They're trying to sell you tickets and DVDs, remember?
We want to buy them, remember?
I mean, with all the yadda-yadda-yadda about the Hollywood as a mutual-admiration society, the globalization, the macdonaldization, blah blah blah, I am still the first to queue for any science-fiction or fantasy blockbuster. I _want_ to pay my buck for the right stuff, and all the "Lord Of The Rings" installments were the right stuff (let me refrain from commenting the "Matrix", nothing hurts as much as disappointment in love).
IT'S ONLY CENSORSHIP WHEN THE GOVERNMENT RESTRICTS SPEECH, Mr. Wolf-cryer.
It's a common mistake, but it is absolutely not true. For example, no author writing about the Hays' code (ruling Hollywood in the years of 1934-1966) has any problem with calling it "censorship" - while it was actually imposed by association of private companies, today known as the MPAA. Government had nothing to do with that - but if it effectively kills the freedom of speech (and that's exactly what the Hays' code did) - it is censorship. If you are interested in that subject, I can recommend you some scholarly publications about the censorship of Hollywood classics like "East Of Eden" or "From Here To Eternity".
Even in the communist states, censorship was not always enforced by the government. For example, in the post-Soviet invasion Czechoslovakia there was no government-enforced censorship of press. You don't need a government censorship if you can remove any dissident from his job at the university or a newspaper and make him work at a coal mine just by a snap of your fingers (those brave Czech authors, who tried to use their freedom of speech after the Soviet invasion, soon ended up working as janitors, like Vaclav Havel). It would be exagerating a bit to say, that American artists face similar choices (use your freedom of speech and work at McDonald's or... accept the terms of MPAA/RIAA), but actually only a bit.
Next time, if anyone tells you that "it's not censorship because it's not made by the government", just give him two words: Vaclav Havel.
By default it is set to "once a week" - that should solve the problem above. Also, usually it gives you enough time to wait for a few days and read the early adopters horror stories on slashdot (like it was with the failed 10.2.8).
But the "remote host" can send an email with binary attachment to the "local user". If the local user receives it with the default mail application of the MacOS 9 (obviously, Microsoft Outlook), the application will process the attachment in the same way as described above - unpack the archive, mount the image, launch the QuickTime Autostart procedure. And you get the same result.
Obviously, there is a very easy "patch" for this vulnerability - just disable the damned Autostart option in QuickTime preferences. But it's really annoying that it is enabled in a vanilla configuration. What were they thinking?
is that Mac os 9 was completly safe to the outside world. AFIK there were no remote holes - now it did crash every ten to fifteen minutes on me, but I've never seen remote vulnerablitly.
You can see one anytime you want by just checking this test site. It works in a similar way as the infamous autostart worm that plagued MacOS Classic machines. The vulnerability works as follows:
1. You click on a link on a website like the above. It starts to download a stuffit-packed disk image to your desktop [without asking; that's the default configuration]
2. Stuffit unpacks and mounts the image [without asking; that's the default configuration]
3. Classic QuickTime sees a newly mounted image and initiates Autostart procedure [DEFAULT CONFIGURATION!]
4. Bingo - you allowed a remote source to execute arbitrary code on your system; and even under MacOS X, it started as a Classic layer process so it runs actually as root
The test site "attacks" you only with a very simple AppleScript applet that only opens your trashcan and that's it. But just think of the possibilites for a really malicious use. It was a very severe vulnerability for all vanilla-configured MacOS 9 (and earlier) machines; but unfortunately, also MacOS X machines with their Classic layer configured as the vanilla MacOS 9 were affected. THIS INCLUDES the MacOS X 10.3 "Panther". In fact, Classic layer always was and still is the biggest security hole in MacOS X, but that's another story. Anyway, Apple was crazy to provide Autostart option in QuickTime (who needs it, anyway?) but it was even more crazy to provide it as the DEFAULT configuration.
Any competent security professional will tell you that "security through obscurity" - what Lance is referring to toward the end of his article - doesn't work.
Please observe that the term "security through obscurity" is often used in two slightly different meanings, one that obviously doesn't work and one that is at least not so obvious. Let me separate them: THE ONE THAT OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT WORK is "let us make our system as obscure as possible by refusing to supply any extensive documentation to the public, not to mention the source code; the less anyone knows about our system the better". Microsoft often resorted (still resorts?) to this kind of "s-t-o" strategy. It doesn't work, because sooner or later the internal documentation will leak, malicious crackers will get it anyway and the bona fide hackers won't provide you with their valuable security alerts, patches etc. This meaning of "s-t-o" has actually nothing to do with the popularity of a given system - it's a matter of a vendor's strategy, not a market share. THE ONE THAT IS NOT THAT OBVIOUS AFTER ALL is "let us maximize our security by choosing a system that is not-so-popular, so at least the script kiddies would have to do some homework before they could even try to log in to our network, not to mention use any actual exploits". To some extent it works - script kiddies by very definition go for an easy prey and a not-so-popular system is not one.
Now, please observe that MacOS X does indeed offer "s-t-o", but only in the latter, not-so-obvious meaning. In the first meaning, it is not obscure at all. Everything related to network, communications, protocols etc. is open in MacOS X - only the GUI layer is proprietary.
I don't like the "security through obscurity doesn't work" mantra just because it is a mantra - people seem to just repeat it, without backing it with any examples. In some cases it's obvious, but in some - it is not. Just wanted to clarify that.
If no one's been running the company since 1974, who sued Apple over the ITMS earlier this year and in the early 90s for shipping microphones with Macs?
" just a bunch of lawyers, who try to maximize the profits on the path of least resistance"
Because there is no Apple Records, actually. No-one was running the company anymore after the "White Album", and in 1974 the court solved a series of trials of one Beatle versus another by enforcing a complex scheme for splitting the profits. All Apple Records assets were then given for trustees management, just as it happens with a bankrupt company. Steve Jobs would probably be very happy to strike a deal like this - but there is no one on the other side of the table to negotiate it. There is just a bunch of lawyers, who try to maximize the profits on the path of least resistance (ironically, since the debut of Macintosh in 1984, Apple Records was constantly in red until very recent years).
As far as the artists not getting much money out of the deal... exactly how is that any worse than what they already had?
Exactly zero point null. The downhillbattle site is pretty clear on this one: So why does iTunes give artists such a raw deal? Because it's the exact same deal that artists have always gotten from the big five record companies.
I'm afraid the whole downhilbattle statement boils down to: 'iTunes Music Store is still a capitalist institution. It is not, unfortunately, something that would be endorsed by Che Guevara, Chairman Mao or Vladimir Ilich Lenin. It is something made by companies running for profit'. And they are right on this point, but actually I have no problems with that. I am a capitalist swine running for profit, too.
However, Gamma radiation consists of nuetrons. Nuetrons are inert and won't react to an EM field.
Holy Zarquon! What a dreadful mistake! Gamma radiation consists of very high-frequency photons.
Neutrons are a part of neutron radiation. It does not have its own fancy Greek letter because it does not occur in naturally active isotopes, so Henri Becquerel (the one who noticed that radioactivity consists of three seperate classes of radiation) and Ernest Rutherford (the one who studied their nature and gave them the Greek letters) could not observe neutron rays.
It wasn't just coloured! The classic Bauhaus album "Burning From The Inside" had this incredible picture from its cover somehow "imprinted" (I have no idea how it was achieved from the techical point of view) on the whole surface of the 12" disc. It was an unforgettable experience, just just watching it rotating on the turntable while listening to "She's in parties".
Re:I DON'T CARE -- I BUY MUSIC LATELY
on
Kazaa-lite Shut Down
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I don't know about you, but none of the wal-marts's within a hundred miles of me are open past 11 nor do they open before 9.
Mail-order companies also refuse to deliver there? What is this place, Antarctica? International Space Station? Los Angeles South Central?
Especailly for people like me who like the smaller, less known bands that don't sell in big (if ANY) stores.
A "smaller, less known band" is usually also harder to find at the p2p's.
But for the artists that I like, I would rather pirate their CD and send them the $20 directly.
Nice idea, but somehow everyone stops on the first half.
Are we getting poor or what? This means that the average bank customer has under $200 dollars in their bank account.
Hm, maybe I'm a bit too European-centric, but I see nothing weird in that. In Europe, you have to be crazy to keep your larger savings on your cash account, because it usually has very low interest rate (banks and investment funds offer much better options to invest your savings). It doesn't matter if you are rich or poor, you just don't keep big money on the cash account. Is it any different accross the pond?
Sir, what you write mostly is not true and I honestly doubt if you really do remember the People's Republic of Poland. Let me focus on some particular points:
They stopped condemning rock music, instead they pursued engaging it on their side (see the Manaam band)
And what exactly should we see about it? (BTW: it's Maanam, not Manaam). Maybe the fact that in 1980's its music was banned from public radio (and there was no private radio) for the band's refusal to participate in some stupid Polish-Soviet Friendship gathering? Their song "Tango" was occupying high position on the popular Top Twenty radio list, but they couldn't play it - they played only a brief staccato of percussion instead. Some freedom, eh?
Nobody even thought about banning homosexuality.
Simply not true. Even in the late 1980's, secret political police launched a so called Operation Hyacinth, aiming for massive arrests of active homosexuals. For the whole period of communism in Poland, homosexuals were invigilated and generally treated as criminals by the police ("indecent behavior" was banned as such). Details in the link attached (sorry - in Polish)
Pornography allowed 18+, sex - 16+.
Neither is true. Pornography was explicitly banned by the Censorship Act (officially known as "Ustawa o kontroli publikacji i widowisk" - "Control Of Publications And Spectacles"), namely by paragraph 10 of the 2nd article. As for sex, it was legal from 15+, but then again, what is and what is not "indecent" was up to arbitrary decision of any policeman.
Hard drugs illegal and mostly unknown. Besides, the youth had far more interesting stuff to do than to drug themselves, start gang wars, rob people.
Not true. In late 1970's, a domestic method for production of a "poor man's heroine", known as "kompot", was developed and succesfully applied wasting thousands of young lifes. Poles are generally ingenous in inventing strange homebrew methods of manufacturing virtually anything, especially means to get knocked down. There were many "poor man's hard drugs" manufactured from incredible stuff, like bathroom cleaners or paint dillutants. As for the young gangs, they were as active as today, especially in the "mean neighborhoods" of major cities.
You didn't HAVE TO work.
Absolutely not true. In 1980's work was mandatory. It was against the law not to have any job. Everyone had to have a stamp of his employer in his ID and show it to any policeman on demand. Lack of a stamp could lead to arrest, high fine and having a compulsory job ordered by the authority (usually digging trenches etc.).
Vacations in your firm's contracted or owned hotel (Black Sea? Yugoslavia? Romania?)
In most cases, a derelict, sub-standard bunkhouse somewhere in the Polish countryside - that would not even be counted as "one star" in any contemporary tourism rating. No bathroom - wash in cold water, defecate in a shared outhouse.
It was the shiny shop shelves bending under weight of wares, it was fast cars, big luxury houses most of people who fought, thought they would have.
No, it was more than that. It was the fact that you don't need to fear the policeman if you didn't break any law. It was the fact that you actually have some rights and can even succesfully defend them in court against the state institutions. It was the fact that you can legally buy foreign currency (illegal under communism). It was the fact that you can actually have a passport and travel wherever and whenever you want (under communism, you could get a passport after explaining where do you want to go and what do you want to do; the authorities could simply refuse without any explanation; you were obliged to return the passport within seven days upon return).
I am old enough to remember similar prediction in 1980's. Popularity of IR-based remote control units and taping TV programs was also supposed to harm advertising - but it didn't happen. The TV commercials have changed, they are now much more witty and provocative than in 1970's and earlier (a good example of this evolution are the TV ads of Coca-Cola - they were INCREDIBLY boring in 1960's!). It turned out that people are simply too lazy to bother with switching channels or skipping ads on tape. They will also be too lazy to use TiVo. Besides, if you are not lazy, you are not a good target audience for the advertisers - if you are active enough to put some effort into skipping ads, you are probably also active enough to make your own market research and you generally don't buy something just because you saw it on TV.
Hmm, talking of prior art - what about the Electric Monk of Douglas Adams?
"Prior"? Stanislaw Lem published this story in 1965. With all due respect to Douglas Adams, he was thirteen back then.
Somehow I have this strange feeling that everything that you need to know about the XXI century was either written by Philip Dick in 1950's or by Stanislaw Lem in 1960's.
Yes, I know we all think Microsoft is the Evil Empire (tm), but even evil empires/villians generally know when it's time to shut the hell up and at least pretend to play by the rules for a while.
Sorry for straying offtopic, but this is generally not true. Actually most empires in history fall just because they went for yet another "easy prey" and bitterly discovered that it wasn't that easy after all. Would the Soviets keep away from Afghanistan, they could pretty well still be in Kremlin. Would Napoleon keep away from Kremlin, he could pretty well keep Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Rome and Madrid till the end of his days. And still this lesson didn't keep Hitler from repeating exatcly the same mistake. The same goes with the villains - Al Capone could live his days in luxury if he wouldn't be too greedy.
DISCLAIMER - no, I am not saying that Bill Gates is like Hitler or Capone; I'm just saying that history proves, that saying "Okay, I have gained enough, now is the time for peaceful consumption of what I've got" is actually the MORE difficult part than saying "Let's build an empire from scratch".
I know where _one_ can be found. It's the K+K George Hotel in Kensington. They have wireless network covering their entire ground floor (that includes bar, restaurant and lobby). You don't have to be the guest of the hotel to use the network, just open your laptop and presto. You can sit at the lobby pretending you're waiting for someone, but I'd rather recommend ordering a coffee or a beer at the bar (regular London pub prices).
What would have happened if Albert Einstein had worked creating amazing pinball games instead of creating the theory of relativity? Humanity would suffer!
I bet the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would hold slightly different opinion on this point.
DISCLAIMER: I know, I know, the actual culprits were Hahn and Strassman; but still, Albert signed the memo written by Leo Szilard and then there was no turning back.
Slashdot Mirror
They're trying to sell you tickets and DVDs, remember?
We want to buy them, remember?
I mean, with all the yadda-yadda-yadda about the Hollywood as a mutual-admiration society, the globalization, the macdonaldization, blah blah blah, I am still the first to queue for any science-fiction or fantasy blockbuster. I _want_ to pay my buck for the right stuff, and all the "Lord Of The Rings" installments were the right stuff (let me refrain from commenting the "Matrix", nothing hurts as much as disappointment in love).
IT'S ONLY CENSORSHIP WHEN THE GOVERNMENT RESTRICTS SPEECH, Mr. Wolf-cryer.
It's a common mistake, but it is absolutely not true. For example, no author writing about the Hays' code (ruling Hollywood in the years of 1934-1966) has any problem with calling it "censorship" - while it was actually imposed by association of private companies, today known as the MPAA. Government had nothing to do with that - but if it effectively kills the freedom of speech (and that's exactly what the Hays' code did) - it is censorship. If you are interested in that subject, I can recommend you some scholarly publications about the censorship of Hollywood classics like "East Of Eden" or "From Here To Eternity".
Even in the communist states, censorship was not always enforced by the government. For example, in the post-Soviet invasion Czechoslovakia there was no government-enforced censorship of press. You don't need a government censorship if you can remove any dissident from his job at the university or a newspaper and make him work at a coal mine just by a snap of your fingers (those brave Czech authors, who tried to use their freedom of speech after the Soviet invasion, soon ended up working as janitors, like Vaclav Havel). It would be exagerating a bit to say, that American artists face similar choices (use your freedom of speech and work at McDonald's or... accept the terms of MPAA/RIAA), but actually only a bit.
Next time, if anyone tells you that "it's not censorship because it's not made by the government", just give him two words: Vaclav Havel.
By default it is set to "once a week" - that should solve the problem above. Also, usually it gives you enough time to wait for a few days and read the early adopters horror stories on slashdot (like it was with the failed 10.2.8).
But the "remote host" can send an email with binary attachment to the "local user". If the local user receives it with the default mail application of the MacOS 9 (obviously, Microsoft Outlook), the application will process the attachment in the same way as described above - unpack the archive, mount the image, launch the QuickTime Autostart procedure. And you get the same result.
Obviously, there is a very easy "patch" for this vulnerability - just disable the damned Autostart option in QuickTime preferences. But it's really annoying that it is enabled in a vanilla configuration. What were they thinking?
is that Mac os 9 was completly safe to the outside world. AFIK there were no remote holes - now it did crash every ten to fifteen minutes on me, but I've never seen remote vulnerablitly.
You can see one anytime you want by just checking this test site. It works in a similar way as the infamous autostart worm that plagued MacOS Classic machines. The vulnerability works as follows:
1. You click on a link on a website like the above. It starts to download a stuffit-packed disk image to your desktop [without asking; that's the default configuration]
2. Stuffit unpacks and mounts the image [without asking; that's the default configuration]
3. Classic QuickTime sees a newly mounted image and initiates Autostart procedure [DEFAULT CONFIGURATION!]
4. Bingo - you allowed a remote source to execute arbitrary code on your system; and even under MacOS X, it started as a Classic layer process so it runs actually as root
The test site "attacks" you only with a very simple AppleScript applet that only opens your trashcan and that's it. But just think of the possibilites for a really malicious use. It was a very severe vulnerability for all vanilla-configured MacOS 9 (and earlier) machines; but unfortunately, also MacOS X machines with their Classic layer configured as the vanilla MacOS 9 were affected. THIS INCLUDES the MacOS X 10.3 "Panther". In fact, Classic layer always was and still is the biggest security hole in MacOS X, but that's another story. Anyway, Apple was crazy to provide Autostart option in QuickTime (who needs it, anyway?) but it was even more crazy to provide it as the DEFAULT configuration.
Any competent security professional will tell you that "security through obscurity" - what Lance is referring to toward the end of his article - doesn't work.
Please observe that the term "security through obscurity" is often used in two slightly different meanings, one that obviously doesn't work and one that is at least not so obvious. Let me separate them:
THE ONE THAT OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT WORK is "let us make our system as obscure as possible by refusing to supply any extensive documentation to the public, not to mention the source code; the less anyone knows about our system the better". Microsoft often resorted (still resorts?) to this kind of "s-t-o" strategy. It doesn't work, because sooner or later the internal documentation will leak, malicious crackers will get it anyway and the bona fide hackers won't provide you with their valuable security alerts, patches etc. This meaning of "s-t-o" has actually nothing to do with the popularity of a given system - it's a matter of a vendor's strategy, not a market share.
THE ONE THAT IS NOT THAT OBVIOUS AFTER ALL is "let us maximize our security by choosing a system that is not-so-popular, so at least the script kiddies would have to do some homework before they could even try to log in to our network, not to mention use any actual exploits". To some extent it works - script kiddies by very definition go for an easy prey and a not-so-popular system is not one.
Now, please observe that MacOS X does indeed offer "s-t-o", but only in the latter, not-so-obvious meaning. In the first meaning, it is not obscure at all. Everything related to network, communications, protocols etc. is open in MacOS X - only the GUI layer is proprietary.
I don't like the "security through obscurity doesn't work" mantra just because it is a mantra - people seem to just repeat it, without backing it with any examples. In some cases it's obvious, but in some - it is not. Just wanted to clarify that.
With Saddam captured, the chance that bad will dominate good in Iraqi news well into next fall's election is far less likely.
You mean, not as many Allied soldiers will return from Iraq in coffins? I'd like it to happen, but I'm not that optimistic.
If no one's been running the company since 1974, who sued Apple over the ITMS earlier this year and in the early 90s for shipping microphones with Macs?
" just a bunch of lawyers, who try to maximize the profits on the path of least resistance"
Because there is no Apple Records, actually. No-one was running the company anymore after the "White Album", and in 1974 the court solved a series of trials of one Beatle versus another by enforcing a complex scheme for splitting the profits. All Apple Records assets were then given for trustees management, just as it happens with a bankrupt company. Steve Jobs would probably be very happy to strike a deal like this - but there is no one on the other side of the table to negotiate it. There is just a bunch of lawyers, who try to maximize the profits on the path of least resistance (ironically, since the debut of Macintosh in 1984, Apple Records was constantly in red until very recent years).
As far as the artists not getting much money out of the deal... exactly how is that any worse than what they already had?
Exactly zero point null. The downhillbattle site is pretty clear on this one:
So why does iTunes give artists such a raw deal? Because it's the exact same deal that artists have always gotten from the big five record companies.
I'm afraid the whole downhilbattle statement boils down to: 'iTunes Music Store is still a capitalist institution. It is not, unfortunately, something that would be endorsed by Che Guevara, Chairman Mao or Vladimir Ilich Lenin. It is something made by companies running for profit'. And they are right on this point, but actually I have no problems with that. I am a capitalist swine running for profit, too.
However, Gamma radiation consists of nuetrons. Nuetrons are inert and won't react to an EM field.
Holy Zarquon! What a dreadful mistake! Gamma radiation consists of very high-frequency photons.
Neutrons are a part of neutron radiation. It does not have its own fancy Greek letter because it does not occur in naturally active isotopes, so Henri Becquerel (the one who noticed that radioactivity consists of three seperate classes of radiation) and Ernest Rutherford (the one who studied their nature and gave them the Greek letters) could not observe neutron rays.
Mac OS isn't just expensive, it's seems ultra expensive. $130 (in eurpoe even more) everytime a minor upgrade comes out is for a Linux guy expensive.
I don't think anyone who actually saw Jaguar and Panther in action would call it a "minor upgrade". It was certainly bigger than Win 95 -> Win 98.
OK, my mistake.
Where is the OS software that is better than it's commercial counterparts?
Here?
coloured vinyl. god i love coloured vinyl
It wasn't just coloured! The classic Bauhaus album "Burning From The Inside" had this incredible picture from its cover somehow "imprinted" (I have no idea how it was achieved from the techical point of view) on the whole surface of the 12" disc. It was an unforgettable experience, just just watching it rotating on the turntable while listening to "She's in parties".
I don't know about you, but none of the wal-marts's within a hundred miles of me are open past 11 nor do they open before 9.
Mail-order companies also refuse to deliver there? What is this place, Antarctica? International Space Station? Los Angeles South Central?
Especailly for people like me who like the smaller, less known bands that don't sell in big (if ANY) stores.
A "smaller, less known band" is usually also harder to find at the p2p's.
But for the artists that I like, I would rather pirate their CD and send them the $20 directly.
Nice idea, but somehow everyone stops on the first half.
Linus, is that you? By the way, I'm looking forward to 2.6.
Highly unlikely. Though Finnish by citizenship, by nationality Linus is actually Swedish.
Are we getting poor or what? This means that the average bank customer has under $200 dollars in their bank account.
Hm, maybe I'm a bit too European-centric, but I see nothing weird in that. In Europe, you have to be crazy to keep your larger savings on your cash account, because it usually has very low interest rate (banks and investment funds offer much better options to invest your savings). It doesn't matter if you are rich or poor, you just don't keep big money on the cash account. Is it any different accross the pond?
Sir, what you write mostly is not true and I honestly doubt if you really do remember the People's Republic of Poland. Let me focus on some particular points:
They stopped condemning rock music, instead they pursued engaging it on their side (see the Manaam band)
And what exactly should we see about it? (BTW: it's Maanam, not Manaam). Maybe the fact that in 1980's its music was banned from public radio (and there was no private radio) for the band's refusal to participate in some stupid Polish-Soviet Friendship gathering? Their song "Tango" was occupying high position on the popular Top Twenty radio list, but they couldn't play it - they played only a brief staccato of percussion instead. Some freedom, eh?
Nobody even thought about banning homosexuality.
Simply not true. Even in the late 1980's, secret political police launched a so called Operation Hyacinth, aiming for massive arrests of active homosexuals. For the whole period of communism in Poland, homosexuals were invigilated and generally treated as criminals by the police ("indecent behavior" was banned as such). Details in the link attached (sorry - in Polish)
Pornography allowed 18+, sex - 16+.
Neither is true. Pornography was explicitly banned by the Censorship Act (officially known as "Ustawa o kontroli publikacji i widowisk" - "Control Of Publications And Spectacles"), namely by paragraph 10 of the 2nd article. As for sex, it was legal from 15+, but then again, what is and what is not "indecent" was up to arbitrary decision of any policeman.
Hard drugs illegal and mostly unknown. Besides, the youth had far more interesting stuff to do than to drug themselves, start gang wars, rob people.
Not true. In late 1970's, a domestic method for production of a "poor man's heroine", known as "kompot", was developed and succesfully applied wasting thousands of young lifes. Poles are generally ingenous in inventing strange homebrew methods of manufacturing virtually anything, especially means to get knocked down. There were many "poor man's hard drugs" manufactured from incredible stuff, like bathroom cleaners or paint dillutants. As for the young gangs, they were as active as today, especially in the "mean neighborhoods" of major cities.
You didn't HAVE TO work.
Absolutely not true. In 1980's work was mandatory. It was against the law not to have any job. Everyone had to have a stamp of his employer in his ID and show it to any policeman on demand. Lack of a stamp could lead to arrest, high fine and having a compulsory job ordered by the authority (usually digging trenches etc.).
Vacations in your firm's contracted or owned hotel (Black Sea? Yugoslavia? Romania?)
In most cases, a derelict, sub-standard bunkhouse somewhere in the Polish countryside - that would not even be counted as "one star" in any contemporary tourism rating. No bathroom - wash in cold water, defecate in a shared outhouse.
It was the shiny shop shelves bending under weight of wares, it was fast cars, big luxury houses most of people who fought, thought they would have.
No, it was more than that. It was the fact that you don't need to fear the policeman if you didn't break any law. It was the fact that you actually have some rights and can even succesfully defend them in court against the state institutions. It was the fact that you can legally buy foreign currency (illegal under communism). It was the fact that you can actually have a passport and travel wherever and whenever you want (under communism, you could get a passport after explaining where do you want to go and what do you want to do; the authorities could simply refuse without any explanation; you were obliged to return the passport within seven days upon return).
I am old enough to remember similar prediction in 1980's. Popularity of IR-based remote control units and taping TV programs was also supposed to harm advertising - but it didn't happen. The TV commercials have changed, they are now much more witty and provocative than in 1970's and earlier (a good example of this evolution are the TV ads of Coca-Cola - they were INCREDIBLY boring in 1960's!). It turned out that people are simply too lazy to bother with switching channels or skipping ads on tape. They will also be too lazy to use TiVo. Besides, if you are not lazy, you are not a good target audience for the advertisers - if you are active enough to put some effort into skipping ads, you are probably also active enough to make your own market research and you generally don't buy something just because you saw it on TV.
Hmm, talking of prior art - what about the Electric Monk of Douglas Adams?
"Prior"? Stanislaw Lem published this story in 1965. With all due respect to Douglas Adams, he was thirteen back then.
Somehow I have this strange feeling that everything that you need to know about the XXI century was either written by Philip Dick in 1950's or by Stanislaw Lem in 1960's.
Yes, I know we all think Microsoft is the Evil Empire (tm), but even evil empires/villians generally know when it's time to shut the hell up and at least pretend to play by the rules for a while.
Sorry for straying offtopic, but this is generally not true. Actually most empires in history fall just because they went for yet another "easy prey" and bitterly discovered that it wasn't that easy after all. Would the Soviets keep away from Afghanistan, they could pretty well still be in Kremlin. Would Napoleon keep away from Kremlin, he could pretty well keep Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Rome and Madrid till the end of his days. And still this lesson didn't keep Hitler from repeating exatcly the same mistake. The same goes with the villains - Al Capone could live his days in luxury if he wouldn't be too greedy.
DISCLAIMER - no, I am not saying that Bill Gates is like Hitler or Capone; I'm just saying that history proves, that saying "Okay, I have gained enough, now is the time for peaceful consumption of what I've got" is actually the MORE difficult part than saying "Let's build an empire from scratch".
I know where _one_ can be found. It's the K+K George Hotel in Kensington. They have wireless network covering their entire ground floor (that includes bar, restaurant and lobby). You don't have to be the guest of the hotel to use the network, just open your laptop and presto. You can sit at the lobby pretending you're waiting for someone, but I'd rather recommend ordering a coffee or a beer at the bar (regular London pub prices).
What would have happened if Albert Einstein had worked creating amazing pinball games instead of creating the theory of relativity? Humanity would suffer!
I bet the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would hold slightly different opinion on this point.
DISCLAIMER: I know, I know, the actual culprits were Hahn and Strassman; but still, Albert signed the memo written by Leo Szilard and then there was no turning back.
I don't know what all of these people are doing to kill their batteries
They are just on the wrong side of the bell's curve.