Ever wonder why crackers only get consumer data and not highly embarrassing confidential data strategic to companies. Like to see the what the top brass really gets payed including entertainment, where does that corporate jet really go, and what is the companies 5 year plan.
Notice how its only your data - your credit card information - that is cracked but not the CEO's bank account information or their personal information.
Guess companies can figure it out when it really matters.
Not against gun ownership but many arguments logically are weak:
Underground black market exist/criminal get guns either way/Law abiding citizens are hurt - If we apply the same argument to say nuclear weapon technology than why is the "West" picking on Iran or North Korea? We should just give up since there is an underground market. Laws restricting nuclear technology transfer hurt law abiding nation such as Sweden.
Hand guns are necessary to defend us from our government - This has not worked well elsewhere. Tanks, helicopter gun ships, missiles, trained disciplined fighting force, etc. will crush any resistance any day. You owning a gun does not make you the last line defending our freedom. More likely it makes you a target of an Apache attack helicopter.
More guns the safer the citizen - Pick your favorite African civil war. Guns are everywhere and available even to children. Nobody is really safer. What happens is powerful groups arise and individuals join those groups. Those in the groups get protection from the group. Those outside the group get slaughtered. Individual gun ownership matters little. It is the group that counts.
Why is it easier to buy a gun than alcohol? Surely, if one can not handle a beer one should not own a gun. Our laws do not add up. There is a stack of laws restricting alcohol from its production to is sale. Is this a simple case of over restricting alcohol or under restricting guns? I do not know but there is an inconsistency.
The lack of competition is the main driving force for the high prices, low bandwidth, and poor services. This is the fault lies in Washington. Broadband is actually getting more expensive in the US compared with price drops in other countries. Here is a good article on the subject...
The Economisthttp://www.economist.com/world/international/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=10534573 Quote
A lack of competition-boosting oversight is one reason for the poor record of the United States (and indeed for New Zealand, another unexpected laggard). Most Americans have a choice of only two broadband providers, either a telecoms or a cable operator. This virtual duopoly suits both sorts of provider, and neither has raced to offer its customers faster access. In some American states, prices have risen; in most other countries they have dropped.
In theory, America's 1996 Telecoms Act obliged operators to rent out their lines to rivals; in practice, a regulatory decision and then a court ruling (in 2003 and 2004 respectively) have made it easy for operators to keep competitors out. The supposed aim of these decisions was to force new firms to build their own infrastructure, instead of piggybacking on facilities set up by older outfits. But new entrants have found it hard to join the fray.
In any event, those American rulings may have been based on a faulty idea of how competition works in this area. As Taylor Reynolds, an OECD analyst, puts it, innovation usually comes in steps: newcomers first rent space on an existing network, to build up customers and income. Then they create new and better infrastructure, as and when they need it.
The Economist http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10534573 has a good story on how competition creates better infrastructure and cheaper rates. Subsides will not help.
"What accounts for the differences among rich countries? Two or three years ago demography was often cited: small, densely populated countries were easier to wire up than big, sparsely inhabited ones. But the leaders in broadband usage include Canada, where a tiny population is spread over a vast area. The best explanation, in fact, is that broadband thrives on a mix of competition and active regulation, to ensure an open contest." Lets follow Adam Smith's theory (i.e. real free markets) and have ISP compete. The government only needs to ensure fair competition.
Setting humor aside, there is lots of FUD being thrown around between the licenses. If one reads both license they are far more similar than different. GPLv3 just adds some clarifications, patent safeguards, and DRM safeguards. Over the years companies and individuals became quite creative in attempting to making open source code, close sourced. This is due mainly through creative reading and rationalizations that most like will not hold in court. Making the license clearer is a benefit since it reduces the attempt to read into it eliminating conflicts and misunderstandings. Just the other day I heard of a company that differentiated between static linking and dynamic linking. They argued that by dynamic linking the work is no longer derived. Hence, one can take open source code, compile it into a dynamic library, and then disregard the GPL. I am curious as to the real reason for the shunning? Is it FUD, do the developers have a real grievance, or are developers simply procrastinating.
I hear this argument all the time and it completely invalid. One must give out the source code to 3rd parties unless one provides the source code bundled with the binaries. If one, does not distribute the source code with the binaries one then needs to provide the source code to anyone who requests it. Following the logic, the GPL allows everyone to have the source code no matter how they obtained the binaries - it was either included with the binaries or provided by request. (On a side note has anyone ever requested the source code to Tornado from vxWorks? They appeared to miss this point in the past.)
Here is the exact text in GPL v2...
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
_
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is
allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
received the program in object code or executable form with such
an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
This is not a "single" bug but rather a train wreck. A botched Siebel CRM upgrade cost AT&T thousands of new customers and an estimated $100 million in lost revenue. This eventually led to the sale of AT&T Cellular to Cingular at a less than optimal price. The article is great in explaining how management and big "personalities" lead to these kinds of disasters.
A full story of the bug: http://www.cio.com/archive/041504/wireless.html
Happens all the time with real property
on
Reining in Google
·
· Score: 1
"It would completely devalue everyone else's property and massively increase the value of its own."
This happens every day with real property (i.e. the stuff you live on.) Just the other day Phoenix rezoned a piece of property which had a building height limitation to allow for the building of a skyscrapper. The property is adjacent to a large number of one story individual homes. The property value of the homes will surely be devalued while the property on which the skyscrapper will be built will massively increase in value. Basically, the developer (Trump) effectively sucked the value out of the neighborhood surrounding the new skyscrapper and put into his pocket. The City of Phoenix declared this was okay since it brought "progress"(i.e. increase tax revenue).
Even if one takes the authors comments on Google as true there is nothing new here. The only difference is they get to whine about it in the Post. Most other real property owners would not even get the time of day to whine about having their properties devalued.
To protect yourself it is best to disable the Win CD-ROM autorun feature. To enable or disable automatically running CD-ROMs, you must edit the registry:
1. Click Start, click Run, type regedit in the Open box, and then press ENTER.
2. Locate and click the following registry key:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\CDRom
3. To disable automatically running CD-ROMs, change the Autorun value to 0 (zero).
To enable automatically running CD-ROMs, change the Autorun value to 1.
I guess you just don't live in one of those states or districts. Tom Sawyer contains racial overtures and some questionable language. It's been band or removed from the read list in some areas of the country. Of course, Huck Finn is a much more popular target. Hopefully, when you read it, it will not corrupt your life and lead you down the slipper slope of immoral behavior.:-)
By the way do you live on the US West Coast or a Northern state that borders the ocean?
My guess is the publishers are afraid of lossing sales for books that are in the public domain. There are many classics works were the copyrights expired a long time ago. Think of all the books sold to schools that can now be downloaded from Google. The "Adventures of Tom Sawyer" by Mark Twain comes to mind if it not already black listed in your state.
Quote: In addition, a 1 per cent sales tax would be placed on Internet services and new computers -- two industries that many argue have profited enormously from rampant file-sharing, but haven't had to compensate artists.
This is where the money is. You take it from law abiding citizens to pay record companies for the potential loses due to illegally pirated music.
Am I the only one alarmed at giving the government the power to punish the law abiding to subsides those that steal? Even worse, the government now is directly responsible for subsidizing another industry. Who's next, the movie industry, the art industry, the book industry, the software industry? This is a terrible idea. Lets face it everyone is going to want a piece of the action. In a few year Bill Gates, the richest man, in the world will be getting government checks based on the potential someone pirated his software.
Exactly, "If markets were truely efficient this wouldn't make a difference" - why not expense the option. It would make the math easier. Logically, when the market takes options into account by being truely effiecent then actually taking them on paper should not change anything. The only reason to hide the expense of stock option is if markets are really not efficient.
I recently built myself a new Linux based system. The hardest part was finding the right video card. I wanted a card like that support mpeg2 (encoding and decoding) and perhaps a TV tuner. No card was available with Linux support. I could care less about 3d since I never play games. I finally compromised for a low cost nVidia card for the mpeg2 and what a pain its been given their so/so prioritary drivers:
- In Mandrake 10 after install the card and their drivers caused KDE application to crash. I traced it down to a problem with GLX. The semi-secret option "NvAGP" in the XF86 config fixed the problem.
Option "NvAgp" "0"... disables AGP support
Option "NvAgp" "1"... use NVAGP, if possible
Option "NvAgp" "2"... use AGPGART, if possible
Option "NvAGP" "3"... try AGPGART;
8 hrs wasted!
- Next,mplayer did not recognize the mpeg2 hardware. The very reason I picked the card. I recompiled mplayer with all the correct flags and finally got the hardware recognized. Another 6 hrs wasted.
I been using Linux since the 0.9 Kernel and can not remember having as much difficulty. Yes, I am a developer so I have always had an advantage using Linux. Since I also develop on Windows I realize how helpless one is when problems occur with prioritary software. You'd be luck if the tech support person actually owns a computer or speak your language. Granted nVidia may install properly on your system but if you have problem your our of luck. Now wait a few years an lets see if nVidia is going to keep on supporting you.
It time someone else got into the market, drop the 3d heat generators chips from their cards and sold a quality product for the non gamers. My bet is their are more non gamer in the PC world by a few orders of magnitude than gamers. I am all for an open source video card with good documentation!
I would say that I'm cheap (or perhaps I just hate wasting money) and I don't believe in pirating software. Most people that I know who are loyally committed to Windows pirate a great deal of their software. It bothers me that someone would dismiss Linux and praise Windows but will not pay for Windows or Windows apps.
Also, if a "free" application is just as good as a "non free" application its logical to pick the free version. Even when the "free' version is not as good it still makes sense to pick it if it meets your needs. Let face it, I eat more ground beef than filet mignon even though the filet mignon is better. It is simple economic logic.
I bet if someone could end all pirating of software it would not be long before the majority of people where using Linux.
Brown's best case is that nothing is invented or innovated in a vacuum. This is true of open source or prioritary software. Linus did not start from nothing and create Linux. From school, reading, and discussion with others he learned how to write an operating system. Linus did not need to fumble around repeating others mistakes. Instead, he borrowed on the good ideas of others than came before him. This is the way all progress is made. We take the good ideas and proven techniques and build on them.
This is far different from saying that Linus stole the code for Linux. He is the rightfull creator of Linux and should be given credit.
Microsoft itself is famous for hiring away skilled programmers from other companies to write code. Wasn't it some DEC VMS programmers who were hired away to write the original Windows NT? Talk about a direct and legal way to steal other companies intellectual property. Hire the guys that wrote it so they can reuse there skills and _ideas_ for you.
Either way, Brown has only proved that ideas come from pre-existing ideas. Nothing more.
Slashdot Mirror
Ever wonder why crackers only get consumer data and not highly embarrassing confidential data strategic to companies. Like to see the what the top brass really gets payed including entertainment, where does that corporate jet really go, and what is the companies 5 year plan. Notice how its only your data - your credit card information - that is cracked but not the CEO's bank account information or their personal information. Guess companies can figure it out when it really matters.
Wow, with this ruling we can setup the original Napster again.
Not against gun ownership but many arguments logically are weak:
Underground black market exist/criminal get guns either way/Law abiding citizens are hurt - If we apply the same argument to say nuclear weapon technology than why is the "West" picking on Iran or North Korea? We should just give up since there is an underground market. Laws restricting nuclear technology transfer hurt law abiding nation such as Sweden.
Hand guns are necessary to defend us from our government - This has not worked well elsewhere. Tanks, helicopter gun ships, missiles, trained disciplined fighting force, etc. will crush any resistance any day. You owning a gun does not make you the last line defending our freedom. More likely it makes you a target of an Apache attack helicopter.
More guns the safer the citizen - Pick your favorite African civil war. Guns are everywhere and available even to children. Nobody is really safer. What happens is powerful groups arise and individuals join those groups. Those in the groups get protection from the group. Those outside the group get slaughtered. Individual gun ownership matters little. It is the group that counts.
Why is it easier to buy a gun than alcohol? Surely, if one can not handle a beer one should not own a gun. Our laws do not add up. There is a stack of laws restricting alcohol from its production to is sale. Is this a simple case of over restricting alcohol or under restricting guns? I do not know but there is an inconsistency.
So one must assume that Lance is out of shape based on Japanese standards. Perhaps, he should work out more.
The Economist http://www.economist.com/world/international/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=10534573
Quote
Setting humor aside, there is lots of FUD being thrown around between the licenses. If one reads both license they are far more similar than different. GPLv3 just adds some clarifications, patent safeguards, and DRM safeguards. Over the years companies and individuals became quite creative in attempting to making open source code, close sourced. This is due mainly through creative reading and rationalizations that most like will not hold in court. Making the license clearer is a benefit since it reduces the attempt to read into it eliminating conflicts and misunderstandings. Just the other day I heard of a company that differentiated between static linking and dynamic linking. They argued that by dynamic linking the work is no longer derived. Hence, one can take open source code, compile it into a dynamic library, and then disregard the GPL. I am curious as to the real reason for the shunning? Is it FUD, do the developers have a real grievance, or are developers simply procrastinating.
I hear this argument all the time and it completely invalid. One must give out the source code to 3rd parties unless one provides the source code bundled with the binaries. If one, does not distribute the source code with the binaries one then needs to provide the source code to anyone who requests it. Following the logic, the GPL allows everyone to have the source code no matter how they obtained the binaries - it was either included with the binaries or provided by request. (On a side note has anyone ever requested the source code to Tornado from vxWorks? They appeared to miss this point in the past.) Here is the exact text in GPL v2... 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following: a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or, _ b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or, c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
This is not a "single" bug but rather a train wreck. A botched Siebel CRM upgrade cost AT&T thousands of new customers and an estimated $100 million in lost revenue. This eventually led to the sale of AT&T Cellular to Cingular at a less than optimal price. The article is great in explaining how management and big "personalities" lead to these kinds of disasters.
A full story of the bug:
http://www.cio.com/archive/041504/wireless.html
"It would completely devalue everyone else's property and massively increase the value of its own."
This happens every day with real property (i.e. the stuff you live on.) Just the other day Phoenix rezoned a piece of property which had a building height limitation to allow for the building of a skyscrapper. The property is adjacent to a large number of one story individual homes. The property value of the homes will surely be devalued while the property on which the skyscrapper will be built will massively increase in value. Basically, the developer (Trump) effectively sucked the value out of the neighborhood surrounding the new skyscrapper and put into his pocket. The City of Phoenix declared this was okay since it brought "progress"(i.e. increase tax revenue). Even if one takes the authors comments on Google as true there is nothing new here. The only difference is they get to whine about it in the Post. Most other real property owners would not even get the time of day to whine about having their properties devalued.
1. Click Start, click Run, type regedit in the Open box, and then press ENTER.
2. Locate and click the following registry key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\CDRom
3. To disable automatically running CD-ROMs, change the Autorun value to 0 (zero). To enable automatically running CD-ROMs, change the Autorun value to 1.
4. Restart your computer.
I guess you just don't live in one of those states or districts. Tom Sawyer contains racial overtures and some questionable language. It's been band or removed from the read list in some areas of the country. Of course, Huck Finn is a much more popular target. Hopefully, when you read it, it will not corrupt your life and lead you down the slipper slope of immoral behavior. :-)
By the way do you live on the US West Coast or a Northern state that borders the ocean?
My guess is the publishers are afraid of lossing sales for books that are in the public domain. There are many classics works were the copyrights expired a long time ago. Think of all the books sold to schools that can now be downloaded from Google. The "Adventures of Tom Sawyer" by Mark Twain comes to mind if it not already black listed in your state.
Quote: In addition, a 1 per cent sales tax would be placed on Internet services and new computers -- two industries that many argue have profited enormously from rampant file-sharing, but haven't had to compensate artists. This is where the money is. You take it from law abiding citizens to pay record companies for the potential loses due to illegally pirated music.
Am I the only one alarmed at giving the government the power to punish the law abiding to subsides those that steal? Even worse, the government now is directly responsible for subsidizing another industry. Who's next, the movie industry, the art industry, the book industry, the software industry? This is a terrible idea. Lets face it everyone is going to want a piece of the action. In a few year Bill Gates, the richest man, in the world will be getting government checks based on the potential someone pirated his software.
Exactly, "If markets were truely efficient this wouldn't make a difference" - why not expense the option. It would make the math easier. Logically, when the market takes options into account by being truely effiecent then actually taking them on paper should not change anything. The only reason to hide the expense of stock option is if markets are really not efficient.
In one word: SEX!
I recently built myself a new Linux based system. The hardest part was finding the right video card. I wanted a card like that support mpeg2 (encoding and decoding) and perhaps a TV tuner. No card was available with Linux support. I could care less about 3d since I never play games. I finally compromised for a low cost nVidia card for the mpeg2 and what a pain its been given their so/so prioritary drivers: - In Mandrake 10 after install the card and their drivers caused KDE application to crash. I traced it down to a problem with GLX. The semi-secret option "NvAGP" in the XF86 config fixed the problem. Option "NvAgp" "0" ... disables AGP support
Option "NvAgp" "1" ... use NVAGP, if possible
Option "NvAgp" "2" ... use AGPGART, if possible
Option "NvAGP" "3" ... try AGPGART;
8 hrs wasted!
- Next,mplayer did not recognize the mpeg2 hardware. The very reason I picked the card. I recompiled mplayer with all the correct flags and finally got the hardware recognized. Another 6 hrs wasted.
I been using Linux since the 0.9 Kernel and can not remember having as much difficulty. Yes, I am a developer so I have always had an advantage using Linux. Since I also develop on Windows I realize how helpless one is when problems occur with prioritary software. You'd be luck if the tech support person actually owns a computer or speak your language. Granted nVidia may install properly on your system but if you have problem your our of luck. Now wait a few years an lets see if nVidia is going to keep on supporting you.
It time someone else got into the market, drop the 3d heat generators chips from their cards and sold a quality product for the non gamers. My bet is their are more non gamer in the PC world by a few orders of magnitude than gamers. I am all for an open source video card with good documentation!
I would say that I'm cheap (or perhaps I just hate wasting money) and I don't believe in pirating software. Most people that I know who are loyally committed to Windows pirate a great deal of their software. It bothers me that someone would dismiss Linux and praise Windows but will not pay for Windows or Windows apps. Also, if a "free" application is just as good as a "non free" application its logical to pick the free version. Even when the "free' version is not as good it still makes sense to pick it if it meets your needs. Let face it, I eat more ground beef than filet mignon even though the filet mignon is better. It is simple economic logic. I bet if someone could end all pirating of software it would not be long before the majority of people where using Linux.
Brown's best case is that nothing is invented or innovated in a vacuum. This is true of open source or prioritary software. Linus did not start from nothing and create Linux. From school, reading, and discussion with others he learned how to write an operating system. Linus did not need to fumble around repeating others mistakes. Instead, he borrowed on the good ideas of others than came before him. This is the way all progress is made. We take the good ideas and proven techniques and build on them. This is far different from saying that Linus stole the code for Linux. He is the rightfull creator of Linux and should be given credit. Microsoft itself is famous for hiring away skilled programmers from other companies to write code. Wasn't it some DEC VMS programmers who were hired away to write the original Windows NT? Talk about a direct and legal way to steal other companies intellectual property. Hire the guys that wrote it so they can reuse there skills and _ideas_ for you. Either way, Brown has only proved that ideas come from pre-existing ideas. Nothing more.