If it was that easy, why is the current iTunes encryption unbroken? The only working 'decryption' that I know about is a different type of memory sniffing - qtfairuse6 watches the iTunes memory space for AAC header and data(after decryption) and just copies it during playback, 'using' iTunes/quicktime to do the actual decryption.
In the distant pass there was a program called (j)Hymn that could look up the system keys wherever iTunes stored them and just run through your library decrypting the files and saving decrypted versions, no running iTunes processes required.
For some reason, it sounds as if the current software players are being entirely too obvious about their use, not trying to obscure it at all.
I'm not sure why they would give you a new CD key without proof of purchase.
You might be referring to over-the-phone activation (You know, when you install, or swap hard drives and copy your data, and windows says your computer needs to be re-activated.. and after trying it tells you that your computer could not be activated, please call microsoft?)... Well, those aren't CD Keys. Those are activation codes and are still tied to the original CD key you used the last time you did a full reinstall of windows on that 'computer'. All they're doing is telling the computer that it's ok to let you use your CD key again.
Or, you know, it could just be made to use BLACK AND WHITE, because that pair is the highest contrast you can achieve, and everyone who can read text.. can read it(By "Can read text", I mean in the present tense, if they know how to read but their eyes have been removed, they can no longer read.;) )
Perhaps it should be said that Dawkins begs the question... I think his book is a x00 page answer to said question. (Granted, I haven't read that book, but I know Dawkins' reputation.;P)
"It's AEP (accepted editorial practice, but you knew that already, right?) to put the meaning of an abbreviation in parentheses next to its first use in a journalism piece, so you're sure the reader understands what you're talking about - unless you're writing an abbreviation knowledge test."
Personally, for web use, I prefer the <acronym> <acronym title="Hypertext Markup Language">HTML</acronym> tag.
While the parentheses method is very useful, the acronym tag allows you to put the definition there an a machine-and-human readable format without cluttering the layout for people who already know what it means.
Net neutrality and the fairness doctrine are rather different in practice, while in theory they may share similar ideals.
Net neutrality: Let your customer(The customer, not your business partner) decide what they want to do with the bandwidth they're buying from you. Do not interfere with their bandwidth based on destination or source(if it is inbound) except where the traffic is disruptive or damaging. That is all I ask from net neutrality. Allow me to access any IP I want without restricting my bandwidth any more than you do for all other IPs. Let any IP that wants to access my IP with the same allowances. Do not block ports, do not apply traffic shaping to slow specific data below my normal limits.
Just one more reason to encourage your kids to take up a second language. It is tons easier to do when your brain is still in 'acquire language' mode.
Yes, that means you and your partner might need to pick up one yourself and speak it around your toddler. I've also seen studies suggesting that once you've learned two languages(There might be some dependencies here, the languages might need to have significantly different syntax and grammar for this to be true), picking up more later in life is easier. These were more recent studies, so I have no idea if they've been debunked or reinforced or just ignored...
"My understanding is that it is not simply a question of Processor, but also the underlying chipset or at least MOBO architecture since the requirement for an AM2 socket and DDR2 memory can turn an otherwise 'svm' enabled AMD Athlon 64 x2 into a 'paravirtualised only' 'pae' chip."
Actually, the Socket 939 Athlon64 X2 processors do not have SVM enabled. The Socket AM2 ones have it enabled. DDR vs DDR2 ram is purely the difference between the 939 and AM2 CPUs... the 939 CPUs only had pinouts for DDR memory, the AM2 CPUs only have pinouts for DDR2 memory.
It sucks for upgrading, yes, but it isn't any kind of weird requirements.. AMD just didn't fully enable VT on the older CPU cores(Maybe they weren't fully debugged, and they only found out about some big bugs after tape-out?). But the bios will not enable VT on any socket 939 CPUs, regardless of CPUFLAGs.
And just cause I wanted to check, here's the cpuinfo from my current socket 939 Opteron:
processor : 0 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 15 model : 39 model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 144 stepping : 1 cpu MHz : 2402.551 cache size : 1024 KB fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 1 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt lm 3dnowext 3dnow pni lahf_lm bogomips : 4824.69
See, no svm.;) (Granted, this isn't dual core, but I'm still pretty sure svm shouldn't show up on any socket 939 system. I know AMD never advertised it as enabled on any socket 939 processor, only on the updated AM2 processors.)
Actually, (And in contrast to the majority of LKML spats that get posted here), Linus' post is actually rather accurate, and I agree with his reasoning. I don't want the RIAA being able to prevent all fair use just because some people make 'un-fair use'. I don't want to prevent other people from doing the same things with my works or I am being hypocritical. (Just to use one example, I realize kernel binary modules have nothing to do with fair use, and everything to do with derived works.)
The advantage to custom designed LiPoly batteries is that you can pack them into tons of nooks and crannies. The thing that still amazes me about your average laptop is that inside that fancy plastic battery pack is a row of cylindrical batteries with air around them. Lipoly fills in all that air with one solid mass of battery, so while the literal energy storing material may be less volume efficient, you can make more efficient use of volume in your designs as opposed to standard LiIon.
This is 'climate change simulation/prediction'. CLIMATE change. Not weather change. The climate is the long-term weather trends for a geographical area. Weather is what temperature humidity/etc it is at a given time/day. The computer models are getting pretty good at predicting the climate, but they still suck at the weather.
"If the model were making valid predictions (the same model, that is), you could parade an endless list: our model predicted this climate change in this region, and this increase this this kind of weather activity. No, not the past. I mean, predict it *now* and see if it bears out in the future. But obviously, you aren't getting that, or it would be used ad infinitum to shut up global warming skeptics." The thing is, this is starting to happen. None of the models can tell you with a high degree of certainty what the temperature in a given city will be on a given day, or the average on a given week, but on larger time and geographical scales, the models are starting to make valid predictions, and the very first few have been validated (well, you do have to wait a while to find out if the predicted global average temperature for 2006 matches reality, you know what I mean?) So, while they're still working on the details, the simplified global simulations seem to be very close to reality. And even though you're dismissing models that accurately predict past events.. they are very good tests for the simulations. Currently my home computer is running the BBC climate change experiment. It starts with historical data from 1920, and runs the simulation forward to 2050. If it predicts accurately from 1920 to now, there's a decent chance it will predict the next few years accurately. The reason it's being done as a distributed computing project is to allow many different models that match the historical data to be tested, and vetted against reality as we get more and more data. As models fail new data, they get tossed out or changed, until we have a mathematical model that mirrors reality and makes valid predictions. Once we have a mathematical model that works, we'll try and figure out WHY it works.
There are other people working the other way - trying to figure out what drives climate change, and turn it into mathematical formulas (and they definitely were integral in designing the climate models being tested in the first place).
Most useful scientific models do NOT match reality 100%. The math would be too in-depth to be worthwhile if you wanted 100% accurate results. But you don't need 100% accuracy for ANYTHING. 99.9999999999% is still good enough for nuclear physics, and is many orders of magnitude quicker to get than 100% in most cases, if 100% is even POSSIBLE in the situation.
"Unless there's story being doled out in bite-sized pieces (like what City of X does, and like the original Asheron's Call did), or a steadily changing menagerie of things to hit and loot to show off, you're going to lose all but the worst fanboys and the most abjectly obsessive-compulsive players."
Interesting way to put it. I've played a few MMO's(all during the beta stages, very few of them kept the fun when they started 'fixing' things for release - like how long it took to level, and the cost of items and balance/time sink stuff like that)
I definitely prefer the latter - having a story that is uncovered bit by bit as time goes on, compared to the pokemon-esque "Gotta catch em all, but about the same time you do, we add more to catch!"
"Given that, prior to the proposal of DRM, there has been no systematic way to ensure that these critical systems are secured" WRONG! there has been one, highly recommended and well known systematic way to ensure that these systems are secured:
Unplug the network cable and lock them in a closet/data center that only authorized people can get into.
If it doesn't NEED to be internet connected, why connect it to the internet?
Why do power generation and health care computers have to be internet connected?
Power generation and other industrial monitor computers especially - There are valid reasons to allow remote monitoring, but do pure monitoring stations have to be as secure as the control stations? Can't they be separate computers sitting next to each other?
Even 'trusted' computing will be hackable, it will just increase the likelihood that you really are talking to who you think you are. For truly critical systems, that ISN'T ENOUGH. I have no problem with hardware support for 'trusted computing', but many of my systems will never be running a 'trusted' software stack(As far as other computers are concerned), because: I cannot trust that software stack, as I am not being given the choice of what to put in it, or perhaps more importantly: What NOT to put in it.
My main computers will all be trusted in the sense that I chose all the software on them, and I control all of it. And I will use trusted computing features to keep them more secure from unwanted software and users.
I will likely have one or maybe two systems running whatever the OS Du Jour is, so that I can make any transactions of convenience that require a 'trusted' hardware/software stack.
If there are any simple, relatively open alternatives, such as a java(Or C# or whatever) VM that runs on whatever OS/arch I choose, and can be 'trusted' by other servers, that might make its way onto my main workstations, but only if I have enough control over what it is and is not allowed to do.
At work, running an IT department, I'm going to love this shit. It'll make it so much easier to implement the silly and arbitrary corporate policies about what kind of software and hardware can be plugged into the computers.
Here's another simple fix: Require the user to push a button to fill in the password. Even if it's a context button that pops up when you click in 'username' or on 'login', so that the user's passwords won't be filled in without them telling it to in each case. That's only a TINY bit more work than merely clicking login, and is MUCH more secure. I think older versions of firefox had that option, but I can't find it in 2.0.:(
I think you are responding to the wrong side of the equation. People here aren't objecting to an atheist in office, they're objecting to BILL GATES in office.;)
And how many of those products actually get properly tested in those scenarios? Granted, in the past 2 or 3 years it has gotten MUCH better, but how many windows users have computers less than 3 years old? A whole lot less than you might think (Still a very large number, but percentage wise it would be lower than you'd think.) And many systems claim to support S3(or whatever) but have such piss poor code for it, that using it is about the same as unplugging your power from the wall without warning, but less environmentally friendly(Since it enters the power save state ok, it just never leaves it.) So what do you do: Trust the ACPI bios that claims to support even more efficient power states, and risk alienating the user by crashing their computer, or only use the less-efficient power states(Which is still slightly risky), despite the fact that the system MIGHT support better power savings just fine?
And if 'cool and quiet' was enabled on my PC, it WOULD crash. Why? Because my system is overclocked, with the voltage boosted, so if AMD's default voltage drop kicked in, my comp would most likely promptly blue screen. I have read about a third-party utility you can install that makes power management calls to do custom voltage and clock speed ramping, similar to cool-n-quiet, but allowing you to test the voltages and make sure they never go too low for your overclocked chip.
Instead of dealing with that, I installed BOINC and I run leiden classical and climatesimulation.net, I figure if I'm going to 'waste' the power, I might as well put it to good use.
It seems like the author is purposefully mis-reading the terms of the EULA. Under the premise that the average user won't be able to read them correctly.
While I agree that that is a problem(And that is, essentially, the reason why noone reads EULAs. They won't know what it actually means if they do!)... Just because my Mother would think.net might apply to the whole OS... legally it doesn't. And you can therefor benchmark the REST of the OS, just not the.net components specifically.(Though I think that clause is total bs anyways.;) )
The virtualization restrictions have been debunked elsewhere - essentially, whether you are using the OS in a virtual machine or not, it is 'legally' 'bound' to that physical machine only - you can't move the VM to a different peice of hardware without taking it off the first piece.
You can still run any copy of windows in a VM.. you just can't buy a license to home, and then run that same license inside a VM inside the first install. You CAN do that with pro/premium/whatever it's called(Which is something I'm glad to hear..)
Actually, there's video record of him saying he 'took the initiative' in securing the funding to 'allow' the internet to be created - in slightly more flowery language. He really does try to make it sound like he's responsible for the internets.
And hell, it may be true that without the money he helped approve, the internet might not be what it is today..
but that still doesn't mean he isn't a pompous git.;)
It isn't even really GOOD for mass storage devices. W/ USB 2.0 it's not BAD anymore, but it certainly isn't good at high-throughput synchronous IO. It's not bad for flash drives, as they tend to be slower anyways.
Actually, while dell does use asian component manufacturers, it does final assembly stateside. The real innovation that dell brought to the table years back is that they have standard components that can be plugged together to meet demand. When you order a dell computer, it usually isn't even assembled yet. Dell enters it into their computerised provisioning system, and it gets entered into the assembly queue. Once all the parts for your computer are in stock at the assembly plant, your computer comes together in about 15-30 minutes from start to finish(Once its your computer's turn anyways). Dell goes to great lengths to avoid keeping stock at that plant as well.
#1: After vista 'detects' that your version is not legit, it gives you 30 days to fix that before actually shutting down.
#2: "Once a virus that makes the cop refuse to authenticate Vista hits the Net, then how can the problem be fixed? By definition and the way I see it, this will be an impossibility."
Well, while a small # of users will already be effected, I see something that prevents vista from being upgraded by paying customers is one of the few things that could convince MS to patch out-of-cycle. Fix the bug in WGA and release it after a couple days of QA.
Minors can't enter into contracts, right? So software EULAs should be unenforceable against them, much less this.
Minors can enter into any contracts they want. They're just unenforceable.;) So, only idiots enter into contracts with Minors (Rather than their parents.)
Slashdot Mirror
If it was that easy, why is the current iTunes encryption unbroken? The only working 'decryption' that I know about is a different type of memory sniffing - qtfairuse6 watches the iTunes memory space for AAC header and data(after decryption) and just copies it during playback, 'using' iTunes/quicktime to do the actual decryption.
In the distant pass there was a program called (j)Hymn that could look up the system keys wherever iTunes stored them and just run through your library decrypting the files and saving decrypted versions, no running iTunes processes required.
For some reason, it sounds as if the current software players are being entirely too obvious about their use, not trying to obscure it at all.
I'm not sure why they would give you a new CD key without proof of purchase.
You might be referring to over-the-phone activation (You know, when you install, or swap hard drives and copy your data, and windows says your computer needs to be re-activated.. and after trying it tells you that your computer could not be activated, please call microsoft?)... Well, those aren't CD Keys. Those are activation codes and are still tied to the original CD key you used the last time you did a full reinstall of windows on that 'computer'. All they're doing is telling the computer that it's ok to let you use your CD key again.
Or, you know, it could just be made to use BLACK AND WHITE, because that pair is the highest contrast you can achieve, and everyone who can read text.. can read it(By "Can read text", I mean in the present tense, if they know how to read but their eyes have been removed, they can no longer read. ;) )
Perhaps it should be said that Dawkins begs the question... I think his book is a x00 page answer to said question. (Granted, I haven't read that book, but I know Dawkins' reputation. ;P)
"It's AEP (accepted editorial practice, but you knew that already, right?) to put the meaning of an abbreviation in parentheses next to its first use in a journalism piece, so you're sure the reader understands what you're talking about - unless you're writing an abbreviation knowledge test."
Personally, for web use, I prefer the <acronym> <acronym title="Hypertext Markup Language">HTML</acronym> tag.
While the parentheses method is very useful, the acronym tag allows you to put the definition there an a machine-and-human readable format without cluttering the layout for people who already know what it means.
Net neutrality and the fairness doctrine are rather different in practice, while in theory they may share similar ideals.
Net neutrality: Let your customer(The customer, not your business partner) decide what they want to do with the bandwidth they're buying from you. Do not interfere with their bandwidth based on destination or source(if it is inbound) except where the traffic is disruptive or damaging. That is all I ask from net neutrality. Allow me to access any IP I want without restricting my bandwidth any more than you do for all other IPs. Let any IP that wants to access my IP with the same allowances. Do not block ports, do not apply traffic shaping to slow specific data below my normal limits.
Just one more reason to encourage your kids to take up a second language. It is tons easier to do when your brain is still in 'acquire language' mode.
Yes, that means you and your partner might need to pick up one yourself and speak it around your toddler. I've also seen studies suggesting that once you've learned two languages(There might be some dependencies here, the languages might need to have significantly different syntax and grammar for this to be true), picking up more later in life is easier. These were more recent studies, so I have no idea if they've been debunked or reinforced or just ignored...
Actually, the Socket 939 Athlon64 X2 processors do not have SVM enabled. The Socket AM2 ones have it enabled. DDR vs DDR2 ram is purely the difference between the 939 and AM2 CPUs... the 939 CPUs only had pinouts for DDR memory, the AM2 CPUs only have pinouts for DDR2 memory.
It sucks for upgrading, yes, but it isn't any kind of weird requirements.. AMD just didn't fully enable VT on the older CPU cores(Maybe they weren't fully debugged, and they only found out about some big bugs after tape-out?). But the bios will not enable VT on any socket 939 CPUs, regardless of CPUFLAGs.
And just cause I wanted to check, here's the cpuinfo from my current socket 939 Opteron: See, no svm.
Actually, (And in contrast to the majority of LKML spats that get posted here), Linus' post is actually rather accurate, and I agree with his reasoning. I don't want the RIAA being able to prevent all fair use just because some people make 'un-fair use'. I don't want to prevent other people from doing the same things with my works or I am being hypocritical. (Just to use one example, I realize kernel binary modules have nothing to do with fair use, and everything to do with derived works.)
The advantage to custom designed LiPoly batteries is that you can pack them into tons of nooks and crannies. The thing that still amazes me about your average laptop is that inside that fancy plastic battery pack is a row of cylindrical batteries with air around them. Lipoly fills in all that air with one solid mass of battery, so while the literal energy storing material may be less volume efficient, you can make more efficient use of volume in your designs as opposed to standard LiIon.
Oh, and a small pet peeve:
This is 'climate change simulation/prediction'. CLIMATE change. Not weather change. The climate is the long-term weather trends for a geographical area. Weather is what temperature humidity/etc it is at a given time/day. The computer models are getting pretty good at predicting the climate, but they still suck at the weather.
"If the model were making valid predictions (the same model, that is), you could parade an endless list: our model predicted this climate change in this region, and this increase this this kind of weather activity. No, not the past. I mean, predict it *now* and see if it bears out in the future. But obviously, you aren't getting that, or it would be used ad infinitum to shut up global warming skeptics."
The thing is, this is starting to happen. None of the models can tell you with a high degree of certainty what the temperature in a given city will be on a given day, or the average on a given week, but on larger time and geographical scales, the models are starting to make valid predictions, and the very first few have been validated (well, you do have to wait a while to find out if the predicted global average temperature for 2006 matches reality, you know what I mean?) So, while they're still working on the details, the simplified global simulations seem to be very close to reality. And even though you're dismissing models that accurately predict past events.. they are very good tests for the simulations. Currently my home computer is running the BBC climate change experiment. It starts with historical data from 1920, and runs the simulation forward to 2050. If it predicts accurately from 1920 to now, there's a decent chance it will predict the next few years accurately. The reason it's being done as a distributed computing project is to allow many different models that match the historical data to be tested, and vetted against reality as we get more and more data. As models fail new data, they get tossed out or changed, until we have a mathematical model that mirrors reality and makes valid predictions. Once we have a mathematical model that works, we'll try and figure out WHY it works.
There are other people working the other way - trying to figure out what drives climate change, and turn it into mathematical formulas (and they definitely were integral in designing the climate models being tested in the first place).
Most useful scientific models do NOT match reality 100%. The math would be too in-depth to be worthwhile if you wanted 100% accurate results. But you don't need 100% accuracy for ANYTHING. 99.9999999999% is still good enough for nuclear physics, and is many orders of magnitude quicker to get than 100% in most cases, if 100% is even POSSIBLE in the situation.
"Unless there's story being doled out in bite-sized pieces (like what City of X does, and like the original Asheron's Call did), or a steadily changing menagerie of things to hit and loot to show off, you're going to lose all but the worst fanboys and the most abjectly obsessive-compulsive players."
Interesting way to put it. I've played a few MMO's(all during the beta stages, very few of them kept the fun when they started 'fixing' things for release - like how long it took to level, and the cost of items and balance/time sink stuff like that)
I definitely prefer the latter - having a story that is uncovered bit by bit as time goes on, compared to the pokemon-esque "Gotta catch em all, but about the same time you do, we add more to catch!"
"Given that, prior to the proposal of DRM, there has been no systematic way to ensure that these critical systems are secured"
WRONG! there has been one, highly recommended and well known systematic way to ensure that these systems are secured:
Unplug the network cable and lock them in a closet/data center that only authorized people can get into.
If it doesn't NEED to be internet connected, why connect it to the internet?
Why do power generation and health care computers have to be internet connected?
Power generation and other industrial monitor computers especially - There are valid reasons to allow remote monitoring, but do pure monitoring stations have to be as secure as the control stations? Can't they be separate computers sitting next to each other?
Even 'trusted' computing will be hackable, it will just increase the likelihood that you really are talking to who you think you are. For truly critical systems, that ISN'T ENOUGH. I have no problem with hardware support for 'trusted computing', but many of my systems will never be running a 'trusted' software stack(As far as other computers are concerned), because: I cannot trust that software stack, as I am not being given the choice of what to put in it, or perhaps more importantly: What NOT to put in it.
My main computers will all be trusted in the sense that I chose all the software on them, and I control all of it. And I will use trusted computing features to keep them more secure from unwanted software and users.
I will likely have one or maybe two systems running whatever the OS Du Jour is, so that I can make any transactions of convenience that require a 'trusted' hardware/software stack.
If there are any simple, relatively open alternatives, such as a java(Or C# or whatever) VM that runs on whatever OS/arch I choose, and can be 'trusted' by other servers, that might make its way onto my main workstations, but only if I have enough control over what it is and is not allowed to do.
At work, running an IT department, I'm going to love this shit. It'll make it so much easier to implement the silly and arbitrary corporate policies about what kind of software and hardware can be plugged into the computers.
Here's another simple fix: Require the user to push a button to fill in the password. Even if it's a context button that pops up when you click in 'username' or on 'login', so that the user's passwords won't be filled in without them telling it to in each case. That's only a TINY bit more work than merely clicking login, and is MUCH more secure. I think older versions of firefox had that option, but I can't find it in 2.0. :(
I think you are responding to the wrong side of the equation. People here aren't objecting to an atheist in office, they're objecting to BILL GATES in office. ;)
"Gee so Microsoft should monkey with mine and all my customers power settings without our permission?"
Not to nitpick, but have you read the XP EULA? I think they have your permission, legally speaking(If EULA's are binding.)
And how many of those products actually get properly tested in those scenarios? Granted, in the past 2 or 3 years it has gotten MUCH better, but how many windows users have computers less than 3 years old? A whole lot less than you might think (Still a very large number, but percentage wise it would be lower than you'd think.) And many systems claim to support S3(or whatever) but have such piss poor code for it, that using it is about the same as unplugging your power from the wall without warning, but less environmentally friendly(Since it enters the power save state ok, it just never leaves it.) So what do you do: Trust the ACPI bios that claims to support even more efficient power states, and risk alienating the user by crashing their computer, or only use the less-efficient power states(Which is still slightly risky), despite the fact that the system MIGHT support better power savings just fine?
And if 'cool and quiet' was enabled on my PC, it WOULD crash. Why? Because my system is overclocked, with the voltage boosted, so if AMD's default voltage drop kicked in, my comp would most likely promptly blue screen. I have read about a third-party utility you can install that makes power management calls to do custom voltage and clock speed ramping, similar to cool-n-quiet, but allowing you to test the voltages and make sure they never go too low for your overclocked chip.
Instead of dealing with that, I installed BOINC and I run leiden classical and climatesimulation.net, I figure if I'm going to 'waste' the power, I might as well put it to good use.
It seems like the author is purposefully mis-reading the terms of the EULA. Under the premise that the average user won't be able to read them correctly.
.net might apply to the whole OS... legally it doesn't. And you can therefor benchmark the REST of the OS, just not the .net components specifically.(Though I think that clause is total bs anyways. ;) )
While I agree that that is a problem(And that is, essentially, the reason why noone reads EULAs. They won't know what it actually means if they do!)... Just because my Mother would think
The virtualization restrictions have been debunked elsewhere - essentially, whether you are using the OS in a virtual machine or not, it is 'legally' 'bound' to that physical machine only - you can't move the VM to a different peice of hardware without taking it off the first piece.
You can still run any copy of windows in a VM.. you just can't buy a license to home, and then run that same license inside a VM inside the first install. You CAN do that with pro/premium/whatever it's called(Which is something I'm glad to hear..)
Actually, there's video record of him saying he 'took the initiative' in securing the funding to 'allow' the internet to be created - in slightly more flowery language. He really does try to make it sound like he's responsible for the internets.
;)
And hell, it may be true that without the money he helped approve, the internet might not be what it is today..
but that still doesn't mean he isn't a pompous git.
It isn't even really GOOD for mass storage devices. W/ USB 2.0 it's not BAD anymore, but it certainly isn't good at high-throughput synchronous IO. It's not bad for flash drives, as they tend to be slower anyways.
"I beleive sexual reproduction is acheived through bumping into each other at star trek conventions."
Sadly, more true than many would realize...
Actually, while dell does use asian component manufacturers, it does final assembly stateside. The real innovation that dell brought to the table years back is that they have standard components that can be plugged together to meet demand. When you order a dell computer, it usually isn't even assembled yet. Dell enters it into their computerised provisioning system, and it gets entered into the assembly queue. Once all the parts for your computer are in stock at the assembly plant, your computer comes together in about 15-30 minutes from start to finish(Once its your computer's turn anyways). Dell goes to great lengths to avoid keeping stock at that plant as well.
Two big problems with his proposed scenario:
#1: After vista 'detects' that your version is not legit, it gives you 30 days to fix that before actually shutting down.
#2: "Once a virus that makes the cop refuse to authenticate Vista hits the Net, then how can the problem be fixed? By definition and the way I see it, this will be an impossibility."
Well, while a small # of users will already be effected, I see something that prevents vista from being upgraded by paying customers is one of the few things that could convince MS to patch out-of-cycle. Fix the bug in WGA and release it after a couple days of QA.
+insightful.
;) So, only idiots enter into contracts with Minors (Rather than their parents.)
Minors can't enter into contracts, right? So software EULAs should be unenforceable against them, much less this.
Minors can enter into any contracts they want. They're just unenforceable.