I heard once (urban legend?) that these "privacy" services permit the whole identification thing to be bypassed by a static code of some sort. If so, then maybe these guys found out your code?
I could never get decent results from HotBot. I'd try it every now and again when my then-favorite (AltaVista) was giving me grief, but it always returned hits that were essentially worthless.
More likely, a casual end user will skip the $199 registration and install their old version of 2000 or WinME/9x on the box - something Microsoft would very much not want to see happen.
Which is why, if I was Microsoft and had the reprehensible idea of "software subscriptions" to push, I'd let the computer work for a year then require renewal.
Bad anology, since it doesn't cut out all streams of advertisement. This is more akin to holding said newspaper upside down over the recycle bin and letting the flyers fall out. That is not going to bankrupt any newspaper anytime soon.
Certainly, it won't. And the reason is that advertisers discovered that with the Web, they had the ability to finally get fairly good live statistics on the effects their ads had. Ironically, it seems that when content providers seeking advertisers leaped to provide this, they damned themselves -- maybe if they could have kept the mystery of "how many people are buying because of my ad?" alive, they'd still be able to command huge advertising rates.
Violating a "service contract" with a monopoly ISP has been equated with serious law breaking.
In the case of stealing bandwidth, where real, quantifiable money was being lost, this does indeed constitute a serious offense. Serious enough to bring the FBI? I doubt it, unless other, much more heinous crimes were involved. It does not amount to any kind of constitutional issue, except of course the overreach of police power.
The same service contract includes prohibitions on running "servers" or electronic publications. Prohibiting electronic publications on a monopoly service ammounts to denial of first amendment rights to free speach [sic].
This, I agree with, and it needs to be pursued. If I'm not exceeding the bandwidth you sold me, then you should have no say over what I do with it.
Re:Evolution in motion - I think he means
on
PINE Releases 4.50
·
· Score: 2
Evolution takes place over EONS, so maybe he meant "glacially slow and painful".
Along those lines, why hasn't "survival of the fittest" killed pine off yet?:-)
Re:P2P != Open Source
on
Film Gimp
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Of course, this is true, but it's also important to remember that anti-piracy legislation (which is really what the {RI,MP}AA is shooting for) has and probably will continue to have negative effects for free software and open source, and not just a link by way of Slashdot.
For example, the DMCA has created a crime out of creating a "circumvention device" (i.e. CSS). So, to play DVDs on my Linux laptop, an entirely legitimate use, I must download a CSS decryptor from a country that doesn't have the DMCA (yet).
Attempts to legislate a DRM requirement will also have a very chilling effect on free software, as it would really be impossible for free software to meet any DRM requirements, as its source is open.
In any modern operating system, a "low priority" thread will happily take 100% of the CPU if nothing else is running. Low priority doesn't mean it hangs on 10% just in case something wants the CPU -- it means that if a high priority and a low priority process both want the CPU, the high priority process is going to get a larger slice.
If you're getting permission to run the client, why hide it?
If you're going to install something on Windows as a service, you're the system's administrator. You therefore effectively stop users who are not also administrators from playing with it, stopping it, etc. This would be directed at sysadmins who want to use the idle cycles of the desktop machines they administer, I believe.
Running something in StartUp is going to give you an application running under the logged-in user's context, that disappears when he logs out, and again can be fiddled with by said user.
Okay, that article is just an advertisement. I'm surprised that some editor at the Times let that pass for a column.
Let me summarize for the impatient. "Operating systems are irrelevant, except for Windows, which we should be thankful to Bill for, because it made everything more accessible, and he's oh-so-visionary. Buy my stuff, which is an incarnation of the vision that Bill wants to realize in Longhorn. Also, Linux is irrelevant."
Er, I don't think so. Unless Windows suddenly thought the process I tried to kill magically transformed itself from an unresponsive GUI app to a service, that's just not the case.
Slashdot Mirror
Really. I could never get it to work, and ended up just telling it to use "lpr". It would fail mysteriously. Yes, I have CUPS running.
I heard once (urban legend?) that these "privacy" services permit the whole identification thing to be bypassed by a static code of some sort. If so, then maybe these guys found out your code?
I could never get decent results from HotBot. I'd try it every now and again when my then-favorite (AltaVista) was giving me grief, but it always returned hits that were essentially worthless.
Seen Windows XP lately? It has its own clutter now. Apparently Microsoft felt left out.
Which is why, if I was Microsoft and had the reprehensible idea of "software subscriptions" to push, I'd let the computer work for a year then require renewal.
Under Linux? Probably everything was in the buffer cache, with that much RAM, before you started it the second time.
That's funny, because it's great on my 333 MHz Pentium II.
Sure.
Not too tough, eh?
Which works until the higher-quality bits are replaced with, say, a large dose of /dev/random.
Certainly, it won't. And the reason is that advertisers discovered that with the Web, they had the ability to finally get fairly good live statistics on the effects their ads had. Ironically, it seems that when content providers seeking advertisers leaped to provide this, they damned themselves -- maybe if they could have kept the mystery of "how many people are buying because of my ad?" alive, they'd still be able to command huge advertising rates.
In the case of stealing bandwidth, where real, quantifiable money was being lost, this does indeed constitute a serious offense. Serious enough to bring the FBI? I doubt it, unless other, much more heinous crimes were involved. It does not amount to any kind of constitutional issue, except of course the overreach of police power.
Along those lines, why hasn't "survival of the fittest" killed pine off yet? :-)
Of course, this is true, but it's also important to remember that anti-piracy legislation (which is really what the {RI,MP}AA is shooting for) has and probably will continue to have negative effects for free software and open source, and not just a link by way of Slashdot.
For example, the DMCA has created a crime out of creating a "circumvention device" (i.e. CSS). So, to play DVDs on my Linux laptop, an entirely legitimate use, I must download a CSS decryptor from a country that doesn't have the DMCA (yet).
Attempts to legislate a DRM requirement will also have a very chilling effect on free software, as it would really be impossible for free software to meet any DRM requirements, as its source is open.
Hmm, is Judge CKK working in WorldCom's antispam department? :-)
In any modern operating system, a "low priority" thread will happily take 100% of the CPU if nothing else is running. Low priority doesn't mean it hangs on 10% just in case something wants the CPU -- it means that if a high priority and a low priority process both want the CPU, the high priority process is going to get a larger slice.
If you're going to install something on Windows as a service, you're the system's administrator. You therefore effectively stop users who are not also administrators from playing with it, stopping it, etc. This would be directed at sysadmins who want to use the idle cycles of the desktop machines they administer, I believe.
Running something in StartUp is going to give you an application running under the logged-in user's context, that disappears when he logs out, and again can be fiddled with by said user.
Obsolete != useless.
Do you really mean machine? If so, maybe you do need to upgrade away from whatever OS you're using, that permits a website to do such a thing...
Okay, that article is just an advertisement. I'm surprised that some editor at the Times let that pass for a column.
Let me summarize for the impatient. "Operating systems are irrelevant, except for Windows, which we should be thankful to Bill for, because it made everything more accessible, and he's oh-so-visionary. Buy my stuff, which is an incarnation of the vision that Bill wants to realize in Longhorn. Also, Linux is irrelevant."
Put down the tinfoil hat, eh?
Daniel has a mirror of the interview at his site.
As damning as this may sound, it should be remembered that Osama is the black sheep of the family.
Er, I don't think so. Unless Windows suddenly thought the process I tried to kill magically transformed itself from an unresponsive GUI app to a service, that's just not the case.
Turn off the flamethrower and read it again.
If "happens when" was deleted, it'd make sense. If more was added after "to", it could make sense. Right now, it doesn't.
You sound an awful lot like you're trolling, but I'll answer anyway.
Yes.