CDRfaq.org has a pretty good discussion of CD-R life with links to studies from NIST and Kodak and a variety of other people. The article also suggests (without quoting its sources) that CD-Rs might last longer than pressed CDs. Can anyone confirm this?
It's also worth noting that although the researcher here said that CD-Rs would only last 5 years, many manufacturers claim that their CD-Rs will last 75 or 100 years. Maybe the truth is somewhere in between. Personally, I have CD-Rs from 5 and 6 years ago (remember when MP3.com sold burned-to-order CDs?) and they still sound fine.
Oh, okay... I didn't realize that the "TPC Chip" that they were referring to was basically the whole "Trusted Computing" shebang. The article made it sound like the chip was just an ID thing, and only at the end does the author get into the rest of what Trusted Computing does.
This makes things a lot more complicated, as the EFF is quick to point out. Yeesh.
Re:Is the court's suggestion technically feasible?
on
Kazaa Owners Risk Jail
·
· Score: 1
Whoops... okay, that's what I get for not reading the Wikipedia article carefully & not having my facts clear. Thanks for setting me straight!:)
Is the court's suggestion technically feasible?
on
Kazaa Owners Risk Jail
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
So the courts want the Kazaa folks "to modify the software to ensure 3,000 keywords would be filtered by 5 December." The hitch is that existing copies wouldn't filter stuff, presumably - the nature of P2P makes that impossible.
I don't see what the big deal is: the owners did all they could to take Kazaa out of Australia altogether. Even if they made a modified version of the program for Australians - which I think would be less of a drastic change than denying downloads altogether - the fact remanins that the original version of the program will be floating around on the Internet and that plenty of people already have it. You can't filter those people's programs, and who's going to knowingly download a crippled verion of Kazaa? And deleting or disasbling existing copies of the program is similarly impossible.
So if you knowingly set up a network that you can't take down, what happens when it's deemed illegal and you say, "Hey, my hands are tied"? Is anyone to blame there? The users? The creators? Justin Frankel (who first dreamed up the Gnutella protocol that Kazaa is based on)? This is a really messy issue, and I don't think that the judge fully understands what the record companies are asking for.
Yeah. Now that I think of it, that's probably a given. I guess I should've been more specific: if people leave their PC's on without a power-save mode or something that might be considered a "startup," this might take a password/finger scan to get from BIOS to OS. If the TPM folks really think that authenticating only at cold startups is enough, they're insane. Which is certainly possible.
"With a TPM onboard, each time your computer starts, you prove your identity to the machine using something as simple as a PIN number or, preferably, a more secure system such as a fingerprint reader."
They'd have to get past this part first (unless people leave their computers on 24/7... which I guess is possible).
Intel quickly made the serial number disabled by default, and few web sites ever started using it. If people *really* have issues with such a system, they won't use it, and they won't buy products that require it. If they don't buy it, companies won't sell it.
If it's an issue, media attention can get people to vote with their dollars and keep it from being a standard.
The only thing that worries me, though, is the Microsoft comment. If somehow Windows requires this system, it'll become a de facto standard. But MS has tread pretty carefully so far - e.g., restrictions on how often you can activate a copy of Windows are pretty lenient. But we'll see if that holds.
Even still, though, MS won't want to make consumers buy new PC's or accept something they don't like in order to buy the new Windows for fear of losing business. So it comes down to whether people really oppose this or not.
What's to stop me from using someone else's info (especially if I'm a phisher and I *have* this stuff lying around) and framing them? Domain contact info is kinda like the Slashdot polls: it's interesting and nice to have on hand, but if you really trust it as a source of accurate information, you're nuts.
(Also, if I were a phisher, wouldn't I just copy the registration information from the website that I was imitating so I'd look even *more* legit?)
I think the government is really over-reacting to this one. Domain registration info won't help identify/prosecute phishers, and the vast majority of people who put fake info in these listings just don't want to get spam, telemarketers, and people harassing them or their family.
If this guy wants to play with fire, I suggest somebody put up a site to publish all of Jack's threats and verbal abuse (plus nonsense) and see if he gets institutionalized.
Hit this site to read about him calling Janet Reno a lesbian, trying to ban a 2 Live Crew album, attempting to get the creator of an anti-Thompson buddy icon arrested after the creator took the icon offline, and other fun stuff.
Does anyone else find it ironic that such an outspoken opponent of violence in the media is so vicious in real life?
...and did it in his name, according to the newspost at the bottom if this page.
So Jack Thompson is a Warrior of God now? Glad to see he's attacking something as significant as video games, and not tackling war or poverty or anything silly like that. Yeesh.
...newly-government approved Chinese names of the form . (i.e. 'name.gongsi') and . (i.e 'name.wangluo')... The purchase of Simplified Chinese names from the i-DNS.net/CNNIC partnership will automatically allow the corresponding web-site to be accessed by an equivalent, computer-generated domain name in Traditional Chinese characters (i.e. used in Hong Kong and Taiwan) free of charge. Conversely, one can also buy a Traditional Chinese name directly and get an automatically assigned Simplified Chinese version free.
Maybe I'm missing something, but it sounds like a non-Chinese user could type in.gongsi or.wangluo instead of traditional Chinese characters and get the same website. In other words, this system doesn't lock users in or out... I really don't see how this is that big of deal. Not to be a jerk, but do the editors read these articles? I'm not a very big fan of China's internet policies myself, but the newspost's threats of lock-in are totally unfounded.
Is airwaves any more of a public resource than newspapers?
Yes. If I don't like what your newspaper has to say, or it has naked people or something and I don't want my family to see that, I just won't buy it. If I don't like what your broadcast TV or radio station has to say, too bad - the signals are in my house whether I want them or not, and unless I throw out my TV and radio, my family will be able to see whatever's being broadcast. Maybe kids are cursing a lot, but who are you to decide that that makes it okay for my (theoretical) family?
I do think the fines for indecency are kinda high, and we do have more important things to worry about than Janet Jackson's chest. At the same time, though, I feel that the fines are necessary: many stations would see them as a necessary cost of business and ignore them otherwise. That's probably not the same with, say, nuclear reactors; the bad publicity alone (not to mention the threat of being totally shut down and, if the owners have any decency at all, the threat to people's lives) is reason to for people to keep your reactor safe. INAL, but I'm assuming that when there's a problem at a reactor, the people running it get a lot more than a fine.
Thanks for explaining that; that makes a lot of sense. If you don't have a Fastlane tag and you speed through a toll booth, do they photograph your license plate and use that to send you a ticket? If that's the case, Fastlane probably doesn't reveal anything that isn't available already and I'll probably have to put my foot in my mouth.:)
Just out of curiosity, do you know if Fastlane logs anything, or is the data thrown away once the tolls are paid?
With the FastLane toll-paying transimtters here in Massachussets, the government tracks how long it takes you to get from one toll booth to another. From there, you can calculate the average speed of the car between the two booths. I this isn't theoretical; the government actually does it. I know someone who got a speeding ticket in the mail but was never pulled over; it turned out that his Fast Lane reciever had signalled that he was speeding.
I can deal with that because FastLane is an optional convenience. If California's transmitters become mandatory and they do track people's speeds (which seems likely), I see that as a serious invasion of privacy. Could they use these GPS devices to track criminals with a warrant? Might these transmitters fall under portions of the USA Patriot act that allow wiretapping and such without a warrant? (That's not a rhetorical question; INAL and I seriously don't know). I understand that California needs tax money to keep the roads in good condition, and it makes sense that the people who drive on them should have to pay for them. But there are some major problems with the way this is being done. If these transmitters become mandatory and nobody makes sure that the law protects our privacy, then we could have an invasion of privacy like none other on our hands.
They need personal data to see whether someone who leaves one college will transfer to another. It sounds like each college provides its own data, so the only way to fix this problem is to unify all the data. Without personal information, all that you'd have is lists of how many people left school and how many people enrolled. You'd have no way of seeing whether people transferred to another school or just dropped out, and you'd (theoretically) have no way of seeing whether someone was returning to school late or transferring.
Race and gender probably would show whether affirmative action programs, etc. are working and whether the government needs to focus on the needs of specific groups.
The part about using someone's address kinda scares me, though. There's no reason why they need that... although if they have someone's SS# (as they'd have to; there are a bajillion Joe Smiths out there that need to be tracked uniquely), they'd probably have his/her address on file anyway.
I'm using Windows XP SP2 and I'm not having any problems either - it must be a problem with the Linux version.
I do have problems with some Flash ads, though: my CPU usage will go to around 80%, and I'll have to close a browser window to make it stop. That can't be right - I'm running an 800mHz machine with plenty of free RAM.
Firefox 1.0 isn't perfectly rock-solid, but I find it to be pretty reliable. The Flash & CNN crashing on Linux problems are weird, though: I wonder if Firefox 1.0 was a little bit rushed with all the hubbub surrounding its release. But it's still a very good piece of software: I'm using it right now, and I've had no more crashes than I have with IE.
When a startup company's developing technology, it'll spend a period of time in "stealth mode" - i.e. they won't release any information about what they're doing so somebody doesn't come and copy their idea while they're still working on it. The website must not have been updated since they came out of stealth mode. (Plus, having such little information available might make people curious about the company). Maybe check back in a week or two.
In all the lawsuits that the RIAA has filed so far, there's been some logical basis for their case - and it's usually something like "People our using our stuff without our permission; make them stop." There's some logic in that: the RIAA makes its profit off of intellectual property that people are getting off KaZaa for free. There would be no such logic in the case that you're describing.
I don't believe that RIAA is as fanatical as the/. crowd tend to think. The RIAA is constantly looking out for their bottom line at the expense of "free information," but I don't think that they're as fanatically against free content as you think. I'm sure they don't love the idea (they're selling the stuff; free content can make bought content less desirable), but you don't see anybody suing, say, purevolume or music.download.com because they have no case and because, in many cases, the labels providing free content are members of the RIAA.
The logic RIAA's arguments have of course been slanted towards their point of view, and "knowing better" is probably defined as "being able to profit and not get in trouble," but there is some logic there, and it would say that a lawsuit wouldn't benefit the RIAA or its members.
I say this, by the way, not as some nutty corporate sympathizer but as someone who's starting a little indie record label that's giving out music for free. There are certainly a lot of problems with the music industry, but you paint labels as totally evil corporate suits. They're certainly interested in the bottom line, but that doesn't make them out-and-out jerks.
By the way, IndyMediaWatch guy, INAL, but if you're the plantiff in a lawsuit and you lose, I don't think that's really a problem - it's not like you'll be fined; it's just that the defendant wouldn't be punished or anything. You have a problem when you lose and you're the defendant.
No, they're not. Wired has permission from the artists and the record labels to be distributing their songs: even if some people in the RIAA think this might be a bad precedent, they can't do anything about it, because they simply have no legal case. This goes beyond a question of fair use vs. copyright infringement: it's been done with permission and it's legal, end of story.
like they know what type of license it is, They know one thing: $$$
The RIAA might be greedy, but they're not morons, and I'm sure they know copyright law like the backs of their hands. They know that they have no case and that a judge would probably throw out any attempt at a lawsuit.
By the way, what would be in it for them? I'm not sure if these labels are RIAA members, but if so, the RIAA would be acting against the decisions of their own members. If not, the RIAA has no business intervening.
Graphing Calculators can provide a similar (and much cheaper) tool. Beginners can start off with BASIC programs, and although these require some tweaking to run smoothly, that's part of the fun. (I goofed around with one myself a little while ago). More advanced assembly programmers have achieved some amazing stuff (such as greyscale on a black-and-white screen and a very accurate port of Bubble Bobble. The specs are all there for the asking.
Sure, calculators aren't as cool or powerful as what Lamothe is putting out there, but they do force you to be creative and do a lot with a little. Besides, making something happen on a little box just seems cooler - you tend to take having complex software for granted with PC's.
...who usually have policies against this kind of thing. See Comcast's here (look at item ix). (If you were thinking of having them get some kind of business-quality connection that would allow that, remember that someone has to pay the bills for that. Maybe I'm being too cynical here, but the idea just doesn't seem very feasible.
As a senator, John Kerry may have given his vote, and as President, George Bush signed it, but these two wrote it, not Bush or Kerry. The CAN-SPAM act may be pretty bad, but Bush and Kerry didn't put loopholes into it to help their campaigns. If you're going to put political jabs into news posts, please do a little research first.:)
Can someone clarify his view for me? I don't follow Linux very closely, but am genuinely curious what Linus' real thoughts on the future of Linux for the desktop are.
He says in both articles that there have been a bunch of really good developments in making Linux user-friendly, but it'll be a while before Joe User feels comfortable sitting down in front of a Linux box. The earlier story but kind of a spin on it - it sounds like they took what Linus said a little bit too far. He didn't really say that 2004 would be the "year of Linux on the desktop"; he said that "This year there will be a lot of desktop users." That's it. Even if you did RTFA, it's still kinda confusing. That's the media for you.:)
Winamp's privacy policy is at http://www.winamp.com/disclaimer.php. It used to be on another page (Google chache here), but it was never at http://www.winamp.com/privacy, which the parent linked to - that's why you're getting a 404 error. Just in case you were wondering about that.
Slashdot Mirror
CDRfaq.org has a pretty good discussion of CD-R life with links to studies from NIST and Kodak and a variety of other people. The article also suggests (without quoting its sources) that CD-Rs might last longer than pressed CDs. Can anyone confirm this?
It's also worth noting that although the researcher here said that CD-Rs would only last 5 years, many manufacturers claim that their CD-Rs will last 75 or 100 years. Maybe the truth is somewhere in between. Personally, I have CD-Rs from 5 and 6 years ago (remember when MP3.com sold burned-to-order CDs?) and they still sound fine.
Oh, okay... I didn't realize that the "TPC Chip" that they were referring to was basically the whole "Trusted Computing" shebang. The article made it sound like the chip was just an ID thing, and only at the end does the author get into the rest of what Trusted Computing does.
This makes things a lot more complicated, as the EFF is quick to point out. Yeesh.
Whoops... okay, that's what I get for not reading the Wikipedia article carefully & not having my facts clear. Thanks for setting me straight! :)
So the courts want the Kazaa folks "to modify the software to ensure 3,000 keywords would be filtered by 5 December." The hitch is that existing copies wouldn't filter stuff, presumably - the nature of P2P makes that impossible.
I don't see what the big deal is: the owners did all they could to take Kazaa out of Australia altogether. Even if they made a modified version of the program for Australians - which I think would be less of a drastic change than denying downloads altogether - the fact remanins that the original version of the program will be floating around on the Internet and that plenty of people already have it. You can't filter those people's programs, and who's going to knowingly download a crippled verion of Kazaa? And deleting or disasbling existing copies of the program is similarly impossible.
So if you knowingly set up a network that you can't take down, what happens when it's deemed illegal and you say, "Hey, my hands are tied"? Is anyone to blame there? The users? The creators? Justin Frankel (who first dreamed up the Gnutella protocol that Kazaa is based on)? This is a really messy issue, and I don't think that the judge fully understands what the record companies are asking for.
Yeah. Now that I think of it, that's probably a given. I guess I should've been more specific: if people leave their PC's on without a power-save mode or something that might be considered a "startup," this might take a password/finger scan to get from BIOS to OS. If the TPM folks really think that authenticating only at cold startups is enough, they're insane. Which is certainly possible.
"With a TPM onboard, each time your computer starts, you prove your identity to the machine using something as simple as a PIN number or, preferably, a more secure system such as a fingerprint reader." They'd have to get past this part first (unless people leave their computers on 24/7... which I guess is possible).
Intel quickly made the serial number disabled by default, and few web sites ever started using it. If people *really* have issues with such a system, they won't use it, and they won't buy products that require it. If they don't buy it, companies won't sell it. If it's an issue, media attention can get people to vote with their dollars and keep it from being a standard. The only thing that worries me, though, is the Microsoft comment. If somehow Windows requires this system, it'll become a de facto standard. But MS has tread pretty carefully so far - e.g., restrictions on how often you can activate a copy of Windows are pretty lenient. But we'll see if that holds. Even still, though, MS won't want to make consumers buy new PC's or accept something they don't like in order to buy the new Windows for fear of losing business. So it comes down to whether people really oppose this or not.
What's to stop me from using someone else's info (especially if I'm a phisher and I *have* this stuff lying around) and framing them? Domain contact info is kinda like the Slashdot polls: it's interesting and nice to have on hand, but if you really trust it as a source of accurate information, you're nuts. (Also, if I were a phisher, wouldn't I just copy the registration information from the website that I was imitating so I'd look even *more* legit?)
I think the government is really over-reacting to this one. Domain registration info won't help identify/prosecute phishers, and the vast majority of people who put fake info in these listings just don't want to get spam, telemarketers, and people harassing them or their family.
If this guy wants to play with fire, I suggest somebody put up a site to publish all of Jack's threats and verbal abuse (plus nonsense) and see if he gets institutionalized.
Hit this site to read about him calling Janet Reno a lesbian, trying to ban a 2 Live Crew album, attempting to get the creator of an anti-Thompson buddy icon arrested after the creator took the icon offline, and other fun stuff.
Does anyone else find it ironic that such an outspoken opponent of violence in the media is so vicious in real life?
...and did it in his name, according to the newspost at the bottom if this page.
So Jack Thompson is a Warrior of God now? Glad to see he's attacking something as significant as video games, and not tackling war or poverty or anything silly like that. Yeesh.
...newly-government approved Chinese names of the form . (i.e. 'name.gongsi') and . (i.e 'name.wangluo')... The purchase of Simplified Chinese names from the i-DNS.net/CNNIC partnership will automatically allow the corresponding web-site to be accessed by an equivalent, computer-generated domain name in Traditional Chinese characters (i.e. used in Hong Kong and Taiwan) free of charge. Conversely, one can also buy a Traditional Chinese name directly and get an automatically assigned Simplified Chinese version free.
.gongsi or .wangluo instead of traditional Chinese characters and get the same website. In other words, this system doesn't lock users in or out... I really don't see how this is that big of deal. Not to be a jerk, but do the editors read these articles? I'm not a very big fan of China's internet policies myself, but the newspost's threats of lock-in are totally unfounded.
Maybe I'm missing something, but it sounds like a non-Chinese user could type in
Is airwaves any more of a public resource than newspapers?
Yes. If I don't like what your newspaper has to say, or it has naked people or something and I don't want my family to see that, I just won't buy it. If I don't like what your broadcast TV or radio station has to say, too bad - the signals are in my house whether I want them or not, and unless I throw out my TV and radio, my family will be able to see whatever's being broadcast. Maybe kids are cursing a lot, but who are you to decide that that makes it okay for my (theoretical) family?
I do think the fines for indecency are kinda high, and we do have more important things to worry about than Janet Jackson's chest. At the same time, though, I feel that the fines are necessary: many stations would see them as a necessary cost of business and ignore them otherwise. That's probably not the same with, say, nuclear reactors; the bad publicity alone (not to mention the threat of being totally shut down and, if the owners have any decency at all, the threat to people's lives) is reason to for people to keep your reactor safe. INAL, but I'm assuming that when there's a problem at a reactor, the people running it get a lot more than a fine.
Thanks for explaining that; that makes a lot of sense. If you don't have a Fastlane tag and you speed through a toll booth, do they photograph your license plate and use that to send you a ticket? If that's the case, Fastlane probably doesn't reveal anything that isn't available already and I'll probably have to put my foot in my mouth. :)
Just out of curiosity, do you know if Fastlane logs anything, or is the data thrown away once the tolls are paid?
With the FastLane toll-paying transimtters here in Massachussets, the government tracks how long it takes you to get from one toll booth to another. From there, you can calculate the average speed of the car between the two booths. I this isn't theoretical; the government actually does it. I know someone who got a speeding ticket in the mail but was never pulled over; it turned out that his Fast Lane reciever had signalled that he was speeding.
I can deal with that because FastLane is an optional convenience. If California's transmitters become mandatory and they do track people's speeds (which seems likely), I see that as a serious invasion of privacy. Could they use these GPS devices to track criminals with a warrant? Might these transmitters fall under portions of the USA Patriot act that allow wiretapping and such without a warrant? (That's not a rhetorical question; INAL and I seriously don't know). I understand that California needs tax money to keep the roads in good condition, and it makes sense that the people who drive on them should have to pay for them. But there are some major problems with the way this is being done. If these transmitters become mandatory and nobody makes sure that the law protects our privacy, then we could have an invasion of privacy like none other on our hands.
They need personal data to see whether someone who leaves one college will transfer to another. It sounds like each college provides its own data, so the only way to fix this problem is to unify all the data. Without personal information, all that you'd have is lists of how many people left school and how many people enrolled. You'd have no way of seeing whether people transferred to another school or just dropped out, and you'd (theoretically) have no way of seeing whether someone was returning to school late or transferring. Race and gender probably would show whether affirmative action programs, etc. are working and whether the government needs to focus on the needs of specific groups. The part about using someone's address kinda scares me, though. There's no reason why they need that... although if they have someone's SS# (as they'd have to; there are a bajillion Joe Smiths out there that need to be tracked uniquely), they'd probably have his/her address on file anyway.
I'm using Windows XP SP2 and I'm not having any problems either - it must be a problem with the Linux version.
I do have problems with some Flash ads, though: my CPU usage will go to around 80%, and I'll have to close a browser window to make it stop. That can't be right - I'm running an 800mHz machine with plenty of free RAM.
Firefox 1.0 isn't perfectly rock-solid, but I find it to be pretty reliable. The Flash & CNN crashing on Linux problems are weird, though: I wonder if Firefox 1.0 was a little bit rushed with all the hubbub surrounding its release. But it's still a very good piece of software: I'm using it right now, and I've had no more crashes than I have with IE.
The review of Nanoloop on HarmonyCentral is of nanoloop 1.x for the original game boy - the article didn't really make that clear.
When a startup company's developing technology, it'll spend a period of time in "stealth mode" - i.e. they won't release any information about what they're doing so somebody doesn't come and copy their idea while they're still working on it. The website must not have been updated since they came out of stealth mode. (Plus, having such little information available might make people curious about the company). Maybe check back in a week or two.
In all the lawsuits that the RIAA has filed so far, there's been some logical basis for their case - and it's usually something like "People our using our stuff without our permission; make them stop." There's some logic in that: the RIAA makes its profit off of intellectual property that people are getting off KaZaa for free. There would be no such logic in the case that you're describing.
/. crowd tend to think. The RIAA is constantly looking out for their bottom line at the expense of "free information," but I don't think that they're as fanatically against free content as you think. I'm sure they don't love the idea (they're selling the stuff; free content can make bought content less desirable), but you don't see anybody suing, say, purevolume or music.download.com because they have no case and because, in many cases, the labels providing free content are members of the RIAA.
I don't believe that RIAA is as fanatical as the
The logic RIAA's arguments have of course been slanted towards their point of view, and "knowing better" is probably defined as "being able to profit and not get in trouble," but there is some logic there, and it would say that a lawsuit wouldn't benefit the RIAA or its members.
I say this, by the way, not as some nutty corporate sympathizer but as someone who's starting a little indie record label that's giving out music for free. There are certainly a lot of problems with the music industry, but you paint labels as totally evil corporate suits. They're certainly interested in the bottom line, but that doesn't make them out-and-out jerks.
By the way, IndyMediaWatch guy, INAL, but if you're the plantiff in a lawsuit and you lose, I don't think that's really a problem - it's not like you'll be fined; it's just that the defendant wouldn't be punished or anything. You have a problem when you lose and you're the defendant.
No, they're not. Wired has permission from the artists and the record labels to be distributing their songs: even if some people in the RIAA think this might be a bad precedent, they can't do anything about it, because they simply have no legal case. This goes beyond a question of fair use vs. copyright infringement: it's been done with permission and it's legal, end of story.
like they know what type of license it is, They know one thing: $$$
The RIAA might be greedy, but they're not morons, and I'm sure they know copyright law like the backs of their hands. They know that they have no case and that a judge would probably throw out any attempt at a lawsuit.
By the way, what would be in it for them? I'm not sure if these labels are RIAA members, but if so, the RIAA would be acting against the decisions of their own members. If not, the RIAA has no business intervening.
Graphing Calculators can provide a similar (and much cheaper) tool. Beginners can start off with BASIC programs, and although these require some tweaking to run smoothly, that's part of the fun. (I goofed around with one myself a little while ago). More advanced assembly programmers have achieved some amazing stuff (such as greyscale on a black-and-white screen and a very accurate port of Bubble Bobble. The specs are all there for the asking.
Sure, calculators aren't as cool or powerful as what Lamothe is putting out there, but they do force you to be creative and do a lot with a little. Besides, making something happen on a little box just seems cooler - you tend to take having complex software for granted with PC's.
...who usually have policies against this kind of thing. See Comcast's here (look at item ix). (If you were thinking of having them get some kind of business-quality connection that would allow that, remember that someone has to pay the bills for that. Maybe I'm being too cynical here, but the idea just doesn't seem very feasible.
As a senator, John Kerry may have given his vote, and as President, George Bush signed it, but these two wrote it, not Bush or Kerry. The CAN-SPAM act may be pretty bad, but Bush and Kerry didn't put loopholes into it to help their campaigns. If you're going to put political jabs into news posts, please do a little research first. :)
Can someone clarify his view for me? I don't follow Linux very closely, but am genuinely curious what Linus' real thoughts on the future of Linux for the desktop are.
:)
He says in both articles that there have been a bunch of really good developments in making Linux user-friendly, but it'll be a while before Joe User feels comfortable sitting down in front of a Linux box. The earlier story but kind of a spin on it - it sounds like they took what Linus said a little bit too far. He didn't really say that 2004 would be the "year of Linux on the desktop"; he said that "This year there will be a lot of desktop users." That's it. Even if you did RTFA, it's still kinda confusing. That's the media for you.
Link to privacy policy returns 404
Winamp's privacy policy is at http://www.winamp.com/disclaimer.php. It used to be on another page (Google chache here), but it was never at http://www.winamp.com/privacy, which the parent linked to - that's why you're getting a 404 error. Just in case you were wondering about that.