I'd argue that with that kind of classification it can hardly be called a "movement". Viewed from the outside they don't look schizophrenic, rather it looks like anyone who wants to stir up some trouble can just claim to be from Anonymous and thus get extra media attention towards what has been done. Since there is no common ground or movement, it's not possible to say that you're sympathetic to the cause either because the question would then become "what cause?".
But most companies (anecdotal IÂm sure) have not upgraded from XP yet, and no matter how good it is, it is showing its age. Windows 7 could actually be perfectly timed, and with the right marketing perhaps they can land some deals that Vista failed to do.
The hardware demands are not finalized and most companies will turn off the visual effects anyway.
I was one of those that fell for the pre-game hype and really looked forward to it. I have the t-shirt to prove it (literally, since I bought the special edition box).
The few hours of the game I had so much fun, the game looked awesome, and I could feel the immersion. However, after driving through the umpteenth guard post and have everyone and their mother shooting at me as soon as they saw a car coming down the road (a post earlier in this thread sums this up perfectly) I stopped and thought "wow, this is pretty boring". The missions are all of the same kind, and I cannot believe this game goes for the innovation title.
Yes, it uses DirectX 10 and it looks amazing, but they didn't even bother to code in a faction system! Even Boiling Point: Road to Hell managed to do that, and they pretty much messed up everything else!
In short, I think if I had written a review after my first 5 - 6 hours, I would have given the game a very good score. If, on the other hand, I would write one now, it would look a lot less impressive.
This is a modus operandis of a lot of video game publishers. Take a look at Haze for example. There are so many games now being hyped as the next great thing that will redefine their genre, yet few actually deliver on that promise at all. I will definitely have to see it to believe it, no doubt about it.
Also, not all of us have English as a first language, so even if we were to know what the second book in the bible was, we'd also have to know what it was called in English.
And what if Google were to lose?
It's sad when we have to wait and hope for these organizations to sue someone big instead of picking on the little guy to have some hope that they might actually be struck down.
Then sit down and explain it to him in simple words he'll understand. I've met people with such a naïve outlook, and the best thing in my opinion is to try and educate them. If we, who are passionate about this, don't, then noone else will.
People in power really don't have as much to hide? I know of a certain New York governor that is evidence to the contrary, and I don't really believe he's a one of a kind.
And that can certainly be done with resolutions. Two years ago I vowed to lose a lot of the weight I put on while studying. I had a general goal set for June/July, but I always broke it down to every day and every week, counting calories and measuring weekly. Its difficult to see 6 - 7 months ahead, you "can always start later". But, by focusing on what I wanted to accomplish each week in order to reach my goal in July, it made it easier. The result: I lost 60 lbs from January to June.
Granted, that is the only new years resolution Ive kept..
I got Orange Box and Call of Duty 4 for xmas, and COD has really been struggling at times. Playing Team Fortress 2 otoh, has worked very well all the time.
Well, in Norway, the legal age for drinking alcohol is 18. Anyone who is in a store learns that if they are unsure, they always ask. Many stores have signs that say if you are under 25, you should show ID before they even ask.
Its not rocket science, its really not that different from selling other things with legal ages, or working at a pub or nightclub. How are you supposed to tell them apart? You dont, you ask both for ID.
I agree, this is a non-story really. In Norway we have a search engine called Kvasir (kvasir.no) which is very good for Norwegian stuff. Big surprise, the big American company cannot compete on accuracy versus a search engine specialized on finding Norwegian results? This is surprising how exactly?
It wasn't turned off, and the updated turned it on. It wasn't even installed on the machines. The "update" installed an application and started it without alerting the user. It is NEVER okay for a company to install an application on my computer without my concent. Ever. This was a desktop search software, not a firewall or something that could probably be used for security.
So people are taking documents that should be on a separate server, places it on a machine that is connected to the internet (which isn't supposed to happen) and then proceeds to share this information over a P2P network? Why is the FTC going after P2P again? Seems to me they need to evaluate the people cleared to handle these documents and the procedures and processes involved.
Every classified document is not "Top Secret" or intelligence related. I don't know about the US, but at least in Norway, a form that is filled with personal information is called "Classified", and the article specifically mentions confidential information being used for identity theft. If you work for a company that participates in bid wars, the bidding documents will be classified, and sales persons may bring that around on their laptops as they travel. They definitely should be careful, but this isn't about the most secret documents, that's why they're on a computer that is connected to the internet. It doesn't mean that them falling into the wrong hands do not do damage though.
And teach them that, even at home, sharing the entire "My Documents" folder when you keep your private and work related stuff there is a bad idea. I mean, most P2P programs I know of don't just make your entire harddrive available, you actually have to put these documents up for grabs.
But a USPTO report earlier this year stirred up the issue again by claiming that P2P installs could adversely affect national security when they made confidential government information available.
How is this even remotely related to any P2P protocol? That's an issue no matter what protocol used. Hell, in Norway there have been lots of screaming because some soldiers have put information and pictures that were confidential in one way or the other up on Facebook. Making confidential information available is a breach of security no matter what protocol you use to distribute it. Perhaps things get distributed more with P2P, but you still have to look for information and download before (while) you distribute it yourself.
The article isn't wrong, in fact, the only place where the words ILLEGAL appear seem to be in the Slashdot headline. The article talks about FISA approved wiretappings.
Surprising? Not really, expected more like it, but this is an organisation that constantly calls entire P2P networks into question because there MIGHT be illegitimate content on them. They even slam the protocol itself, claiming it is illegal, and are caught red handed doing illegal deeds themselves. Schadenfreude more than surprise I'd say.
The MPAA does not dispute it paid Anderson for the sensitive information, but insists that it had no idea that Anderson stole the data. "The MPAA obtains information from third parties only if it believes the evidence has been collected legally," says MPAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Kaltman.
Essentially, the MPAA said "we will give you anything if you rat these people out and obtain evidence for us", yet "didn't know" he was doing it illegally? Please, just shows how desperate they can be and what kind of morale these people have.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd argue that with that kind of classification it can hardly be called a "movement". Viewed from the outside they don't look schizophrenic, rather it looks like anyone who wants to stir up some trouble can just claim to be from Anonymous and thus get extra media attention towards what has been done. Since there is no common ground or movement, it's not possible to say that you're sympathetic to the cause either because the question would then become "what cause?".
I'd say it also serves to prove the point that "common sense" really isn't that common.
But most companies (anecdotal IÂm sure) have not upgraded from XP yet, and no matter how good it is, it is showing its age. Windows 7 could actually be perfectly timed, and with the right marketing perhaps they can land some deals that Vista failed to do.
The hardware demands are not finalized and most companies will turn off the visual effects anyway.
I was one of those that fell for the pre-game hype and really looked forward to it. I have the t-shirt to prove it (literally, since I bought the special edition box).
The few hours of the game I had so much fun, the game looked awesome, and I could feel the immersion. However, after driving through the umpteenth guard post and have everyone and their mother shooting at me as soon as they saw a car coming down the road (a post earlier in this thread sums this up perfectly) I stopped and thought "wow, this is pretty boring". The missions are all of the same kind, and I cannot believe this game goes for the innovation title.
Yes, it uses DirectX 10 and it looks amazing, but they didn't even bother to code in a faction system! Even Boiling Point: Road to Hell managed to do that, and they pretty much messed up everything else!
In short, I think if I had written a review after my first 5 - 6 hours, I would have given the game a very good score. If, on the other hand, I would write one now, it would look a lot less impressive.
This is a modus operandis of a lot of video game publishers. Take a look at Haze for example. There are so many games now being hyped as the next great thing that will redefine their genre, yet few actually deliver on that promise at all. I will definitely have to see it to believe it, no doubt about it.
Also, not all of us have English as a first language, so even if we were to know what the second book in the bible was, we'd also have to know what it was called in English.
And what if Google were to lose? It's sad when we have to wait and hope for these organizations to sue someone big instead of picking on the little guy to have some hope that they might actually be struck down.
And that's why corporate users pay several times the amount that home users pay for their lines.
Then sit down and explain it to him in simple words he'll understand. I've met people with such a naïve outlook, and the best thing in my opinion is to try and educate them. If we, who are passionate about this, don't, then noone else will.
People in power really don't have as much to hide? I know of a certain New York governor that is evidence to the contrary, and I don't really believe he's a one of a kind.
They throttle their heaviest PRIVATE users, which mean nothing to them compared to getting the corporate sector as customers.
Indeed it is!
And that can certainly be done with resolutions. Two years ago I vowed to lose a lot of the weight I put on while studying. I had a general goal set for June/July, but I always broke it down to every day and every week, counting calories and measuring weekly. Its difficult to see 6 - 7 months ahead, you "can always start later". But, by focusing on what I wanted to accomplish each week in order to reach my goal in July, it made it easier. The result: I lost 60 lbs from January to June.
Granted, that is the only new years resolution Ive kept..
Because his job is not to write insightful opinion pieces, but to generate ad revenue.
I got Orange Box and Call of Duty 4 for xmas, and COD has really been struggling at times. Playing Team Fortress 2 otoh, has worked very well all the time.
Well, in Norway, the legal age for drinking alcohol is 18. Anyone who is in a store learns that if they are unsure, they always ask. Many stores have signs that say if you are under 25, you should show ID before they even ask. Its not rocket science, its really not that different from selling other things with legal ages, or working at a pub or nightclub. How are you supposed to tell them apart? You dont, you ask both for ID.
I agree, this is a non-story really. In Norway we have a search engine called Kvasir (kvasir.no) which is very good for Norwegian stuff. Big surprise, the big American company cannot compete on accuracy versus a search engine specialized on finding Norwegian results? This is surprising how exactly?
It wasn't turned off, and the updated turned it on. It wasn't even installed on the machines. The "update" installed an application and started it without alerting the user. It is NEVER okay for a company to install an application on my computer without my concent. Ever. This was a desktop search software, not a firewall or something that could probably be used for security.
So people are taking documents that should be on a separate server, places it on a machine that is connected to the internet (which isn't supposed to happen) and then proceeds to share this information over a P2P network? Why is the FTC going after P2P again? Seems to me they need to evaluate the people cleared to handle these documents and the procedures and processes involved.
Every classified document is not "Top Secret" or intelligence related. I don't know about the US, but at least in Norway, a form that is filled with personal information is called "Classified", and the article specifically mentions confidential information being used for identity theft. If you work for a company that participates in bid wars, the bidding documents will be classified, and sales persons may bring that around on their laptops as they travel. They definitely should be careful, but this isn't about the most secret documents, that's why they're on a computer that is connected to the internet. It doesn't mean that them falling into the wrong hands do not do damage though.
And teach them that, even at home, sharing the entire "My Documents" folder when you keep your private and work related stuff there is a bad idea. I mean, most P2P programs I know of don't just make your entire harddrive available, you actually have to put these documents up for grabs.
But a USPTO report earlier this year stirred up the issue again by claiming that P2P installs could adversely affect national security when they made confidential government information available.
How is this even remotely related to any P2P protocol? That's an issue no matter what protocol used. Hell, in Norway there have been lots of screaming because some soldiers have put information and pictures that were confidential in one way or the other up on Facebook. Making confidential information available is a breach of security no matter what protocol you use to distribute it. Perhaps things get distributed more with P2P, but you still have to look for information and download before (while) you distribute it yourself.
The article isn't wrong, in fact, the only place where the words ILLEGAL appear seem to be in the Slashdot headline. The article talks about FISA approved wiretappings.
Surprising? Not really, expected more like it, but this is an organisation that constantly calls entire P2P networks into question because there MIGHT be illegitimate content on them. They even slam the protocol itself, claiming it is illegal, and are caught red handed doing illegal deeds themselves. Schadenfreude more than surprise I'd say.
The MPAA does not dispute it paid Anderson for the sensitive information, but insists that it had no idea that Anderson stole the data. "The MPAA obtains information from third parties only if it believes the evidence has been collected legally," says MPAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Kaltman.
Essentially, the MPAA said "we will give you anything if you rat these people out and obtain evidence for us", yet "didn't know" he was doing it illegally? Please, just shows how desperate they can be and what kind of morale these people have.