And others do the exact opposite. Baen Books, for example, has the latest David Weber/Honor Harringtion novel At All Costs, available for download now.
Or you can wait until November when it's available in print. The trick is that the download is an "Advance Readers Copy", which they say is unproofed and may change before final publication.
Translation: Buy this one because you can't wait, and then buy the "release" downloadable version in August, and then buy the hardback in November.
At least on the site they admit up front they're taking advantage of you. But either "pre-release" or "strict release", the idea is to drum up interest and business.
Sorry, not true. A good external firewall can examine packets moving into and out of your network and help prevent DoS attacks like SYN and ACK floods, IP spoofs, and so on. And extapolating your needs from your own personal machine to a major network is a bit... misleading.
I believe the statement being made is that those smart guys are not working in management.
Just think about that for a second. The company with over 95% of the OS market, over 95% of the wp/sh/pr "office" market, 60% of the corporate server market, and 80-90% of the browser market does NOT have smart people working in management?
Right.
Re:Name 5 innovations from Microsoft.
on
Ballmer on Innovation
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Innovation in and as of itself is not usually a desirable corporate attribute. "First movers" that innovate in a field are usually rewarded with arrows in their back.
Success with an "innovation" usually comes from the second or third company down the line that's able to market it to the public at large.
Xerox Park may have innovated with the windows, mouse, and the gui, and Apple may have planted the seed, but MS is the one who brought the concept to the masses. Which one "deserves" the credit?
If I remember correctly, what they're actually going to do is store documents like Word's in standard zip file format. The text and formatting will be xml, images and other binaries will be associated files in the zip document. The zip format also aids in the compression of the somewhat repetitive xml document structure.
They will have to be a "little" creative, after all, to support things like embedding an excel table into a word document.
First, you used an amazing number of words to illustrate a fair use situation, since the single copy of the book was lended. (I assume you didn't steal it?)
Second, it's common vernacular to say I was "robbed" when your house was broken into, even though, technically, you were probably burgularized. The generic term covers the concept, even though a more specific word exists.
So, as someone whose work is often "stolen", I have little sympathy for rationalizations, and I refuse to play the flip side of the propaganda game. As said, many on the "other" side would greatly prefer that people use words or euphemisms that hide or trivialize the offense.
I totally agree. I'm positive the designers of Windows 3.1 and NT should have had the foresight to create in-depth security features and firewalls, just in case some teenager tried to crack their system with a stack-overflow virus off that DARPA internet thing...
I think you forgot the part that said win32 firewalls.
I think YOU need to think about what you just said.
Win32 firewalls? You mean the win32 firewall on the notebook you just booted up? The win32 firewall running on the stolen notebook? The one its owner would have deliberately UNBLOCKED so the anti-theft protection worked? The one that just let the program phone home while you were messing around trying to block it from doing so? THAT win32 firewall?
I appreciate the detailed explanation, but I had to chuckle at the last line. I've seen plenty of "detailed spec's" that had rather large, freight-train-sized holes in them...
Of course, the "phone home" message could be a garden variety http/s request. So unless you setup your firewall to deliberately block your own web access....
Okay, so now we've backed down from the "average" HS/C teen to the "average" mp3 collector. Fine.
But now I'll have to take exception with the other "fact" you tried to slip in there, that they're "the ones responsible for the majority of piracy".
Because unless you have some hard evidence to backup your assertions, I tend to believe that the "majority" of the problem lies with the "tens (hundreds) of thousands" of teens who individually download and trade dozens of this week's most popular songs.
But I will grant you that the "collector" who wastes gigabytes downloading music he'll never even hear probably (all you can download subscription service?) wouldn't pay anyway.
But since that individual isn't the real problem, he isn't relevant to the discussion. Makes a nice straw man though...
And who cares about your judgement thing about abusing and subverting...
You mean, other than the fact that this entire article was about the SC's Grokster decision, and its implications regarding P2P in general and BT in particular? That distraction?
And I'll continue to do so, as the end result is no different. You have something you were supposed to pay for... and didn't.
The value of a CD isn't in the bit of plastic, but in the music it contained and in the freedom it granted for you to listen to it whenever you wanted.
And yes, there's a more specific legal term for the act. There's also a perfectly good generic term for it as well. And people who do steal would prefer to hide the fact under a mask of doublespeak and a cloak of rationalization.
But I can see why others would prefer "infringement", as it sounds SO much better than stealing. Infringe? Why that's barely stepping a tippy-toe over the line... hardly worth even mentioning.
And we come full circle. I agree that BT is "efficient" when it comes to serving highly popular files in a dense environment. In fact I never denied that.
Reduce popularity and/or density, however, and its efficency begins to reduce dramatically in proportion. Or just how many servers in a given network are online AND happen to still have a fragement of an infrequently accessed file?
So once again, the judgement still needs to be balanced on the scenarios were BT is useful and beneficial, as opposed to the number of situations where its usefulness is abused and subverted.
Just to deal with the "theoretical" statement, I find it extremely difficult to believe that people would no lnger buy music if they had no other alternative (e.g. stealing). When I was a teenager we almost always managed to the find money for that which we valued.
Today, however, teens can steal music without the hassle of getting caught by a security guard. As such, they choose to do so, and spend their money on more clothes and better cell phones (BBC article).
I'm not required to deal with the RIAA or the artists they "represent".
That's actually the best response anyone can make. As long as corporations perceive that people are stealing from them, they're going to defend their property with everything they have.
Let people turn away to legal alternatives and new models, however, and they have no alternatives. Then they either change or die.
As the old saw goes, your freedom ends the second your fist touches my nose. Fair use is one thing, stealing from the people who create and make the things you would enjoy is something else entirely...
... as he imposed a horrible operating system on the world.
Actually, he did no such thing. He provided a system and applications which work (most of the time), allowed businesses and people to share files and mail and other documents, and allowed them to transfer learned computer skills from one job to the next, all on relatively inexpensive hardware.
If the market hadn't wanted those standards and desired those attributes and selected for those price points, he would not have been able to "impose" them on it.
You don't think the Internet has a few major links that connect everything, do you? It's a distributed network. There's a whole bunch of routes to anywhere...
No, there's not. Or I guess we'd have to define "a whole bunch". To quote...
"The actual impact of a network disruption would depend on a variety of factors, such as the cities affected by the disruption. Grubesic said the most severe impacts would occur if telecommunications equipment were destroyed in the six largest Internet hubs: Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta, Dallas, Chicago, and Washington, DC.
For example, Los Angeles is a major hub location connecting other large cities in the South and West. If Los Angeles were eliminated as a node on the Internet, many other cities in California may not have Internet access. But it would also hurt Internet accessibility in Las Vegas, Phoenix, Tucson, Denver, Dallas and Houston, the study suggests."
Yes, there are a lot a peering arangements between providers and so on, but there's only so much fibre running out directly from one major city to the next. Traffic routes from your house to an ISP to major carriers to congregate at a hub, travels out along the same backbone to the next hub, and fans back out again in reverse.
It's how, to give a recent example, Pakistan went dark due to a single damaged undersea cable.
...then you can use your URL to log in to any OpenID consumer site.
Which is the problem. It doesn't need to be your URL.
My current comments stand, with a couple of exceptions. First, it appears that you have to "authorize" a site. Second, you have to be logged in.
Given those two conditions, it appears I could easily impersonate someone on a site they frequent if they have a session running AND if I know (from their sig, perhaps) their URL/domain.
Actually, as near as I can tell it doesn't "prove" anything. Anyone who learns or knows the URL can pretend to be me on this or any other site. Especially if you're dumb enough to use the subdomain format shown. (e.g. brad.livejournal.com)
Without a private portion (password) it fails at authentication of identity, and devolves to just being "easy"...
Slashdot Mirror
Or you can wait until November when it's available in print. The trick is that the download is an "Advance Readers Copy", which they say is unproofed and may change before final publication.
Translation: Buy this one because you can't wait, and then buy the "release" downloadable version in August, and then buy the hardback in November.
At least on the site they admit up front they're taking advantage of you. But either "pre-release" or "strict release", the idea is to drum up interest and business.
Sorry, not true. A good external firewall can examine packets moving into and out of your network and help prevent DoS attacks like SYN and ACK floods, IP spoofs, and so on. And extapolating your needs from your own personal machine to a major network is a bit... misleading.
Just think about that for a second. The company with over 95% of the OS market, over 95% of the wp/sh/pr "office" market, 60% of the corporate server market, and 80-90% of the browser market does NOT have smart people working in management?
Right.
Success with an "innovation" usually comes from the second or third company down the line that's able to market it to the public at large.
Xerox Park may have innovated with the windows, mouse, and the gui, and Apple may have planted the seed, but MS is the one who brought the concept to the masses. Which one "deserves" the credit?
They will have to be a "little" creative, after all, to support things like embedding an excel table into a word document.
Harris Poll
Second, it's common vernacular to say I was "robbed" when your house was broken into, even though, technically, you were probably burgularized. The generic term covers the concept, even though a more specific word exists.
So, as someone whose work is often "stolen", I have little sympathy for rationalizations, and I refuse to play the flip side of the propaganda game. As said, many on the "other" side would greatly prefer that people use words or euphemisms that hide or trivialize the offense.
I totally agree. I'm positive the designers of Windows 3.1 and NT should have had the foresight to create in-depth security features and firewalls, just in case some teenager tried to crack their system with a stack-overflow virus off that DARPA internet thing...
I think YOU need to think about what you just said.
Win32 firewalls? You mean the win32 firewall on the notebook you just booted up? The win32 firewall running on the stolen notebook? The one its owner would have deliberately UNBLOCKED so the anti-theft protection worked? The one that just let the program phone home while you were messing around trying to block it from doing so? THAT win32 firewall?
I did miss that. Thank you.
Remember long ago when they appeared here first, and the other rags copied the /. stories the next day?
The technique doesn't even work for ostriches...
I appreciate the detailed explanation, but I had to chuckle at the last line. I've seen plenty of "detailed spec's" that had rather large, freight-train-sized holes in them...
Of course, the "phone home" message could be a garden variety http/s request. So unless you setup your firewall to deliberately block your own web access....
It's rather trivial, actually.
But now I'll have to take exception with the other "fact" you tried to slip in there, that they're "the ones responsible for the majority of piracy".
Because unless you have some hard evidence to backup your assertions, I tend to believe that the "majority" of the problem lies with the "tens (hundreds) of thousands" of teens who individually download and trade dozens of this week's most popular songs.
But I will grant you that the "collector" who wastes gigabytes downloading music he'll never even hear probably (all you can download subscription service?) wouldn't pay anyway.
But since that individual isn't the real problem, he isn't relevant to the discussion. Makes a nice straw man though...
So the "average" HS/college teenager has 50,000 mp3s?
Right.
So either you're exaggerating just a bit... or the problem is worse that anyone ever realized. ;)
You mean, other than the fact that this entire article was about the SC's Grokster decision, and its implications regarding P2P in general and BT in particular? That distraction?
The value of a CD isn't in the bit of plastic, but in the music it contained and in the freedom it granted for you to listen to it whenever you wanted.
And yes, there's a more specific legal term for the act. There's also a perfectly good generic term for it as well. And people who do steal would prefer to hide the fact under a mask of doublespeak and a cloak of rationalization.
But I can see why others would prefer "infringement", as it sounds SO much better than stealing. Infringe? Why that's barely stepping a tippy-toe over the line... hardly worth even mentioning.
Reduce popularity and/or density, however, and its efficency begins to reduce dramatically in proportion. Or just how many servers in a given network are online AND happen to still have a fragement of an infrequently accessed file?
So once again, the judgement still needs to be balanced on the scenarios were BT is useful and beneficial, as opposed to the number of situations where its usefulness is abused and subverted.
Nice chatting with you.
Today, however, teens can steal music without the hassle of getting caught by a security guard. As such, they choose to do so, and spend their money on more clothes and better cell phones (BBC article).
That's actually the best response anyone can make. As long as corporations perceive that people are stealing from them, they're going to defend their property with everything they have.
Let people turn away to legal alternatives and new models, however, and they have no alternatives. Then they either change or die.
Otherwise, the arms race will continue...
As the old saw goes, your freedom ends the second your fist touches my nose. Fair use is one thing, stealing from the people who create and make the things you would enjoy is something else entirely...
Actually, he did no such thing. He provided a system and applications which work (most of the time), allowed businesses and people to share files and mail and other documents, and allowed them to transfer learned computer skills from one job to the next, all on relatively inexpensive hardware.
If the market hadn't wanted those standards and desired those attributes and selected for those price points, he would not have been able to "impose" them on it.
No, there's not. Or I guess we'd have to define "a whole bunch". To quote...
"The actual impact of a network disruption would depend on a variety of factors, such as the cities affected by the disruption. Grubesic said the most severe impacts would occur if telecommunications equipment were destroyed in the six largest Internet hubs: Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta, Dallas, Chicago, and Washington, DC.
For example, Los Angeles is a major hub location connecting other large cities in the South and West. If Los Angeles were eliminated as a node on the Internet, many other cities in California may not have Internet access. But it would also hurt Internet accessibility in Las Vegas, Phoenix, Tucson, Denver, Dallas and Houston, the study suggests."
Yes, there are a lot a peering arangements between providers and so on, but there's only so much fibre running out directly from one major city to the next. Traffic routes from your house to an ISP to major carriers to congregate at a hub, travels out along the same backbone to the next hub, and fans back out again in reverse.
It's how, to give a recent example, Pakistan went dark due to a single damaged undersea cable.
Which is the problem. It doesn't need to be your URL.
My current comments stand, with a couple of exceptions. First, it appears that you have to "authorize" a site. Second, you have to be logged in.
Given those two conditions, it appears I could easily impersonate someone on a site they frequent if they have a session running AND if I know (from their sig, perhaps) their URL/domain.
Actually, as near as I can tell it doesn't "prove" anything. Anyone who learns or knows the URL can pretend to be me on this or any other site. Especially if you're dumb enough to use the subdomain format shown. (e.g. brad.livejournal.com)
Without a private portion (password) it fails at authentication of identity, and devolves to just being "easy"...