No, it's a prediction of whether or not GP will say he read the article, since there's no way for GP to demonstrate that he had read the article, only that he has read it at time of demonstration.
> Enabling VT is a huge security risk with no benefit > for most of HP's customers.
But please be strict and state that this is risk for running certain operating systems.
Um, why? Whether or not all operating systems have that as a risk is irrelevant to the fact that it is a risk for the operating system which "most of HP's customers" run. Omitting the factoid that not all OS's are vulnerable when discussing the risk to HP's users isn't telling a half-truth, because the former has no relevance to the latter.
Furthermore, VT is a security risk for all operating systems insofar as it is a security risk at all.
It's very annoying, because you can't take any screen captures when DVD Player is playing, even if it's not in the foreground. The per-window or per-region screen-capture functionality should at least work *wanders off grumbling*
Troll: there aren't TPM modules in many Intel Macs, and the ones which were shipped in Macs before are for use only by the user. The firmware and operating system don't initialize it, and you need to compile/install your own drivers to get it to do anything. It's not useful as a DRM device because you'd need firmware and OS updates to use it to protect the content properly.
Yes, but the fact that the GPL includes provisions to distribute software without warranty would likely not prevent somebody from adding their own warranty as an additional agreement. Furthermore, software isn't service, and there could easily be a warranty on the latter and not the former, and finally, few services (especially free, ad-supported ones) probably have warranties anyway.
It is an interesting transformation, and one that took people by storm. I can't help but wonder if this doesn't introduce a conflict of interest between the anti-DRM stuff and supporting GNU in the future.
You'll authorize a computer. Or you'll use an old computer which you still have (you are keeping them for all the other data which is going to become unreadable, right?) . Or you'll use the yearly reset-my-authorization-count feature. Or you'll use an iPod. Or you'll crack the encryption, which will probably be pretty easy in ten years.
They can't change the terms for music you already have without your consent (or inattentiveness) at present. iTunes will probably play mp3s for quite a long time, and whether or not iTunes can encode to mp3 doesn't relate to your use of iTunes DRM'd music. Furthermore, iTunes still will encode to mp3, though not by default. The default is AAC audio in a non-DRM'd format.
Lastly, nothing about Apple or a Mac forces you to use iTunes any more than Windows forces you to use WMP. Apple's use of DRM in iTunes has no relation to possible use of DRM in their operating systems.
Speaking of their operating systems, it's highly unlikely that Apple will implement anything remotely close to Microsoft-restrictive for OSX running on Apple hardware (i.e. it'll probably remain free of even product keys.) OSX does not run on non-Apple hardware. That is an obvious decision. That's not something that Apple's going to be able to suddenly change for the worse later ("Hey, guess what, now OSX is only going to run on Apple hardware that... uh.. was manufactured in Tailand! Yeah, that's it!")
Lastly, Apple includes a TPM in the Intel Macs, true. But, in the words of Amit Singh, "Unfortunately, there are several aspects of trusted computing that are often misunderstood--in particular, its relationship to the controversial idea of Digital Rights Management (DRM)." How is it often misunderstood? Apple doesn't use the TPM, for one thing. "Nevertheless, it is important to note that Apple does not use the TPM. If you have a TPM-equipped Macintosh computer, you can use the TPM for its intended purpose, with no side effect on the normal working of Mac OS X." (emphasis his) In order to get the TPM to do anything at all, he needed to write a driver for the thing, which is what the article I was quoting from is about.
One last thing: some of the newest Intel Macs don't have TPMs anymore.
So, the submitter's question: "Will Apple follow Microsoft's lead in [being DRM-friendly]?"
They'll probably continue to use DRM in iTunes, but that's iTunes, and not Macs or Mac OS X, and it's certainly on the good side of things. OSX doesn't seem to be using DRM right now, and it's unlikely that it will use severe DRM in the immediate future (and certainly not Trusted stuff). With the caveat that bobody can predict the future, I think the answer is: no.
Recent (i.e. not old 68k crap) Macs I've dealt with:
iBook — carefully cared for, survived so-far for 7 years, including getting part of the CD tray getting snapped off and getting stepped on three times. Save the battery, it is still fully functional.
Titanium PowerBook — in nearly constant (i.e. for a few hours almost every day) heavy use, plus getting carried to/from/around a high school daily. Had its MLB replaced twice in its lifetime, got a new case once. (Three AppleCare trips, each painless.) In my care for about 1.5 years; bought and sold it used.
Aluminium PowerBook — at least as heavy usage (numerous dents). Had the MLB replaced once (repair took two weeks due to a parts shortage, but was otherwise good). Also in my care for about 1.5 years; bought it refurb, sold it used.
Aluminium PowerBook — again heavy usage (still got dented, somehow...). No problems. 1.25 years. used->used.
Mac Mini — shipped with wrong install CDs; new ones sent by AppleCare. No other problems, 11 months and countng. Bought refurb.
MacBook — bought new 6 months ago, no problems.
MacBook — bought refurb about a month ago. DOA, replaced with...
MacBook — bought refurb about 2 weeks ago. No problems.
iMac — 7 years and counting without problems
iMac — bought from a non-Apple-certified reseller (school IT dept). MLB eventually needed to be replaced.
I can think of 5 other Macs I've been somewhat responsible for maintaining, which haven't had significant problems.
The experiences divide cleanly into three categories:
DOA: can happen to anything. Fixed easily.
Computers which take a heavy beating both in usage and literally. Occasionally broken, fixed by AppleCare reasonably painlessly.
Computers treated normally which last for a really long time.
We Apple zealots may downplay the anecdotes of horrible things happening with {Macs, AppleCare, Apple}. But they are simply anecdotes, and the publicity of a problem has no correlation whatsoever with how much of a problem it actually is (as any Slashdotter should be able to attest) (i.e. anecdotes != data). As someone else pointed out, if we are sufficiently satisfied with Macs to defend Apple, we're, uh, satisfied? That's kinda hard to argue.
and lastly, for contrast, I've had plenty of experiences with PCs failing just as mysteriously/frequently/whateverly as my Macs have, if not more.
Conversely, a user who only rarely saved files would probably have not used much of the space on her hard drive in the first place. Regardless of how fragmented her old filesystem would have been, writing $os_size worth of data to the beginning of the disk certainly to eliminate data.
It's also known that with modern hard drives, which do smart things like block relocation and stuff, that the old formula for multi-pass erases doesn't have any advantages.
I also hope for the sake of her HDD that they haven't completely dismantled it.:-)
As others have pointed out, many companies have been offering this for a while.
That list includes PayPal: back before eBay bought PayPal (at least four years ago), PayPal had a directory of shops. They had a feature where, if you added a credit card to your account, it'd let you browse the web with a frame at the top of the window (IIRC) with a virtual Visa/MasterCard number which you could use to buy things.
Indeed, the fault is not entirely McDonald's. Liebeck was found 20% at fault (Wikipedia), and damages were reduced accordingly. Coffee served at that temperature would cause third degree burns in 2-7 seconds (ibid), and, according to the testimony of a McDonalds, was not fit for human consumption (because it would burn the mouth and throat.)
So, basically, it would have scalded her in far less than 90 seconds.
I imagine that it wouldn't be too difficult for malware of that scale to just insert their own hooks into the kernel's filesystem layer either (regardless of whether or not the system had live indexing.)
"The Secretary may prohibit or limit the exportation, melting, or treatment of United States coins when the Secretary decides the prohibition or limitation is necessary to protect the coinage of the United States."
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's a prediction of whether or not GP will say he read the article, since there's no way for GP to demonstrate that he had read the article, only that he has read it at time of demonstration.
Um, why? Whether or not all operating systems have that as a risk is irrelevant to the fact that it is a risk for the operating system which "most of HP's customers" run. Omitting the factoid that not all OS's are vulnerable when discussing the risk to HP's users isn't telling a half-truth, because the former has no relevance to the latter.
Furthermore, VT is a security risk for all operating systems insofar as it is a security risk at all.
It's very annoying, because you can't take any screen captures when DVD Player is playing, even if it's not in the foreground. The per-window or per-region screen-capture functionality should at least work *wanders off grumbling*
Troll: there aren't TPM modules in many Intel Macs, and the ones which were shipped in Macs before are for use only by the user. The firmware and operating system don't initialize it, and you need to compile/install your own drivers to get it to do anything. It's not useful as a DRM device because you'd need firmware and OS updates to use it to protect the content properly.
Yes, but the fact that the GPL includes provisions to distribute software without warranty would likely not prevent somebody from adding their own warranty as an additional agreement. Furthermore, software isn't service, and there could easily be a warranty on the latter and not the former, and finally, few services (especially free, ad-supported ones) probably have warranties anyway.
Mod parent up.
Who said I needed to reply to only posts I disagree with? ;-)
I didn't say Anti-DRM and the free software movement, I said Anti-DRM and GNU. There's a big difference.
It is an interesting transformation, and one that took people by storm. I can't help but wonder if this doesn't introduce a conflict of interest between the anti-DRM stuff and supporting GNU in the future.
pwned
Wow. You're a good man.
They can't change the terms for music you already have without your consent (or inattentiveness) at present. iTunes will probably play mp3s for quite a long time, and whether or not iTunes can encode to mp3 doesn't relate to your use of iTunes DRM'd music. Furthermore, iTunes still will encode to mp3, though not by default. The default is AAC audio in a non-DRM'd format.
Lastly, nothing about Apple or a Mac forces you to use iTunes any more than Windows forces you to use WMP. Apple's use of DRM in iTunes has no relation to possible use of DRM in their operating systems.
Speaking of their operating systems, it's highly unlikely that Apple will implement anything remotely close to Microsoft-restrictive for OSX running on Apple hardware (i.e. it'll probably remain free of even product keys.) OSX does not run on non-Apple hardware. That is an obvious decision. That's not something that Apple's going to be able to suddenly change for the worse later ("Hey, guess what, now OSX is only going to run on Apple hardware that... uh.. was manufactured in Tailand! Yeah, that's it!")
Lastly, Apple includes a TPM in the Intel Macs, true. But, in the words of Amit Singh, "Unfortunately, there are several aspects of trusted computing that are often misunderstood--in particular, its relationship to the controversial idea of Digital Rights Management (DRM)." How is it often misunderstood? Apple doesn't use the TPM, for one thing. "Nevertheless, it is important to note that Apple does not use the TPM. If you have a TPM-equipped Macintosh computer, you can use the TPM for its intended purpose, with no side effect on the normal working of Mac OS X." (emphasis his) In order to get the TPM to do anything at all, he needed to write a driver for the thing, which is what the article I was quoting from is about.
One last thing: some of the newest Intel Macs don't have TPMs anymore.
So, the submitter's question: "Will Apple follow Microsoft's lead in [being DRM-friendly]?"
They'll probably continue to use DRM in iTunes, but that's iTunes, and not Macs or Mac OS X, and it's certainly on the good side of things. OSX doesn't seem to be using DRM right now, and it's unlikely that it will use severe DRM in the immediate future (and certainly not Trusted stuff). With the caveat that bobody can predict the future, I think the answer is: no.
I can think of 5 other Macs I've been somewhat responsible for maintaining, which haven't had significant problems.
The experiences divide cleanly into three categories:
We Apple zealots may downplay the anecdotes of horrible things happening with {Macs, AppleCare, Apple}. But they are simply anecdotes, and the publicity of a problem has no correlation whatsoever with how much of a problem it actually is (as any Slashdotter should be able to attest) (i.e. anecdotes != data). As someone else pointed out, if we are sufficiently satisfied with Macs to defend Apple, we're, uh, satisfied? That's kinda hard to argue.
and lastly, for contrast, I've had plenty of experiences with PCs failing just as mysteriously/frequently/whateverly as my Macs have, if not more.
Conversely, a user who only rarely saved files would probably have not used much of the space on her hard drive in the first place. Regardless of how fragmented her old filesystem would have been, writing $os_size worth of data to the beginning of the disk certainly to eliminate data.
:-)
It's also known that with modern hard drives, which do smart things like block relocation and stuff, that the old formula for multi-pass erases doesn't have any advantages.
I also hope for the sake of her HDD that they haven't completely dismantled it.
As others have pointed out, many companies have been offering this for a while.
That list includes PayPal: back before eBay bought PayPal (at least four years ago), PayPal had a directory of shops. They had a feature where, if you added a credit card to your account, it'd let you browse the web with a frame at the top of the window (IIRC) with a virtual Visa/MasterCard number which you could use to buy things.
Might be less "Funny" than "insightful"...
(Though I'm too lazy to go sifting through Copyright Law and figure out whether or not it actually does apply.)
It's not sad at all that he should be able to buy his way out of a murder conviction if he's innocent.
It'll be sad if he buys his way out of the conviction when he's guilty, but we don't know that he's guilty yet.
It's saddest for you to assume that he's guilty and if he'd need to buy his way out of a murder conviction if he's innocent.
Indeed, the fault is not entirely McDonald's. Liebeck was found 20% at fault (Wikipedia), and damages were reduced accordingly. Coffee served at that temperature would cause third degree burns in 2-7 seconds (ibid), and, according to the testimony of a McDonalds, was not fit for human consumption (because it would burn the mouth and throat.)
So, basically, it would have scalded her in far less than 90 seconds.
The same thing would exist for Apple.
I imagine that it wouldn't be too difficult for malware of that scale to just insert their own hooks into the kernel's filesystem layer either (regardless of whether or not the system had live indexing.)
And use PullTab if you want to activate which with Apple-Tab (normally reserved by the Dock for the app switcher.)
Um.... no. Control-tab on Windows switches between every window on the system.
Apple-tab and Apple-` on the Mac switch between (respectively) apps and the windows of the current app.
None of those are the same.
Share and enjoy.
That's a great idea, but I posted here already... :-(
Does anyone else here that weird noise? It sounds like - no - it can't be... an airplane flying over my sofa, so it must be...
the sound of the joke flying over your head!
(Sorry.)
Damn your sig. :-)