Re:Variety of standards
on
Gnutella2?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Of course, but pressure on client distibution can be equally damaging, as well as the adding of corrupt files to the network and other such underhand tricks. Having a central server to shut down made Napster an easy target but real P2P systems are vunerable as well, especially if one standard emerges
Variety of standards
on
Gnutella2?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Anything that is a move to keep a variety of standards out the in the P2P world is a positive move, stopping record companies finding a way to stop the whole movement by blocking a single protocol, (a la Napster). The more the better.
One of the best ways to find out non-obvious bugs is to, if you can, get normal people to use the program as they would. People with no prior knowledge of the software, apart from what they want it to do, will use the software in a way that people who have worked on the code and know the internal structure wouldn't, and hence find things that coders wouldn't.
Nothing is idiot proof because idiots are so damned clever.
And as the article suggested they offloaded it straight away. They messed up on the research bit, and technically are at fault, but it is hardly a malicious intent to pirate software and make illegal gains off unowned code.
They did get left with the mess by the previous company who reneged on the deal in the first place. The initial piracy was not their doing it got got handed over when they bought the company
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, but pressure on client distibution can be equally damaging, as well as the adding of corrupt files to the network and other such underhand tricks. Having a central server to shut down made Napster an easy target but real P2P systems are vunerable as well, especially if one standard emerges
Anything that is a move to keep a variety of standards out the in the P2P world is a positive move, stopping record companies finding a way to stop the whole movement by blocking a single protocol, (a la Napster). The more the better.
One of the best ways to find out non-obvious bugs is to, if you can, get normal people to use the program as they would. People with no prior knowledge of the software, apart from what they want it to do, will use the software in a way that people who have worked on the code and know the internal structure wouldn't, and hence find things that coders wouldn't. Nothing is idiot proof because idiots are so damned clever.
Come back and tell me when they can grow a Shakey's Pizza
They will just find another way to annoy the hell out of us, and it will probably be a more intrusive one.
Imagine being taken over by an army of cloned Australians. I'm not going to sleep well tonight.
And as the article suggested they offloaded it straight away. They messed up on the research bit, and technically are at fault, but it is hardly a malicious intent to pirate software and make illegal gains off unowned code.
They did get left with the mess by the previous company who reneged on the deal in the first place. The initial piracy was not their doing it got got handed over when they bought the company