It has more to do with the fact that relationships are complex. Your theory that the USA does whatever it wants (and so do other countries) is very far from reality.
Countries have to balance all their interests in determining behavior, as there are consequences to just doing whatever you want. It's no different to how humans behave when interacting with each other. You don't just go around and do whatever you want. You work out some long term balance to the whole thing.
Spare us your psuedo real politik theory because it just is plain garbage. Iraq is a classic example. It was actually more in the USA interest to leave Hussein in place, establish a workable situation with him, and deal with the negative PR. After all, he killed way more extremist Muslims than the USA has and was more despised by them than even the USA is. I won't even mention the WMD theory.
You might want to read some history books. You will see plenty of examples where countries take very complicated approaches to situations, often to their own short term detriment.
Uh, sorry, but he is right and the statistics prove it. People in developed countries, especially America, are getting fatter. You can call it superficial when people complain about it, but it is reality.
I completely agree with him. Of course I am more focused on women because, as a heterosexual, the limit to my caring about fat men is when I have to sit in economy class and share my seat with them. Other than that, I focus on women. And a disproportionate number of them are fat by any standard.
Sorry, but if your body cannot properly process your caloric intake, then you need to lower it or find another way to burn it.
If you are a chubby chaser, then you can ignore this message.
Unfortunately, Hymm (or any of its variants) do not so far remove the DRM that Harmony puts back onto the file. I do not know the technical details, but apparently the FairPlay-compatible DRM that Harmony uses it not exactly the same. Otherwise, this firmware update would not have broken Harmony.
Nice try, but that's essentially the same as what Napster was doing. Providing a central "database" where the material was linked.
The only defense here for such a website is that DMCA-style laws and even old copyright laws provide a safe haven clause. This means that the copyright holder must inform them that the content is copyrighted and unauthorized for sharing. If you check most sites that host Bittorrent links to copyrighted content, they always have some clear language saying "if you are the copyyright holder and this is your stuff, tell us and we will remove the link". Until that kicks in and the copyright holder informs them, there is no liability.
That all being said, the newer laws (like the one just passed in Australia) lets anyone notify the site and force a reaction. No longer is only the copyright holder themself required.
Quit whining and call your credit card company, dispute the charge, and be done with it. You will never pay them that money.
Why spend all that time talking to a brick wall at playstation.com? You asked them for the full credit and they refused. That is all you have to do before contesting the charge with the credit card company.
You are better off putting the hassle back on them than to deal with it yourself.
Come on, the "single sign on" idea is flawed anyway. I'm never gonna trust all my data to a single entity, nobody does that - just look at asset management. Diversify your risks.
People often confuse "single sign-on" with "centrally stored data". The Liberty Alliance solution is different because it is a federated approach based on identity.
In this solution, you identify yourself with a single method. Take for example, 3 different entities you may interact with: your bank, a government agency, and a store. If those three entities can trust each other, they will accept information from each other as legitimate. If, for example, you want your bank to share information with the government agency (account number, mortage interest paid for taxes, etc.) then you can tell your bank this is ok. If you want a store to share certain information with your bank (like valid shipping addresses when making a purchase) then it is possible with this trusted but federated system.
None of this means that all of the data relevant to each of those relationships is centrally stored or maintained by a single entity.
The question will become all about the identity itself because, if that is breached, then all the others can be breached. Some federated method of identity is probably inevitable, where the bank does not accept just some centrally managed single sign-on verified. You will need something unique if you are going to one of these entities. But in the example above, you don't need to verify yourself to the store in order to share your account information. Instead, you identify yourself to your bank and then tell your bank it can share the information with the store. The store trusts the bank and therefore trusts the information from the bank.
Actually, VMware's ESX platform is probably a more fitting comparison to Xen as ESX is not running on a host operating system. It is pure virtualization of the hardware. Of course, this is a server-side only solution and is pretty explicit about the hardware platforms it supports compared to the more generic GSX and Workstation versions.
VMware's vMotion solution really makes ESX stand out, though. With vMotion, you can literally drag a running guest OS from one ESX box to another within seconds.
ESX is really where production server consolidation is taking place in the x86 world. More competition, however, is only for the better.
If some dude at your company pirates windows does the BSA audit the entire company and extract money from them.
Actually, that is exactly what the BSA does. If they think they have ANY evidence of software piracy for a product from one of their member's, they will come after you.
We had exactly the same thing happen. A former employee was installing products and never buying the licenses. We started to suspect it after he left, but before we could sort it all out (it takes time to self-audit) the BSA called. Then it was too late. It is not about buying the old licenses for them and getting compliant, even if it is clear there is no willfull infringment. They want to both settle for a large amount AND use you in the press.
Other than apparently being a horrible attorney who has never won one of his "it's so clear and there is so much evidence" cases, what is he good for? He is just an attention whore who is standing by himself in the middle of a field. Why is it always his name railing against the videogames? Where are all the others that have proven his "facts"?
This guy gets way too much attention, but I guess it's easy when you are the sole voice railing against a multibillion dollar industry for its violence. The rest of the public is busy buying and playing the games he bitches about.
Substitute "EA" with "US Steel". Substitute "programmer" with "factory worker". Substitute "no overtime" with "no overtime". Illegal is illegal. Even the wife who wrote the blog admits they know it is illegal. The question is, who is going to make a federal case out of it.
One parallel I see to the videogame industry is the entertainment industry (meaning film and television). Workers get abused because there are 1000 people in line waiting to take existing jobs, so if you have a job you accept abuse. The difference is that there are strong unions protecting actors and behind the scenes workers. Videogame companies are not yet under that pressure of collective bargaining.
Take note, the days are numbered about when videogame company employees will get their due. EA is a California company. California has two things that are constant: a lot of lawyers and strong labor laws. An employee at EA who clearly documents all of this bogus stuff, gets an attorney to take it on contingency, and then obtains class action status for all EA employees is going to make Mr. Probst's $22 million in stock options look like pittance.
Think that is ridiculous? Ask Microsoft about their attempts to screw over "contractors" in the 80s and 90s. You can label someone whatever you want, but there are definitions for words and there are only so many changes you can make before people stop accepting those changes. In Microsoft's case, they lost their battle to call someone a contractor when the person was treated like an employee. Those people won their stock options.
Me? My wine glass is empty so I need to go now...but you've got to be impressed that a drunk person worked "pittance" into their slashdot post.
Actually, Novell stopped its strategy of developing native NCP (Netware Core Protocol) clients a couple of years ago and you will not see one on Linux ever. Instead, they implemented CIFS on the backend and the user logs into Novell Directory Services using a small agent on the client. This implements NDPS (for print services) along with the core directory services. It's small and very clean.
Combine it with ZenWorks agents and you can do full client management of policies and software distribution.
Except there are those of us that fundamentally disagree with the premise that broadcasting material must be of substantial value to the public. And I bet you don't think so either. Otherwise, your Friends and Seinfeld episodes would have been replaced with PBS's Frontline every week.
The public airwaves are for whatever the "public" wants to use them for. I would also suggest that those who actually listen to the radio should be the decision makers of what gets on the radio. That's called the free market and that is exactly why Howard Stern is on the air. He is immensely popular with the radio listening public, far distancing anyone else in per market listeners.
If you are under any illusion that someone Howard Stern's show will be replaced by some show that fulfills your "substantial value to the public" test, you really are kidding yourself. Maybe the replacement won't be "vulgar" but I can promise it won't have any redeeming values in its place.
In a country of almost 300 million people, you will not find agreement about what is vulgar and what is not. Nor will you find agreement about what should be allowed on the radio and what should not. What I hope can at least happen is that those who find something vulgar do what they naturally tend to do: don't listen to it.
Uh, no. He is an idiot. He just got lucky that the Supreme Court, other courts, technology companies, and a lot of individuals have managed to block, circumvent, or downright destroy his ideas and efforts. Just because others have prevented his stupidity from doing as much damage as they could does not make him any less stupid.
The point is that Valenti has always tried to hamstring or block technology instead of helping the entertainment industry adapt. For that, I stand by my label of him as an idiot.
Don't forget that if you plan to use the Cognac glasses in a restaurant or other public place, you have to buy a special version of those glasses. They are the same, but you have to pay for the right to use them in public.
Also, those Cognac glasses are only for a certain kind of Cognac. You are not allowed to use them to drink unlicensed brands of Cognac. And don't even think about putting anything else in them. Want to drink water out of them? If we catch you, we will sue you.
Valenti is an idiot. He almost single-handedly killed the entertainment industry with his crusade against VCRs (a technology that actually saved the industry). I cannot figure out why the industry even pays him lip service because he is a moron. Oh, he doesn't mind technology so long as it has all the controls in place he wants and it is illegal to change those controls.
Why is it that the 10th Amendment has become this misinterpreted by so many people to be a states rights amendment? It is nothing of the sort. It is not some protection against a strong central government.
The 10th Amendment was simply added because the US Constitution has to specifically grant powers to the government.
If you would like to learn more, please apply for admission at any law school. You will learn, probably in your second year Con Law class, that your states rights interpretation (which you are repeating from what you have heard elsewhere) has never been accepted in any court or other branch of the US government. And you will also learn that the people who wrote it also did not intend it as such.
Oh man, you were so close. Leave out the word sharing and you've got it!
You are absolutely correct to point that out. As the Supreme Court stated:
"No issue concerning the transfer of tapes to other persons, the use of home-recorded tapes for public performances, or the copying of programs transmitted on pay or cable television systems was raised."
They explicitly stated that there decision did not cover the sharing of the recordings. It is also interesting to note their exclusion of "pay or cable television systems" which is something XM Radio would fall under. They were not saying it did not, only that it was not an issue before them to decide. You cannot infer anything from that statement when it comes to court cases. Therefore, timeshifting was established as clearly legal and... well... that was pretty much the sum total.
One must remember that the Supreme Court also noted that their decision was made in the absence of further restrictions by Congress. Unfortunately, the DMCA may be the basis for those further restrictions. We will see.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the PHP folks specifically tell you not to run PHP with Apache 2.0. It is in their FAQ on their website.
Lufthansa's new Business Class cabinet has a network jack at every seat.
The plugs are available in Business and First class cabinets at each seat. I doubt you will see them in Economy class in the near future.
Countries have to balance all their interests in determining behavior, as there are consequences to just doing whatever you want. It's no different to how humans behave when interacting with each other. You don't just go around and do whatever you want. You work out some long term balance to the whole thing.
Spare us your psuedo real politik theory because it just is plain garbage. Iraq is a classic example. It was actually more in the USA interest to leave Hussein in place, establish a workable situation with him, and deal with the negative PR. After all, he killed way more extremist Muslims than the USA has and was more despised by them than even the USA is. I won't even mention the WMD theory.
You might want to read some history books. You will see plenty of examples where countries take very complicated approaches to situations, often to their own short term detriment.
I completely agree with him. Of course I am more focused on women because, as a heterosexual, the limit to my caring about fat men is when I have to sit in economy class and share my seat with them. Other than that, I focus on women. And a disproportionate number of them are fat by any standard.
Sorry, but if your body cannot properly process your caloric intake, then you need to lower it or find another way to burn it.
If you are a chubby chaser, then you can ignore this message.
Unfortunately, Hymm (or any of its variants) do not so far remove the DRM that Harmony puts back onto the file. I do not know the technical details, but apparently the FairPlay-compatible DRM that Harmony uses it not exactly the same. Otherwise, this firmware update would not have broken Harmony.
You definitely can do it with Novell's Zenworks.
The only defense here for such a website is that DMCA-style laws and even old copyright laws provide a safe haven clause. This means that the copyright holder must inform them that the content is copyrighted and unauthorized for sharing. If you check most sites that host Bittorrent links to copyrighted content, they always have some clear language saying "if you are the copyyright holder and this is your stuff, tell us and we will remove the link". Until that kicks in and the copyright holder informs them, there is no liability.
That all being said, the newer laws (like the one just passed in Australia) lets anyone notify the site and force a reaction. No longer is only the copyright holder themself required.
Screw Chrismukkah. Festivus is the holiday of choice!
Quit whining and call your credit card company, dispute the charge, and be done with it. You will never pay them that money. Why spend all that time talking to a brick wall at playstation.com? You asked them for the full credit and they refused. That is all you have to do before contesting the charge with the credit card company. You are better off putting the hassle back on them than to deal with it yourself.
It does now, baby!
People often confuse "single sign-on" with "centrally stored data". The Liberty Alliance solution is different because it is a federated approach based on identity.
In this solution, you identify yourself with a single method. Take for example, 3 different entities you may interact with: your bank, a government agency, and a store. If those three entities can trust each other, they will accept information from each other as legitimate. If, for example, you want your bank to share information with the government agency (account number, mortage interest paid for taxes, etc.) then you can tell your bank this is ok. If you want a store to share certain information with your bank (like valid shipping addresses when making a purchase) then it is possible with this trusted but federated system.
None of this means that all of the data relevant to each of those relationships is centrally stored or maintained by a single entity.
The question will become all about the identity itself because, if that is breached, then all the others can be breached. Some federated method of identity is probably inevitable, where the bank does not accept just some centrally managed single sign-on verified. You will need something unique if you are going to one of these entities. But in the example above, you don't need to verify yourself to the store in order to share your account information. Instead, you identify yourself to your bank and then tell your bank it can share the information with the store. The store trusts the bank and therefore trusts the information from the bank.
VMware's vMotion solution really makes ESX stand out, though. With vMotion, you can literally drag a running guest OS from one ESX box to another within seconds.
ESX is really where production server consolidation is taking place in the x86 world. More competition, however, is only for the better.
Actually, that is exactly what the BSA does. If they think they have ANY evidence of software piracy for a product from one of their member's, they will come after you.
We had exactly the same thing happen. A former employee was installing products and never buying the licenses. We started to suspect it after he left, but before we could sort it all out (it takes time to self-audit) the BSA called. Then it was too late. It is not about buying the old licenses for them and getting compliant, even if it is clear there is no willfull infringment. They want to both settle for a large amount AND use you in the press.
This guy gets way too much attention, but I guess it's easy when you are the sole voice railing against a multibillion dollar industry for its violence. The rest of the public is busy buying and playing the games he bitches about.
One parallel I see to the videogame industry is the entertainment industry (meaning film and television). Workers get abused because there are 1000 people in line waiting to take existing jobs, so if you have a job you accept abuse. The difference is that there are strong unions protecting actors and behind the scenes workers. Videogame companies are not yet under that pressure of collective bargaining.
Take note, the days are numbered about when videogame company employees will get their due. EA is a California company. California has two things that are constant: a lot of lawyers and strong labor laws. An employee at EA who clearly documents all of this bogus stuff, gets an attorney to take it on contingency, and then obtains class action status for all EA employees is going to make Mr. Probst's $22 million in stock options look like pittance.
Think that is ridiculous? Ask Microsoft about their attempts to screw over "contractors" in the 80s and 90s. You can label someone whatever you want, but there are definitions for words and there are only so many changes you can make before people stop accepting those changes. In Microsoft's case, they lost their battle to call someone a contractor when the person was treated like an employee. Those people won their stock options.
Me? My wine glass is empty so I need to go now...but you've got to be impressed that a drunk person worked "pittance" into their slashdot post.
Combine it with ZenWorks agents and you can do full client management of policies and software distribution.
The public airwaves are for whatever the "public" wants to use them for. I would also suggest that those who actually listen to the radio should be the decision makers of what gets on the radio. That's called the free market and that is exactly why Howard Stern is on the air. He is immensely popular with the radio listening public, far distancing anyone else in per market listeners.
If you are under any illusion that someone Howard Stern's show will be replaced by some show that fulfills your "substantial value to the public" test, you really are kidding yourself. Maybe the replacement won't be "vulgar" but I can promise it won't have any redeeming values in its place.
In a country of almost 300 million people, you will not find agreement about what is vulgar and what is not. Nor will you find agreement about what should be allowed on the radio and what should not. What I hope can at least happen is that those who find something vulgar do what they naturally tend to do: don't listen to it.
By the way, I have seen this bug on some other sites too.
Oh my gawd! They killed Kenny! Those bastards!
Damn. I knew I shouldn't have stopped reading slashdot over the weekend.
The point is that Valenti has always tried to hamstring or block technology instead of helping the entertainment industry adapt. For that, I stand by my label of him as an idiot.
Also, those Cognac glasses are only for a certain kind of Cognac. You are not allowed to use them to drink unlicensed brands of Cognac. And don't even think about putting anything else in them. Want to drink water out of them? If we catch you, we will sue you.
Valenti is an idiot. He almost single-handedly killed the entertainment industry with his crusade against VCRs (a technology that actually saved the industry). I cannot figure out why the industry even pays him lip service because he is a moron. Oh, he doesn't mind technology so long as it has all the controls in place he wants and it is illegal to change those controls.
The 10th Amendment was simply added because the US Constitution has to specifically grant powers to the government.
If you would like to learn more, please apply for admission at any law school. You will learn, probably in your second year Con Law class, that your states rights interpretation (which you are repeating from what you have heard elsewhere) has never been accepted in any court or other branch of the US government. And you will also learn that the people who wrote it also did not intend it as such.
You are absolutely correct to point that out. As the Supreme Court stated:
"No issue concerning the transfer of tapes to other persons, the use of home-recorded tapes for public performances, or the copying of programs transmitted on pay or cable television systems was raised."
They explicitly stated that there decision did not cover the sharing of the recordings. It is also interesting to note their exclusion of "pay or cable television systems" which is something XM Radio would fall under. They were not saying it did not, only that it was not an issue before them to decide. You cannot infer anything from that statement when it comes to court cases. Therefore, timeshifting was established as clearly legal and ... well ... that was pretty much the sum total.
One must remember that the Supreme Court also noted that their decision was made in the absence of further restrictions by Congress. Unfortunately, the DMCA may be the basis for those further restrictions. We will see.