I know, but in today's world, it's fairly unknown to I would safely say 99% of computer users. I'm trying to discuss the trend of user incompetiance/phobia of computer knowlege that is so absurdly being exploited by this company, and your post shows the transition excellently. While 10 years ago, 25% might have known (I know that's way high), now almost 0% does, and 0%, according to this corp., are supposed to.
Alright, holding shift to disable autorun IS pretty obscure. And using it to disable autorun to copy data is a pretty obscure application. But looking at this is a broader aspect, are we not supposed to understand our computers anymore? Are we not supposed to understand that this disk comes with an autorun we are allowed to disable? Isn't the greater question here, 'Are we losing control of our computers?' Think about it. Are we moving from a world of entreprenurs and ingenuity to a world of plug-and-play, autorun, vanilla coke world where any understanding should be left to professionally trained and liscensed experts in the name of security? If we didn't have Linux, would we already be there?
You mean to tell me that a company means to supress that holding down 1 key can prevent the unauthorized loading FROM A DISK YOU OWN to A COMPUTER YOU OWN of A PROGRAM YOU DON'T WANT on the basis that it violates a law against circumvention measures???? If I do use this violation I use an "illegal" "feature" built into an OS. But I'm not supposed to use that feature, or probably even know about it. Explain this please.
This is just another example of security by blind trust and blatant ignorance. If we wanted this, we could declare everything secure because it's illegal to try to make it insecure or even experiment with security. It's not only illegal now to metaphorically climb the fence to get to land you own, now it's illegal to look at the lock.
I was wondering a while ago if chess could be set out into a possibility tree with work such as seti@home where one players actions will always be counterable. Theoretically it's possible, but i haven't done the preliminary calcs to determine processing power necessary/time/etc. Your thoughts?
I know you're joking, but that information is really valuable. On a page with that many hits, a survey to be used in web design could be quite accurate of the general population and could likely be sold for quite a bit. Bet that wasn't in the contract... I'm not saying it is, or is going to be, but it could.
I went to ftc.gov to see if such a link is standard operating procedure for them. It isn't on that site. Strange, no? Why would they track anyone who wants to stop receiveing phone ads? To make up for it in spam!:-)
I am not a lawyer. I just attach it to my sig incase i forget to put it in the post. It prevents you from getting sued for giving out legal advice, even if you aren't.
And, while they're at it, why don't they just stop making movies all togather! That way, there'd be no piracy! Or not have awards! Or not release DVDs or VHS! Wouldn't that be great? And you can't trust theater bootlegs either, so no theaters!
I imagine that with time and practice, the echolocation could become intuitive at greater complexities. The brain has a good capacity to adapt to tasks, it would be interesting to see how it adapts to a new sense. Anyway, I definitly want one.
Agh! Do these twits know why apple was named Apple? Because Woz liked picking apples! Is it totally impossible to have 2 corperations with the same name without one suing? How many Comp* are there or "Computer Source" or generic names like that? This is just as absurd as the guy name Shell who lost his domain name to the corperation in Germany. It's time we admit that people and corperations and other corperations and people can have the same name as long as an average consumer could differenciate them, eg based on symbol or product. Not only that, people>corperations. This has totally gotten out of hand. If people can tell the difference, who cares if they have the same name. Jeez.
Alright, let's ignore the spying/creepyness aspect for one second. It's just plain obnoxious to tax residents, not buisnesses, but residents, who go one more roadtrips and commute farther. One should know where the tolls are and how much they are instead of just a sattelite odometer tax.
No, it's not. It's down, and quite down. Providing mirrors is a valuable service, as even the strongest sites can be wiped out by/. and using mod points to encourage this seems acceptable, at least to me.
So Microsoft is tracking usenet to examine the society of posters. I don't see the problem here. All the information is publicly availible, if a graduate student was doing this you'd have no problem. Microsoft can examine usenet society all they want.
No, the argument is that if you create something, you can't allow people to freely distribute it WHILE you maintain ownership, as only you can distribute it. Which is bizarre, as publishers have distributed books for years... It's a really bad argument.
The GPL is a license that allows people to use a work. Copyright is the owners method of ownership of a work. These licenses describe the way a work can be used. The GPL is a specific type of license. It retains the ownership of the work, yet allows the work to be distributed. Because it maintains ownership by a specific owner (eg Linus for the Linux kernel), it is constant with copyright law. Just because you use an GPL work doesn't mean you own it. I'm fairly sure this is how it works, but IANAL.
Slashdot Mirror
I know, but in today's world, it's fairly unknown to I would safely say 99% of computer users. I'm trying to discuss the trend of user incompetiance/phobia of computer knowlege that is so absurdly being exploited by this company, and your post shows the transition excellently. While 10 years ago, 25% might have known (I know that's way high), now almost 0% does, and 0%, according to this corp., are supposed to.
Alright, holding shift to disable autorun IS pretty obscure. And using it to disable autorun to copy data is a pretty obscure application. But looking at this is a broader aspect, are we not supposed to understand our computers anymore? Are we not supposed to understand that this disk comes with an autorun we are allowed to disable? Isn't the greater question here, 'Are we losing control of our computers?' Think about it. Are we moving from a world of entreprenurs and ingenuity to a world of plug-and-play, autorun, vanilla coke world where any understanding should be left to professionally trained and liscensed experts in the name of security? If we didn't have Linux, would we already be there?
You mean to tell me that a company means to supress that holding down 1 key can prevent the unauthorized loading FROM A DISK YOU OWN to A COMPUTER YOU OWN of A PROGRAM YOU DON'T WANT on the basis that it violates a law against circumvention measures???? If I do use this violation I use an "illegal" "feature" built into an OS. But I'm not supposed to use that feature, or probably even know about it. Explain this please.
This is just another example of security by blind trust and blatant ignorance. If we wanted this, we could declare everything secure because it's illegal to try to make it insecure or even experiment with security. It's not only illegal now to metaphorically climb the fence to get to land you own, now it's illegal to look at the lock.
All I'm asking for is a sanity check.
Not only that, perhaps a more interesting question: If a player could always win in chess, would it be the one who goes first or second?
I was wondering a while ago if chess could be set out into a possibility tree with work such as seti@home where one players actions will always be counterable. Theoretically it's possible, but i haven't done the preliminary calcs to determine processing power necessary/time/etc. Your thoughts?
I know you're joking, but that information is really valuable. On a page with that many hits, a survey to be used in web design could be quite accurate of the general population and could likely be sold for quite a bit. Bet that wasn't in the contract... I'm not saying it is, or is going to be, but it could.
You must be new here. That's only one order of magnatude. Around here, that's pretty good.
I went to ftc.gov to see if such a link is standard operating procedure for them. It isn't on that site. Strange, no? Why would they track anyone who wants to stop receiveing phone ads? To make up for it in spam! :-)
No, it just means that a link from slashdot should be on the list as a potental site vulnerablility :-)
Try the papermate Write Bros. Blue Ink Medium. I highly reccomend it, it writes well and the color's good.
I am not a lawyer. I just attach it to my sig incase i forget to put it in the post. It prevents you from getting sued for giving out legal advice, even if you aren't.
And, while they're at it, why don't they just stop making movies all togather! That way, there'd be no piracy! Or not have awards! Or not release DVDs or VHS! Wouldn't that be great? And you can't trust theater bootlegs either, so no theaters!
Yes, the five second rule is true, if the slashdot editors don't look back for more than five seconds, you get an disease-ridden dupe.
I imagine that with time and practice, the echolocation could become intuitive at greater complexities. The brain has a good capacity to adapt to tasks, it would be interesting to see how it adapts to a new sense. Anyway, I definitly want one.
From someone who has used both FSN and FSV, let me explain the difference. FSN is a joy to use and FSV is a buggy toy. I loved IRIX.
Agh! Do these twits know why apple was named Apple? Because Woz liked picking apples! Is it totally impossible to have 2 corperations with the same name without one suing? How many Comp* are there or "Computer Source" or generic names like that? This is just as absurd as the guy name Shell who lost his domain name to the corperation in Germany. It's time we admit that people and corperations and other corperations and people can have the same name as long as an average consumer could differenciate them, eg based on symbol or product. Not only that, people>corperations. This has totally gotten out of hand. If people can tell the difference, who cares if they have the same name. Jeez.
Alright, let's ignore the spying/creepyness aspect for one second. It's just plain obnoxious to tax residents, not buisnesses, but residents, who go one more roadtrips and commute farther. One should know where the tolls are and how much they are instead of just a sattelite odometer tax.
Yeah, *bsd is dying is a running gag. I don't think anyone actually believes it anymore.
Before we all go off on the *bsd is dying trip, let's look at the actual statistics, from Netcraft. This survey is current. Thanks.
And if the human is smart, it will design software that embeds flaws.
I'm sorry, i can't resist commenting that you know you're company's doing well when they're about to not be bankrupt anymore. :-)
No, it's not. It's down, and quite down. Providing mirrors is a valuable service, as even the strongest sites can be wiped out by /. and using mod points to encourage this seems acceptable, at least to me.
So Microsoft is tracking usenet to examine the society of posters. I don't see the problem here. All the information is publicly availible, if a graduate student was doing this you'd have no problem. Microsoft can examine usenet society all they want.
No, the argument is that if you create something, you can't allow people to freely distribute it WHILE you maintain ownership, as only you can distribute it. Which is bizarre, as publishers have distributed books for years... It's a really bad argument.
The GPL is a license that allows people to use a work. Copyright is the owners method of ownership of a work. These licenses describe the way a work can be used. The GPL is a specific type of license. It retains the ownership of the work, yet allows the work to be distributed. Because it maintains ownership by a specific owner (eg Linus for the Linux kernel), it is constant with copyright law. Just because you use an GPL work doesn't mean you own it. I'm fairly sure this is how it works, but IANAL.