So why are you getting pissed at Borland because they're trying to protect their investment?
I feel you are misunderstanding the issue. Nobody is pissed at Borland because they expect people to buy their software. They are pissed because Borland is levelling an accusation but producing no evidence. If they want this issue to be resolved they need to give more information than: "You owe us money." That isn't the proper way to request payment. They need to either handle this professionally (send an invoice detailing the software package, who registered, date registered, etc.) or forget it. There is no excuse for such unprofessional behavior.
Star trek doesn't need this to be loaded with bad science. Here's a nice gravity related one, in "generations" they alter the course of the nexus by blowing up a star that would have influenced it gravitationally. Unfortunatly they miss the fact that even if the star blows up, the mass is all still there, just spread out, and its center of mass is still in the same place, the path of the nexus wouldn't have changed.
This is hillarious. I am not a Star Trek fan, but the fact that they don't even operate on high school level of physical understanding leaves me in stitches!
You don't have to sue if they committed an actual crime. That is a serious hacking crime. The D.A. will probably prosecute it themselves if you reported it. Of course, you should track down the spammer first. I'm not sure if they would take the time to investigate it themselves.
I agree, and this is a very good thing. I don't know how many/.ers watch HBO, but I know I do and it is excellent. HBO has, bar none, the best original programming of any channel. They are simply far superior. Why? To make money they need you to choose HBO. They don't just throw it out over the wire with commercials and hope someone watches it. You buy it because you like it. If other channels had to compete for viewers on that level there would be an explosion of excellent programming as opposed to the nigh-unwatchable garbage floating about the airwaves and cable lines. Go HBO
By the way, news channels and channels such as TechTV would probably still get by with advertisements. It is channels trying to sell content that would have to improve their business models.
First of all, as I recall the Lindows box from Wal-Mart is $299.
The X-Box from Wal-Mart is $199.
X-Box specs:
Coppermine Pentium 3 processor (about 733Mhz as I recall)
Nvidia gpu which falls somewhere between a Geforce 3 and Geforce 4 in power (according to anandtech)
10GB hd
64 MB of RAM
By comparison the Lindows Box has
800Mhz Via C3
40GB hd
onboard graphics (ugh)
128 MB of RAM (I think PC133)
It seems to me that the Pentium will probably outperform the C3, and know the X-Box GPU is far more powerful than what you have in the "Lindows Box." Assuming the extra hd space and RAM makes up for this (it doesn't) the X-Box is still $100 cheaper.
I don't believe that this falls under the DCMA because this encryption is not used for copyright protection. It doesn't prevent me from bit for bit copying a dvd (as I understand it). What this part of the encryption prevents is "untrusted" software from being run. It is Microsoft's way of keeping third parties from releasing X-Box software they do not approve of.
Are you really so ignorant? You are reversing the situation. All of the latest games don't run on linux. It isn't the operating system's responsibility to be compatible with the program. It is the responsibility of programmers to make work compatible with popular operating systems.
" Linux has big strides to take before you can think about it surpassing Macs as the #2 desktop OS."
This isn't looking at the situation the right way. You can SAY that Linux won't surpass MacOS because Mac is better on the desktop, and you are probably right that Mac is better on desktop. However, better doesn't always equal success. In fact, I would venture to say that better RARELY equals success. There are far more factors than that. Now, OSX and Linux are both gaining market share on Windows at the moment. Linux seems to gaining it faster. I am not bashing Mac, just saying that at the moment it does appear linux will be #2 on the desktop (in user #'s, not quality).
This doesn't address the real issue. If someone from India wants to come work in the United States I am all for it. Let them immigrate, let them naturalize if they want to, but don't let them stop by and take an American workers job for a couple of years while shipping every cent they make out of our economy and back to India. That hurts everyone.
I think that that is fine he claims not to be an "open source maverick." This editorial isn't meant to connect with you and I (although it does resonate with me on many levels). He wants it to be accessible to even those who know little or nothing about linux. He makes sure they understand that he isn't just some sort of activist (as MS makes OSS users out to be). His PC is a tool. He feels that MS is on the way to breaking his tool, and he wants the world to know that he won't stand for it. This is good.
This is a little offtopic, but it is at the bottom, so nobody will read it anyways.
I look at the tech industry, that I am preparing to enter, and I see my life ahead of me as a great gamble. I have to pick what platform to develop for, who to develop for, and where to develop at. All of these choices will seriously affect my life, my earning value, and the future of my family. This is scary! Five years ago, I was still in high school. If someone asked me then what platform I would develop on I would say, "The newest Win32 of course!" In a perfect world I would have wanted to work for my MS. Now though, there is no guarantee. I honestly believe linux is the future of computing, but I have no idea what business model is best to use with it! OSS is new territory in the business world. The GPL is a big question mark! I am pretty damn good at poker, but I don't enjoy the prospect of gambling with my life. Oh well, here it comes.
It's amazing how much sympathy has poured out for a guy who stole people's credit card numbers...
Why the fuck do people post this kind of subterfuge? Do you honestly think the "Free Kevin" campaign was about wanting it to be "ok" to crack? It wasn't, get your head out of your ass. The point is the government abused their power in the way the case was handled. They made an EXAMPLE out of him, which is unjust. I am all about arresting people for breaking the law, but let's do it constitutionally.
What I'm trying to say is that there aren't predefined sets of personality, where you can say "This person will become and addict, and oh, this guy over here, he won't be." Anyone can find themselves taking any activity too seriously, -especially- when there is competition involved. (and especially males, for we can focus single-mindedly on one thing and have the competitive streak to boot ; )
I think you are oversimplifying. It is true that anyone could very well become emotionally dependent on something, but it is pretty well scientifically documented that there are genetic predispositions to both physical and emotional addictions. Does this mean anyone with an addiction has a certain gene, or anyone who doesn't has this other gene? No. But it means that certain people are, by nature, far mor likely to be addicts than others.
I see that you are a little unfamiliar with the rage that only us Americans seem to have. Simply put, we are an angry people. Some people think we just try to pass of blame onto other people to take it off of our own backs. This is sometimes true. But it would be much more accurate to say we just blame everyone for anything for the hell of it. When you get to a certain point of pissed off, you can't have enough targets. If you lose your job to someone willing to work 70 hours a week for 35 grand a year, the "hard working Indian immigrant" becomes a "daiper-head terroist" or "dot wearing misogynists", etc. It isn't that most Americans really hate Indians. Not at all. But when we get pissed we aren't afraid to say it. You will also notice more Americans are killed in violent rage by Americans every year than Indians. We just make fun of you, we kill each other.
they are focussed on the cost aspect "inexpensive beer" not the "free as in speech". A few tech savvy individuals dont represent the bulk of bored civil servants and decision makers. They just want to stretch a rupee further.
And that is a bad thing? When I first started mucking around with linux one of the first things I thought was (and I mean this): "If I were in charge of tech for a company I could save them thousands of dollars with this." That was truly my initial reaction and it stands true. It is one of linux's finest points. I have heard all of the arguments about TCO and they don't hold up. Why? Things such as "Linux support will be more expensive" get thrown in there every time. Maybe now, but that concept doesn't scale. Once you get the whole company on linux people will learn to use it. Support will be less of an issue. Besides, if I am providing the support, I would rather that cash go to myself than MS anyways. Linux is good for me.
As a side note, often MORE techies are needed to support windows, so it is well worth it to pay a *nix admin a bit more and sacrifice an MS junky or two.
This seems like the most logical idea I have seen so far. The one and only problem I see with it is that in some towns the only place to buy a cd is to hit the old wal-mart, hastings, or other chain. Now hastings, you may be able to make that happen. Wal-Mart, well, if the corporation gets involved you probably won't get anywhere. But, if you got really lucky. Maybe they'd offer you one of those nice settlements big corporations are so fond of using to make legal woes disappear.
You should try clonecd by elaborate bytes. I don't remember how much it costs, but it is pretty affordable, and you can try it for free. I have never had a cd that it couldn't copy, and it has a built in virtual drive that you can use to mount images. Pretty slick all in all, and the most reliable program for getting exact copies that I know of.
I think this is wrong. First of all, most of the people in that whole set either worked on salary (the engineer, the producer, probably the session player) and they have already been compensated by the record company for that, regardless of the album's sales. Then there is the album cover-art designer. I don't mind them getting a cut of my cash assuming I actually get my copy of the cover art, but if you are fine with a burned cd then you don't have the cover art anyways, so let the starving artist starve.
As I see it, technology is ripping into those profits like a hungry coyote into a bucket of KFC.
Actually a close look at the evidence suggests that technology hasn't touched their profits. As was mentioned in an article on both the reg and slashdot, if the industry released the same amount of cds per year today as they did several years ago, then each of those cds would only have to sell 3,000 copies (an utter failure) to have them right back where they were before P2P came about. Oh well, they have only themselves to blame.
And "we, the people" have nothing at all to do with deciding where ownership ends and greed begins. Ownership of something is a real, legal, fact.
You are fucking daft. Ownership is a legal fact. You admit to it, but you say we the people have nothing to do with deciding where it ends and begins, which is wrong! If you erase all of the laws, I own nothing. Not a thing. Now, I may possess some things, but I have no indefenite control on them. They are only mine until someone big enough to take them away does. Under U.S. law, however, if someone big walks up and takes my keyboard away it is still mine. I still own it no matter what happens to it from there.
n English that means kiss half your rights goodbye on any IP issue. Note, just half. McCain is a media whore like most politicians that aspire to be anything at the national level and will not allow himself to be seen as partisan to either side. He'll try to make a sly push to appear to be the knight in shining armor that will protect both sides. But as we all know you can't protect one without harming the other.
Half your ass is better than all of your ass. You seem to be extremely uneducated as to what exactly it is that Hollings has been doing with his time in the commerce commitee, then you want to say McCain will be a schill? You are fucking ridiculous and hardly worth reply.
You imply that Valenti could be happy about this? I am sure he's not. Hollings was in big media's pocket. He was a pushover. A useless piece of shit in every sense of the word. McCain cannot do worse if he tried.
I'm a liberal Democrat and I would love it if McCain turned Democrat, but it sure as hell hasn't happened.
McCain doesn't need to turn democrat. He is fine as republican with independent leanings (as far voting records, not as far as turning independent or democrat). This bipartasinship (he should turn democrat) is ridiculous. Luckily the country seems to be ever so gradually moving away from it, but it will take a long, long time. In the meantime, McCain will do an excellent job at this position. Even if he doesn't, he couldn't be worse than Hollings, who is nothing more than a pushover for the MPAA and RIAA. My God, such a spineless man should never have been made a Senator.
Slashdot Mirror
So why are you getting pissed at Borland because they're trying to protect their investment?
I feel you are misunderstanding the issue. Nobody is pissed at Borland because they expect people to buy their software. They are pissed because Borland is levelling an accusation but producing no evidence. If they want this issue to be resolved they need to give more information than: "You owe us money." That isn't the proper way to request payment. They need to either handle this professionally (send an invoice detailing the software package, who registered, date registered, etc.) or forget it. There is no excuse for such unprofessional behavior.
Star trek doesn't need this to be loaded with bad science. Here's a nice gravity related one, in "generations" they alter the course of the nexus by blowing up a star that would have influenced it gravitationally. Unfortunatly they miss the fact that even if the star blows up, the mass is all still there, just spread out, and its center of mass is still in the same place, the path of the nexus wouldn't have changed.
This is hillarious. I am not a Star Trek fan, but the fact that they don't even operate on high school level of physical understanding leaves me in stitches!
You don't have to sue if they committed an actual crime. That is a serious hacking crime. The D.A. will probably prosecute it themselves if you reported it. Of course, you should track down the spammer first. I'm not sure if they would take the time to investigate it themselves.
I agree, and this is a very good thing. I don't know how many
By the way, news channels and channels such as TechTV would probably still get by with advertisements. It is channels trying to sell content that would have to improve their business models.
Fail to understand the use?
First of all, as I recall the Lindows box from Wal-Mart is $299.
The X-Box from Wal-Mart is $199.
X-Box specs:
Coppermine Pentium 3 processor (about 733Mhz as I recall)
Nvidia gpu which falls somewhere between a Geforce 3 and Geforce 4 in power (according to anandtech)
10GB hd
64 MB of RAM
By comparison the Lindows Box has
800Mhz Via C3
40GB hd
onboard graphics (ugh)
128 MB of RAM (I think PC133)
It seems to me that the Pentium will probably outperform the C3, and know the X-Box GPU is far more powerful than what you have in the "Lindows Box." Assuming the extra hd space and RAM makes up for this (it doesn't) the X-Box is still $100 cheaper.
Edge: X-Box
I don't believe that this falls under the DCMA because this encryption is not used for copyright protection. It doesn't prevent me from bit for bit copying a dvd (as I understand it). What this part of the encryption prevents is "untrusted" software from being run. It is Microsoft's way of keeping third parties from releasing X-Box software they do not approve of.
it doesn't run all of the latest games,
Are you really so ignorant? You are reversing the situation. All of the latest games don't run on linux. It isn't the operating system's responsibility to be compatible with the program. It is the responsibility of programmers to make work compatible with popular operating systems.
" Linux has big strides to take before you can think about it surpassing Macs as the #2 desktop OS."
This isn't looking at the situation the right way. You can SAY that Linux won't surpass MacOS because Mac is better on the desktop, and you are probably right that Mac is better on desktop. However, better doesn't always equal success. In fact, I would venture to say that better RARELY equals success. There are far more factors than that. Now, OSX and Linux are both gaining market share on Windows at the moment. Linux seems to gaining it faster. I am not bashing Mac, just saying that at the moment it does appear linux will be #2 on the desktop (in user #'s, not quality).
A Macintosh can be a "desktop." A pc can be a "desktop." A Macintosh cannot be a pc.
This doesn't address the real issue. If someone from India wants to come work in the United States I am all for it. Let them immigrate, let them naturalize if they want to, but don't let them stop by and take an American workers job for a couple of years while shipping every cent they make out of our economy and back to India. That hurts everyone.
I think that that is fine he claims not to be an "open source maverick." This editorial isn't meant to connect with you and I (although it does resonate with me on many levels). He wants it to be accessible to even those who know little or nothing about linux. He makes sure they understand that he isn't just some sort of activist (as MS makes OSS users out to be). His PC is a tool. He feels that MS is on the way to breaking his tool, and he wants the world to know that he won't stand for it. This is good.
This is a little offtopic, but it is at the bottom, so nobody will read it anyways.
I look at the tech industry, that I am preparing to enter, and I see my life ahead of me as a great gamble. I have to pick what platform to develop for, who to develop for, and where to develop at. All of these choices will seriously affect my life, my earning value, and the future of my family. This is scary! Five years ago, I was still in high school. If someone asked me then what platform I would develop on I would say, "The newest Win32 of course!" In a perfect world I would have wanted to work for my MS. Now though, there is no guarantee. I honestly believe linux is the future of computing, but I have no idea what business model is best to use with it! OSS is new territory in the business world. The GPL is a big question mark! I am pretty damn good at poker, but I don't enjoy the prospect of gambling with my life. Oh well, here it comes.
It's amazing how much sympathy has poured out for a guy who stole people's credit card numbers...
Why the fuck do people post this kind of subterfuge? Do you honestly think the "Free Kevin" campaign was about wanting it to be "ok" to crack? It wasn't, get your head out of your ass. The point is the government abused their power in the way the case was handled. They made an EXAMPLE out of him, which is unjust. I am all about arresting people for breaking the law, but let's do it constitutionally.
What I'm trying to say is that there aren't predefined sets of personality, where you can say "This person will become and addict, and oh, this guy over here, he won't be." Anyone can find themselves taking any activity too seriously, -especially- when there is competition involved. (and especially males, for we can focus single-mindedly on one thing and have the competitive streak to boot ; )
I think you are oversimplifying. It is true that anyone could very well become emotionally dependent on something, but it is pretty well scientifically documented that there are genetic predispositions to both physical and emotional addictions. Does this mean anyone with an addiction has a certain gene, or anyone who doesn't has this other gene? No. But it means that certain people are, by nature, far mor likely to be addicts than others.
I see that you are a little unfamiliar with the rage that only us Americans seem to have. Simply put, we are an angry people. Some people think we just try to pass of blame onto other people to take it off of our own backs. This is sometimes true. But it would be much more accurate to say we just blame everyone for anything for the hell of it. When you get to a certain point of pissed off, you can't have enough targets. If you lose your job to someone willing to work 70 hours a week for 35 grand a year, the "hard working Indian immigrant" becomes a "daiper-head terroist" or "dot wearing misogynists", etc. It isn't that most Americans really hate Indians. Not at all. But when we get pissed we aren't afraid to say it. You will also notice more Americans are killed in violent rage by Americans every year than Indians. We just make fun of you, we kill each other.
they are focussed on the cost aspect "inexpensive beer" not the "free as in speech". A few tech savvy individuals dont represent the bulk of bored civil servants and decision makers. They just want to stretch a rupee further.
And that is a bad thing? When I first started mucking around with linux one of the first things I thought was (and I mean this): "If I were in charge of tech for a company I could save them thousands of dollars with this." That was truly my initial reaction and it stands true. It is one of linux's finest points. I have heard all of the arguments about TCO and they don't hold up. Why? Things such as "Linux support will be more expensive" get thrown in there every time. Maybe now, but that concept doesn't scale. Once you get the whole company on linux people will learn to use it. Support will be less of an issue. Besides, if I am providing the support, I would rather that cash go to myself than MS anyways. Linux is good for me.
As a side note, often MORE techies are needed to support windows, so it is well worth it to pay a *nix admin a bit more and sacrifice an MS junky or two.
This seems like the most logical idea I have seen so far. The one and only problem I see with it is that in some towns the only place to buy a cd is to hit the old wal-mart, hastings, or other chain. Now hastings, you may be able to make that happen. Wal-Mart, well, if the corporation gets involved you probably won't get anywhere. But, if you got really lucky. Maybe they'd offer you one of those nice settlements big corporations are so fond of using to make legal woes disappear.
You should try clonecd by elaborate bytes. I don't remember how much it costs, but it is pretty affordable, and you can try it for free. I have never had a cd that it couldn't copy, and it has a built in virtual drive that you can use to mount images. Pretty slick all in all, and the most reliable program for getting exact copies that I know of.
You know, you can always filename and ID tags after you rip with Cd-n-Go.
I think this is wrong. First of all, most of the people in that whole set either worked on salary (the engineer, the producer, probably the session player) and they have already been compensated by the record company for that, regardless of the album's sales. Then there is the album cover-art designer. I don't mind them getting a cut of my cash assuming I actually get my copy of the cover art, but if you are fine with a burned cd then you don't have the cover art anyways, so let the starving artist starve.
As I see it, technology is ripping into those profits like a hungry coyote into a bucket of KFC.
Actually a close look at the evidence suggests that technology hasn't touched their profits. As was mentioned in an article on both the reg and slashdot, if the industry released the same amount of cds per year today as they did several years ago, then each of those cds would only have to sell 3,000 copies (an utter failure) to have them right back where they were before P2P came about. Oh well, they have only themselves to blame.
And "we, the people" have nothing at all to do with deciding where ownership ends and greed begins. Ownership of something is a real, legal, fact.
You are fucking daft. Ownership is a legal fact. You admit to it, but you say we the people have nothing to do with deciding where it ends and begins, which is wrong! If you erase all of the laws, I own nothing. Not a thing. Now, I may possess some things, but I have no indefenite control on them. They are only mine until someone big enough to take them away does. Under U.S. law, however, if someone big walks up and takes my keyboard away it is still mine. I still own it no matter what happens to it from there.
n English that means kiss half your rights goodbye on any IP issue. Note, just half. McCain is a media whore like most politicians that aspire to be anything at the national level and will not allow himself to be seen as partisan to either side. He'll try to make a sly push to appear to be the knight in shining armor that will protect both sides. But as we all know you can't protect one without harming the other.
Half your ass is better than all of your ass. You seem to be extremely uneducated as to what exactly it is that Hollings has been doing with his time in the commerce commitee, then you want to say McCain will be a schill? You are fucking ridiculous and hardly worth reply.
You imply that Valenti could be happy about this? I am sure he's not. Hollings was in big media's pocket. He was a pushover. A useless piece of shit in every sense of the word. McCain cannot do worse if he tried.
I'm a liberal Democrat and I would love it if McCain turned Democrat, but it sure as hell hasn't happened.
McCain doesn't need to turn democrat. He is fine as republican with independent leanings (as far voting records, not as far as turning independent or democrat). This bipartasinship (he should turn democrat) is ridiculous. Luckily the country seems to be ever so gradually moving away from it, but it will take a long, long time. In the meantime, McCain will do an excellent job at this position. Even if he doesn't, he couldn't be worse than Hollings, who is nothing more than a pushover for the MPAA and RIAA. My God, such a spineless man should never have been made a Senator.