Actually the RPC bug that blaster uses affects the communication hooks the firewall in XP uses, as a result it generally won't prevent infection at all. It is able to stop attacks with the latest of the RPC DCOM vulnerabilities (#3 in the past month I believe) which affects all 32bit versions of windows. Perhaps we should tell win98 users to enable to the personal firewall that microsoft included in the patch for the.... oops wait microsoft didn't give this SUPPORTED os a patch for the firewall.
"How is Windows Update hard to understand? It scans your computer for you and tells you which patches you need to install. Security patches are listed as critical, other patches are listed under the "Windows" heading, and drivers by themselves. I can't think of a way to make it easier without removing the user completely."
Excuse me, but how exactly is a new version of the web browser, and the directx 9 something which could possibly be called a "security update". Critical updates means whatever microsoft would like for you to install. Not security patches.
"Yes, they do stop supporting version after a point. No company continues to release patches to every version of software forever. Try getting patches for Red Hat 3.0, you can't do it. And when they have upgrades, they are clearly marked. I have never accidentally updated anything, as they are clearly marked as being the next version of the software."
odd, I can download patches for rh8 and EVERY application that came with it. I see here... but I can't download any new patches for IE5 or for WMP6, in fact I couldn't since the first day they released the new versions. New holes are only patched in the new version.
You spoiled little brat. More than 70% of US citizens (who are paid drastically more than those in pretty much all other nations) make less than $55k/year! Of the 30% who make that much or more I'd be willing to wager at least 25% of them have to work 60+hr weeks.
The other 5% make more money altogether than the bottom 60% of the entire US population!!! These numbers according to the IRS. Look it up yourself.
If you find 50k+ a yr to be chump change perhaps you should drop your own salary a bit to make way for the experienced and unemployed masses out there who would be happy to have it. Of course some of those masses are people like you, who are unemployed because they felt faint at the prospect of *gasp* having to feed their wife and dog on a mere 55k/yr!
" The first emulator of these arcade games was for the Mac and it was a commercial package"
yes but nearly nobody has ever heard of it, all it did was maybe inspire MAME to preserve the history. Who did it first is irrelevant.
"Surely not eveyrone with thousands or ROMs can wrap himself in the flag of protecting those bits from the scrapheap of history?"
making redundant copies is least thing these people are doing to preserve the bits from the scrapheap. It's playing them and inviting friends to do the same. It's those same people who will be BUYING roms from sites like this because of their own renewed interest in the games. And who will be spreading the word.
If that mac emulator had remained the only one, there wouldn't be any interested buyers. If Mame didn't exist those individual with thousands of roms wouldn't exist and they ARE the buyers. And without those people with massive collections their friends and relatives and co-workers they've introduced to the games they used to love again wouldn't exist.
Personally I have a pirated mame collection of a modest 280ish roms at work. All of my co-workers asked for games they used to love in the old style arcades. Every one of them would buy roms now. If it weren't for my pirated collection and my following news regarding roms, they'd A, have no interest, and B never hear about starroms.
I don't care what any RIAA lawyer or rep says to insure they can sell you the same thing repeatedly.
A copyright holder cannot copyright media, and cannot license it, they can only grant license to what they have copyrighted... the lyrics themselves, the actual combination of notes. This is what they have a copyright for and therefore what you have a license for.
However a port of a game from one platform to another is a bit different, what is copyrighted is the code and the code is not the same.
Apple caters to more tech savvy people? Surely you have completely lost it. Apple macs the most idiot proof operating systems for the most ignorant users on the planet. I mean come on. Yes there are mac power users like every other arena, but the average mac user barely undersands the concept of mouse. The average mac using professional knows alot about
video and STILL barely understands the concept of the mouse. In general mac users start out computer stupid just like pc users, the difference is that pc users have to start learning more about their computer to keep it running properly. mac's are designed (successfully) to keep the user from ever needing to know a single thing about their machine, and thus they generally don't.
It shares EVERY fundemental component with it. You cannot boot linux or windows on it without a hack because of the bios which was put on it for exactly that reason. With a regular bios designed for it's board it's just a regular ibm clone designed to a reduced form factor!
My point is that the software written for a platform does not define what the platform inheriently is. The Xbox is an ibm pc compatible, the playstation 2 is not. Both are computers, that calculator in the drawer there is a computer too. The question wasn't about computers, it was about pc's. The definition of a pc is not in the software, it's in the hardware.
"ok, so let me get this straight, if I buy 1u server componenets and build it into a small case, flash a proprietary bios with DRM and call it a game console, that means it's not a pc anymore?"
"No. When you build a machine and strictly make nothing but games for it, then it's a game console. We're not talking about a difficult equation here."
ok, so doing the above is not enough to turn the pc I built into a game console, I have to make a dvd player... oops that's an app. ok I have to make an ip stack for network gam... oops that's application. oh right, I have to make nothing but games for the above pc with a flashed bios in a set top case. The software I write for it (disregarding everything anyone else writes for it) magically transforms that pc into a game console. Gotcha.
Gee I thought I'd have to do something difficult like sony and nintendo did and actually produce an architecture instead of just loading a different bios on pc hardware. silly me.
That's exactly what this is about. CD-Burners that don't comply with "trusted" computing encryption and DRM schemes, keyboards and mice in the same token. Even monitor that turn off when a signal i sent by the os saying someone is playing a "pirated" video they made at home on a camcorder that doesn't have the DRM circuitry (after all it might have been recording a movie in a theater and not your kids first birthday cake!).
"Um.. no it isn't. Unless you want to count the PS2 and the Dreamcast as PC's, you can't claim Microsoft's is suddenly one. They may have similar components, but that does not a PC make. You can give a man a baboon's heart, but he doesn't suddenly become a baboon."
ok, so let me get this straight, if I buy 1u server componenets and build it into a small case, flash a proprietary bios with DRM and call it a game console, that means it's not a pc anymore?
Nano, maybe they've never altered hardware in such a fashion. But then again, find me a linux driver MADE BY MICROSOFT for any microsoft produced hardware??
But the bios is software NOT hardware, lets see if we can name software microsoft has tried to twist so that it only interoperate CORRECTLY with windows... hmmm ALL OF THEIR SOFTWARE. Ok now that thats established, lets see if we can think of a time microsoft has tried to use software leverage to manipulate the DEVELOPEMENT of hardware that only works with windows. The trusted computing initiative. Gee, there we go, point made I believe.
Now lets see if we can find a croo... eh why bother, I'll put the burden back on you, I challenge you to find an action microsoft has taken that WASN'T crooked and windows centric.
Trusted computing is about creating a platform the content providers can trust. Not the computer owners.
Whether the content provider is a network admin rightfully protecting the company owned computers on his network. Or microsoft/riaa wrongfully protecting the computer YOU own from copy infringing materials and from things they just don't like even though you have every legal right to do them.
true dat, not to mention there are simply some people who have no business breeding and spreading their genes to begin with! They simply are not on par.
Repeat after me. THEY have NO right to check and see if I have.
That's what police are for, when they have sufficient evidence to get a judge to sign a warrant, THEN they may come and examine my computer as provided for explicitly in the constitution of the united states of america to prevent EXACTLY this.
I've said it once and I'll say it again, the only LEGITIMATE use for the individual, company, gov entity, etc to keep unauthorized software from running on THEIR OWN computers. Is this good stuff for a fortune 500 to keep their employees from installing winamp and kazaa... absolutely.
Should any 3rd party selling something to me as a member of the public in any way whatsoever be able to utilize this technology? NO. When I buy a piece of software, book, mp3, cd, etc, it should be completely free of this, and then left to me if I want to require signing within my organization to ensure users are only using what I've ok'd, or to keep my kids from installing garbage and spyware.
That is all well and good, but you surely know the masses of people at home are more important than the securtity of any fortune 500 or all of them for that matter.
So long as all DRM applications are knocked out and actively prevented. And there is some sort of guarantee no VENDER can use this technology, that it can only be used at the private level... then it would be a good thing. I could control what software runs on my home systems, but no vendor could generate a key and require ME to verify to THEM.
Slashdot Mirror
*sighs* bitching about those who don't read the articles and you don't even read the headlines!!!
The article said port 80 when originally posted, it was altered after that to port 135.
The author also claims msblaster was an email virus.
Actually the RPC bug that blaster uses affects the communication hooks the firewall in XP uses, as a result it generally won't prevent infection at all. It is able to stop attacks with the latest of the RPC DCOM vulnerabilities (#3 in the past month I believe) which affects all 32bit versions of windows. Perhaps we should tell win98 users to enable to the personal firewall that microsoft included in the patch for the.... oops wait microsoft didn't give this SUPPORTED os a patch for the firewall.
"How is Windows Update hard to understand? It scans your computer for you and tells you which patches you need to install. Security patches are listed as critical, other patches are listed under the "Windows" heading, and drivers by themselves. I can't think of a way to make it easier without removing the user completely."
Excuse me, but how exactly is a new version of the web browser, and the directx 9 something which could possibly be called a "security update". Critical updates means whatever microsoft would like for you to install. Not security patches.
"Yes, they do stop supporting version after a point. No company continues to release patches to every version of software forever. Try getting patches for Red Hat 3.0, you can't do it. And when they have upgrades, they are clearly marked. I have never accidentally updated anything, as they are clearly marked as being the next version of the software."
odd, I can download patches for rh8 and EVERY application that came with it. I see here... but I can't download any new patches for IE5 or for WMP6, in fact I couldn't since the first day they released the new versions. New holes are only patched in the new version.
You spoiled little brat. More than 70% of US citizens (who are paid drastically more than those in pretty much all other nations) make less than $55k/year! Of the 30% who make that much or more I'd be willing to wager at least 25% of them have to work 60+hr weeks.
The other 5% make more money altogether than the bottom 60% of the entire US population!!! These numbers according to the IRS. Look it up yourself.
If you find 50k+ a yr to be chump change perhaps you should drop your own salary a bit to make way for the experienced and unemployed masses out there who would be happy to have it. Of course some of those masses are people like you, who are unemployed because they felt faint at the prospect of *gasp* having to feed their wife and dog on a mere 55k/yr!
true, that is why open source is so effective ;)
mv vs cp
/mnt/floppy/ /mnt/floppy
/mnt/floppy/ /mnt/floppy
I'll explain this as well as I can to someone who fails to grasp the concept.
lets say we have a file, song.mp3
if I
cp song.mp3 songcopy.mp3
mv song.mp3
sync
umount
I made a copy! I can now give the floppy for a friend and my song.mp3 is STILL THERE!!!! Nothing is missing!!!
Now if I simply...
mv song.mp3
sync
umount
And give it to my friend, he now has my song.mp3 file and I have non for myself, we've MOVED it instead of making a copy of it.
" The first emulator of these arcade games was for the Mac and it was a commercial package"
yes but nearly nobody has ever heard of it, all it did was maybe inspire MAME to preserve the history. Who did it first is irrelevant.
"Surely not eveyrone with thousands or ROMs can wrap himself in the flag of protecting those bits from the scrapheap of history?"
making redundant copies is least thing these people are doing to preserve the bits from the scrapheap. It's playing them and inviting friends to do the same. It's those same people who will be BUYING roms from sites like this because of their own renewed interest in the games. And who will be spreading the word.
If that mac emulator had remained the only one, there wouldn't be any interested buyers. If Mame didn't exist those individual with thousands of roms wouldn't exist and they ARE the buyers. And without those people with massive collections their friends and relatives and co-workers they've introduced to the games they used to love again wouldn't exist.
Personally I have a pirated mame collection of a modest 280ish roms at work. All of my co-workers asked for games they used to love in the old style arcades. Every one of them would buy roms now. If it weren't for my pirated collection and my following news regarding roms, they'd A, have no interest, and B never hear about starroms.
I don't care what any RIAA lawyer or rep says to insure they can sell you the same thing repeatedly.
A copyright holder cannot copyright media, and cannot license it, they can only grant license to what they have copyrighted... the lyrics themselves, the actual combination of notes. This is what they have a copyright for and therefore what you have a license for.
However a port of a game from one platform to another is a bit different, what is copyrighted is the code and the code is not the same.
I reread what you said and you did relent and say media-savvy. Perhaps I pounced a bit too hard and fast on that one.
;)
I've just read many people saying that mac users tend to be more tech savvy recently and that anal part of me that can't stand nonsense snapped
Apple caters to more tech savvy people? Surely you have completely lost it. Apple macs the most idiot proof operating systems for the most ignorant users on the planet. I mean come on. Yes there are mac power users like every other arena, but the average mac user barely undersands the concept of mouse. The average mac using professional knows alot about
video and STILL barely understands the concept of the mouse. In general mac users start out computer stupid just like pc users, the difference is that pc users have to start learning more about their computer to keep it running properly. mac's are designed (successfully) to keep the user from ever needing to know a single thing about their machine, and thus they generally don't.
It shares EVERY fundemental component with it. You cannot boot linux or windows on it without a hack because of the bios which was put on it for exactly that reason. With a regular bios designed for it's board it's just a regular ibm clone designed to a reduced form factor!
My point is that the software written for a platform does not define what the platform inheriently is. The Xbox is an ibm pc compatible, the playstation 2 is not. Both are computers, that calculator in the drawer there is a computer too. The question wasn't about computers, it was about pc's. The definition of a pc is not in the software, it's in the hardware.
"ok, so let me get this straight, if I buy 1u server componenets and build it into a small case, flash a proprietary bios with DRM and call it a game console, that means it's not a pc anymore?"
"No. When you build a machine and strictly make nothing but games for it, then it's a game console. We're not talking about a difficult equation here."
ok, so doing the above is not enough to turn the pc I built into a game console, I have to make a dvd player... oops that's an app. ok I have to make an ip stack for network gam... oops that's application. oh right, I have to make nothing but games for the above pc with a flashed bios in a set top case. The software I write for it (disregarding everything anyone else writes for it) magically transforms that pc into a game console. Gotcha.
Gee I thought I'd have to do something difficult like sony and nintendo did and actually produce an architecture instead of just loading a different bios on pc hardware. silly me.
"I can see the next ms.blaster worm that wipes your bios requireing you to replace the ROM."
read "replace the ROM" as "replace the board" and thinking along the same lines microsoft will use to get motherboard manufacturers in on this.
That's exactly what this is about. CD-Burners that don't comply with "trusted" computing encryption and DRM schemes, keyboards and mice in the same token. Even monitor that turn off when a signal i sent by the os saying someone is playing a "pirated" video they made at home on a camcorder that doesn't have the DRM circuitry (after all it might have been recording a movie in a theater and not your kids first birthday cake!).
It's called amibios and it's not windows.
The drm technology does more than check for a flag somewhere to determine if it's turned to 0/1, the content is encrypted.
I readily admit I haven't much played with OSX or inspected it so I'm talking out my arse.
But isn't OSX based on BSD now? Couldn't you use BSD drivers?
"Um.. no it isn't. Unless you want to count the PS2 and the Dreamcast as PC's, you can't claim Microsoft's is suddenly one. They may have similar components, but that does not a PC make. You can give a man a baboon's heart, but he doesn't suddenly become a baboon."
ok, so let me get this straight, if I buy 1u server componenets and build it into a small case, flash a proprietary bios with DRM and call it a game console, that means it's not a pc anymore?
Nano, maybe they've never altered hardware in such a fashion. But then again, find me a linux driver MADE BY MICROSOFT for any microsoft produced hardware??
But the bios is software NOT hardware, lets see if we can name software microsoft has tried to twist so that it only interoperate CORRECTLY with windows... hmmm ALL OF THEIR SOFTWARE. Ok now that thats established, lets see if we can think of a time microsoft has tried to use software leverage to manipulate the DEVELOPEMENT of hardware that only works with windows. The trusted computing initiative. Gee, there we go, point made I believe.
Now lets see if we can find a croo... eh why bother, I'll put the burden back on you, I challenge you to find an action microsoft has taken that WASN'T crooked and windows centric.
Trusted computing is about creating a platform the content providers can trust. Not the computer owners.
Whether the content provider is a network admin rightfully protecting the company owned computers on his network. Or microsoft/riaa wrongfully protecting the computer YOU own from copy infringing materials and from things they just don't like even though you have every legal right to do them.
true dat, not to mention there are simply some people who have no business breeding and spreading their genes to begin with! They simply are not on par.
Repeat after me. THEY have NO right to check and see if I have.
That's what police are for, when they have sufficient evidence to get a judge to sign a warrant, THEN they may come and examine my computer as provided for explicitly in the constitution of the united states of america to prevent EXACTLY this.
I've said it once and I'll say it again, the only LEGITIMATE use for the individual, company, gov entity, etc to keep unauthorized software from running on THEIR OWN computers. Is this good stuff for a fortune 500 to keep their employees from installing winamp and kazaa... absolutely.
Should any 3rd party selling something to me as a member of the public in any way whatsoever be able to utilize this technology? NO. When I buy a piece of software, book, mp3, cd, etc, it should be completely free of this, and then left to me if I want to require signing within my organization to ensure users are only using what I've ok'd, or to keep my kids from installing garbage and spyware.
The ONLY LEGITIMATE use of trusted computing is for network administrators to control what applications their users can install and run.
The other uses like DRM are not legitimate and your right they'd be more or less useless with the EFF's changes. So what's your point?
That is all well and good, but you surely know the masses of people at home are more important than the securtity of any fortune 500 or all of them for that matter.
So long as all DRM applications are knocked out and actively prevented. And there is some sort of guarantee no VENDER can use this technology, that it can only be used at the private level... then it would be a good thing. I could control what software runs on my home systems, but no vendor could generate a key and require ME to verify to THEM.
I really don't see how you'd manage this though,