Not getting so much in the way of commercial calls, but I do get a fair number more calls for "donating to the fireman's fund", or the "policeman softball league", and such. I'm also getting more "political announcements" -- especially around election time -- multiple/day at that time. Then there is a small uptick in people wanting to do surveys.
One area where I've gotten alot more junk calls: calls that ring once or twice, then stop, or calls that drop the line as soon as I pickup. It's gotten so bad that more often than not, I'll let my answering machine pick it up first, then if it doesn't hang up, I'll pick up an extension.
I think I get more junk calls now than before -- just different parties. I presume that all the non-profits, poll centers, politico's, etc, can pick up the list and get a pre-validated list of valid phone numbers.
As someone else pointed out, the telemarketers have to get a copy of your number -- otherwise how would they know not to call it? All they need to do is compare new list to old list and pile on the phone numbers that dropped off the list (5 year time limit expired)....Ug.
There is no "legal" or "illegal" when it comes to civil law. It only comes down to what a lawyer can prove in the court room. The facts are immaterial. I'm not exagerating. Civil law is a "game" about who can _convince_ a judge or jury of the truth or falseness of the accusations. Welcome to U.S. Legal 101.
You have to understand. The truth and the facts, really don't matter.
Unfortunately, it is a very, very screwed up system. If you think "right" triumps over "wrong", you are sadly, buying the popular "illusion". This is one reason why many lawyers are considered so slimey -- because they are "amoral". They don't have morals when it comes to winning the "legal game". Those who do, operate at a disadvantage. It's all about the "game".
If you search back on Vmware vs Xensource, you'll see Vmware is doing everything to discredit Xen and hardware hypervisors.
But Vmware's agitation is understandable. They're about to lose it all to an open source project. Where have I seen this before?
---
Um, I dunno, where? Oh, you mean how open source Linux and BSD have killed off proprietary OS's like Windows. Yeah... I've seen it before...or are you referring to something else?:-)
Excuse my ignorance, but last I heard [dated info], was that Xen required modifications to client and/or Host OS's What's the scoop on that now?
Can I install Xen off the open-source "shelf", install on Linux, then load up VM's with winXP and maybe a BSD server thrown in for good measure? How about loading Xen's onto a host WinXP and running virtual Linux and BSD images?
Smaller scenario...I had dual boot laptop oh...6 years or so ago - at
the time it was still Win98SE (needed for some finance software). With no magic tools (other than a network setup switching tool - set IP, forwarding, DNS, proxy) I could boot native into Win98SE or Linux, or with VMWare, run the same Win98 image and never have to reboot to windows. Accessing a real partition in the VM helped disk performance substantially.
Eventually had to stop using VMWare, because I ran into a floating point bug in their SW emulation that would hang the VM hard. They weren't capable of fixing it in any specified timeframe, and the main reason I needed a VM was to run the finance SW which used floating point.
Is Xen developed enough , to just install it on my linux box and use it to dual boot XP, Vista or BSD? With dual core cpu's being more plentiful there should be much better performance (or did Intel develop the 2nd CPU to free up one cpu for apps while the other ran the spyware?:-). But even if Xen is capable, how easy is it to setup? Could I give it to a "manager" to install on their own?:-) How 'bout parents (i.e. non-computer types).
This is an important issue why Xen (like so many other open source projects) might not replace VMWare anymore than Linux has replaced Windows on the desktop: Packaging. Does it have the hand-holding "wizards" (gag) that can help the masses? Is it anywhere near the point-and-click stage?
From what I've heard with VMWare, they can "sell"/"give away" pre-installed virtual machines that a user can just click-install and run, and up comes a virtual Linux browswer & email session nice and safe to handle virus & doodoo-laden email. Is Xen there? Can it run on Windows? Unfortunately, I think there's still a need to give Windows the direct HW access and VM Linux (very unfortunate for stability). But the biggie: Graphics (and in same vein, but not as hard, cpuwise, HighDef, multi-channel sound. Until 3D graphics can run "at speed" in a VM, people will still need to boot Windows for for all the Graphics intensive apps.
Another area that was lacking in VMWare (not sure about current products, is one VM seeing multiple CPU's and/or cores. Say you have what would have been a dual-cpu workstation. With Dual Core chips in the two cpu sockets, workstations easily have 4 processors (a bit mind boggling to think of eventual 4-core/chip processors with two of those!).
While one could run multiple VM's, one to a cpu, that's alot of unnecessary memory 'burned' for no great reason. Unless reliability is an issue, it would be real useful to run 1 OS that can access multiple processors with each processor talking, perhaps, to different disk controllers all talking to SAS drives with each drive having the smarts to queue commands from multiple processes while optimizing transfers. Of course it's not just the OS image wasted, but block caches as well.
Assume a 4-cpu 2xdualcore 4GB. Let WinXP Home have Desktop. Say it gets 1 CPU, 750MB and the GPU. Now let the other 3 CPU's run Samba for file serving to a "domain". A
Seems like existing obscenity laws could be used to control violent video games.
Violent content gets an "X" rating at theaters...why not video games? If it's PG or less, minors can buy it..."R", parents buy it. "X"...well parents can still buy it...seems possible compromise....
It's not that windows will be secure, exactly, it will still be able to download disabling code from microsoft. Their firewall is transparent to their own software.
Recently, I was forced onto SP2 (new computer, old computer died, even linux won't run on the new system -- doesn't see the SAS Harddisk at all nor the Gigabit Broadcom ethernet; I'm sure it will be supported in 12-18 months:-( ).
But one of the brilliant things I noticed about their "security upgraded XP" was that it seemed to "disable" most of my current security. Now windows goes around the firewall product I have installed. Other software is still blocked. Even MS-sites appear to be blocked, but the WGA-authentication and update routines -- they just go around the firewall.
This is will be the end of user's controlling their machines that run MSed-upOS. The creator of the sysinternals site was being happy about Microsoft adding new "managed" hooks to allow programs to monitor various functions -- but my guess is it's the equivalent of a sucker punch. Vendors switch to the new interfaces to do monitoring, but anything that MS wants to hide will be hidden from their new "hooks".
XP2 also ignores user and computer proxy settings -- it first tries to go direct (around my SW firewall).. too bad it's on an internal, non-routable subnet. When I complained to MS-support about the update problem, they had me uninstall my firewall software completely -- to download "patches" (not install or download an SP2-upgrade), just the normal "firedrill tuesday".
Then they told me I had to take my computer out of a domain, and wanted me to hook it up directly to the internet so it could go around any checks on their access. Sorry, told them, I wasn't in a position to eliminate the proxy server from the equation (it actually would be a pain, even if I wasn't annoyed by their blatent attempts to circumvent my network security.
Yeah -- great! We can all rely on MS, to keep us safe, because we know they will never download anything harm(WGA)full, that could accidently deactivate our computer. It's such a pain, as well to keep calling them up to get activiation codes...it takes way too much time and I usually get shunted over to a person who tries to grill me about multiple installs. I tell them the truth. If they put out an OS that didn't need reinstallation on a frequent basis, they wouldn't keep getting license hits from the programs I have to reinstall. Idiots.
The implication is that he treats everyone the same way. Whether he sees them as men or sees them as women, he treats everyone the same way.
Yes, so? He treats everyone as "men". Meaning he treats men differently than he would women. If he'd said he treated everyone as "people", wouldn't have been an issue.
If he said "I treat everyone like women", in the game would you have interpreted that to mean he treats everyone like men? Hardly....because he admits to holding a bias in treating men and women differently.
The problem with most men, is they don't realize that "man" != "Human". It's so comical to watch the masculine dominated medical industry act so "shocked" when they discover that many drugs, treatments, therapies, etc, work very differently in women than in men.
Conditions like "fibromyagia" and "chronic fatigue syndrome" were thought to be all in women's heads -- because cases with men were unheard of. Not until advances in medical science allowed men to "see that something was wrong" were they acknowledged as "real diseases". Medical texts for "reasonable and conservative" treatment use men as the "gold standard" for recovery and working despite chronic or severe pain. Psychosomatic or, the new speak term, "somatically focused", for decades and on into today, seems to be the first lame excuse offered for why the male-medical establishment has for not being able to find a cause for someone's chronic pain. And when women complain, they are labeled "hysterical" -- a word deriving it's meaning from the Greek for "uterus" as it was thought to be caused by women's reproductive organs --- one of the earliest forms of male medical stupidity.
I've seen other research done on opioids and pain -- and in some trials with more common narcotics, men got significantly better pain relief. Another opioid type, (?Kappa, it's been several years), was thought to be useless for pain relief because initially it was only tested on men. When it was tested on women it worked better than motrin (which works better in men than in women).
Perpetuating the myth that "treating everyone one like men" "is the same as saying "treating everyone like people" is just plain ridiculous. I think it is very saddening to know how many men don't know the difference.
As far as my being an attorney. Ha! Hardly...though I'm exposed to them, and it's amazing how pliable and subjective the facts and "reality" are in the hands of a capable attorney. Truth and reality, really, don't enter the picture. It's really about being a fast talking saleman who knows the minutia of the law who can spin a good story and weave in enough supporting facts to create whatever impression they want to leave. Think about the RIAA suing innocent people when you think about attorneys. They can sue you for tying your shoes wrong, and it will cost you more to defend yourself than if you just pay them to go away.
But as far as my "wishing" a pox on someone...."wishing" doesn't enter into it.
You may think this is just splitting hairs, but if you've been on the receiving end of some lame masculine expectations that boil down to you just not being "man" enough for a job (not that it would every be phrased so clearly), you'd probably feel it was a bit more than a split hair.
Would you prefer a "blessing" instead of a "pox"? How about "May you reap what you sow"....:-)
Anonymous idiot wrote:
Title: "This is why I treat all players in the game as men" Then later: "So, I really don't give a crap about someone's gender in game"
If you really didn't care what someone's gender in the game was, you would have no need to treat all players "as men" (whatever that means).
In the context of this discussion, the comment was made about women players, perhaps, having some advantage in being treated "better", as in, perhaps, getting more gifts.
Comparatively, you treat men "worse" than you would women -- so when you say you treat all players as men, that simply means you are a jerk to all players. Why does this not suprise me?
Or, to say it another way, you didn't say "I treat all players as women", or I treat all players as "people"....or whatever. Obviously sex & gender mean a great deal to you, as you feel a *need* to label your "attention" as "male-centric". If you really didn't care about someone's gender in the game, you wouldn't feel a need to treat them all like "men". Whether you are gay, and put men on a pedastal, or het (and, apparently view all men as competitors), you still have a distinct difference as to how men and women should be treated. You choose to use your "male treatment" as the normal standard.
A pox on you!
Conversely -- in online forums and such, I'm more likely to choose a neutral pseudonym so I don't get treated condescendingly by people like you who feel a need to treat women like men just to not be "taken advantage of"... Have you ever thought of being the same (i.e. "nice, but not a doormat") to all people?
Your logic is flawed, so #3 is an invalid conclusion.
#2 G.C. will be annoyed.
2a. So? Do they _really_ have a choice?
But more importantly, there is 1.5:
1.5) Genuine customers will see many pirates getting away without paying. If MS doesn't make attempts to crack down, genuine customers might be tempted to use one copy of Windows on more than one machine. With WGA, like DVD-CSS, the only purpose is to keep honest folk, honest.
#3 should be:
3) Makes alot of [sick], but common-place, "sense" in today's world.
It sucks, but you can't claim there is no logic for it. The are just following in the footsteps of the dvd makers.
Ya know...if you ever read the EULA's, you wouldn't have had to install the WGA.
The EULA for WGA said it was Beta Software. I said no. WGA failed to install. Selected "don't bother me about this update again" (don't know if it will do any good...haven't been back yet), but got a kick off of how easily blocked WGA was just by rejecting the EULA...
Can't believe they try to download Unstable Beta software in the guise of "Critical Security Software"...lame..
Ya want buttons - the 5 normal mice buttons (with the scroll wheel doubling as a button) and an additional six programmable buttons across the top. It's also symetric for left or two handed mouse users (I use one on each side of the keyboard -- very handy).
If you have a screen larger than 800x600, you might want to use Opera to view the animated Gif. You can use Opera's Zoom feature to zoom the browswer window and image to full screen. Since Firefox doesn't have page zoom, you have to use the image zoom, which is reset each refresh. Unfortunately, by the time you use the cursor to select a larger zoom setting, the "video" is over. -l
Reading this article I was wondering what the problem with reverse engineering code was. I didn't see there being a legal issue and as others pointed out: there is no illegality involved.
The only time when a cleanroom approach is necessary is if the source has been published as the original IBM BIOS was. Forgive my memory if I forget the exact entity, but I believe it was Phoenix Technologies that created their own BIOS to compete with IBM's BIOS. In that case, IBM had published the code in their 3-ring, hard-bound BIOS tech reference.
In the current situation, no source code has been published. The vendor is a hardware manufacturer and provides the binary-driver to enable their hardware to be something more than an ugly paper weight.
Now it comes to trying to use the same piece of hardware, but under a different OS. Even the DMCA has a clause allowing reverse engineering of "access control routines" when the purpose is to provide compatibility. Reverse engineering a DVD access routine, was problematic because it did alot more than simply allowing compatibility, it also allowed circumvention of region lockouts, and would allow skipping of "mandatory" sections on the DVD. The latter was considered bad because they want to enable advertising sales on home DVD media, among other reasons.
However, there is no "content-control-industry" behind network drivers, the binary drivers are not protecting copyrighted material. So the two situations are completely different.
Secondly, providing an alternate driver for hardware manufacturer's device doesn't create economic harm to the harm to them, but conversely, directly enlarges their potential market and if anything, creates economic benefit to the OEM.
Unless a party (like the OEM) is "harmed" in some way (usually economic), there is no basis for a lawsuit. A plaintiff must show harm or damage in order for them to have grounds for a lawsuit against another party.
Unless someone can think of a situation where an alternate OS driver would create some economic damage to the hardware manufacturer, I submit, that talk about "legal issues" is complete FUD.
To be concerned about nebulous "legal issues" for a situation like this would be akin to worrying about legal issues in creating computer aids for the "visually impaired" that magnify book text, or for the blind that allow a hand-held scanning wand to be passed over text that speaks the words under the wand.
In both situations, you are enabling a larger class of people to access the object that the object-creator (OEM, publisher) is selling.
To me, creating fear, uncertainty and doubt, by claiming "potential legal issues", might as well be applied to going to the bathroom wherein you decide you can't, because of "potential legal issues".
Google could do something though...they could just switch to Windows and our data retention worries would be over...:-)..."Nice collection of data there, be a shame if that machine got 0wned, no telling what those script kiddies might upload into user accounts"...:O
This typical fear-mongering among the telcos using the "scarcity" mentality as a way to extract more money out of the same resources. Rather than addressing congestion by building additional capacity to meet demand, it's far more profitable to divide the current capacity into smaller and smaller chunks for resale to consumers. The telcos don't have to actually "do" anything, just come up with artificial schemes to partition customer's current access.
It similar to what the entertainment industry is doing with music. They cannot sustain phenomenal growth that the switch to CD's in the 80's/90's generated, so to generate the same revenue from a relatively flat inventory, they need to figure out new ways to divide a "song" up, so they can sell the same song to you repeatedly.
With DRM, they can artificially DIVIDE your song collection once by device (requiring a new sale for each device you want to listen from), *and* 2nd, in "time". No longer is your purchase of a song a one time event, but you will be able to repurchase, the same song, each time you want to listen to it!
This method is being pioneered by the computer software industry: you don't buy programs, you "license" them, with terms subject to change anytime the licensor wants to change them. Don't like it? Too bad, some people are saying that shrink-wrap license agreements "are" binding (as though this is a done matter, but for those that believe it's a "done deal", it is.
What a great system. If you don't want to produce more of something to make more money, just get the government to help you enforce new "partitioning" schemes so you can bring in new sales of the same old product in perpetuity.
Seems like this is the quickest way, not to encourage "growth", but encourage gouging and tricks to allow you to earn more money off of less and less product. Capitolism at its finest [sic].
If you are saying that the WGA check is a virus and can behave like a virus in that it cause havoc, then yes, I agree.
If you are saying "nothing has changed", I'd disagree. Each time software goes out to some "destination", there is an increased chance that it opens the system up to attack.
If Microsoft's "viral WGA" check runs daily and both updates and downloads information, there is a chance each day of it getting it wrong and screwing up the system.
It's another insecurity vector that is added to a system.
Virus's have to have a way in. If you don't run interactively on a machine (so no email, no loading unknown binaries), and if the machine presents no services to the outside world, how do viruses/worms get in?
The problem with Windows software is that most of it is untrustworthy -- it doesn't do what the manufacturers claim it will do, and often does things that are undocumented for (and unwanted by) customers.
You want to put a dent in Windows virus's, worms, etc. Start distributing source. Let people build their own binary and be able to read the source to find out that the software performs as advertised.
How can they say there is little documentation when the entire project is open for reading? I know I've been told that even though there may be some kernel man pages in section 9, the real manpage comes from reading the source.
It's a matter of the documentation hasn't localized into English...it's still in C.
May or not be the same thing...but a month or so ago, Anandtech sported a review of the new Apple Intel Core Duo and ran benchmarks on "BootCamp" (native XP with Apple hardware drivers) vs. using a virtual PC technology from Parallel and Parallel or MS-Generic Drivers.
So tell me, how does a Virtual machine run faster than Native?
It looked like the "BootCamp" hardware drivers were stealing cycles from compute-bound tasks, making native performance run slower than virtualized performance. The virtual emulated disk, however, was too much of a performance hit to be compensated for by Apple's lower-performance drivers.
Just a guestimate, but it looks like Apple's HW drivers degrade performance by about 10-15% versus "normal" drivers.
On this page, the numbers show the iMac Core Due@ 2GHz performing ~15% slower than a 1.86GHz, Generic-PC Core Duo.
"...In the end, they will run on top of xen in their own environment and be easily upgradable."
Ah...you're joking, right?
Let's see...running "Xen" to virtulize a network and NAS server on my own machine to serve up extra disk space for my own machine. Is it me or would trying to run NAS servers virtualized on my own machine to provide extra disk space seem a bit unproductive?
My first comment was "yeah", and "so". My second comment was "neither is commercial software".
The question is, which is more dangerous and/or harmful? Commercial software that you invest hundreds to thousands of dollars in and gives you the false sense of security that you are somehow more protected, or O.S. software, where you know you are getting unsupported software?
Seems like commercial sofware is far more harmful, since it wastes company resources and supports the fraudulent perception that commercial software is somehow "better".
Few software companies, and even fewer large software companies release reliable or tested software. Read the EULA. Commercial sofware has the same guarantee as O.S. software>: Use at your own risk, this software isn't guaranteed or waranteed for *any* purpose. At most, you can get a refund for the price paid for one copy of the software (same as OS, free cost = refund free).
The "advantage" of closed source, is that you can be sure that eventually,the feature you want, or the bug that you need fixed won't be. Not only will it not be fixed, it's quite possible it will _never_ be fixed -- that old feature you wanted fixed, isn't included in new, replacement product, or you can't update, because some other feature is broken in the new version.
At least with OS, you have the possibility (no guarantee that it will be buildable, despite the source being available) of fixing the problem or feature -- even if you have to hire someone to do it.
With a commercial vendor, you may not be able to get your "pet"-bug or feature fixed/implemented at any price (especially if the company has gone out of business or has sold themselves to a software acquisition company (Semntc, Corl) who buy up working software projects from others, then run them downhill, often because the don't have the intellectual capital, resources or focus to spend on the adopted product to keep it up the same level as the company they bought it from.
Like the tags said, this article is "flamebait" to waste our time posting obvious replies like this one.
I'm wondering how many customers these guys have. $1000 is less than the small claims amount, seems like a perfect justice would be to have every customer sue the companies in small claims court. The fees the companies would spend in defending against the numerous claims would cost as much as the fines!
Slashdot Mirror
Not getting so much in the way of commercial calls, but I do get a fair number more calls for "donating to the fireman's fund", or the "policeman softball league", and such. I'm also getting more "political announcements" -- especially around election time -- multiple/day at that time. Then there is a small uptick in people wanting to do surveys.
One area where I've gotten alot more junk calls: calls that ring once or twice, then stop, or calls that drop the line as soon as I pickup. It's gotten so bad that more often than not, I'll let my answering machine pick it up first, then if it doesn't hang up, I'll pick up an extension.
I think I get more junk calls now than before -- just different parties. I presume that all the non-profits, poll centers, politico's, etc, can pick up the list and get a pre-validated list of valid phone numbers.
As someone else pointed out, the telemarketers have to get a copy of your number -- otherwise how would they know not to call it? All they need to do is compare new list to old list and pile on the phone numbers that dropped off the list (5 year time limit expired)....Ug.
Hope and a buck will get you a cup of coffee -- maybe you'll wake up and understand the lie that is the US legal (not justice) system.
-l
There is no "legal" or "illegal" when it comes to civil law. It only comes down to what a lawyer can prove in the court room. The facts are immaterial. I'm not exagerating. Civil law is a "game" about who can _convince_ a judge or jury of the truth or falseness of the accusations. Welcome to U.S. Legal 101.
You have to understand. The truth and the facts, really don't matter.
Unfortunately, it is a very, very screwed up system. If you think "right" triumps over "wrong", you are sadly, buying the popular "illusion". This is one reason why many lawyers are considered so slimey -- because they are "amoral". They don't have morals when it comes to winning the "legal game". Those who do, operate at a disadvantage. It's all about the "game".
-lpq
--- Um, I dunno, where? Oh, you mean how open source Linux and BSD have killed off proprietary OS's like Windows. Yeah ... I've seen it before...or are you referring to something else? :-)
Excuse my ignorance, but last I heard [dated info], was that Xen required modifications to client and/or Host OS's What's the scoop on that now?
Can I install Xen off the open-source "shelf", install on Linux, then load up VM's with winXP and maybe a BSD server thrown in for good measure? How about loading Xen's onto a host WinXP and running virtual Linux and BSD images?
Smaller scenario...I had dual boot laptop oh...6 years or so ago - at the time it was still Win98SE (needed for some finance software). With no magic tools (other than a network setup switching tool - set IP, forwarding, DNS, proxy) I could boot native into Win98SE or Linux, or with VMWare, run the same Win98 image and never have to reboot to windows. Accessing a real partition in the VM helped disk performance substantially.
Eventually had to stop using VMWare, because I ran into a floating point bug in their SW emulation that would hang the VM hard. They weren't capable of fixing it in any specified timeframe, and the main reason I needed a VM was to run the finance SW which used floating point.
Is Xen developed enough , to just install it on my linux box and use it to dual boot XP, Vista or BSD? With dual core cpu's being more plentiful there should be much better performance (or did Intel develop the 2nd CPU to free up one cpu for apps while the other ran the spyware? :-). But even if Xen is capable, how easy is it to setup? Could I give it to a "manager" to install on their own? :-) How 'bout parents (i.e. non-computer types).
This is an important issue why Xen (like so many other open source projects) might not replace VMWare anymore than Linux has replaced Windows on the desktop: Packaging. Does it have the hand-holding "wizards" (gag) that can help the masses? Is it anywhere near the point-and-click stage?
From what I've heard with VMWare, they can "sell"/"give away" pre-installed virtual machines that a user can just click-install and run, and up comes a virtual Linux browswer & email session nice and safe to handle virus & doodoo-laden email. Is Xen there? Can it run on Windows? Unfortunately, I think there's still a need to give Windows the direct HW access and VM Linux (very unfortunate for stability). But the biggie: Graphics (and in same vein, but not as hard, cpuwise, HighDef, multi-channel sound. Until 3D graphics can run "at speed" in a VM, people will still need to boot Windows for for all the Graphics intensive apps.
Another area that was lacking in VMWare (not sure about current products, is one VM seeing multiple CPU's and/or cores. Say you have what would have been a dual-cpu workstation. With Dual Core chips in the two cpu sockets, workstations easily have 4 processors (a bit mind boggling to think of eventual 4-core/chip processors with two of those!).
While one could run multiple VM's, one to a cpu, that's alot of unnecessary memory 'burned' for no great reason. Unless reliability is an issue, it would be real useful to run 1 OS that can access multiple processors with each processor talking, perhaps, to different disk controllers all talking to SAS drives with each drive having the smarts to queue commands from multiple processes while optimizing transfers. Of course it's not just the OS image wasted, but block caches as well. Assume a 4-cpu 2xdualcore 4GB. Let WinXP Home have Desktop. Say it gets 1 CPU, 750MB and the GPU. Now let the other 3 CPU's run Samba for file serving to a "domain". A
Seems like existing obscenity laws could be used to control violent video games.
Violent content gets an "X" rating at theaters...why not video games?
If it's PG or less, minors can buy it..."R", parents buy it. "X"...well
parents can still buy it...seems possible compromise....
-l
It's not that windows will be secure, exactly, it will still be able to download disabling code from microsoft. Their firewall is transparent to their own software.
:-( ).
.. too bad it's on an internal, non-routable subnet. When I complained to MS-support about the update problem, they had me uninstall my firewall software completely -- to download "patches" (not install or download an SP2-upgrade), just the normal "firedrill tuesday".
Recently, I was forced onto SP2 (new computer, old computer died, even linux won't run on the new system -- doesn't see the SAS Harddisk at all nor the Gigabit Broadcom ethernet; I'm sure it will be supported in 12-18 months
But one of the brilliant things I noticed about their "security upgraded XP" was that it seemed to "disable" most of my current security. Now windows goes around the firewall product I have installed. Other software is still blocked. Even MS-sites appear to be blocked, but the WGA-authentication and update routines -- they just go around the firewall.
This is will be the end of user's controlling their machines that run MSed-upOS. The creator of the sysinternals site was being happy about Microsoft adding new "managed" hooks to allow programs to monitor various functions -- but my guess is it's the equivalent of a sucker punch. Vendors switch to the new interfaces to do monitoring, but anything that MS wants to hide will be hidden from their new "hooks".
XP2 also ignores user and computer proxy settings -- it first tries to go direct (around my SW firewall)
Then they told me I had to take my computer out of a domain, and wanted me to hook it up directly to the internet so it could go around any checks on their access. Sorry, told them, I wasn't in a position to eliminate the proxy server from the equation (it actually would be a pain, even if I wasn't annoyed by their blatent attempts to circumvent my network security.
Yeah -- great! We can all rely on MS, to keep us safe, because we know they will never download anything harm(WGA)full, that could accidently deactivate our computer. It's such a pain, as well to keep calling them up to get activiation codes...it takes way too much time and I usually get shunted over to a person who tries to grill me about multiple installs. I tell them the truth. If they put out an OS that didn't need reinstallation on a frequent basis, they wouldn't keep getting license hits from the programs I have to reinstall. Idiots.
-l
The implication is that he treats everyone the same way. Whether he sees them as men or sees them as women, he treats everyone the same way.
Yes, so? He treats everyone as "men". Meaning he treats men differently than he would women. If he'd said he treated everyone as "people", wouldn't have been an issue.
If he said "I treat everyone like women", in the game would you have interpreted that to mean he treats everyone like men? Hardly....because he admits to holding a bias in treating men and women differently.
The problem with most men, is they don't realize that "man" != "Human". It's so comical to watch the masculine dominated medical industry act so "shocked" when they discover that many drugs, treatments, therapies, etc, work very differently in women than in men.
Conditions like "fibromyagia" and "chronic fatigue syndrome" were thought to be all in women's heads -- because cases with men were unheard of. Not until advances in medical science allowed men to "see that something was wrong" were they acknowledged as "real diseases". Medical texts for "reasonable and conservative" treatment use men as the "gold standard" for recovery and working despite chronic or severe pain. Psychosomatic or, the new speak term, "somatically focused", for decades and on into today, seems to be the first lame excuse offered for why the male-medical establishment has for not being able to find a cause for someone's chronic pain. And when women complain, they are labeled "hysterical" -- a word deriving it's meaning from the Greek for "uterus" as it was thought to be caused by women's reproductive organs --- one of the earliest forms of male medical stupidity.
I've seen other research done on opioids and pain -- and in some trials with more common narcotics, men got significantly better pain relief. Another opioid type, (?Kappa, it's been several years), was thought to be useless for pain relief because initially it was only tested on men. When it was tested on women it worked better than motrin (which works better in men than in women).
Perpetuating the myth that "treating everyone one like men" "is the same as saying "treating everyone like people" is just plain ridiculous. I think it is very saddening to know how many men don't know the difference.
As far as my being an attorney. Ha! Hardly...though I'm exposed to them, and it's amazing how pliable and subjective the facts and "reality" are in the hands of a capable attorney. Truth and reality, really, don't enter the picture. It's really about being a fast talking saleman who knows the minutia of the law who can spin a good story and weave in enough supporting facts to create whatever impression they want to leave. Think about the RIAA suing innocent people when you think about attorneys. They can sue you for tying your shoes wrong, and it will cost you more to defend yourself than if you just pay them to go away.
But as far as my "wishing" a pox on someone...."wishing" doesn't enter into it.
You may think this is just splitting hairs, but if you've been on the receiving end of some lame masculine expectations that boil down to you just not being "man" enough for a job (not that it would every be phrased so clearly), you'd probably feel it was a bit more than a split hair.
Would you prefer a "blessing" instead of a "pox"? How about "May you reap what you sow"....:-)
-l
Anonymous idiot wrote:
Title: "This is why I treat all players in the game as men"
Then later: "So, I really don't give a crap about someone's gender in game"
If you really didn't care what someone's gender in the game was, you would have
no need to treat all players "as men" (whatever that means).
In the context of this discussion, the comment was made about women players, perhaps, having some advantage in being treated "better", as in, perhaps, getting more gifts.
Comparatively, you treat men "worse" than you would women -- so when you say you treat all players as men, that simply means you are a jerk to all players. Why does this not suprise me?
Or, to say it another way, you didn't say "I treat all players as women", or I treat all players as "people"....or whatever. Obviously sex & gender mean a great deal to you, as you feel a *need* to label your "attention" as "male-centric". If you really didn't care about someone's gender in the game, you wouldn't feel a need to treat them all like "men". Whether you are gay, and put men on a pedastal, or het (and, apparently view all men as competitors), you still have a distinct difference as to how men and women should be treated. You choose to use your "male treatment" as the normal standard.
A pox on you!
Conversely -- in online forums and such, I'm more likely to choose a neutral pseudonym so I don't get treated condescendingly by people like you who feel a need to treat
women like men just to not be "taken advantage of"... Have you ever thought of
being the same (i.e. "nice, but not a doormat") to all people?
-l
Denial is one of the early signs, ya know...:-)
Your logic is flawed, so #3 is an invalid conclusion.
#2 G.C. will be annoyed.
2a. So? Do they _really_ have a choice?
But more importantly, there is 1.5:
1.5) Genuine customers will see many pirates getting away without paying. If MS doesn't make attempts to crack down, genuine customers might be tempted to use one copy of Windows on more than one machine. With WGA, like DVD-CSS, the only purpose is to keep honest folk, honest.
#3 should be:
3) Makes alot of [sick], but common-place, "sense" in today's world.
It sucks, but you can't claim there is no logic for it. The are just following in the footsteps of the dvd makers.
l
Ya know...if you ever read the EULA's, you wouldn't have had to install the WGA.
The EULA for WGA said it was Beta Software. I said no. WGA failed to install. Selected "don't bother me about this update again" (don't know if it will do any good...haven't been back yet), but got a kick off of how easily blocked WGA was just by rejecting the EULA...
Can't believe they try to download Unstable Beta software in the guise of "Critical
Security Software"...lame..
-l
Ya want buttons - the 5 normal mice buttons (with the scroll wheel doubling as a button) and an additional six programmable buttons across the top. It's also symetric for left or two handed mouse users (I use one on each side of the keyboard -- very handy).
-l
If you have a screen larger than 800x600, you might want to use Opera to view the animated Gif. You can use Opera's Zoom feature to zoom the browswer window and image to full screen. Since Firefox doesn't have page zoom, you have to use the image zoom, which is reset each refresh. Unfortunately, by the time you use the cursor to select a larger zoom setting, the "video" is over.
-l
Reading this article I was wondering what the problem with reverse engineering code was. I didn't see there being a legal issue and as others pointed out: there is no illegality involved.
The only time when a cleanroom approach is necessary is if the source has been published as the original IBM BIOS was. Forgive my memory if I forget the exact entity, but I believe it was Phoenix Technologies that created their own BIOS to compete with IBM's BIOS. In that case, IBM had published the code in their 3-ring, hard-bound BIOS tech reference.
In the current situation, no source code has been published. The vendor is a hardware manufacturer and provides the binary-driver to enable their hardware to be something more than an ugly paper weight.
Now it comes to trying to use the same piece of hardware, but under a different OS. Even the DMCA has a clause allowing reverse engineering of "access control routines" when the purpose is to provide compatibility. Reverse engineering a DVD access routine, was problematic because it did alot more than simply allowing compatibility, it also allowed circumvention of region lockouts, and would allow skipping of "mandatory" sections on the DVD. The latter was considered bad because they want to enable advertising sales on home DVD media, among other reasons.
However, there is no "content-control-industry" behind network drivers, the binary drivers are not protecting copyrighted material. So the two situations are completely different.
Secondly, providing an alternate driver for hardware manufacturer's device doesn't create economic harm to the harm to them, but conversely, directly enlarges their potential market and if anything, creates economic benefit to the OEM.
Unless a party (like the OEM) is "harmed" in some way (usually economic), there is no basis for a lawsuit. A plaintiff must show harm or damage in order for them to have grounds for a lawsuit against another party.
Unless someone can think of a situation where an alternate OS driver would create some economic damage to the hardware manufacturer, I submit, that talk about "legal issues" is complete FUD.
To be concerned about nebulous "legal issues" for a situation like this would be akin to worrying about legal issues in creating computer aids for the "visually impaired" that magnify book text, or for the blind that allow a hand-held scanning wand to be passed over text that speaks the words under the wand.
In both situations, you are enabling a larger class of people to access the object that the object-creator (OEM, publisher) is selling.
To me, creating fear, uncertainty and doubt, by claiming "potential legal issues", might as well be applied to going to the bathroom wherein you decide you can't, because of "potential legal issues".
Where's my FUD-B-Gone Spray?...
-l
Google could do something though...they could just switch to Windows and our data retention worries would be over...:-) ..."Nice collection of data there, be a shame if that machine got 0wned, no telling what those script kiddies might upload into user accounts"... :O
This typical fear-mongering among the telcos using the "scarcity" mentality as a way to extract more money out of the same resources. Rather than addressing congestion by building additional capacity to meet demand, it's far more profitable to divide the current capacity into smaller and smaller chunks for resale to consumers. The telcos don't have to actually "do" anything, just come up with artificial schemes to partition customer's current access.
It similar to what the entertainment industry is doing with music. They cannot sustain phenomenal growth that the switch to CD's in the 80's/90's generated, so to generate the same revenue from a relatively flat inventory, they need to figure out new ways to divide a "song" up, so they can sell the same song to you repeatedly.
With DRM, they can artificially DIVIDE your song collection once by device (requiring a new sale for each device you want to listen from), *and* 2nd, in "time". No longer is your purchase of a song a one time event, but you will be able to repurchase, the same song, each time you want to listen to it!
This method is being pioneered by the computer software industry: you don't buy programs, you "license" them, with terms subject to change anytime the licensor wants to change them. Don't like it? Too bad, some people are saying that shrink-wrap license agreements "are" binding (as though this is a done matter, but for those that believe it's a "done deal", it is.
What a great system. If you don't want to produce more of something to make more money, just get the government to help you enforce new "partitioning" schemes so you can bring in new sales of the same old product in perpetuity.
Seems like this is the quickest way, not to encourage "growth", but encourage gouging and tricks to allow you to earn more money off of less and less product. Capitolism at its finest [sic].
-l
You can suspend the update process with "sysinternals" Process explorer. Then
it won't bug you every 10 minutes.
(Been there, done that...)
I think you miss the point (or not).
If you are saying that the WGA check is a virus and can behave like a virus in that it cause havoc, then yes, I agree.
If you are saying "nothing has changed", I'd disagree. Each time software goes out to some "destination", there is an increased chance that it opens the system up to attack.
If Microsoft's "viral WGA" check runs daily and both updates and downloads information, there is
a chance each day of it getting it wrong and screwing up the system.
It's another insecurity vector that is added to a system.
Virus's have to have a way in. If you don't run interactively on a machine (so no email, no loading unknown binaries), and if the machine presents no services to the outside world, how do viruses/worms get in?
The problem with Windows software is that most of it is untrustworthy -- it doesn't do what the manufacturers claim it will do, and often does things that are undocumented for (and unwanted by) customers.
You want to put a dent in Windows virus's, worms, etc. Start distributing source. Let people
build their own binary and be able to read the source to find out that the software performs as advertised.
-l
How can they say there is little documentation when the entire project is open for reading? I know I've been told that even though there may be some kernel man pages in section 9, the real manpage comes from reading the source.
It's a matter of the documentation hasn't localized into English...it's still in C.
-l
May or not be the same thing...but a month or so ago, Anandtech sported a review of the new Apple Intel Core Duo and ran benchmarks on "BootCamp" (native XP with Apple hardware drivers) vs. using a virtual PC technology from Parallel and Parallel or MS-Generic Drivers.
Tests showed the Virtual PC ran consistently faster than "BootCamp" except on a disk-heavy Multimedia benchmark and even there, the virtual PC was only about 2% slower.
So tell me, how does a Virtual machine run faster than Native?
It looked like the "BootCamp" hardware drivers were stealing cycles from compute-bound tasks, making native performance run slower than virtualized performance. The virtual emulated disk, however, was too much of a performance hit to be compensated for by Apple's lower-performance drivers.
Just a guestimate, but it looks like Apple's HW drivers degrade performance by about
10-15% versus "normal" drivers.
On this page, the numbers show the iMac Core Due@ 2GHz performing ~15% slower than a 1.86GHz, Generic-PC Core Duo.
It's better than the 3-5X performance hit the Apple G5 had on server tasks versus Linux 2.6.
Even having the advantage of running on the same hardware as on the iMac, Apple OS
needs some signifcant tuning.
The performance "dehanced" drivers under "BootCamp" appear to be a deliberate attempt by Apple to cover for their OS's deficiencies.
-l
"...In the end, they will run on top of xen in their own environment and be easily upgradable."
Ah...you're joking, right?
Let's see...running "Xen" to virtulize a network and NAS server on my own machine to serve up extra disk space for my own machine. Is it me or would trying to run NAS servers virtualized on my own machine to provide extra disk space seem a bit unproductive?
-l
"'...and is one of the coolest features in Solaris 10.'
:-)
This is clearly an objective writer." --
No, its simply putting the tool in context for you. Like saying "Internet Explorer is the coolest feature in Windows NT 5.1"...
The question is, which is more dangerous and/or harmful?
Commercial software that you invest hundreds to thousands of dollars in and gives you the false sense of security that you are somehow more protected, or O.S. software, where you know you are getting unsupported software?
Seems like commercial sofware is far more harmful, since it wastes company resources and supports the fraudulent perception that commercial software is somehow "better".
Few software companies, and even fewer large software companies release reliable or tested software. Read the EULA. Commercial sofware has the same guarantee as O.S. software>: Use at your own risk, this software isn't guaranteed or waranteed for *any* purpose. At most, you can get a refund for the price paid for one copy of the software (same as OS, free cost = refund free).
The "advantage" of closed source, is that you can be sure that eventually,the feature you want, or the bug that you need fixed won't be. Not only will it not be fixed, it's quite possible it will _never_ be fixed -- that old feature you wanted fixed, isn't included in new, replacement product, or you can't update, because some other feature is broken in the new version.
At least with OS, you have the possibility (no guarantee that it will be buildable, despite the source being available) of fixing the problem or feature -- even if you have to hire someone to do it.
With a commercial vendor, you may not be able to get your "pet"-bug or feature fixed/implemented at any price (especially if the company has gone out of business or has sold themselves to a software acquisition company (Semntc, Corl) who buy up working software projects from others, then run them downhill, often because the don't have the intellectual capital, resources or focus to spend on the adopted product to keep it up the same level as the company they bought it from.
Like the tags said, this article is "flamebait" to waste our time posting obvious replies like this one.
l
"Unless those statellites fall out of the sky, GPS is here to stay." ...
;^
Uh, how about until the government decides that GPS data needs to be kept private due to "national security" concerns?
I'm wondering how many customers these guys have. $1000 is less than the small claims amount, seems like a perfect justice would be to have every customer sue the companies in small claims court. The fees the companies would spend in defending against the numerous claims would cost as much as the fines!
(Just dreaming...)...