I would offer full virtual servers running FOSS (GNU/Linux, *BSD). Push the creativity and responsibility to students side. Let _them_ do whatever they want to do, whatever they can possibly come up with. Clouds, services, etc. Limit them via fair policy. In this way, environment is created by them where they can create better social services, search engines, fiddle with applications running on multiple servers at once, etc. For example XEN can be used or some commercial virtualization offer.
If music (and P2P) was a _free_ service from ISPs, P2P users would not be in danger of being _sued_ by music industry. If music industry wanted any money from P2P or ISPs, they would have to come with a reasonable business offer first.
I think many P2P users would gladly legalize P2P usage by paying reasonable fee to music, movie, book and other industries.
Since RIAA and others are not successful in suing individuals, they logically go after ISPs. How will ISPs react? A war between ISPs and its customers will start. P2P users might easily switch to encrypted private networks (for example running on TCP ports like 443 or 993, where other encrypted and in most cases, commercial and completely legal services are offered).
Lets vote with our wallets and support companies who deserve it.
If they do not support standards, force DRM onto users, behave like a monopoly, do not support drivers into FOSS, deny fair use (like hacking) or threaten security researchers... simply do not buy their goods and publish why you made the choice.
I would not be against some sort of public blacklist. Date, what happened, links to articles. People tend to forget and this kind of thing would help all of us remember.
Any widely used software or service used should be available as FOSS, free of patents and built on standards.
Highly specialized software is successful even if proprietary. Porting proprietary software to Linux brings new customers. Good examples might be Oracle Database or Maya. It might be a win-win situation for FOSS, hardware suppliers, customers and service providers. At least until Larry the Consolidator comes with some stupid ideas >:-/
Adobe on GNU/Linux might be benefit for all.
I guess Microsoft will never port MSOffice to GNU/Linux. It would lower users addiction to MSWindows OS and Microsoft dominant position will be under threat.
It seems, that author of the article honestly believes, that those four people on the photograph are helping out to make world more trustworthy. He describes cyberspace as an endless roster, full of security holes which are abused by cyber-thieves and viruses. After terrifing readers he shows bright future and solution which seems to be naturally obvious, politically correct and somehow product of evolution.
I know this music because i lived in a dictatorship. One of the best weapons anyone who wants to have a control over anything is whip&sugar. Scare first and give sugar when object get scared, therefore getting control over its fear.
What he forgets to say is that those holes exist because of software houses incompetence (oops). Author tries to get around problem and while hiding real causes of timeless insecurity problems, he offers something he himself does not understand. Anonymity, security, solved intellectual property problems and one-click-away perfect technology. If he would, he could not have presented this kind of solution.
He writes what he thinks users want to read, without giving them any other options or alternative solutions. He forgets to say, that future of economy might lay in services and company, which gets the control over how services will be offered will surerly have most power.
He mixes a lot of things that have nothing in common. Services offered by companies (for example email) and functions that should be strictly in hands of the user (choice of anonymity). Time, when everyone was able to manage anything well enough is slowly coming to an end. Level of knowhow needed is rapidly growing and only groups of organized individuals or companies are able to maintan it and continue to offer good services. That might be one of the reasons, why businesses are turning toward Linux. Platform is not important any more.
Whenever any authority tried to decide what was good or bad (fair use of intellectual property) it ended as a control over the whole process (and it was not the user, who had it).Added cost of PC or earlier upgrade means nothing in comparision with the fact, that companies would get (?almost?) complete control over anything anyone does with any computer. It seems, that user would be put in front of decision: comply and do what is not forbidden or become an outcast.
"In all cases, it would be the user, not Microsoft, who sets these policies". This might be true, if Palladium was a framework, not a product and would become an open standard, without any patents and free of charge. In other words something users and companies are welcome to use and not forced. "Microsoft is also publishing the systems source code". I run searches on Microsoft web site and Goolge and found no source code or any other information.
What else will Palladium bring than more control to large companies? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9FlvG8KCvYwHJjIURAuz4AJ4w+CwD4+ybbwX3GIyl vs mW+W51IACeJQMe 4LOZUlJ/3/eG5FAUGO9Mv7E= =9QKF - ----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
15 minutes of fame is over?
on
Free Solaris 8
·
· Score: 1
If i take what happened to Linux in last 6 months:
Nearly every company has something to do with it.
I am worried, that suites took Linux as a "shield" to help them fight M$, not as a solution, to cure problems with CloseSource and Un*x fragmentation.
Suits think: If Linux did it, why can not we? They still did not learn their lesson...
I have read the 2nd article. "http://www.geeknews.net/articles/BradWebb/071299. shtml" and my opinion is: Un*x is good when you need something get done. Win32 could be ehmmm, FUN, but live is too short to use such a bloated thing, when there are much better tools to work with.
Slashdot Mirror
I would offer full virtual servers running FOSS (GNU/Linux, *BSD). Push the creativity and responsibility to students side. Let _them_ do whatever they want to do, whatever they can possibly come up with. Clouds, services, etc. Limit them via fair policy. In this way, environment is created by them where they can create better social services, search engines, fiddle with applications running on multiple servers at once, etc. For example XEN can be used or some commercial virtualization offer.
If music (and P2P) was a _free_ service from ISPs, P2P users would not be in danger of being _sued_ by music industry. If music industry wanted any money from P2P or ISPs, they would have to come with a reasonable business offer first.
I think many P2P users would gladly legalize P2P usage by paying reasonable fee to music, movie, book and other industries.
Since RIAA and others are not successful in suing individuals, they logically go after ISPs. How will ISPs react? A war between ISPs and its customers will start. P2P users might easily switch to encrypted private networks (for example running on TCP ports like 443 or 993, where other encrypted and in most cases, commercial and completely legal services are offered).
Lets vote with our wallets and support companies who deserve it.
... simply do not buy their goods and publish why you made the choice.
If they do not support standards, force DRM onto users, behave like a monopoly, do not support drivers into FOSS, deny fair use (like hacking) or threaten security researchers
I would not be against some sort of public blacklist. Date, what happened, links to articles. People tend to forget and this kind of thing would help all of us remember.
Any widely used software or service used should be available as FOSS, free of patents and built on standards.
Highly specialized software is successful even if proprietary. Porting proprietary software to Linux brings new customers. Good examples might be Oracle Database or Maya. It might be a win-win situation for FOSS, hardware suppliers, customers and service providers. At least until Larry the Consolidator comes with some stupid ideas >:-/
Adobe on GNU/Linux might be benefit for all.
I guess Microsoft will never port MSOffice to GNU/Linux. It would lower users addiction to MSWindows OS and Microsoft dominant position will be under threat.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
l vs mW+W51IACeJQMe
- ----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hash: SHA1
It seems, that author of the article honestly believes, that those four people on the photograph are helping out to make world more trustworthy. He describes cyberspace as an endless roster, full of security holes which are abused by cyber-thieves and viruses. After terrifing readers he shows bright future and solution which seems to be naturally obvious, politically correct and somehow product of evolution.
I know this music because i lived in a dictatorship. One of the best weapons anyone who wants to have a control over anything is whip&sugar. Scare first and give sugar when object get scared, therefore getting control over its fear.
What he forgets to say is that those holes exist because of software houses incompetence (oops). Author tries to get around problem and while hiding real causes of timeless insecurity problems, he offers something he himself does not understand. Anonymity, security, solved intellectual property problems and one-click-away perfect technology. If he would, he could not have presented this kind of solution.
He writes what he thinks users want to read, without giving them any other options or alternative solutions. He forgets to say, that future of economy might lay in services and company, which gets the control over how services will be offered will surerly have most power.
He mixes a lot of things that have nothing in common. Services offered by companies (for example email) and functions that should be strictly in hands of the user (choice of anonymity). Time, when everyone was able to manage anything well enough is slowly coming to an end. Level of knowhow needed is rapidly growing and only groups of organized individuals or companies are able to maintan it and continue to offer good services. That might be one of the reasons, why businesses are turning toward Linux. Platform is not important any more.
Whenever any authority tried to decide what was good or bad (fair use of intellectual property) it ended as a control over the whole process (and it was not the user, who had it).Added cost of PC or earlier upgrade means nothing in comparision with the fact, that companies would get (?almost?) complete control over anything anyone does with any computer. It seems, that user would be put in front of decision: comply and do what is not forbidden or become an outcast.
"In all cases, it would be the user, not Microsoft, who sets these policies". This might be true, if Palladium was a framework, not a product and would become an open standard, without any patents and free of charge. In other words something users and companies are welcome to use and not forced. "Microsoft is also publishing the systems source code". I run searches on Microsoft web site and Goolge and found no source code or any other information.
What else will Palladium bring than more control to large companies?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9FlvG8KCvYwHJjIURAuz4AJ4w+CwD4+ybbwX3GIy
4LOZUlJ/3/eG5FAUGO9Mv7E=
=9QKF
If i take what happened to Linux in last 6 months:
Nearly every company has something to do with it.
I am worried, that suites took Linux as a "shield" to help them fight M$, not as a solution, to cure problems with CloseSource and Un*x fragmentation.
Suits think: If Linux did it, why can not we? They still did not learn their lesson...
what a pity
As written in Specifications:
Continuous play time Approximately 4.5 hours
Even a walkman can do much better...
I have read the 2nd article. "http://www.geeknews.net/articles/BradWebb/071299. shtml" and my opinion is:
Un*x is good when you need something get done. Win32 could be ehmmm, FUN, but live is too short to use such a bloated thing, when there are much better tools to work with.