If they are being swayed by advertising and free samples, than they are nothing more than a sales agent.
Exactly. I routinely fought w/my doctor about how many meds she was prescribing for me and why. Yes, diruetics are supposedly the first method that doctors should try when faced with someone who has high blood pressure. Problem is that I was diagnosed at 18 and only treated at 22+ (due to D1 athletics). She had started treating me over a year and a half after I was already on other meds.
Diruetics cause night time muscle cramps/spasms in me but she refused to not prescribe them for me. She wanted me to take three different drugs (two for the hypertension and the diruetic). She was fully aware of how much that would cost me but what does she care?
I figure that while the Insurance companies are shortchanging the doctors on their pay the drug companies are making it well worth their while to prescribe more and more drugs even when it might not be financially viable for the patient.
It's not "automatic" with anything but a good majority of users of any addictive, mood altering, substance (i.e. alcohol, crack, PCP, etc) become a liability in some way.
2. A coercive measure intended to ensure compliance or conformity: interdict, penalty, sanction. See reward/punish/deserve.
I don't see what you are confused about. They want to make sure that people aren't trading stuff owned by others so they are "ensuring compliance/conformity".
The UCLA research group is developing the software and hardware components of a system that would embed DVDs with an RFID tag and DVD players with an RFID reader so that the tagged DVDs would play only in RFID-enabled players and only if the reader could authenticate the DVD's tag. In order to authenticate, the player would also need to link to some type of online network, similar to the EPCglobal Network, that would associate the DVD with a legal sale. Through this system, the copyright owners (the film production company and any other license-holders of the content) would have digital rights management over the work. But viewers would not be able to play the DVDs without an RFID-enabled player because the tag would essentially lock the disc.
I don't see anything there that allows me to exercise fair-use. I need to use some special DVD player (the market has already proven they don't like this), I need to have an Internet connection, and I need to buy some special DVD...
I apparently can't make a backup copy for myself, move the content to portable formats, etc. Hey UCLA Research Team, remember this is necessary. Oh wait, you aren't being paid by the consumers, you're being paid by the content providers...
The Motion Picture Association of America, a trade group that represents major Hollywood studios, estimates that the U.S. motion picture industry loses more than $3 billion annually in potential worldwide revenue due to piracy.
LOL. This is difficult to prove and we all know why. Thanks for the blantant bullshit though.
This sounds more like advertising to the content providers than it sounds like some sort of press release of what hey have/can do.
Bullshit. Nobody is going to believe that you had a stalker, garcia. You ain't anything special.
You apparently don't have to be:
Dear Mr. Roehl:
I have been enlisted as a vendor to do an active spot check of geocaching in the greater Twin Cities metro area. I will be conducting spot checks for approximately the next 60 days. As part of my activity I will attempt to get a pulse on the attitude of MnGCA board members, premium members and others regarding responsible geocaching. I would appreciate your cooperation in not locking threads that can provide revealing information about the general attitude of your active members, board members and hopefully the Site Administrator.
For our purposes it would be most helpful if you to unlock the "Bad Old Putty Cat" thread so we can determine how many members, if any, think this is NOT an appropriate cache container. I notice that you logged in this cache as a find on January 23rd. Being that you apparently registered NO concerns for this wooden bird house cache (by one of your members) we assume that you think it meets MnGCA guidelines for an acceptable cache placement. We are interested to know what eXactly is MnGCAs administrative policy for taking active measures to keep ~ as Chad would say ~ "MN folks working to keep caching legal in the state...." For eXample how many geocaches in 2004 were recommended for removal/archival by a MnGCA board member for being inactive, in poor shape, unsafe, etc, etc. etc.? Also, do you think it might be a good idea for MnGCA members to inform other cachers if their cache is an all~seasons winter friendly cache or only a fair weather friendly cache?
It is a little disconcerting that no apparent concern is voiced by the Site Administrator, yourself or a board member to the potential danger that a cache like "Barn Byewater" may pose. Perhaps there needs to be an oversite geocaching agency that has the final say on whether or not *removed* (Red Wing) is informed of the potential risk of the current geocache on Barn Bluff. Since that geocache was placed a small child fell to her death in the general area of "Barn Byewater." I would appreciate it very much if you cooperate by showing us your willingness to have an open forum of discussion. Afterall, I get the impression so far that MnGCA has a rather hands off policy on policing geocaches yet you are quick to lock a thread. Are we to assume that MnGCA does not welcome constructive criticism? Are we to assume that the most active geocacher in the greater metro area is a "maniacal genius" whos goal in life is to monopolize location after location after location (700??? caches placed)? Perhaps, there are other members that would like an opportunity to place a cache near their place of residence that isn't already taken by someone who lives miles away. What we'd really would like to know is if MnGCA is already out~of~control? What about giving everyone a fair chance by limiting a member to the number of caches they can place each year and the length of time any one cache can eXist?
Wouldn't this actually increase geocaching activity by creating more new sites to search every year instead of the same old cache at the same old location for several years? Or is one goal of Mngca a hands-off policy ~ with the fewer restrictions the better (e.g. bird house cache attached to tree with metal fastner)??? What eXactly, if anything, does the braintrust of MnGCA do to discourage and curtail such cute & clever caches as the "Bad Old Putty Cat?"
You indicate that you would like ~ "To obtain a challenging and demanding position in the Office of the Registrar...." Is *removed* (952) *removed* aware of how much time you spend each day checking the discussion forums at MnGCA and thinking about geocaching at tax payer eXpense? Do you think, *removed*, Ed.D., and President of HTC~South would have any interest in www.lazylightning.org and likewise helping you further your career objectives???
Internet cafés are also available, but although fairly anonymous, every machine may be infected with keystroke loggers that give governments access to and knowledge of 'banned' sites.
I would think that Internet Café "spies" would be more useful than keyloggers to the authorities looking for dissidents. Unless these connections are somehow routed through multiple anonymous/encrypted proxies and hopping through open WAPs I really don't believe that a public terminal is in any way "safe".
A stalker that I had earlier this year was easily located via tracking his IP and figuring out which coffee shops and libraries he was using. The libraries all went through a single county-wide proxy and narrowing his location down on a Sunday was easier than you could possibly imagine (all satellite locations in the county were closed except one).
If I could track someone down that easily imagine what the members of a Gestapo looking to do more than end some harassing emails could do, especially when they might have a network of spies watching public access locations in person.
it's a Dell p-133 with 40MB of RAM (absolute maximum) and a 1.6GB HD with several bad sectors running Win98 (it has run various Flavors of Linux and even FreeBSD once).
It has no battery because I threw it out a year ago when it refused to hold a charge at all (hell it's 8.5 years old, what do you expect?), it crashes frequently adding to the bad sectors problem but a new laptop HD is worth more than the machine itself so I won't replace it.
The screen is starting to go on it and the LCD routinely flickers and becomes so fucked up I have to turn it off for a while.
It works for games.yahoo.com and google searches. I use putty and screen to sit on the couch and surf/IRC while watching TV.
I'd like to get a new one but $300 for something that is used and I only use for sitting there in front of the TV doesn't seem in the cards for me.
I've been using my t-mobile hiptop more and more and if it played yahoo games I'd switch completely;)
When a guy goes "IE is better then Firefox and just as secure if not MORE secure" you know he's an idiot.
When a "guy" says that, perhaps he's uneducated about the subject or biased. When Bill Gates says that about IE it's not only biased, it's good business sense.
Like he would ever admit his software and marketshare domination is inferior/lower to another product out there.
If you are going to rag on him you might as well do it for the right reasons.
"This type of spam is more than just an annoyance to consumers," said Mr Reilly. "It poses a real danger to people who may be fooled into buying counterfeit versions of prescription drugs or unwittingly open e-mail links to sexually explicit websites."
Is this similar to states that send out notifications to their employees and citizens that buying drugs from Canada is acceptable, encouraged, and more inexpensive than buying them from any pharmacy in their local area? I guess I'm in danger.
In this day and age, if you open an email from someone you don't know and see links and you click them you are not unwittingly doing anything. You are just a nitwit.
Under the lawsuit Mr Reilly wants the defendants fined for breaking state and national laws outlawing spam. He also wants them to repay people who lost money because of the huge amounts of spam mail that was sent.
Brought the hammer down? They haven't been convicted of anything yet. They have had their websites shutdown until they go to court and fight the lawsuit. Let's not make this any more "sensational" then it already is. Thanks.
While I see both of your points it would be easier than having to setup a UPOC SMS group, or have AIM group chat, or gasp -- have to call people...
I don't like making phone calls. I have GPRS and SMS to talk w/people. Phone calls make me drop GPRS and they take too long and require my undivided attention.
Quick SMS or IMs are much easier. If a webapp could tell you where your friends currently are (opt-in of course) then that would own.
I don't know if I'd like to have a single company be doing that (especially the way Google has been heading as of late).
I am concerned, however, about the infrastructure of society being in the hands of a company.
That is exactly what Microsoft wants, in my opinion, and in that respect, Google and MS are identical.
That's exactly what every company wants but they want to do it in a way where their customers pay out the ass for it. People support Google because it's "free" (free as in I gave out my personal habbits to the lowest bidder so I could see maps for free).
Apparently I didn't explain myself correctly in my posts above. Let's try again...
I am NOT arguing that you need a lot of storage for everyday use. What I am saying, though, is that the article is hyping this sub-$200 laptop as a movie and music player but refuses to mention how much on-board storage there is.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. It's obvious that the storage built-in will not be able to support movies and music (as they so proudly claim) and you will likely have to shell out $150+ to do those things.
Even if it is only 512MB...for Word docs and web browsing how much do you need?
Well, if you had read the non-slashdotted article:
Vinay L. Deshpande, chairman and chief executive officer of Encore Software, told a press conference the system would have the essential features of a conventional personal computer: everyday applications such as word processing, spreadsheet, personal information manager, e-mail and web-browser. It will play music and movies, have text-to-speech conversion facility and built-in local-language support.
Movies and music on 512MB? Get serious. As I said, you will likely be shelling out 150+ for memory. I found it VERY suspicious that they were touting the price when they aren't including any storage space.
$199 doesn't impress me with slow specs and no storage.
It will have no hard disk but will have built-in memory and facility to plug in memory cards for any storage over and above that provided for in the built-in memory. It will not have games. High-speed computing is ruled out. The reasoning is that "while adding to the cost, these are of no use to many users.''
The one link is slashdotted already and the other doesn't say how much memory it has built-in. Yeah, it's sub-$200 until you realize that you have to pay another $150+ for a decent sized memory "stick" (or two or three).
When you write such riveting articles with titles like "Read The F***ing Story, Then RTFM" we know that you must be a gem of a freelancer! I wouldn't know for sure though, I couldn't RTFS or the FM. I'm a Slashdotter afterall.
What I found funny about the quotes given by "Carmella" is that they were mirrored on several other sites with the citation leading back to the Wired article.
From this article entitled "Spyware on My Machine? So What?":
I had a good idea what the Marketscore software does, though I didn't read the entire user agreement," said 19-year-old New York University student Keith Caron. "In general when any application asks to install another application, I assume the other application is spyware. But you have to support spyware if you're going to have free file-sharing applications. Fair's fair.
I had a good idea what Delio was doing when she wrote these articles, though I didn't read the entire thing," said 26-year-old Slashdotter Bill Roehl. "In general when any story is posted to the main page, I assume it's full of worthless bullshit that no one cares about. But you have to support Slashdot if you're going to be a Slashbotter. Fair's fair in addiction."
I know that I was asked many times to answer simple questions on campus. I usually would give some valid reply and list a fake name and address. They can have my thoughts but why would I ever give them my personal information.
"Keith" seems like a typical college student from 2004, IMHO, most of them don't give a shit as long as they can get their music free and fast.
it may become a poster child Microsoft can use to point out that open source software's "many eyes" theory is hogwash. Maybe it is hogwash.
I don't run Firefox because I find it inferior to IE in rendering pages as they were intended (yes, we live in an IE world, deal with it).
As far as "many eyes" being hogwash, I can't agree. Even though these exploits were found recently work has been done to make sure that the exploits are closed quickly. Some of MSFT's holes were left open for MONTHS before anything was done (and that included half-assed workarounds to stop the problems).
While Firefox may not be the best browser for me and it might not be as "safe/secure" as the zealots would like you to believe, the bugs *are* fixed in a much shorter timeframe because the coders DO care about their product.
Like many Windows users, you seem to forget that OSS != Linux.
What's your point? They talked about Linux *and* other free software in the article (OpenOffice, Firefox, *and* Linux). I am not a "Windows user" (as you are using it condescendingly) and I do understand the difference between Linux and OSS TYVM.
Quite the pro OSS piece... To answer the question posed in the summary, "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?" Because there is more to the world than just the web and e-mail.
It sure is but doubleclick was doing something that was basically hidden from view. Most people didn't know about firewalls, their hosts file, cookies, cookie blocking, etc. Doubleclick was silently aggregating your habbits on the web behind the scenes.
Google, while what they are doing is becoming increasingly scary, is at least up front about it... "Our programs scan your emails and display ads related."
You don't have to use Google. You could be screwed and use something worse (MSN, AskJeeves, whatever) or you can suffer w/Yahoo, whatever newbie comes into the market...
You don't have to use GMail, GOffice, or any of the other various pieces of software they do/will offer.
Personally, I use them for now. As they become scarier and possibly grab a greater hold over us and start hiding their privacy violations I might change my mind. Until then just pay attention.
Slashdot Mirror
If they are being swayed by advertising and free samples, than they are nothing more than a sales agent.
Exactly. I routinely fought w/my doctor about how many meds she was prescribing for me and why. Yes, diruetics are supposedly the first method that doctors should try when faced with someone who has high blood pressure. Problem is that I was diagnosed at 18 and only treated at 22+ (due to D1 athletics). She had started treating me over a year and a half after I was already on other meds.
Diruetics cause night time muscle cramps/spasms in me but she refused to not prescribe them for me. She wanted me to take three different drugs (two for the hypertension and the diruetic). She was fully aware of how much that would cost me but what does she care?
I figure that while the Insurance companies are shortchanging the doctors on their pay the drug companies are making it well worth their while to prescribe more and more drugs even when it might not be financially viable for the patient.
That's my paranoid thought at least.
It's not "automatic" with anything but a good majority of users of any addictive, mood altering, substance (i.e. alcohol, crack, PCP, etc) become a liability in some way.
2. A coercive measure intended to ensure compliance or conformity: interdict, penalty, sanction. See reward/punish/deserve.
I don't see what you are confused about. They want to make sure that people aren't trading stuff owned by others so they are "ensuring compliance/conformity".
The UCLA research group is developing the software and hardware components of a system
that would embed DVDs with an RFID tag and DVD players with an RFID reader so that the tagged
DVDs would play only in RFID-enabled players and only if the reader could authenticate the
DVD's tag. In order to authenticate, the player would also need to link to some type of
online network, similar to the EPCglobal Network, that would associate the DVD with a legal
sale. Through this system, the copyright owners (the film production company and any other
license-holders of the content) would have digital rights management over the work. But
viewers would not be able to play the DVDs without an RFID-enabled player because the tag
would essentially lock the disc.
I don't see anything there that allows me to exercise fair-use. I need to use some special
DVD player (the market has already proven they don't like this), I need to have an Internet
connection, and I need to buy some special DVD...
I apparently can't make a backup copy for myself, move the content to portable formats, etc.
Hey UCLA Research Team, remember this is necessary. Oh wait, you aren't being paid by the
consumers, you're being paid by the content providers...
The Motion Picture Association of America, a trade group that represents major Hollywood
studios, estimates that the U.S. motion picture industry loses more than $3 billion annually
in potential worldwide revenue due to piracy.
LOL. This is difficult to prove and we all know why. Thanks for the blantant bullshit
though.
This sounds more like advertising to the content providers than it sounds like some sort of
press release of what hey have/can do.
Bullshit. Nobody is going to believe that you had a stalker, garcia. You ain't anything special.
... ." Is *removed*
You apparently don't have to be:
Dear Mr. Roehl:
I have been enlisted as a vendor to do an active spot check of geocaching in the greater Twin Cities metro area. I will be conducting
spot checks for approximately the next 60 days. As part of my activity I will attempt to get a pulse on the attitude of MnGCA board members,
premium members and others regarding responsible geocaching. I would appreciate your cooperation in not locking threads that can provide
revealing information about the general attitude of your active members, board members and hopefully the Site Administrator.
For our purposes it would be most helpful if you to unlock the "Bad Old Putty Cat" thread so we can determine how many members, if any, think
this is NOT an appropriate cache container. I notice that you logged in this cache as a find on January 23rd. Being that you apparently
registered NO concerns for this wooden bird house cache (by one of your members) we assume that you think it meets MnGCA guidelines for an
acceptable cache placement. We are interested to know what eXactly is MnGCAs administrative policy for taking active measures to keep ~ as
Chad would say ~ "MN folks working to keep caching legal in the state...." For eXample how many geocaches in 2004 were recommended for
removal/archival by a MnGCA board member for being inactive, in poor shape, unsafe, etc, etc. etc.? Also, do you think it might be a good
idea for MnGCA members to inform other cachers if their cache is an all~seasons winter friendly cache or only a fair weather friendly
cache?
It is a little disconcerting that no apparent concern is voiced by the Site Administrator, yourself or a board member to the potential danger that a cache like "Barn Byewater" may pose. Perhaps there needs to be an oversite geocaching agency that has the final say on whether or not *removed* (Red Wing) is informed of the potential risk of the current geocache on Barn Bluff. Since that geocache was placed a small child fell to her death in the general area of "Barn Byewater." I would appreciate it very much if you cooperate by showing us your willingness to have an open forum of discussion. Afterall, I get the impression so
far that MnGCA has a rather hands off policy on policing geocaches yet you are quick to lock a thread. Are we to assume that MnGCA does not
welcome constructive criticism? Are we to assume that the most active geocacher in the greater metro area is a "maniacal genius" whos goal in
life is to monopolize location after location after location (700??? caches placed)? Perhaps, there are other members that would like an
opportunity to place a cache near their place of residence that isn't already taken by someone who lives miles away. What we'd really would like to know is if MnGCA is already out~of~control? What about giving everyone a fair chance by limiting a member to the number of caches they can place each year and the length of time any one cache can eXist?
Wouldn't this actually increase geocaching activity by creating more new sites to search every year instead of the same old cache at the same old location for several years? Or is one goal of Mngca a hands-off policy ~ with the fewer restrictions the better (e.g. bird house cache attached to tree with metal fastner)??? What eXactly, if anything, does the braintrust of MnGCA do to discourage and curtail such cute & clever caches as the "Bad Old Putty Cat?"
You indicate that you would like ~ "To obtain a challenging and demanding position in the Office of the Registrar
(952) *removed* aware of how much time you spend each day checking the discussion forums at MnGCA and thinking about geocaching at tax payer eXpense? Do you think, *removed*, Ed.D., and President of HTC~South would have any interest in www.lazylightning.org and likewise helping you further your career objectives???
Truly yours,
*removed*
Internet cafés are also available, but although fairly anonymous, every machine may be infected with keystroke loggers that give governments access to and knowledge of 'banned' sites.
I would think that Internet Café "spies" would be more useful than keyloggers to the authorities looking for dissidents. Unless these connections are somehow routed through multiple anonymous/encrypted proxies and hopping through open WAPs I really don't believe that a public terminal is in any way "safe".
A stalker that I had earlier this year was easily located via tracking his IP and figuring out which coffee shops and libraries he was using. The libraries all went through a single county-wide proxy and narrowing his location down on a Sunday was easier than you could possibly imagine (all satellite locations in the county were closed except one).
If I could track someone down that easily imagine what the members of a Gestapo looking to do more than end some harassing emails could do, especially when they might have a network of spies watching public access locations in person.
Sounds like my laptop, only better...
;)
it's a Dell p-133 with 40MB of RAM (absolute maximum) and a 1.6GB HD with several bad sectors running Win98 (it has run various Flavors of Linux and even FreeBSD once).
It has no battery because I threw it out a year ago when it refused to hold a charge at all (hell it's 8.5 years old, what do you expect?), it crashes frequently adding to the bad sectors problem but a new laptop HD is worth more than the machine itself so I won't replace it.
The screen is starting to go on it and the LCD routinely flickers and becomes so fucked up I have to turn it off for a while.
It works for games.yahoo.com and google searches. I use putty and screen to sit on the couch and surf/IRC while watching TV.
I'd like to get a new one but $300 for something that is used and I only use for sitting there in front of the TV doesn't seem in the cards for me.
I've been using my t-mobile hiptop more and more and if it played yahoo games I'd switch completely
When a guy goes "IE is better then Firefox and just as secure if not MORE secure" you know he's an idiot.
When a "guy" says that, perhaps he's uneducated about the subject or biased. When Bill Gates says that about IE it's not only biased, it's good business sense.
Like he would ever admit his software and marketshare domination is inferior/lower to another product out there.
If you are going to rag on him you might as well do it for the right reasons.
"This type of spam is more than just an annoyance to consumers," said Mr Reilly. "It poses a real danger to people who may be fooled into buying counterfeit versions of prescription drugs or unwittingly open e-mail links to sexually explicit websites."
Is this similar to states that send out notifications to their employees and citizens that buying drugs from Canada is acceptable, encouraged, and more inexpensive than buying them from any pharmacy in their local area? I guess I'm in danger.
In this day and age, if you open an email from someone you don't know and see links and you click them you are not unwittingly doing anything. You are just a nitwit.
Under the lawsuit Mr Reilly wants the defendants fined for breaking state and national laws outlawing spam. He also wants them to repay people who lost money because of the huge amounts of spam mail that was sent.
Brought the hammer down? They haven't been convicted of anything yet. They have had their websites shutdown until they go to court and fight the lawsuit. Let's not make this any more "sensational" then it already is. Thanks.
While I see both of your points it would be easier than having to setup a UPOC SMS group, or have AIM group chat, or gasp -- have to call people...
I don't like making phone calls. I have GPRS and SMS to talk w/people. Phone calls make me drop GPRS and they take too long and require my undivided attention.
Quick SMS or IMs are much easier. If a webapp could tell you where your friends currently are (opt-in of course) then that would own.
I don't know if I'd like to have a single company be doing that (especially the way Google has been heading as of late).
I am concerned, however, about the infrastructure of society being in the hands of a company.
That is exactly what Microsoft wants, in my opinion, and in that respect, Google and MS are identical.
That's exactly what every company wants but they want to do it in a way where their customers pay out the ass for it. People support Google because it's "free" (free as in I gave out my personal habbits to the lowest bidder so I could see maps for free).
Apparently I didn't explain myself correctly in my posts above. Let's try again...
I am NOT arguing that you need a lot of storage for everyday use. What I am saying, though, is that the article is hyping this sub-$200 laptop as a movie and music player but refuses to mention how much on-board storage there is.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. It's obvious that the storage built-in will not be able to support movies and music (as they so proudly claim) and you will likely have to shell out $150+ to do those things.
If you are someone with NO computer at all in India right now do you really think no movie/music support is the end of the world?
Then why tout it as a feature and not mention the built-in storage while praising the fact that it is under the $200 pricepoint.
Even if it is only 512MB...for Word docs and web browsing how much do you need?
Well, if you had read the non-slashdotted article:
Vinay L. Deshpande, chairman and chief executive officer of Encore Software, told a press conference the system would have the essential features of a conventional personal computer: everyday applications such as word processing, spreadsheet, personal information manager, e-mail and web-browser. It will play music and movies, have text-to-speech conversion facility and built-in local-language support.
Movies and music on 512MB? Get serious. As I said, you will likely be shelling out 150+ for memory. I found it VERY suspicious that they were touting the price when they aren't including any storage space.
$199 doesn't impress me with slow specs and no storage.
It will have no hard disk but will have built-in memory and facility to plug in memory cards for any storage over and above that provided for in the built-in memory. It will not have games. High-speed computing is ruled out. The reasoning is that "while adding to the cost, these are of no use to many users.''
The one link is slashdotted already and the other doesn't say how much memory it has built-in. Yeah, it's sub-$200 until you realize that you have to pay another $150+ for a decent sized memory "stick" (or two or three).
When you write such riveting articles with titles like "Read The F***ing Story, Then RTFM" we know that you must be a gem of a freelancer! I wouldn't know for sure though, I couldn't RTFS or the FM. I'm a Slashdotter afterall.
What I found funny about the quotes given by "Carmella" is that they were mirrored on several other sites with the citation leading back to the Wired article.
From this article entitled "Spyware on My Machine? So What?":
I had a good idea what the Marketscore software does, though I didn't read the entire user agreement," said 19-year-old New York University student Keith Caron. "In general when any application asks to install another application, I assume the other application is spyware. But you have to support spyware if you're going to have free file-sharing applications. Fair's fair.
I had a good idea what Delio was doing when she wrote these articles, though I didn't read the entire thing," said 26-year-old Slashdotter Bill Roehl. "In general when any story is posted to the main page, I assume it's full of worthless bullshit that no one cares about. But you have to support Slashdot if you're going to be a Slashbotter. Fair's fair in addiction."
I know that I was asked many times to answer simple questions on campus. I usually would give some valid reply and list a fake name and address. They can have my thoughts but why would I ever give them my personal information.
"Keith" seems like a typical college student from 2004, IMHO, most of them don't give a shit as long as they can get their music free and fast.
Until a new PSP game comes out and patches it for you.
Thanks for linking to a crap blog. Let's try for some real content: PS2Dev Forum and the PSP Hacker link which contains two QT movies.
it may become a poster child Microsoft can use to point out that open source software's "many eyes" theory is hogwash. Maybe it is hogwash.
I don't run Firefox because I find it inferior to IE in rendering pages as they were intended (yes, we live in an IE world, deal with it).
As far as "many eyes" being hogwash, I can't agree. Even though these exploits were found recently work has been done to make sure that the exploits are closed quickly. Some of MSFT's holes were left open for MONTHS before anything was done (and that included half-assed workarounds to stop the problems).
While Firefox may not be the best browser for me and it might not be as "safe/secure" as the zealots would like you to believe, the bugs *are* fixed in a much shorter timeframe because the coders DO care about their product.
I'm all for seeing her levitate above a bed in her night gown. Personally, if I saw that live I wouldn't care if she was frozen, dead, or undead.
Like many Windows users, you seem to forget that OSS != Linux.
What's your point? They talked about Linux *and* other free software in the article (OpenOffice, Firefox, *and* Linux). I am not a "Windows user" (as you are using it condescendingly) and I do understand the difference between Linux and OSS TYVM.
Quite the pro OSS piece... To answer the question posed in the summary, "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?" Because there is more to the world than just the web and e-mail.
Death from incorrectly transporting/storing dry ice and having it slowly suffocate them while they sit for hours playing some silly video game.
It sure is but doubleclick was doing something that was basically hidden from view. Most people didn't know about firewalls, their hosts file, cookies, cookie blocking, etc. Doubleclick was silently aggregating your habbits on the web behind the scenes.
Google, while what they are doing is becoming increasingly scary, is at least up front about it... "Our programs scan your emails and display ads related."
You don't have to use Google. You could be screwed and use something worse (MSN, AskJeeves, whatever) or you can suffer w/Yahoo, whatever newbie comes into the market...
You don't have to use GMail, GOffice, or any of the other various pieces of software they do/will offer.
Personally, I use them for now. As they become scarier and possibly grab a greater hold over us and start hiding their privacy violations I might change my mind. Until then just pay attention.
Those poor Dartmouth students... The future is here!
Lenina Huxley: I was wondering if you would like to have sex?
John Spartan: With you? Here? Now?
[Lenina nods]
John Spartan: Oh, yeah.
[after futuristic, contact-free "sex"]
John Spartan: I was thinkin' we could do it the old-fashioned way.
Lenina Huxley: You mean... *fluid transfer*?
Even though contact-free "sex" sounds lame I'm sure wireless beer would be something to rave about!