Linux is like the electric car, not a chance and only in a few places..
Well in this case, Africa might be just one of those places. I mean,what is MS going to do? Give away Windows licenses for free, and throw in Vista-capable PC's as well? (sorry, didn't read the TFA).
Another thing Linux has going here, is that it is -relatively- easy to produce local versions. I mean, does there even exist Windows XP or Vista in Swahili? If not, that may be just what Linux needs to get picked over Windows (or other candidates). And let's not forget the educational aspect: having a system where you can see how it works, how it's put together & how to adapt it to your own requirements, is great when you're in a place where the IT industry is often just starting.
I might be great news for solar power, but tell me about it once you have a working prototype with a noteworthy efficiency improvement.
From what I've read this story is more about image sensors, but for solar cell applications: I don't understand the fuss about all these 'breakthrough efficiency record' stories. For all but a few applications (think satellites, pocket calculators etc.) efficiency doesn't matter. There is no shortage of sunlight, and therefore no need to turn a maximum of it into electricity. What matters is price per generated electric power ($/Watt), and how long the solar cells will last.
If I'm not mistaken, the solar cell market is hitting the 1 $/Watt mark around now, and growing at what, 10% ? 20% ? 50% per year? Wake me up when solar cells become cheaper than roof tiles, or provide a return on investment in <5 years (for average households), and will last decades after that. Then you have a breakthrough.
Suppose farmers acted like that. They grow grain to sell, but their plants create oxygen from carbon dioxide gas as a side effect. Oxygen is a valuable commodity, it's sold in bottles for many uses: hospitals, aviators, steel-cutting, etc. But farmers are sensible enough to know that it would be totally impractical to try to charge for the oxygen their plants release into the atmosphere.
Hmm... a farmer analogy. Do we witness the birth of a new/. meme here? Farmers vs. cars? I like it, with the ongoing 'green' trend and all (and fuel prices, and greenhouse effect). Support the farmer! Make oxygen, not ehm... cars!
If I were one of those invited, then a thing like this would immediately make me loose interest in whatever they'd have to say. Show in advance you can't do yourself what you're preaching about. Duh!
I'd just decline the invitation, and spend my time elsewhere (probably more productive). If a majority of the invited folks would do this, the event would be dead in the water. Killed by stupidity of the organization.
And on top of that, there's a direct feedback loop. If the machine makes a mistake recognizing the user's handwriting, the user can immediately correct that mistake. No such option with automated scanning/OCR. And in any process, direct feedback on the discrepancy between (what you wanted) and (what you have right now) can make a huge difference in the results.
Yeah, people in general don't care. This is a trivial detail to the world at large. The freedom to use and modify software is simply meaningless to all but a vanishingly small percentage of humans.
People don't care because it's trivial to circumvent copyright law. Imagine if that weren't the case: where everybody would have to pay for every single piece of commercial software they use. Where the are no cracks/serials, illegal downloads or warez copied from friends available. In that situation, people would care a great deal. Commercial software prices would drop faster than the US stock market, and freeware, open source etc. would become huge overnight.
Basically, people don't care because it's so easy to ignore the law. Which, IMHO, says a lot about what average folks think about the notion (and value) of copyrights. And perhaps, patents.
In this context, the "secret sauce"/advantage isn't about security, but refers to a competitive advantage over other vendors of electronic voting systems.
If you protect trade secrets for electronic voting systems, then basically you're saying that having commercial competition in a market for electronic voting systems (and companies making money selling these), is more important than having fair and verifiable election results. Excuse me, but that only makes sense in a land where the almighty $$ means everything.
Right, that would be 6 experts, and btw: none of the other names ring a bell for me, but is that Brian Kernighan of Awk/C/Unix fame?
Also from the GP:
Maybe in error, the Judge finally recognized the need for better "expert" peer review.
Maybe I missed it, but where in the article does it say the judge wants more, or better review? All I'm reading is the judge stopped release of this report. Even if it weren't a solid review, sometimes a little info is better than no info at all.
the fact is that the guy already had access to the systems.
Access to a normally inaccessible private network is not the same as access to systems on that private network.
Although with IT staff this incompetent, I'd expect any next step(s) to be trivial with a real hacker behind the steering wheel (as opposed to a white hat guy like in this case).
Right, and let's not forget supercomputers used for simulating nuclear weapon designs, or things like that. Only the latest & greatest is good enough when talking about ways to destroy fellow humans.
I'm no fan of the PDF format, but it has a place in this world because a) it serves a specific purpose, b) it works reasonably well for that purpose, and c) there isn't any popular format out there to take its place.
Compared with other popular formats, the defining feature of PDF is that it's designed to be turned into sheets of dead tree at some point. Separate pages, with fixed vertical and horizontal size. PDF is very useful for that purpose, but it's often used in places where it makes no sense.
I come accross PDF's mostly as technical documentation like datasheets (for electronic components). Mostly these are scanned pages (dead tree original), linked together as a single PDF file. I use those PDF's only for viewing on a computer, they don't ever make it back to paper. For this use, I would much rather have plain HTML, with illustrating pictures and so on packed in a single file. This would take much less space (text-based vs. scanned images), load up faster (browser!) and allow for easier navigation, searching, and editing. But you know what? Clicking on a.pdf is more convenient than unzipping a directory filled with with HTML, and opening an index file in there (for the user). And scanning 20 pages, linking them into a.pdf file is easier than doing a full conversion to text, and create decently formatted HTML (for the producer). Therefore PDF usually wins, even though there's more efficient ways to bring the info from A to B.
For above application, the reason for PDF's popularity stems from the form of the original (dead tree), and that users are expected to turn the documents back into that format. Why use online viewing all over your office, when you can *wastefully* turn things back into paper and drag around briefcases filled with the stuff?
From what I've seen, the average office still isn't used to going all electronic when it comes to documentation. When you follow a course, you don't get an USB stick stuffed with HTML to crawl through (or pointer to internal company webpage). You get a pile of A4 sheets.
For stuff that I create myself, I prefer HTML, or in general: the simplest format that will bring the info from A to B and is easy for online viewing. How you can turn it into A4 sheets is of secondary importance. But until a true '21st century' paperless office becomes the norm, PDF will have its place.
Google's going to bring these people broadband at 95% of their current price
Ehmm... TFA talks about "bring the cost of bandwidth in such markets down by 95 per cent". Doesn't that mean: take 95% off, leave 5% (1/20 th) of previous cost?
Right now, an Atom based netbook will have 3D capable of doing Compiz (I know, I've played with it on at least two differing eeePC models right now...) and some lower-end FOSS 3D games out of the box. With what has been given out so far, you still can't do this with VIA's offerings, which include the netbook designs and the EPIA boards. That, alone, isn't a good thing or selling point, really, for those designs right now.
I'm wondering just how important VIA considers Linux support for its products. I mean, many VIA's products, especially the Epia/mini-ITX stuff are in a market segment halfway between embedded applications and 'low-end' desktops. These products and Linux are a natural match.
With competition from all sides, open source Linux drivers that support all essential features, are at least as good as their Windows counterparts, could give these products the edge they need to beat the competition. Even if a buyer runs Windows on these boards, knowing that the same full featureset/performance is available under open source operating systems, might be considered added value, read: enough added value to pick these boards over competitor's offerings.
So how important does VIA think this is? And is their attitude changing? If so, how? What are they doing (what resources are invested) to match goals with deeds (like, hire developers)?
Exactly HOW or WHO did this is not mentioned in TFA
If they have/get their hands on these modified (but signed) packages, it would be nice if they'd do some reverse engineering, and publish a follow-up detailing *what* was modified. That might provide some insight on why it was done (and perhaps who was behind it).
Given enough time and energy, practically any network-connected system can be hacked. That is because security is *hard*, and there are few people who have the means to create chains that contain only strong links, and put those strong chains in the hands of a big audience.
But given workable tools, I think security comes down more to procedures, and a competent sysadmin than anything else. I'd put more faith in a well-managed Windows server than a Linux server with an idiot as admin. With all factors equal, I'd put more faith in a Unix-like system than anything coming from Redmond. For starters, because Unix systems (and clones) were built from the ground up as networked, multi-user systems.
First, congrats to Ms.Andersen for making the RIAA pay for its mistake. But compensation of her legal costs does not count as proper compensation, for several reasons:
Not sure how this usually works, but if you hire a lawyer to defend yourself against such charges, isn't it up to you to pay that lawyer until compensation gives you a refund (which may take years)? Meaning: if you haven't got any money to spare, you can't mount a proper defense. If you take it out of a savings account, you're missing the (higher!) interest you would have had, had that money been kept there. Perhaps you might settle, out of fear that you can't keep paying your lawyer as long as needed. That alone tilts the playing field to the RIAA side.
If only the lawyers' fee is compensated, your time is regarded as either free, or worthless? (take your pick). That is ridiculous. Any time you spend on it could have been spent making money, quality time with friends/family, hobbies, going out, etc, etc. Regardless of how much you think your time is worth, forcing other people to waste their time (if your reasons are shown invalid) should cost money, period. Time is about the only thing you can't buy, no matter how rich you are. What if this had been a cancer patient with <3 months to live?
Then there's the distress caused, negative publicity surrounding her person, etc, all of which doesn't count as damage?
For all these reasons, Ms.Andersen deserves a lot more compensation than just legal fees. It's too bad she has to start her own proceedings to get those. It would be better if that were automatic. Get proven wrong in a 'big corp vs. little guy' lawsuit, and be ordered to compensate legal fees plus an automatic percentage for related damages. Otherwise it's just too easy for corporations to bully on ordinary folks (like we see all the time).
Watched the YouTube link in the summary, for those of you who are too lazy or don't want to click video links:
The recipient in this case (a computer shop owner) likes this option to obtain computers, because buying them all new would be much more expensive, read: unaffordable for most of his customers
On average, 8 out of 10 received items are working. Working parts from the other 2 are used to bring non-working systems back to life.
For the remaining stuff, there's no recycling system in place
Doesn't exactly sound like 'dumping crap'. But the 'no recycling system in place' caught my attention. If you think of it, is it weird? No, perhaps in really poor countries, the IT industry is a relatively new and immature business. Compare that when computers where a new thing for people in western countries. You'd want one (like we still do today). The purchase price of a new one would be prohibitive. So for many folks, their first computer would be a 2nd hand one. When you'd get a better one, you'd give/sell the old one to a friend or family member. And when the time came that it was finally dead, what would you do? Right: no plan for that, no recycling system in place. I can imagine that a lot of broken computers from the PC XT era have found their way into landfills, before western countries came to the conclusion that's not wise, and an unsustainable way to get rid of e-waste (and thus, before regulations were put in place).
So my point: perhaps a lot of these African nations simply haven't gotten to that point yet. Besides, a lot of these issues will differ from case to case. Some organizations could be doing really well, even from an environmental perspective. Or shady businesses may indeed just be in it for the money, dumping crap, fully aware they're screwing their African partners long-term. Let's try to separate the bad from the good, shall we?
Both of those options are perfectly fine. If the market changes and the recording industry refuses to supply what people want, then someone (or something) will step in and fill the gap. If the recording industry chooses to do so themselves, good for them. If they refuse, they'll just go bankrupt or become irrelevant.
Either way, people will find ways to get what they want. Therefore I don't really care whether RIAA & friends will 'go with the flow', or die a slow death. Do you?
Whenever you have to search long and hard to find new 'features', this can only mean one of several things:
It's not really a feature that people want (because if it were, it would be announced loud & clear)
It's just ammo for lawyers to shoot with, or
They don't want you to see it (eg. what they're doing might be illegal)
Even more on-topic are these quotes from the Wiki article (provided by spinkham above):
According to Nebuad's sales pitch less than 1% of users opt-out. One ISP expects to earn at least $2.50 per month for each user (..) Generally, NebuAd provides an additional income stream to network operators, which may maintain or lower consumers' internet access bills.
As we've all known for a long time, ordinary people's surfing habits are worth money. What when you'd ask people up front: "Do you want your surfing habits to remain private, or give up this privacy in exchange for a discount?"
I'm afraid the vast majority of people would go for the discount. The anything-connected-to-everything world of today has gotten us so used to data breaches and 'unknown parties' snooping through our private info, that we just don't seem to care anymore. Which seems strange: the less (privacy) you have left, wouldn't you value those last remains more than you used to?
Slashdot Mirror
Linux is like the electric car, not a chance and only in a few places..
Well in this case, Africa might be just one of those places. I mean ,what is MS going to do? Give away Windows licenses for free, and throw in Vista-capable PC's as well? (sorry, didn't read the TFA).
Another thing Linux has going here, is that it is -relatively- easy to produce local versions. I mean, does there even exist Windows XP or Vista in Swahili? If not, that may be just what Linux needs to get picked over Windows (or other candidates). And let's not forget the educational aspect: having a system where you can see how it works, how it's put together & how to adapt it to your own requirements, is great when you're in a place where the IT industry is often just starting.
I might be great news for solar power, but tell me about it once you have a working prototype with a noteworthy efficiency improvement.
From what I've read this story is more about image sensors, but for solar cell applications: I don't understand the fuss about all these 'breakthrough efficiency record' stories. For all but a few applications (think satellites, pocket calculators etc.) efficiency doesn't matter. There is no shortage of sunlight, and therefore no need to turn a maximum of it into electricity. What matters is price per generated electric power ($/Watt), and how long the solar cells will last.
If I'm not mistaken, the solar cell market is hitting the 1 $/Watt mark around now, and growing at what, 10% ? 20% ? 50% per year? Wake me up when solar cells become cheaper than roof tiles, or provide a return on investment in <5 years (for average households), and will last decades after that. Then you have a breakthrough.
Suppose farmers acted like that. They grow grain to sell, but their plants create oxygen from carbon dioxide gas as a side effect. Oxygen is a valuable commodity, it's sold in bottles for many uses: hospitals, aviators, steel-cutting, etc. But farmers are sensible enough to know that it would be totally impractical to try to charge for the oxygen their plants release into the atmosphere.
Hmm... a farmer analogy. Do we witness the birth of a new /. meme here? Farmers vs. cars? I like it, with the ongoing 'green' trend and all (and fuel prices, and greenhouse effect). Support the farmer! Make oxygen, not ehm... cars!
-- Yeah yeah, go mod me offtopic.
If I were one of those invited, then a thing like this would immediately make me loose interest in whatever they'd have to say. Show in advance you can't do yourself what you're preaching about. Duh!
I'd just decline the invitation, and spend my time elsewhere (probably more productive). If a majority of the invited folks would do this, the event would be dead in the water. Killed by stupidity of the organization.
For a moment there, I was picturing some new technology that could distinguish between C, PERL and and Java written on scratch paper.
In pseudocode:
// undecipherable
IF LooksLikeC THEN "This must be C code"
IF LooksLikeJava THEN "This must be Java code"
ELSE "Must be Perl code"
And on top of that, there's a direct feedback loop. If the machine makes a mistake recognizing the user's handwriting, the user can immediately correct that mistake. No such option with automated scanning/OCR. And in any process, direct feedback on the discrepancy between (what you wanted) and (what you have right now) can make a huge difference in the results.
Yeah, people in general don't care. This is a trivial detail to the world at large. The freedom to use and modify software is simply meaningless to all but a vanishingly small percentage of humans.
People don't care because it's trivial to circumvent copyright law. Imagine if that weren't the case: where everybody would have to pay for every single piece of commercial software they use. Where the are no cracks/serials, illegal downloads or warez copied from friends available. In that situation, people would care a great deal. Commercial software prices would drop faster than the US stock market, and freeware, open source etc. would become huge overnight.
Basically, people don't care because it's so easy to ignore the law. Which, IMHO, says a lot about what average folks think about the notion (and value) of copyrights. And perhaps, patents.
In this context, the "secret sauce"/advantage isn't about security, but refers to a competitive advantage over other vendors of electronic voting systems.
If you protect trade secrets for electronic voting systems, then basically you're saying that having commercial competition in a market for electronic voting systems (and companies making money selling these), is more important than having fair and verifiable election results. Excuse me, but that only makes sense in a land where the almighty $$ means everything.
Right, that would be 6 experts, and btw: none of the other names ring a bell for me, but is that Brian Kernighan of Awk/C/Unix fame?
Also from the GP:
Maybe in error, the Judge finally recognized the need for better "expert" peer review.
Maybe I missed it, but where in the article does it say the judge wants more, or better review? All I'm reading is the judge stopped release of this report. Even if it weren't a solid review, sometimes a little info is better than no info at all.
the fact is that the guy already had access to the systems.
Access to a normally inaccessible private network is not the same as access to systems on that private network.
Although with IT staff this incompetent, I'd expect any next step(s) to be trivial with a real hacker behind the steering wheel (as opposed to a white hat guy like in this case).
Now what about the software?
Nothing conclusive there I'm afraid, since only beta versions were released so far.
Right, and let's not forget supercomputers used for simulating nuclear weapon designs, or things like that. Only the latest & greatest is good enough when talking about ways to destroy fellow humans.
I'm no fan of the PDF format, but it has a place in this world because a) it serves a specific purpose, b) it works reasonably well for that purpose, and c) there isn't any popular format out there to take its place.
Compared with other popular formats, the defining feature of PDF is that it's designed to be turned into sheets of dead tree at some point. Separate pages, with fixed vertical and horizontal size. PDF is very useful for that purpose, but it's often used in places where it makes no sense.
I come accross PDF's mostly as technical documentation like datasheets (for electronic components). Mostly these are scanned pages (dead tree original), linked together as a single PDF file. I use those PDF's only for viewing on a computer, they don't ever make it back to paper. For this use, I would much rather have plain HTML, with illustrating pictures and so on packed in a single file. This would take much less space (text-based vs. scanned images), load up faster (browser!) and allow for easier navigation, searching, and editing. But you know what? Clicking on a .pdf is more convenient than unzipping a directory filled with with HTML, and opening an index file in there (for the user). And scanning 20 pages, linking them into a .pdf file is easier than doing a full conversion to text, and create decently formatted HTML (for the producer). Therefore PDF usually wins, even though there's more efficient ways to bring the info from A to B.
For above application, the reason for PDF's popularity stems from the form of the original (dead tree), and that users are expected to turn the documents back into that format. Why use online viewing all over your office, when you can *wastefully* turn things back into paper and drag around briefcases filled with the stuff?
From what I've seen, the average office still isn't used to going all electronic when it comes to documentation. When you follow a course, you don't get an USB stick stuffed with HTML to crawl through (or pointer to internal company webpage). You get a pile of A4 sheets.
For stuff that I create myself, I prefer HTML, or in general: the simplest format that will bring the info from A to B and is easy for online viewing. How you can turn it into A4 sheets is of secondary importance. But until a true '21st century' paperless office becomes the norm, PDF will have its place.
True, but if they're real scientists they'd figure out it's easier to sweep the black hole under the 30-ton transformer. When done, cover up with rug.
Google's going to bring these people broadband at 95% of their current price
Ehmm... TFA talks about "bring the cost of bandwidth in such markets down by 95 per cent". Doesn't that mean: take 95% off, leave 5% (1/20 th) of previous cost?
Right now, an Atom based netbook will have 3D capable of doing Compiz (I know, I've played with it on at least two differing eeePC models right now...) and some lower-end FOSS 3D games out of the box. With what has been given out so far, you still can't do this with VIA's offerings, which include the netbook designs and the EPIA boards. That, alone, isn't a good thing or selling point, really, for those designs right now.
I'm wondering just how important VIA considers Linux support for its products. I mean, many VIA's products, especially the Epia/mini-ITX stuff are in a market segment halfway between embedded applications and 'low-end' desktops. These products and Linux are a natural match.
With competition from all sides, open source Linux drivers that support all essential features, are at least as good as their Windows counterparts, could give these products the edge they need to beat the competition. Even if a buyer runs Windows on these boards, knowing that the same full featureset/performance is available under open source operating systems, might be considered added value, read: enough added value to pick these boards over competitor's offerings.
So how important does VIA think this is? And is their attitude changing? If so, how? What are they doing (what resources are invested) to match goals with deeds (like, hire developers)?
Exactly HOW or WHO did this is not mentioned in TFA
If they have/get their hands on these modified (but signed) packages, it would be nice if they'd do some reverse engineering, and publish a follow-up detailing *what* was modified. That might provide some insight on why it was done (and perhaps who was behind it).
Given enough time and energy, practically any network-connected system can be hacked. That is because security is *hard*, and there are few people who have the means to create chains that contain only strong links, and put those strong chains in the hands of a big audience.
But given workable tools, I think security comes down more to procedures, and a competent sysadmin than anything else. I'd put more faith in a well-managed Windows server than a Linux server with an idiot as admin. With all factors equal, I'd put more faith in a Unix-like system than anything coming from Redmond. For starters, because Unix systems (and clones) were built from the ground up as networked, multi-user systems.
In related news, did anyone notice the Oprah ad below the story (down on the left side):
"LOSE WEIGHT IN 2008! THE BESTLIFE DIET - JOIN NOW!"
Talk about context-sensitive advertising ;-))
First, congrats to Ms.Andersen for making the RIAA pay for its mistake. But compensation of her legal costs does not count as proper compensation, for several reasons:
For all these reasons, Ms.Andersen deserves a lot more compensation than just legal fees. It's too bad she has to start her own proceedings to get those. It would be better if that were automatic. Get proven wrong in a 'big corp vs. little guy' lawsuit, and be ordered to compensate legal fees plus an automatic percentage for related damages. Otherwise it's just too easy for corporations to bully on ordinary folks (like we see all the time).
Watched the YouTube link in the summary, for those of you who are too lazy or don't want to click video links:
Doesn't exactly sound like 'dumping crap'. But the 'no recycling system in place' caught my attention. If you think of it, is it weird? No, perhaps in really poor countries, the IT industry is a relatively new and immature business. Compare that when computers where a new thing for people in western countries. You'd want one (like we still do today). The purchase price of a new one would be prohibitive. So for many folks, their first computer would be a 2nd hand one. When you'd get a better one, you'd give/sell the old one to a friend or family member. And when the time came that it was finally dead, what would you do? Right: no plan for that, no recycling system in place. I can imagine that a lot of broken computers from the PC XT era have found their way into landfills, before western countries came to the conclusion that's not wise, and an unsustainable way to get rid of e-waste (and thus, before regulations were put in place).
So my point: perhaps a lot of these African nations simply haven't gotten to that point yet. Besides, a lot of these issues will differ from case to case. Some organizations could be doing really well, even from an environmental perspective. Or shady businesses may indeed just be in it for the money, dumping crap, fully aware they're screwing their African partners long-term. Let's try to separate the bad from the good, shall we?
the recording industry needs to adapt or die
Both of those options are perfectly fine. If the market changes and the recording industry refuses to supply what people want, then someone (or something) will step in and fill the gap. If the recording industry chooses to do so themselves, good for them. If they refuse, they'll just go bankrupt or become irrelevant.
Either way, people will find ways to get what they want. Therefore I don't really care whether RIAA & friends will 'go with the flow', or die a slow death. Do you?
Didn't he just use Microsoft's Remote Desktop to "hack into" those systems?
Obviously not. To cause $900k worth of damage, these systems must have been running really powerful software (read: something else).
Well, for the time being I prefer to tinker with things outside my body, thank you.
Whenever you have to search long and hard to find new 'features', this can only mean one of several things:
Even more on-topic are these quotes from the Wiki article (provided by spinkham above):
According to Nebuad's sales pitch less than 1% of users opt-out. One ISP expects to earn at least $2.50 per month for each user (..) Generally, NebuAd provides an additional income stream to network operators, which may maintain or lower consumers' internet access bills.
As we've all known for a long time, ordinary people's surfing habits are worth money. What when you'd ask people up front: "Do you want your surfing habits to remain private, or give up this privacy in exchange for a discount?"
I'm afraid the vast majority of people would go for the discount. The anything-connected-to-everything world of today has gotten us so used to data breaches and 'unknown parties' snooping through our private info, that we just don't seem to care anymore. Which seems strange: the less (privacy) you have left, wouldn't you value those last remains more than you used to?