providing material benefit to "terrorists."
on
Feds Want to Tap VoIP
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I think it is a lost cause to try to stem the abuse of freedom and rights that government snoops are swarming around like coyotes around some road kill. But VoIP should be much easier for the Common Man to encrypt a la PGP (yes, I understand it would be some other software solution...) I know, I know, why should we have to? Well, I imagine just discussion of this issue could get you labeled as providing material benefit to "terrorists."
All in all, I don't really see why its news. That VCs were there just explains its about figuring out new business schemes under the guise of fun. I guess Tim O'Reilly's presence there somehow adds a sheen of approval over all of it.
Come on. It's not about camping, it's about networking. No one goes camping with 1000 other people.
That's not just internet. Oracle does not require a network connection to function. And the list goes beyond that; Photoshop, Flash, Illustrator, all work on Mac and Windows.
Yes, all these apps work on different platforms, but I'll bet under the hood, each version has been optimized with specialized tools for a specific platform.
And to point out error in your argument, if you work in a steel mill that uses Windows, and you use windows apps, SQL server and build windows tools using Windows own language. That's swell and good. But many companies have lost millions just for doing that.
You miss the point. If you are building for Windows, it makes since to use a Windows optimized language. And, the statement that companies have lost millions using apps like SQL Server is tenuous at best, it's a sweeping statement that really does not mean much nor have any particular facts to back it up. Lost millions in what way? Again, you focus on the internet. Not all (in fact, very few) Windows apps are related to the Internet, or even on a machine attched to the internet.
An example: When Code Red, Nimda and SQL Slammer hit in under 6 months time causing companies to lose massive amounts of information, their IT departments to crash and costing them millions.
Again, Internet. The software in my imagenary steel plant run on machines that are not connected to the Internet. Also, stay tuned, as Linux use grows, so will virus attacks targeted at Linux / Open Source.
Many decided that they had enough and decided to switch.
Not really, though they should switch. Numbers, please. It hasn't happened yet.
Some switched merely off of SQL Server while others switched off of Windows altogether. But because windows apps are not cross platform, they ended up having to spend millions trying to replace their infrastructure.
Can you show this to be so? No, not very many "enterprise" companies have dropped SQL Server. And, as we all know from the heated battle Linux is having getting into "enterprise", we do know that not very many large operations have switched yet, so there have not yet been "millions" spent on re-tooling.
Now, let's say that steel mill decides they want a Linux server to handle things now. Those scripts are more than likely not going to work. You will have to recode them in another language.
Yes, and if they decide to switch to BeOS, they will have to recode too. But it is very rare that manufacturing code is not distinctly tied to a specific hardware profile. Indeed often, it's all proprietary. It is unlikely that a manufacturing process would just up and decide "gee, I wan't to use a different OS". It doesn't work that way.
By the way, I mostly work with Linux based apps, but I'll use whatever is best for the job
Database aside, you're talking Internet -- web servers, ftp servers, and so on. And games (quake) don't count. Contrary to what many of the "developers" that hang out here may think, the computer application world does not revolve around internet. There are many many more applications out there like the software that runs a manufacturing process or the 911 call center. If I work in a steel mill and the process is controlled by Windows based apps, it makes sense to use a Windows optimized language.
It is assumed that if you are building applications for Windows, you are "locked in", just as if you are building a PLATFORM SPACIFIC app for any other OS. Remember, the majority of desktops is still Windows, and so if you are building a app for Windows, you might just want to use some language that is optimised for Windows.
Oh wait! C# only runs on one operating system. Can you name any other development languages that only run on ONE OS, boys and girls? Neither can I.
So what, and big deal. C# was built by Microsoft to run on Windows, and it's fast because it's integrated into Windows. Sounds like a good solution for Windows based applications. Quit strutting around with your ass in the air.
Bush hopes to spark a renewed public interest in space exploration.
Bush has no interest in men on Mars, this is a political statement designed to make him look "presidential" in the JFK way, a la Apollo. What he hopes is people will rally around and say "this guy Bush, he has VISION! We need VISONARIES like George Bush!" It's all fluff and spin, no substance.
What would really impress people is if he came out and said "I am nationalizing the pharmaceutical industry, and the world will no longer need or want for the meds that will stem world suffering."
Or, he could say "I have decided to walk the walk, and get rid of all the Weapons of Mass Destruction that the United States has both developed and proliferated to mankind."
Or, he could say "I have decided to fund new technologies that will free us from the chains of fossil fuels, and bring about a new era in sustainable energy."
But no, instead he will wax wildly about Man's need to discover new frontiers, to extend Man's reach into the universe. Look for wild ideas about multinational corporations mining minerals on the surface of Mars, polluting it just as we have done here on our own planet.
I think it's important to understand that the Earth's environment is not a static thing and never has been. Without question, industrialization has warmed the environment. I grew up in Portland, Oregon, and when I was a kid, the Willamette (as polluted as it was back then, now you can catch salmon off the seawall right in downtown) actually froze over. But also, keep in mind that the Earth has gone through many freeze and thaw cycles. We are in a thaw cycle, and industry or not, we can not change that. Not all climatic changes are due to Man's ignorance, some are inevitable. Of course if you live in South Florida, this may not be what you want to hear.
Interestingly, our office was very professional. Typical high-tech company on the tenth floor of a glass tower overlooking Pike Place market in Seattle. The PORN itself was produced elsewhere (we called the Capital Hill studio "The Arcade").
I used to work for IEG, Internet Entertainment Group (now dead), owners of the flagship "ClubLove" and 100's of others. If Photoshop started banning PORN, I can tell you that you would see GIMP eat up a huge market shair. PORN (not "pr0n") is big business. IEG at one time had 10 Silicon Graphics machines feeding into four OC-3 lines (and a bunch of T-1's for getting the live PORN from the studio). We used PhotoShop extensively.
The interesting thing about this is that Real (a dying dot com) has decided to use the same format as the "i" products from Apple.
This will not help. Real is a dying and dead company, their product ounce had promise, but that was a long time ago, they lost the ball, and jumping in on subscription music now will be too little and too late. Sell your shares, if you where stupid enough to have kept them this long.
My wife agrees with you, she says that at the very least this is the stuff that inspires our children to discover new things, to be the on the edge that discovers the new technologies, to be the Einstein's of our age, with new ideas we can only dream about. I guess I'm just a bit disappointed that with the billions of dollars out there, hard science that addresses social issues has such a low priority.
I'll say it again, but I'll try a different way to avoid the "troll / flamebait" I received last time I brought this up: How does Mars exploration do anything for society beyond improve our knowledge of esoteric things and perhaps get a few very smart scientists their Masters? Please don't get me wrong, I understand this is amazing stuff, both the technology that got us there, and the fascinating things we learn. But...
How does this advance Man in ways that benefit the body, the Family of Man? Will it feed people or solve the mystery of AIDS? Will it allow old people to get their meds cheaper? Isn't there better ways to spend billions of dollars that benefit mankind in a more substantial way?
The International Space Station has so much more promise to benefit our everyday life, yet it is now just a footnote, almost forgotten. We should be concentrating on ideas that benefit mankind in tangible ways.
Sorry. Point well taken. Many Slashdotters have issues with "big business" and I understand that. Big business, indeed most public traded companies, are back stabbing "I Got Mine" organizations. Goes without saying in most cases.
and perhaps to spite microsoft too, but that again is in their business interest.
As it should be. Remember, Socialism and Communism are nice ideas on paper that have never worked in the Real World. It seems to be a problem with human nature.
No, it's not. The "Open Source movement", such as it is, is about developing software that meets your need and making it available to others so that they may also benefit from it and possibly extend/improve it.
Big biz is not going to buy into that. Do you want Linux on the desktop, or not?
Open Source software allows people/organizations to benefit from the charity of others; that does not mean that they have any "right" to demand any piece of software.
Than, I take it you really don't care if Linux makes it to the desktop of government or major businesses, you would not be unhappy if it stayed a server resource?
Businesses do not have to run Open Source software. If they are satisfied with their current solutions, more power to them.
You have just answered my questions! The parent story is about big business accepting Linux on the desktop. This is not an issue to you, I think. But for many, it is. I have outlined what, in my mind; it will take to put Linux on the desktop. If Linux does not address what big biz and the PHBs want, it will die (like *BSD? Sorry, that's a bad Slashdot joke), ending up a boutique OS like BeOS.
That being said, you do have a point about the lack of polish in many Open Source applications.
Both StarOffice and it's more Open Source brother, OpenOffice, and a great start. It's a fine package. But there are things they need to do to improve it. I see OpenOffice as 2 to 4 years behind MS Office for the thing biz wants. Don't get me wrong, it's a full-featured package, but still... There are things, places, areas that it needs to improve.
I did mention PowerPoint. I hate it (I *love* the Getysburg Address reduce to a PowerPoint). It dumbs down everything. But we can not get away from the fact that business wants it, it speaks to the PHBs like the Bible. There are other business apps as well. For example CRM apps.
But the one area that Open Source is very wanting is easy Application Install packages. You know, click-throughs and what not, fewer compatibility issues, and being able to handle compatibility issues in a more intuitive way. Not everyone is a Linux guru, and in Big Biz, time is defiantly money, and money makes the "enterprise" world go round and round. And, about a spell-checker that is as good as Google? MS Office spell checker sucks.
And this is the one big problem with participants in the Open Source movement (note: not with Open Source, per se): There are many fine Open Source apps, but the majority of them are by developers for developers. We need to look more at what business needs out of Open Source. Hate PowerPoint? Well business wants it. Hate Access dB? Well, business loves it. And without any question, until OpenOffice addresses these issues full force, especially all the bells and whistle of Excel, "enterprise" businesses will not migrate the desktop. It really is going to be all about business applications if we want to win the desktop war.
It's perfectly reasonable to assume that Microsoft was test the new Apple product, they would be remiss not to, as would any company want to learn more about their competitors. As to the guy getting the axe for that pic, Microsoft knew where it had been taken because the individual that took it told everyone on his web site.
But also, remember Microsoft actually does make software for Apple products...
These features Photoshop has that Gimp does not have just hasn't given anyone a sufficient itch yet.
Oh?
From the developer of FilGimp: "Film GIMP developer Caroline Dahllof, a programmer at Rhythm & Hues, "Photoshop handles more layers with big images better". Matte painting artists at Rhythm & Hues create large backgrounds with perhaps forty layers and use a lot of specialized plugins. Working on single large images is quite different from the typical Film GIMP tasks of retouching film frames to remove dust or wire rigs. To get rid of Photoshop completely would require investing a lot of developer resources."
Actually, I agree with you. I'm doing nothing wrong, I have nothing to hide, and I already give up sensitive personal information everyday for less important things like national security.
By the way, would you object to a national ID card? Would it bother you if they where able to track and analyze your movements and purchases, the books you read and the people you associate with? I'm sure Microsoft would be more than happy to supply the database technology, although Oracle would be a better choice!
Slashdot Mirror
I think it is a lost cause to try to stem the abuse of freedom and rights that government snoops are swarming around like coyotes around some road kill. But VoIP should be much easier for the Common Man to encrypt a la PGP (yes, I understand it would be some other software solution...) I know, I know, why should we have to? Well, I imagine just discussion of this issue could get you labeled as providing material benefit to "terrorists."
Come on. It's not about camping, it's about networking. No one goes camping with 1000 other people.
...Nine months later...nothing notable happens.
Yes, all these apps work on different platforms, but I'll bet under the hood, each version has been optimized with specialized tools for a specific platform.
And to point out error in your argument, if you work in a steel mill that uses Windows, and you use windows apps, SQL server and build windows tools using Windows own language. That's swell and good. But many companies have lost millions just for doing that.
You miss the point. If you are building for Windows, it makes since to use a Windows optimized language. And, the statement that companies have lost millions using apps like SQL Server is tenuous at best, it's a sweeping statement that really does not mean much nor have any particular facts to back it up. Lost millions in what way? Again, you focus on the internet. Not all (in fact, very few) Windows apps are related to the Internet, or even on a machine attched to the internet.
An example: When Code Red, Nimda and SQL Slammer hit in under 6 months time causing companies to lose massive amounts of information, their IT departments to crash and costing them millions.
Again, Internet. The software in my imagenary steel plant run on machines that are not connected to the Internet. Also, stay tuned, as Linux use grows, so will virus attacks targeted at Linux / Open Source.
Many decided that they had enough and decided to switch.
Not really, though they should switch. Numbers, please. It hasn't happened yet.
Some switched merely off of SQL Server while others switched off of Windows altogether. But because windows apps are not cross platform, they ended up having to spend millions trying to replace their infrastructure.
Can you show this to be so? No, not very many "enterprise" companies have dropped SQL Server. And, as we all know from the heated battle Linux is having getting into "enterprise", we do know that not very many large operations have switched yet, so there have not yet been "millions" spent on re-tooling.
Now, let's say that steel mill decides they want a Linux server to handle things now. Those scripts are more than likely not going to work. You will have to recode them in another language.
Yes, and if they decide to switch to BeOS, they will have to recode too. But it is very rare that manufacturing code is not distinctly tied to a specific hardware profile. Indeed often, it's all proprietary. It is unlikely that a manufacturing process would just up and decide "gee, I wan't to use a different OS". It doesn't work that way.
By the way, I mostly work with Linux based apps, but I'll use whatever is best for the job
Database aside, you're talking Internet -- web servers, ftp servers, and so on. And games (quake) don't count. Contrary to what many of the "developers" that hang out here may think, the computer application world does not revolve around internet. There are many many more applications out there like the software that runs a manufacturing process or the 911 call center. If I work in a steel mill and the process is controlled by Windows based apps, it makes sense to use a Windows optimized language.
It is assumed that if you are building applications for Windows, you are "locked in", just as if you are building a PLATFORM SPACIFIC app for any other OS. Remember, the majority of desktops is still Windows, and so if you are building a app for Windows, you might just want to use some language that is optimised for Windows.
So what, and big deal. C# was built by Microsoft to run on Windows, and it's fast because it's integrated into Windows. Sounds like a good solution for Windows based applications. Quit strutting around with your ass in the air.
So you would have no problems with, say, storing vast abounts of arsnic and radioactive waste on Mars? Is that what you're saying?
Bush has no interest in men on Mars, this is a political statement designed to make him look "presidential" in the JFK way, a la Apollo. What he hopes is people will rally around and say "this guy Bush, he has VISION! We need VISONARIES like George Bush!" It's all fluff and spin, no substance.
What would really impress people is if he came out and said "I am nationalizing the pharmaceutical industry, and the world will no longer need or want for the meds that will stem world suffering."
Or, he could say "I have decided to walk the walk, and get rid of all the Weapons of Mass Destruction that the United States has both developed and proliferated to mankind."
Or, he could say "I have decided to fund new technologies that will free us from the chains of fossil fuels, and bring about a new era in sustainable energy."
But no, instead he will wax wildly about Man's need to discover new frontiers, to extend Man's reach into the universe. Look for wild ideas about multinational corporations mining minerals on the surface of Mars, polluting it just as we have done here on our own planet.
My Hummer has no stickers accept the one that get's me on base.
I think it's important to understand that the Earth's environment is not a static thing and never has been. Without question, industrialization has warmed the environment. I grew up in Portland, Oregon, and when I was a kid, the Willamette (as polluted as it was back then, now you can catch salmon off the seawall right in downtown) actually froze over. But also, keep in mind that the Earth has gone through many freeze and thaw cycles. We are in a thaw cycle, and industry or not, we can not change that. Not all climatic changes are due to Man's ignorance, some are inevitable. Of course if you live in South Florida, this may not be what you want to hear.
Interestingly, our office was very professional. Typical high-tech company on the tenth floor of a glass tower overlooking Pike Place market in Seattle. The PORN itself was produced elsewhere (we called the Capital Hill studio "The Arcade").
I used to work for IEG, Internet Entertainment Group (now dead), owners of the flagship "ClubLove" and 100's of others. If Photoshop started banning PORN, I can tell you that you would see GIMP eat up a huge market shair. PORN (not "pr0n") is big business. IEG at one time had 10 Silicon Graphics machines feeding into four OC-3 lines (and a bunch of T-1's for getting the live PORN from the studio). We used PhotoShop extensively.
This will not help. Real is a dying and dead company, their product ounce had promise, but that was a long time ago, they lost the ball, and jumping in on subscription music now will be too little and too late. Sell your shares, if you where stupid enough to have kept them this long.
My wife agrees with you, she says that at the very least this is the stuff that inspires our children to discover new things, to be the on the edge that discovers the new technologies, to be the Einstein's of our age, with new ideas we can only dream about. I guess I'm just a bit disappointed that with the billions of dollars out there, hard science that addresses social issues has such a low priority.
How does this advance Man in ways that benefit the body, the Family of Man? Will it feed people or solve the mystery of AIDS? Will it allow old people to get their meds cheaper? Isn't there better ways to spend billions of dollars that benefit mankind in a more substantial way?
The International Space Station has so much more promise to benefit our everyday life, yet it is now just a footnote, almost forgotten. We should be concentrating on ideas that benefit mankind in tangible ways.
Sorry. Point well taken. Many Slashdotters have issues with "big business" and I understand that. Big business, indeed most public traded companies, are back stabbing "I Got Mine" organizations. Goes without saying in most cases.
As it should be. Remember, Socialism and Communism are nice ideas on paper that have never worked in the Real World. It seems to be a problem with human nature.
Big biz is not going to buy into that. Do you want Linux on the desktop, or not?
Open Source software allows people/organizations to benefit from the charity of others; that does not mean that they have any "right" to demand any piece of software.
Than, I take it you really don't care if Linux makes it to the desktop of government or major businesses, you would not be unhappy if it stayed a server resource?
Businesses do not have to run Open Source software. If they are satisfied with their current solutions, more power to them.
You have just answered my questions! The parent story is about big business accepting Linux on the desktop. This is not an issue to you, I think. But for many, it is. I have outlined what, in my mind; it will take to put Linux on the desktop. If Linux does not address what big biz and the PHBs want, it will die (like *BSD? Sorry, that's a bad Slashdot joke), ending up a boutique OS like BeOS.
That being said, you do have a point about the lack of polish in many Open Source applications.
Thank you! Complement accepted (smile).
I did mention PowerPoint. I hate it (I *love* the Getysburg Address reduce to a PowerPoint). It dumbs down everything. But we can not get away from the fact that business wants it, it speaks to the PHBs like the Bible. There are other business apps as well. For example CRM apps.
But the one area that Open Source is very wanting is easy Application Install packages. You know, click-throughs and what not, fewer compatibility issues, and being able to handle compatibility issues in a more intuitive way. Not everyone is a Linux guru, and in Big Biz, time is defiantly money, and money makes the "enterprise" world go round and round. And, about a spell-checker that is as good as Google? MS Office spell checker sucks.
And this is the one big problem with participants in the Open Source movement (note: not with Open Source, per se): There are many fine Open Source apps, but the majority of them are by developers for developers. We need to look more at what business needs out of Open Source. Hate PowerPoint? Well business wants it. Hate Access dB? Well, business loves it. And without any question, until OpenOffice addresses these issues full force, especially all the bells and whistle of Excel, "enterprise" businesses will not migrate the desktop. It really is going to be all about business applications if we want to win the desktop war.
But also, remember Microsoft actually does make software for Apple products...
Have you seen their stock price? Have you see their revenues? Have you seen how much their stuff costs? Apple is the "little guy"?
Oh?
From the developer of FilGimp: "Film GIMP developer Caroline Dahllof, a programmer at Rhythm & Hues, "Photoshop handles more layers with big images better". Matte painting artists at Rhythm & Hues create large backgrounds with perhaps forty layers and use a lot of specialized plugins. Working on single large images is quite different from the typical Film GIMP tasks of retouching film frames to remove dust or wire rigs. To get rid of Photoshop completely would require investing a lot of developer resources."
By the way, would you object to a national ID card? Would it bother you if they where able to track and analyze your movements and purchases, the books you read and the people you associate with? I'm sure Microsoft would be more than happy to supply the database technology, although Oracle would be a better choice!