To have a proposal like this shot down in a town where the local newspaper has a "Religion" section, during a contested Republican presidential race, what are the odds?
I think he was trying to say that Holland is politically conservative.
I don't know what he's trying to say about religion. That religion == censorship? That religion == fascism? That religion is itself a social evil, or that all people who profess a religion are any huckster who comes down the pike?
There is nothing wrong with a newspaper having a Religion section. In fact, there is a good deal right with it. If newspapers have a Politics section, they should have a Religion section too. Religion isn't just a hobby. It influences the believer's entire life, and is a social force to be reckoned with even by the non-religious. For many people, their religion is the most important thing in the universe, because it truth, it is the best explanation of reality.
So your statement has no real punch. Some papers have religion reporters. A lot of newspapers consign infrequent religious reports to "lifestyle" feature stories. Though a newspaper merely having a regular section devoted to religion is a Good Thing IMHO, it does not, in and of itself, say anything about the political leanings of the area residents.
It could just as well have been,
To have a proposal like this shot down in a town where the high school has a football team, and during a heated gubernatorial race, what are the odds?
For your dad's machine, you might grab "Y2000" from Mega 16-Bit Freeware's DOS Utilities. Freeware, 31K. Prints out to the screen while testing. readme.txt explains in not-too-geekish terms about system clocks etc.
If the BIOS or CMOS is the culprit, there's a freeware workaround at the top of the same page. With source. I didn't need it myself, but purports to get around the annoyance of setting the date every time Dad reboots.
I don't promise much excitement though. In Netscape, for some mysterious reason (snort!) I can not get to the voting--it's always, "The people have spoken". In Lynx, I was able to get to the voting page for the first question, even though I declined their cookie which wanted a GUID. But then, for some mysterious reason (snerk!), the USEMAP isn't really a USEMAP, and I "could not connect to host". Hmm. In Microsoft Internet Explorer, when I refused the damn cookies with the GUID, even though I accepted the others, the page will not load.
So what this poll says is that people who use Microsoft exclusively for their OS and browser, and who don't mind being tracked, and who trust Microsoft as their source of news, about 2/3 of them agree that the DOJ is a big meanyhead.
This article manages to take good news (Netscape 5 is poised to debut officially) and turn it into impending destruction of the world as we know it. "The release date slipped. So it looks like Netscape is doomed doomed doomed." I guess you still can't get fired for buying Microsoft. But... consider the source: ZDNet, Microsoft's faithful lapdog.
As a web author and user, the new version of Netscape may be well worth the wait. I have heard only good things about Gecko, the rendering engine. If Netscape 5 supports HTML 4.0 better and more completely than MSIE, I will be a very happy camper.
asqui asks: "why the heck does this affect you guys?"
Because I use Windows at work. And am not allowed to change some settings.
Because two web sites I work on were forced to move from UNIX to Windows, because the since-fired PHB (an MSCE) said it would dovetail so nicely with all the other Windows stuff he was foisting on us.
Because I dual-boot at home, and am hard pressed to find software for my aging 'puter on the Windows side. Sure, I could "just upgrade" again. But a new OS would mean more memory, a new mobo and chip, and new video card.
Because, and someone else has stated this already, out on the Net there are an annoying number of clueless jerks who just assume that everyone has the very latest incarnation of Windows, and are downright hostile to other operating systems, browsers, newsreaders, mail clients, and word processors that did not come from the One True OS.
Because people ask me for computer help, and often I have to reassure them that it's not their fault, they didn't do anything wrong to cause BSOD/bogus error messages/incompatible Microsoft-only "standards".
Because in the big picture, I do not like to see greed, theft, deception, extortion, and monopolistic control.
Real didn't tell anyone that they were collecting this information. Not until they got caught with their pants down, that is. Therefore:
Users had no choice. You could not decline if your privacy is more important to you than listening to RealPlayer stuff over the Net.
They didn't just track how many times you used the software, they tracked where you went, what you listened to or watched, and how you used it (e.g., the comment about stats on how many sucker^H^H^H^H^Hvalued customers recorded CDs).
And probably nobody spoofed the GUID, not if no one outside of Real knew it was being collected before.
It is an issue because it is a hitherto undocumented invasion of privacy.
When released by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the document entitled
Findings of Fact will be available for download from this page. This release will occur at 6:30 pm (eastern time) today, November 5th.
Could it be that Microsoft asked for a jury trial if/once their summary motions for dismissal were denied? They haven't fared so well in their latest DOJ bench trial, if the press has been at all accurate about the judge's reactions.
Trial by a jury "of your peers" doesn't mean they'll get a bunch of techies. More likely they'll get a panel of people who don't know an awful lot about computer science or engineering. And these would have to be people who, if they have ever heard of DR-DOS, have no decided opinion one way or the other about Microsoft's conduct.
So isn't it at least remotely possible that Microsoft requested trial by jury? Perhaps in the hopes that average citizens could be swayed by Microsoft's assertion of the need for compatibility, or an argument that the only way Digital Research could have created DR-DOS to be as compatible as it was, was by--gasp!--hacking?
Yep, it happens. Not just a fluke, and definitely not just you.
When I bought a brand spanking new hard drive, I didn't have storage space elsewhere to keep Netscape and IE, but I figured I would just re-install IE from disk and then go get Netscape.
Unca Bill won't let you do that.
But, more than one way to skin a cat. What I did was install one of those omnipresent AOL coasters, and used it to get to Netscape.
Infoseek shows up as one of "First and Fast" after you read through the insulting, self-congratulatory ad and tell them, "Yes, you jerks, I really did mean to search for what I searched for."
It turns up also in "Computers > Internet > WWW > Searching the Web > Search Engines > General" because that is an Open Directory Project category. See the invitation at the bottom to become an editor?
Or, if you take the link to "Web Pages" (i.e., skip your babysitting, skip categories, skip press releases, just give me the best matching pages), Infoseek's main page is the top hit.
[T]he judge does need to tke some technical briefings before makeing a ruleing in this case as it could mean the end of anyone else using cookies if the judgment isn't carefully worded.
And this would be bad how?
Does this look like Spamazon's computer? Hell, it's not even my computer; my employer paid for it.
I do agree that the patent describes nothing more than cookies. Client-server. Client sends personal information to server. (Eek.) Server stores information in encoded (please God) form on client. In the future, when client contacts server, server can retrieve info and serve a customized response. It does not say anything about time frame, collating orders, server-side programming--just cookies.
Bill Joy clearly doesn't mean "community" in the same way the word is understood in the Linux community or indeed almost anywhere else. For Sun and their (proprietary, closed) Java/jini "community", it is a feel-good warm 'n' fuzzy corporate euphemism for "franchise". At best. What the term means at worst is left as an exercise for the reader.
Why did this article permit Joy to be the only one who addressed the so-called "right to make money"? I grow weary of this strawman argument that GPL doesn't allow programmers any income from their labor. But surely Mr. Anti-Socialism Raymond would have had a few choice words on this topic.
Really. Somehow this idea manages to be sleazy and boring at the same time.
Sleazy because the contestants would do anything for a buck. And in particular, they're willing to stab other people in the back.
Boring because it'd be like watching your high school student government. A good-looking "popular" political schemer will win. Probably an upper middle class white male.
Must see TV? Only for morally bankrupt idiots who can't tune in to an exciting televised golf tournament or something.
Nope, not just the meta tags. The makers of P?Z forbid you to use the word P?Z anywhere on the web. So you've just run afoul of their landsharks, because/. is on the web.
Good point. Well, actually, Rob violated this one by posting the story with quote. Evidently, everyone on the web is supposed to refer to it as "the candy formerly known as P?Z".
What a lack of imagination you have. What an impoverished view of life. The only reason for a company's existence is to make money? I think not.
It's not as if even B* G* quit school saying, "I have to become a millionaire. I know, I'll wheel and deal [some would say, steal] my way into a monopoly."
Software development could flourish in a barter economy, in socialism, in communism, . . . it doesn't require a capitalist system.
Call me an idealist, but I contend that the vast majority of companies began with a product or service which they and others considered worthwhile.
Top Ten Specific Reasons Why Only MSIE Users Can View Microsoft Cracking Challenge
10. If you're doing lame browser detection, MSIE is fewer letters to type than Netscape, Mozilla, or even Opera.
9. Similarly, "JScript" is shorter than "JavaScript".
8. AOL^H^H^HMicrosoft is the Internet.
7. We left our copy of FrontPage at the default settings. But don't worry, it will all be fixed in FrontPage 2005.
6. We fear the mighty/. effect, and those fanatics wouldn't be caught dead using Exploder.
5. VisualBasic is more powerful and efficient than C++.* Likewise, Internet Explorer has that comforting familiar Microsoft Windows interface, so you don't have to learn that arcane, complicated Netscape setup.
4. You can't crack our powerful enterprise-level Microsoft(tm) Windows(tm) server if you can't read the rules we made up, nanny nanny boo boo.
3. We're weenies. We couldn't write "Hello world" in HTML, let alone use scripting languages.
2. 3l337 hAx0r d0oDz swear by MSIE.**
And the number one reason why only MSIE users are permitted to view the Microsoft cracking challenge is... drumroll, please...
1. Somehow the demo site was interfered with. Give me another chance, your honor.
*Editor's note: Microsoft actually says this on another page.
NSI can now sell domain records to anyone they damn well please.
This is a good thing because N$I is claiming just that, that they own the whois database, and that they can sell bits of it or restrict access in any manner they please. Never mind that they oversaw the database as a government monopoly.
The gov't is saying, increasingly forcefully, that NSI does not own whois information.
"So who's to stop the spammers?" Well, it sure as hell won't be NSI, one way or the other. I see some domain owners here hoping all contact info goes private. I hope it doesn't. In spam-killing, it is extremely useful to know who owns the netblock, who provides DNS, and who is in charge. I can't see how opening up the db will appreciably increase spam. Hey, you're getting spammed now, while NSI is trying to prevent access, aren't you? Handing over whois to any one company, having access at their whim, hinders spam-killing.
Slashdot Mirror
Kurt Gray said,
To have a proposal like this shot down in a town where the local newspaper has a "Religion" section, during a contested Republican presidential race, what are the odds?
I think he was trying to say that Holland is politically conservative.
I don't know what he's trying to say about religion. That religion == censorship? That religion == fascism? That religion is itself a social evil, or that all people who profess a religion are any huckster who comes down the pike?
There is nothing wrong with a newspaper having a Religion section. In fact, there is a good deal right with it. If newspapers have a Politics section, they should have a Religion section too. Religion isn't just a hobby. It influences the believer's entire life, and is a social force to be reckoned with even by the non-religious. For many people, their religion is the most important thing in the universe, because it truth, it is the best explanation of reality.
So your statement has no real punch. Some papers have religion reporters. A lot of newspapers consign infrequent religious reports to "lifestyle" feature stories. Though a newspaper merely having a regular section devoted to religion is a Good Thing IMHO, it does not, in and of itself, say anything about the political leanings of the area residents.
It could just as well have been,
To have a proposal like this shot down in a town where the high school has a football team, and during a heated gubernatorial race, what are the odds?
For your dad's machine, you might grab "Y2000" from Mega 16-Bit Freeware's DOS Utilities. Freeware, 31K. Prints out to the screen while testing. readme.txt explains in not-too-geekish terms about system clocks etc.
If the BIOS or CMOS is the culprit, there's a freeware workaround at the top of the same page. With source. I didn't need it myself, but purports to get around the annoyance of setting the date every time Dad reboots.
Bad URL.
Try this: http://www.msnbc.com/news/207645.asp
I don't promise much excitement though. In Netscape, for some mysterious reason (snort!) I can not get to the voting--it's always, "The people have spoken". In Lynx, I was able to get to the voting page for the first question, even though I declined their cookie which wanted a GUID. But then, for some mysterious reason (snerk!), the USEMAP isn't really a USEMAP, and I "could not connect to host". Hmm. In Microsoft Internet Explorer, when I refused the damn cookies with the GUID, even though I accepted the others, the page will not load.
So what this poll says is that people who use Microsoft exclusively for their OS and browser, and who don't mind being tracked, and who trust Microsoft as their source of news, about 2/3 of them agree that the DOJ is a big meanyhead.
This article manages to take good news (Netscape 5 is poised to debut officially) and turn it into impending destruction of the world as we know it. "The release date slipped. So it looks like Netscape is doomed doomed doomed." I guess you still can't get fired for buying Microsoft. But... consider the source: ZDNet, Microsoft's faithful lapdog.
As a web author and user, the new version of Netscape may be well worth the wait. I have heard only good things about Gecko, the rendering engine. If Netscape 5 supports HTML 4.0 better and more completely than MSIE, I will be a very happy camper.
asqui asks: "why the heck does this affect you guys?"
Because I use Windows at work. And am not allowed to change some settings.
Because two web sites I work on were forced to move from UNIX to Windows, because the since-fired PHB (an MSCE) said it would dovetail so nicely with all the other Windows stuff he was foisting on us.
Because I dual-boot at home, and am hard pressed to find software for my aging 'puter on the Windows side. Sure, I could "just upgrade" again. But a new OS would mean more memory, a new mobo and chip, and new video card.
Because, and someone else has stated this already, out on the Net there are an annoying number of clueless jerks who just assume that everyone has the very latest incarnation of Windows, and are downright hostile to other operating systems, browsers, newsreaders, mail clients, and word processors that did not come from the One True OS.
Because people ask me for computer help, and often I have to reassure them that it's not their fault, they didn't do anything wrong to cause BSOD/bogus error messages/incompatible Microsoft-only "standards".
Because in the big picture, I do not like to see greed, theft, deception, extortion, and monopolistic control.
It's an issue because:
And probably nobody spoofed the GUID, not if no one outside of Real knew it was being collected before.
It is an issue because it is a hitherto undocumented invasion of privacy.
And I grabbed Mike's copy and mirrored it here.
Thank you, Mike! Good man! I got in right when the page changed, and have been trying to grab source ever since. I got ~225K and it puked on me.
So here is Mirror 1 of US vs MS finding of facts. Because we computer geeks count from 0, right? ;-)
NCSA/1.5.2 running on IRIX 6.5, for those of you keeping score at home.
No longer a rumor. U.S. vs. Microsoft special web site now says this:
I'm all a-tingle.
IANAL.
Could it be that Microsoft asked for a jury trial if/once their summary motions for dismissal were denied? They haven't fared so well in their latest DOJ bench trial, if the press has been at all accurate about the judge's reactions.
Trial by a jury "of your peers" doesn't mean they'll get a bunch of techies. More likely they'll get a panel of people who don't know an awful lot about computer science or engineering. And these would have to be people who, if they have ever heard of DR-DOS, have no decided opinion one way or the other about Microsoft's conduct.
So isn't it at least remotely possible that Microsoft requested trial by jury? Perhaps in the hopes that average citizens could be swayed by Microsoft's assertion of the need for compatibility, or an argument that the only way Digital Research could have created DR-DOS to be as compatible as it was, was by--gasp!--hacking?
Just a thought.
Yep, it happens. Not just a fluke, and definitely not just you.
When I bought a brand spanking new hard drive, I didn't have storage space elsewhere to keep Netscape and IE, but I figured I would just re-install IE from disk and then go get Netscape.
Unca Bill won't let you do that.
But, more than one way to skin a cat. What I did was install one of those omnipresent AOL coasters, and used it to get to Netscape.
Infoseek shows up as one of "First and Fast" after you read through the insulting, self-congratulatory ad and tell them, "Yes, you jerks, I really did mean to search for what I searched for."
It turns up also in "Computers > Internet > WWW > Searching the Web > Search Engines > General" because that is an Open Directory Project category. See the invitation at the bottom to become an editor?
Or, if you take the link to "Web Pages" (i.e., skip your babysitting, skip categories, skip press releases, just give me the best matching pages), Infoseek's main page is the top hit.
Rob the Roadie sez,
And this would be bad how?
Does this look like Spamazon's computer? Hell, it's not even my computer; my employer paid for it.
I do agree that the patent describes nothing more than cookies. Client-server. Client sends personal information to server. (Eek.) Server stores information in encoded (please God) form on client. In the future, when client contacts server, server can retrieve info and serve a customized response. It does not say anything about time frame, collating orders, server-side programming--just cookies.
... was September 12, 1997.
So. Who was using cookies before that date?
Bill Joy clearly doesn't mean "community" in the same way the word is understood in the Linux community or indeed almost anywhere else. For Sun and their (proprietary, closed) Java/jini "community", it is a feel-good warm 'n' fuzzy corporate euphemism for "franchise". At best. What the term means at worst is left as an exercise for the reader.
Why did this article permit Joy to be the only one who addressed the so-called "right to make money"? I grow weary of this strawman argument that GPL doesn't allow programmers any income from their labor. But surely Mr. Anti-Socialism Raymond would have had a few choice words on this topic.
Really. Somehow this idea manages to be sleazy and boring at the same time.
Sleazy because the contestants would do anything for a buck. And in particular, they're willing to stab other people in the back.
Boring because it'd be like watching your high school student government. A good-looking "popular" political schemer will win. Probably an upper middle class white male.
Must see TV? Only for morally bankrupt idiots who can't tune in to an exciting televised golf tournament or something.
(Second attempt to subvert the fancy tables and centering)
XXXX..XXXX..XXXXX..X..X.......X.
XXX...XXX....X..
X.....X.....X...
X.....XXXX..XXXX
"Your honor, it doesn't use the complainant's trademark. It clearly says, 'XXXX..XXXX..XXXX.'"
What I see in the preview is not how it shows up when submitted. :-(
Or
1111 1111 11111 1 1 1
111 111 1
1 1 1
1 1111 1111
"Your honor, it doesn't use the complainant's trademark. It clearly says, '1111 1111 1111.'"
Looks terrible in Lynx! Rob, please stop making everything centered. It is hard to read when the whole page is center-aligned. Grumble, grumble.
Nope, not just the meta tags. The makers of P?Z forbid you to use the word P?Z anywhere on the web. So you've just run afoul of their landsharks, because /. is on the web.
Good point. Well, actually, Rob violated this one by posting the story with quote. Evidently, everyone on the web is supposed to refer to it as "the candy formerly known as P?Z".
What a lack of imagination you have. What an impoverished view of life. The only reason for a company's existence is to make money? I think not.
It's not as if even B* G* quit school saying, "I have to become a millionaire. I know, I'll wheel and deal [some would say, steal] my way into a monopoly."
Software development could flourish in a barter economy, in socialism, in communism, . . . it doesn't require a capitalist system.
Call me an idealist, but I contend that the vast majority of companies began with a product or service which they and others considered worthwhile.
Top Ten Specific Reasons Why Only MSIE Users Can View Microsoft Cracking Challenge
10. If you're doing lame browser detection, MSIE is fewer letters to type than Netscape, Mozilla, or even Opera.
9. Similarly, "JScript" is shorter than "JavaScript".
8. AOL^H^H^HMicrosoft is the Internet.
7. We left our copy of FrontPage at the default settings. But don't worry, it will all be fixed in FrontPage 2005.
6. We fear the mighty /. effect, and those fanatics wouldn't be caught dead using Exploder.
5. VisualBasic is more powerful and efficient than C++.* Likewise, Internet Explorer has that comforting familiar Microsoft Windows interface, so you don't have to learn that arcane, complicated Netscape setup.
4. You can't crack our powerful enterprise-level Microsoft(tm) Windows(tm) server if you can't read the rules we made up, nanny nanny boo boo.
3. We're weenies. We couldn't write "Hello world" in HTML, let alone use scripting languages.
2. 3l337 hAx0r d0oDz swear by MSIE.**
And the number one reason why only MSIE users are permitted to view the Microsoft cracking challenge is... drumroll, please...
1. Somehow the demo site was interfered with. Give me another chance, your honor.
*Editor's note: Microsoft actually says this on another page.
**Editor's note: swear at, more likely.
Ah, we meet again.
RISCy Business wrote:
This is a good thing because N$I is claiming just that, that they own the whois database, and that they can sell bits of it or restrict access in any manner they please. Never mind that they oversaw the database as a government monopoly.
The gov't is saying, increasingly forcefully, that NSI does not own whois information.
"So who's to stop the spammers?" Well, it sure as hell won't be NSI, one way or the other. I see some domain owners here hoping all contact info goes private. I hope it doesn't. In spam-killing, it is extremely useful to know who owns the netblock, who provides DNS, and who is in charge. I can't see how opening up the db will appreciably increase spam. Hey, you're getting spammed now, while NSI is trying to prevent access, aren't you? Handing over whois to any one company, having access at their whim, hinders spam-killing.
The teeny tiny absolute font size still looks horrible in Windows, and even in MSIE running in Windows.
Exactly right.
I don't know about y'all, but my privacy is worth more than $27... wholesale.