ass.
You see, in Australia, there are two companies that give cable. Telstra and Optus. Telstra is a 51% owned government company, and while it may have good telephone service, its cable service is expensive, gets knocked out with regularity, and it has special software that doesn't run on Linux. Optus is waaay better, especially since there is an option for the cap to be X times what the average user uses. Excellent stuff.
(For all Telstra Broadband Cable users, use BPA Login, a linux friendly, easier and more extensive configuration client)
Back to the point. I certainly wouldn't waste my time downloading a crappy movie (on my 15'), one which i can see with more enjoyment in front of a nice big tv, with good sound and clear picture.
Besides, I would find it strange sitting with a bunch of friends watching a movie on the PC, or for the few with GF's, how the hell are you mean to curl up with her if your infront of a computer???
Yet these MPAA and RIAA just want to keep enforcing more "protection", make us jump through more hoops, and do not give people the benefit of choice. I make sure i buy all my cd's, DVD second hand etc, and you should too. Its cheaper, anyway.
DVD is an excellent idea for storage and lots of files on the one medium, but due to the MPAA and RIAA's selfishness and oversight, and the corrupt american system (I am not american, Im an Aussie, but we stupidly adopt most american things about 6 months after),the high-tech, convienent uses for DVD is going down the drain.
If that law goes through (and then, undoubtedly, come here), its illegal for me to download Mandrake and burn it onto CD so I can do a install, and have the CD's there for booting or use on other computers. Quite frankly, its gh3y. So much for the tech revolution. More like the tech devolution.
Its not slashdotted, Foo!
Thanks for that, two solutions in one. One (actually two) last question(s).
After installing mandrake to make the partition, i can then uninstall mandrake and install rh if i wish, and this won't affect the partition?
And about 3 gig is a good partition to try linux, or will i need more?
Actually, thats a good point i haven't considered.
My father and I built both of our own computers about a year back, and we build a lot of computers for our relatives as well. So i really don't have much of an idea about bundled software.
I've only recently started reading slashdot, and since i've started reading it, i've installed Mozilla and Trillian on my computer, as well as downloading OO right now. The next step is to try out linux. But thats where i need help. Any suggestions on good tutorials about -
1. Partitioning my hard drive effectively in Windoze
2. And getting the most user-friendly Linux flavour so i can learn it?
The only real problem i can see is this is going to be hard to get to the average masses. I know quite a few people who think that they need MS Office, mainly because they have an ME or XP.
If in they're advertising, say it works the same as MS Office, and supports all their documents etc etc, then they might see a little change. The problem is, MS has had such a monopoly, its hard to breakthrough to a non-technical users level.
Here is that Link
For the hoplessly bleeding edge, their is a Q uake Version modified to use Ipv6. They even have a server up!
No, its owned by Infogrames, as it says in the main posting.
I mean, imagine having a joystick-like thing in your pocket, walking to a friends house down the street?
First there was the problem with neustar not putting aside some domain names for public use, and now this crap. Its all to do with the dollar sign being flashed first and service coming a distance second. The .us domain has been around for a while AFAIK. Its just that these compaines are new to handling it. Their incompetence, nothing to do with it being new.
But what can we expect on the domain-registering front nowadays? Look at verisign and bulkregister. Instead of spending money upgrading quality and customer service, they're going to use it to run sleazy campaigns and sue the living daylights out of each other.
Its got to go back to the non-profit organization model. This sorta stuff really stinks.
I can just see it now, a little island scooting around the atlantic using sea water as fuel. Hehe.
As i pointed out before, there is an alternative to the RIAA. The RIAA, by and by, mass produces and markets the Pop songs of the world. THere are lots of good bands, with good songs that are with independant labels, and/or distribute themselves. Trawl through a through music forums, get a few band names, go to their websites, download the mp3's, and listen. The only band i support through the RIAA nowadays is Metallica, my other "new music" is from independants or online buying schemes.
You're absolutely correct. Bands that give away free mp3's on their websites, and use these websites and free sharing networks as publicity, are growing stronger. I recently downloaded some songs from bands mentioned in various forums, directly from their websites. While i didn't like some, the others I liked, I went out and bought their Cd, or ordered directly from them.
The only thing holding back complete distribution through net is the fact the more "popular" artists are not doing anything like that. While their is a sizable market for non-mainstream bands, this is nothing compared to the Britney Spears, N'Syncs of the world.
What needs to happen, IMO, is much like what Steven King did with books. Steven King tried to distribute online, and just him trying that got a fair amount of publicity about the ways of using the internet for books etc. IF one well known artist decides to do the online distribution thing, IT will get publicity, and that could get the ball rolling.
While I find the RIAA practices despicable to say the least, I can't exactly bring myself to trust Verizon or Kazaa, especially the latter.
Im not sure of whether a case of the lesser evil is really going to change things in the music industry.
The RIAA doesn't want the music control being handled by someone else, for obvious reasons. At the same time, they afraid to go into the online market properly for the fear of competition, thus they think that by suing the living crap out of anything online, it will eventually go away.
But trusting Kazaa to provide a music service? The same guys that have done a deal with brilliant digital entertainment?
Why can't a group of artists, group together, make their own online service, and provide it a lower cost than the RIAA? By being legal, this will literally force the RIAA to react with an online service thats cheaper, and thats good for consumers.
But until the RIAA have competition from the artist's themselves (and popular ones), they will continue to fight in the courts. The Kazaa/Verizon idea is a bad idea from the getgo.
Its moot, you're too late
So, if a consumer can choose whether they recieve ads via phone, sms, mail (there are some services to prevent you getting ads via mail I believe) - why shouldnt they be able to choose whether they recieve the TV ads too?
Two things. The Tv companies have money, and thus can buy judges and legislators and sue small companies.
Secondly, its actually quite different. They're not just sending out ads nilly-willy, but thats how they provide their service. Ie its like using a a scumware infected program like Kazaa. You get the product for free, but the company you get it from is making a money from the product being watched/used.
Now all the types you listed are spam, and do not provide a service. Tv "needs" ad to provide the content for "free".