I can see it now: Bill Gates shows up at your front door, hands you a million dollars, and walks away. You run to your computer and submit the headline, "BILL GATES IS A TRESSPASSER."
Depends whether or not the toiletpaper was already used.
(if you were that rich you'd wipe you ass with money at least once too)
1) generate public/private key pair. Public key gets stored on a "trusted" server
2) Server sends random string of data
3) Client sends reply with signature of data and ID.
4) Server looks up public key from keyserver and verifies signature
With this scheme the reply to the webserver is unique per request/session and can only come from the private key (barring any hashing/crypto exploits). The public key is retrieved from a "trusted" server so that some authenticty can be ensured without the client/server having had contact before.
The only weakpoint (security wise) is that the private key is still stored on your computer and vulnerable to attack and that will never change.
Just yesterday I had my client telling me we needed to make the entire user interface use AJAX. The workflow would be exactly identical, the only difference is he can tell potential adopters that we use .
Alot of people are posting about other companies working on the same thing. None that I looked at were nearly as refined or easy to use. One actually recommended walking down/across a 6 lane highway to get to the train station.
The big thing that will separate google transit from others is that it piggy backs on top of thier mapping system. Eventually it will allow google to produce a trip planner that includes driving, parking, and mass transit.
"I've read TFA, according to the article it's a design flaw in IE. No one seems to be blaming Google anyway?"
They are just taking a defensive stance early on. Considering microsoft is going up against google in several different webapps, it wouldn't surprise me (or anyone else) that the M$ uses this to try and hurt googles pretty boy image. I bet the exploit will be "very difficult to fix" and M$ will throw blame in thier direction while they "work furiously" to produce a patch.
I want to know how anyone could lose a lawsuit to them or even give in.
names are not mutally exclusive. Using thier logic if i sat on a corner selling bibles and crack I could not be called a crackdealer because I prefered to be called a bible salesman.
It's not slander if its true. The definition of spyware is anything that monitors and reports your actions to a 3rd party. They have admitted that is exactly what thier product did. Regardless of whether the user agreed to the intentionally long EULA it does not prevent them from getting advice about thier computer. Just imagine if every company were allowed to sue everyone who made a recommendation against thier products. Even non-profit organizations such as better business bureau would be liable.
You probably weren't the only one who submitted this. This story got posted several hours ago on other websites and was filtering through irc. The official release time was supposed to be 1:30 PST.
This release is not just for firefox 1.5 but also a redesigned addons.mozilla.org
needless to say this is a big release and people have been working all morning to ensure it goes well.
Get some war veterens behind the cause. It would be near impossible for politicians to ignore soldiers wounded in the defense of this country. They already spend enormous amounts of money caring for these people so cost is not an issue. It would be political suicide to go against it.
It has come to my attention that you have made anti-bush comments and are at this very moment having anti-bush thoughts. It is extremely un-patriotic to question the judgement of the President. He is your elected President and can do no wrong. The black helicopters will be by shortly to pick you up for your brainwashing.
It wouldnt be worth thier effort to try and sue him. Bittorrent is an opensource app, they sue bram cohen nothing changes. He can't take back the license for copies already distributed or stop derivitive works. He probably wouldn't even have the money to pay a settlement that covers the MPAA's lawyer fees.
If they sue him its for one reason: To destroy his life.
however, if they get him as a partner that opens the door for them to get a copy of the sourcecode with a different license. Under an opensource license they will never be able to produce a commercial DRM laden product based on Bittorrent.
Re:The price is about the same as CD + Stick
on
Barenaked USB Drive
·
· Score: 1
YOU arent buying the memory stick at cost, they are. They are selling it to you for the same price you would pay for a single stick from a store. Maybe if you plan on buying 100,000 copies of the album they will cut you a deal.
"Of course, maybe I'm just mad that you're supposed to buy this crap once a year for a very high fee when it takes like 20 seconds to regenerate one of these things. The initial fee is understandable if they actually verify to some real extent the identity, but after that its just a money grubbing joke."
You hit it right on the head. Certificate signing is a racket for making easy money. It is a racket because instead of the fee being used to provide security they just mislead the public with a false sense of it.
IMO businesses should not be made out of services that exist to protect the public. The main goal of all businesses is to make money. Only when profits and greed are removed can the goal switch to protecting the public.
The price is about the same as CD + Stick
on
Barenaked USB Drive
·
· Score: 1
The price of 128meg memory sticks start at $14. Add in the cost of a normal album and you have about $30. They aren't making anymore money except maybe for selling you 2 products at the same time.
Is it worth it? Probably not unless you wanted a memory stick too. Personally, the memory stick is way too small for my tastes. I'd rather spend my money on 1g SD card that will work in my PDA, computer, camera, etc.
Its just a gimmick to get attention and its working.
This is not at all unexpected. Microsoft makes alot of money from office so they obivously want to squash the OpenDocument movement that was starting in MA. Opening the M$ office formats takes thier main argument away.
IMO it shouldn't change anything because once OpenOffice supports M$ formats government and business can use BOTH OpenOffice and M$ Office. OpenOffice for standard employees and people with needs for specific features such as usability get M$.
The big question is what lag time will there be when M$ updates the format, produces a complete new format, or just refuses to release updates? Once M$ realizes they opened the door for OpenOffice no doubt they will artificially introduce reasons to use thier product.
The chances of having a fake to match a car in the vicinity of the crime is low. Even if you researched your target area and found a car to pose as there is no telling even it will even be driven at the time of your crime. Switching out plates during a car chase isn't even plausible unless you have something built into your car like james bond.
Sony is just trying to get people to agree to a settlement before they can be found guilty.
Getting your money back is not enough.
The bad press sony is feeling is not enough
I don't doubt that sony will try this again only they will dump money in so it isn't a half assed rootkit. They will make sure the EULA covers all actions and potential damages. A court ruling sets precedent and will deter future attempts. Accept the payoff and you're only taking a step closer to the confined world of DRM.
"They've already been doing it for years with movies On Demand, now you can do the same thing on your computer. There are time limits for On Demand and Blockbuster, now it's the limit for your authorized download."
Yes, but you also get the movie when you want it. It will take at least several hours if not several days to download a movie, especially if the network is not popular. People want to watch movies when they have the time available, not the other way around.
It's still the lesser of 2 evils: Vendor lock in or Paying for features you need now.
Eventually the features will get added to open officer whether or not someone specifically pays for them, but that isn't the issue. The issue is that we need the features sooner rather than later and for that you pay.
You (taxpayer, consumer, end user) are paying for development of a product one way or another. The choice is a steady influx of money to microsoft, who will do whatever they want with it, or knowing the money goes to freeing yourself from vendor lockin and eventual loss of data.
When you start performing long term planning, instead of focusing only on short term needs, you will see the benefit.
given the high level of spam I get at any yahoo mail account ive ever created. Half of which is sponsored or allowed through the spam filters by yahoo. I will NEVER trust yahoo to certify my products. Given thier past actions certification will be nothing more than a company paying for yahoo's shiny logo on thier product.
With enough money you could get a "program" that installs nothing but virii, rootkits, trojans and other nastyness aproved by them.
"Ultimately MA is going to have to decide whether it can afford to turn its back on a small slice of its populace or continue the process of inclusion. I'm hoping for the latter, since within the disabled spectrum, there are plenty of people still capable of working and being productive members of society."
There are common misconceptions in the comments being made, here is the reality:
MA does NOT need to turn thier back on anyone.
Accessibility support does NOT require programmmers to donate thier time.
MA can take the money they would have spent on microsoft licensing and instead spend it on the developing required features in openoffice/etc. Even better, they would look for support in other state and federal governments also willing to contribute. For the amount of money the entire U.S. (government, businesses, citizens) spends on office products, there is no feature that would be left out.
There is nothing saying you can't pay opensource developers. IBM and other big companies do this for the linux kernel. I get paid for developing much smaller OS projects. Government and businesses just need to wake up and realize the potential cost savings they are overlooking.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends whether or not the toiletpaper was already used.
(if you were that rich you'd wipe you ass with money at least once too)
1) generate public/private key pair. Public key gets stored on a "trusted" server
2) Server sends random string of data
3) Client sends reply with signature of data and ID.
4) Server looks up public key from keyserver and verifies signature
With this scheme the reply to the webserver is unique per request/session and can only come from the private key (barring any hashing/crypto exploits). The public key is retrieved from a "trusted" server so that some authenticty can be ensured without the client/server having had contact before.
The only weakpoint (security wise) is that the private key is still stored on your computer and vulnerable to attack and that will never change.
Just yesterday I had my client telling me we needed to make the entire user interface use AJAX. The workflow would be exactly identical, the only difference is he can tell potential adopters that we use .
The big thing that will separate google transit from others is that it piggy backs on top of thier mapping system. Eventually it will allow google to produce a trip planner that includes driving, parking, and mass transit.
I have a photographic memory so my employer forces me to work blindfolded.
They are just taking a defensive stance early on. Considering microsoft is going up against google in several different webapps, it wouldn't surprise me (or anyone else) that the M$ uses this to try and hurt googles pretty boy image. I bet the exploit will be "very difficult to fix" and M$ will throw blame in thier direction while they "work furiously" to produce a patch.
names are not mutally exclusive. Using thier logic if i sat on a corner selling bibles and crack I could not be called a crackdealer because I prefered to be called a bible salesman.
It's not slander if its true. The definition of spyware is anything that monitors and reports your actions to a 3rd party. They have admitted that is exactly what thier product did. Regardless of whether the user agreed to the intentionally long EULA it does not prevent them from getting advice about thier computer. Just imagine if every company were allowed to sue everyone who made a recommendation against thier products. Even non-profit organizations such as better business bureau would be liable.
This release is not just for firefox 1.5 but also a redesigned addons.mozilla.org
needless to say this is a big release and people have been working all morning to ensure it goes well.Get some war veterens behind the cause. It would be near impossible for politicians to ignore soldiers wounded in the defense of this country. They already spend enormous amounts of money caring for these people so cost is not an issue. It would be political suicide to go against it.
If thats the case then I heard Elisha Cuthbert frequently plots terrorist attacks while in the shower.
It has come to my attention that you have made anti-bush comments and are at this very moment having anti-bush thoughts. It is extremely un-patriotic to question the judgement of the President. He is your elected President and can do no wrong. The black helicopters will be by shortly to pick you up for your brainwashing.
Not when wages are being kept down by companies off-shoring.
If they sue him its for one reason: To destroy his life.
however, if they get him as a partner that opens the door for them to get a copy of the sourcecode with a different license. Under an opensource license they will never be able to produce a commercial DRM laden product based on Bittorrent.
YOU arent buying the memory stick at cost, they are. They are selling it to you for the same price you would pay for a single stick from a store. Maybe if you plan on buying 100,000 copies of the album they will cut you a deal.
You hit it right on the head. Certificate signing is a racket for making easy money. It is a racket because instead of the fee being used to provide security they just mislead the public with a false sense of it.
IMO businesses should not be made out of services that exist to protect the public. The main goal of all businesses is to make money. Only when profits and greed are removed can the goal switch to protecting the public.
Is it worth it? Probably not unless you wanted a memory stick too. Personally, the memory stick is way too small for my tastes. I'd rather spend my money on 1g SD card that will work in my PDA, computer, camera, etc.
Its just a gimmick to get attention and its working.
IMO it shouldn't change anything because once OpenOffice supports M$ formats government and business can use BOTH OpenOffice and M$ Office. OpenOffice for standard employees and people with needs for specific features such as usability get M$.
The big question is what lag time will there be when M$ updates the format, produces a complete new format, or just refuses to release updates? Once M$ realizes they opened the door for OpenOffice no doubt they will artificially introduce reasons to use thier product.
The chances of having a fake to match a car in the vicinity of the crime is low. Even if you researched your target area and found a car to pose as there is no telling even it will even be driven at the time of your crime. Switching out plates during a car chase isn't even plausible unless you have something built into your car like james bond.
Getting your money back is not enough.
I don't doubt that sony will try this again only they will dump money in so it isn't a half assed rootkit. They will make sure the EULA covers all actions and potential damages. A court ruling sets precedent and will deter future attempts. Accept the payoff and you're only taking a step closer to the confined world of DRM.The bad press sony is feeling is not enough
Large selection.
Don't pay for it.
Do whatever I want with it (without having to defeat DRM)
That is exactly why this service will fail.
I've already paid for cable service, I see no legal issues with downloading these shows.
Yes, but you also get the movie when you want it. It will take at least several hours if not several days to download a movie, especially if the network is not popular. People want to watch movies when they have the time available, not the other way around.
Eventually the features will get added to open officer whether or not someone specifically pays for them, but that isn't the issue. The issue is that we need the features sooner rather than later and for that you pay.
You (taxpayer, consumer, end user) are paying for development of a product one way or another. The choice is a steady influx of money to microsoft, who will do whatever they want with it, or knowing the money goes to freeing yourself from vendor lockin and eventual loss of data.
When you start performing long term planning, instead of focusing only on short term needs, you will see the benefit.
With enough money you could get a "program" that installs nothing but virii, rootkits, trojans and other nastyness aproved by them.
There are common misconceptions in the comments being made, here is the reality:
MA can take the money they would have spent on microsoft licensing and instead spend it on the developing required features in openoffice/etc. Even better, they would look for support in other state and federal governments also willing to contribute. For the amount of money the entire U.S. (government, businesses, citizens) spends on office products, there is no feature that would be left out.
There is nothing saying you can't pay opensource developers. IBM and other big companies do this for the linux kernel. I get paid for developing much smaller OS projects. Government and businesses just need to wake up and realize the potential cost savings they are overlooking.
http://www.netflix.com/Search?v1=Dunyayi+Kurtaran+ Adam&search_submit.x=0&search_submit.y=0