To me this his another obvious proof of the evilness of MPAA/RIAA and DRM. What a beautiful way to demonstrate how this combination works against us.
How can it be that a company with security as its number one priority produce a format (WMV/A) that contains, on purpose, holes that let such things happen when it is suppose to replace formats that are free (as in beer and speech) and suffer no problem (see ogg vorbis). All this in a technology that is supposed to protect us (DRM). In fact we can clearly see that it protects MPAA and RIAA rather than customers. Is this a new? Obviously not. Neither DRM nor xxAA could pretend to serve public interest.
Such tactics show how low they can go. I wish it is criminal to act like this. If I look at it, I see a mix of SPAM, spyware and virii/worm.
MPAA, RIAA, DRM, WMV, WMA, Windows, etc. acronyms I would not touch a 3 meter pole.
I think AlexTheBeast is right and what you tell about is logic is wrong.
First,
Passport mostly failed because those masses didn't "get it" and didn't care to.
The masses surely care... as much as they can. Many good reasons why it really failed is explained in other commentaries.
Second, and that is what I want to underline, is your analogy with MS OSes / Passport and it's acceptance from public.
(after all, do they avoid Microsoft's OSes for security reasons?)
Many reasons can be given to explain why MS took such a big part of the desktop. Mostly by opportunity, good business, powerful marketing, anti-competitive tactics, etc.
The customer, the one with no computer knowlegde, faced a monopoly, he had no choice. And he would probably have followed the same path if he was presented alternatives. (Unix never focused on jo six-pack ; Mac did well but was more expensive). Until now, MS was the only choice for Mr. Customer.
But the real difference, is that computer user never thought security was an issue. Computers are presented like a calculator, a typewriter, a gaming station, an Internet access point. Do you care about security for your calculator, your old typewriter, your gamecube or public Internet access points? Absolutly not! Computers are not advertised for what they really are. They are many orders more complex than every other accessory a customer faced before. Never before, he had to care of security, performance, backups, compatibility, stability, interoperability, license issues, etc.
If there is a thing all customers know is that money, credit card for instance, as well as personal information were always something to be careful of. That has be thougth for many years.
Moreover, it is not because customers use a monopoly's product that they are satisfied with this product and this monopoly. Some will get a far as they can from MS.
So you can not pretend that customers are facing the same choice. In fact the parallele cannot be done bitween the two because one choice (passport) is made knowing the other's conseqences (MS OSes).
If you are waiting for a Anti-Virus company to say "this virus is good and effective" you will wait a long time.
What I see is a company saying we are first to report but we wont say anything that can be good for our "enemy". There is nothing difficult about testing its efficiency but it is not in their interest.
I am not saying this worm is good, but that if they wanted to verify it would be easy.
if you think that taking sites down was not just and legitimate
The legetimity is only true when it is put in context. Perhaps what is legitimate in the USA is not elsewhere. The habits are valid with each country/cultures.
I do not think that you would appreciate to have to wear the beard and to pray at certain hours if this is not your religion only because one foreign country had sent a letter asking it. It would be ridiculous, but it would be legitimate in their country.
Torvalds worked for years at now-struggling chip designer Transmeta, but he now plans to stay with his current employer, Open Source Development Labs in Oregon, "for the foreseeable future."
Is it me or this is a bad intro for Linus? I find this a little septic or cinic. It could have made a reference to this story or something more worthy. But maybe that is too much for news.com.com.com.com.;)
Predictions are no big deal...
I can predict everything that happens... if it has happened.
This guy is not a psychic, he is a psychotic freak!
There is another religious freak around Quebec you probably have heard with cloned babies fake story : Rael.
That is true, but this is not the point here. It's about Firefox adoption growth.
But if you want to compare, you got to take in count that open source distributes openly. 10 million is far less than the real number. Think of all linux distros using their own packaging system and copies (gentoo, debian, mandrake, etc.), the openCD, people installing for friends and familly (take me, I installed it for 9 other people) and all sort of distributed downloads.
In open source, things are different.
This is non-sense. As many post showed, Internet is much bigger. Just wait for me to finish uploading my new web site. I am still waiting for/dev/random to finish. It's been 4 weeks since it started, maybe something is wrong!? I'll wait until I reach my next pentabyte to stop transfer.
Anyway, the major news is about Wal-Mart. That's intersting to know such thing. Now what really matters is what information they gather and how?
Remember such stories aboutRFID at Wal-Mart? I remember a story about Wal-Mart illegally using it on test products.
I think you should revise your thoughts about mighty Intel. They just suck when it comes to power consumption and they always did. P4 always been power hungry CPU, approximativly 10 to 20% more than AMD for similar performance.
You can refer to recent story on Slashdot Particuly Anandtech comparison. If you want to compare performance : AnandTech (same article) or ExtremeTech.
So don't think Intel had any interest in low power consuption, they were for the gagihertz race. Now tings are changing, they canceled everything (think of 4Ghz) to work "around" the CPU. They surrender to AMD. Race for Gigahertz is over. Dual core is the way to go, particularly specialysed ones.
If you want to reduce your CPU temperature about 20deg C try Athcool on GNU/Linux. It shuts down northbridge went idle. Obviously, you lose 5% performance, but it's your choice. It can be activated at will!
Most of your point is right but take it from another angle.
It all depends on what you call "intelligence" and how you define "understand". Let me ask a question : "how do you really understand the meaning of a word?". I would say that it is when you can use this word in the sens it is intended. Now what if a program can use this word with the good meaning? We could say that it undertands it. And in fact, it does so, at least as well as we. There is no intrinsic concept in a word, only arbitrary significance.
And it's all what ontologies are about. Give a formal definition to a concept to be uniformly used.
Go see the Friend of a Friend (FOAF) project it is a live implementation of what we can think of the first layer of the Semantic Web.
You have to consider that we will not see a "final" version soon. And the Trust layer is on top of pyramid. So wait for a couple of years...:)
I predict Semantic Web will have a greater impact than the Internet has now. From individuals to business to software and AI, let the revolution begin...
I would add that even though, the Internet has far more faulty affirmations or wrong answers it has a special merit : everyone can participate and add to it. It is the first media to achieve this and it is very important. Where nowhere you could be heard, on the web you can.
Furthermore, you have to question the quality of other information ressources you compare the web to. I mean, journals are pretty much crap (some are very good though). Do you think journalists check their sources? Maybe much of the times, but for forget it when their is a scoop nearby. There is a real lack of professionalism and don't talk about the censure being made. When more than 90% of USA reads journals from a single company, you ask about information control.
I wanted to bring a little perspective. Is it better to have plenty of information with the risk of it being wrong or to have only one source shredding it for you?
There is a similar debate around Wikipedia. Intersting results about the quality of the information you can have with good community.:)
"Webs of trust." People will make pages telling what pages they believe have a good reputation, and generally tells the truth.
That won't work for stuff that's politically sensitive, since people will mod sites down just because they dislike what the site says, even if it is accurate. It also gets really complicated with sites that are accurate on one subject but don't know jack about another.
The Semantic Web is an extention of the web as we no it now. Nothing less, but lot more! It keeps the idea of everyone can say anything. Now about the web of trust (which is something that fits over all lower layers), it's about giving trust to the information. It is what YOU trust more. It is personalised to every user of the Internet. You can say you trust your friend but you disagre with Bush. That is perfectly possible and sensible.
In fact you could resume the whole thing like Slashdot, where you have friends, fans, foes, etc. In./ their is always people from both sides which makes interesting debates. Don't see this like censure, but like a mechanism to reveal content that mean something for you.
Computers will have "beliefs" reflecting their owner's own.
In that case, what's the point? If your computer only accepts data that fits in with your predetermined conclusions, it will provide valueless results.
What the computer "believe" is what is user tells him so... So the point is that it presents content would care of. Consider that every people does this. That's psycological. Would you prefer a solution presenting you content of value to your needs or the actual solution where you get everything and you got to filter out meaningless content? In fact, what the computer does is what you would do... with the assle of actualy doing it.
For me, searching a search result shows one thing: search engine can't do what I want. There are missing something and that's what Semantic Web is all about.
In fact capitalism have no problem with bogus software.
I suggest that the fault goes to the manager who decided to make the transition from UNIX to Windows. ;-)
Pretty much everything you say here is rigth but let me add this.
This is done on purpose, at least much of the time.:) Creators (and writers) permits themself such things to add flexibility and, in some way, humour and fun for the fans.
Sometime's, Moe's is on a corner, sometimes its next to the music store where Lisa got her saxaphone
Also, note that every city changes. Even in real life, buildings are not always the same.
This is to be taken with a sense of humour.
Happy Simpons!
I use it on my production machine and it is rock solid. You want to know how much?
Here's the story...
My computer crashed because of a power failure. I booted, everything was fine. Even the bash process continued running with no power!! Amazing you say? I dropped the computer in the furnace by inadvertency (at 600F for an hour) and in spite of the destruction of the hard disk, no corruption at all. Reiser rebuild the hard disk bit per bit. Now if this is not rock solid, what is?
Obviously, this isn't a real story.
But believe me it's the greatest filesystem; in the world in stability, performance and capability. The plug-in architecture is completely new.
There is nothing left behind in Reiser4, no fs can compete. That's it. Give it a try.
To me, this looks like a great way to make people pay for patches. Remember the previous story on slashdot saying M$ was thinking about making pay for service pack?
This is a more subtile way of doing so. Including it in the OS would mean it's "free" as Internet Explorer and it would put attention of anti-trust officals on their back.
Now M$ makes the bugs, the patchs, the anti-viruses... and they have enough ressources to make viruses if they want to.;)
1. Make bugs / holes
2. Make patch / anti-virus
3. Profits! $$
There's nothing like this in AMD numbering scheme.
Like they did with desktop computers, the numbers are comparaisons.
For example, a 3000+ is not 3Ghz but an estimate Mhz comparison with Intel's processors.
Here the comparison is made against VIA processors.
So a 1500 is a 1Ghz comparable with a 1500Mhz VIA processor.
It is better explained here http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/24/amd_geode/
Slashdot Mirror
SPAM should be considered crime against humanity. But then, what do you get for this kind of crime? Some media coverage at most.
How can it be that a company with security as its number one priority produce a format (WMV/A) that contains, on purpose, holes that let such things happen when it is suppose to replace formats that are free (as in beer and speech) and suffer no problem (see ogg vorbis). All this in a technology that is supposed to protect us (DRM). In fact we can clearly see that it protects MPAA and RIAA rather than customers. Is this a new? Obviously not. Neither DRM nor xxAA could pretend to serve public interest.
Such tactics show how low they can go. I wish it is criminal to act like this. If I look at it, I see a mix of SPAM, spyware and virii/worm.
MPAA, RIAA, DRM, WMV, WMA, Windows, etc. acronyms I would not touch a 3 meter pole.
First,
The masses surely care... as much as they can. Many good reasons why it really failed is explained in other commentaries.Second, and that is what I want to underline, is your analogy with MS OSes / Passport and it's acceptance from public.
Many reasons can be given to explain why MS took such a big part of the desktop. Mostly by opportunity, good business, powerful marketing, anti-competitive tactics, etc.The customer, the one with no computer knowlegde, faced a monopoly, he had no choice. And he would probably have followed the same path if he was presented alternatives. (Unix never focused on jo six-pack ; Mac did well but was more expensive). Until now, MS was the only choice for Mr. Customer.
But the real difference, is that computer user never thought security was an issue. Computers are presented like a calculator, a typewriter, a gaming station, an Internet access point. Do you care about security for your calculator, your old typewriter, your gamecube or public Internet access points? Absolutly not! Computers are not advertised for what they really are. They are many orders more complex than every other accessory a customer faced before. Never before, he had to care of security, performance, backups, compatibility, stability, interoperability, license issues, etc.
If there is a thing all customers know is that money, credit card for instance, as well as personal information were always something to be careful of. That has be thougth for many years.
Moreover, it is not because customers use a monopoly's product that they are satisfied with this product and this monopoly. Some will get a far as they can from MS.
So you can not pretend that customers are facing the same choice. In fact the parallele cannot be done bitween the two because one choice (passport) is made knowing the other's conseqences (MS OSes).
What I see is a company saying we are first to report but we wont say anything that can be good for our "enemy". There is nothing difficult about testing its efficiency but it is not in their interest.
I am not saying this worm is good, but that if they wanted to verify it would be easy.
The world needs more people thinking like you. :)
Of course it comes from someone agreeing.
I'll add that Britney being #1 is a shame.
The legetimity is only true when it is put in context. Perhaps what is legitimate in the USA is not elsewhere. The habits are valid with each country/cultures.
I do not think that you would appreciate to have to wear the beard and to pray at certain hours if this is not your religion only because one foreign country had sent a letter asking it. It would be ridiculous, but it would be legitimate in their country.
Is it me or this is a bad intro for Linus? I find this a little septic or cinic. It could have made a reference to this story or something more worthy. But maybe that is too much for news.com.com.com.com. ;)
Could you tell us which firmware you are using, when did you buy yours? Since this player constantly evolves dates are importants.
I can predict everything that happens... if it has happened.
This guy is not a psychic, he is a psychotic freak!
There is another religious freak around Quebec you probably have heard with cloned babies fake story : Rael.
But if you want to compare, you got to take in count that open source distributes openly. 10 million is far less than the real number. Think of all linux distros using their own packaging system and copies (gentoo, debian, mandrake, etc.), the openCD, people installing for friends and familly (take me, I installed it for 9 other people) and all sort of distributed downloads.
In open source, things are different.
It is now waiting for a spaceship to bring it to fresh new blood.
That's the main line of my new book. You like it?
Anyway, the major news is about Wal-Mart. That's intersting to know such thing. Now what really matters is what information they gather and how?
Remember such stories about RFID at Wal-Mart? I remember a story about Wal-Mart illegally using it on test products.
My 2 cents...
You can refer to recent story on Slashdot Particuly Anandtech comparison. If you want to compare performance : AnandTech (same article) or ExtremeTech.
So don't think Intel had any interest in low power consuption, they were for the gagihertz race. Now tings are changing, they canceled everything (think of 4Ghz) to work "around" the CPU. They surrender to AMD. Race for Gigahertz is over. Dual core is the way to go, particularly specialysed ones.
If you want to reduce your CPU temperature about 20deg C try Athcool on GNU/Linux. It shuts down northbridge went idle. Obviously, you lose 5% performance, but it's your choice. It can be activated at will!
By the way, I'm talking about desktop.
It all depends on what you call "intelligence" and how you define "understand". Let me ask a question : "how do you really understand the meaning of a word?". I would say that it is when you can use this word in the sens it is intended. Now what if a program can use this word with the good meaning? We could say that it undertands it. And in fact, it does so, at least as well as we. There is no intrinsic concept in a word, only arbitrary significance.
And it's all what ontologies are about. Give a formal definition to a concept to be uniformly used.
Go see the Friend of a Friend (FOAF) project it is a live implementation of what we can think of the first layer of the Semantic Web.
You have to consider that we will not see a "final" version soon. And the Trust layer is on top of pyramid. So wait for a couple of years... :)
I predict Semantic Web will have a greater impact than the Internet has now. From individuals to business to software and AI, let the revolution begin...
Moreover, it is about content, not presentation. So don't be afraid about if your page is HTML Strict, Final or Transitionnal is has nothing to do.
But IMHO, good design don't hurt! ;)
I would add that even though, the Internet has far more faulty affirmations or wrong answers it has a special merit : everyone can participate and add to it. It is the first media to achieve this and it is very important. Where nowhere you could be heard, on the web you can.
Furthermore, you have to question the quality of other information ressources you compare the web to. I mean, journals are pretty much crap (some are very good though). Do you think journalists check their sources? Maybe much of the times, but for forget it when their is a scoop nearby. There is a real lack of professionalism and don't talk about the censure being made. When more than 90% of USA reads journals from a single company, you ask about information control.
I wanted to bring a little perspective. Is it better to have plenty of information with the risk of it being wrong or to have only one source shredding it for you?
There is a similar debate around Wikipedia. Intersting results about the quality of the information you can have with good community. :)
The Semantic Web is an extention of the web as we no it now. Nothing less, but lot more! It keeps the idea of everyone can say anything. Now about the web of trust (which is something that fits over all lower layers), it's about giving trust to the information. It is what YOU trust more. It is personalised to every user of the Internet. You can say you trust your friend but you disagre with Bush. That is perfectly possible and sensible. ./ their is always people from both sides which makes interesting debates.
In fact you could resume the whole thing like Slashdot, where you have friends, fans, foes, etc. In
Don't see this like censure, but like a mechanism to reveal content that mean something for you.
What the computer "believe" is what is user tells him so... So the point is that it presents content would care of. Consider that every people does this. That's psycological. Would you prefer a solution presenting you content of value to your needs or the actual solution where you get everything and you got to filter out meaningless content? In fact, what the computer does is what you would do... with the assle of actualy doing it.
For me, searching a search result shows one thing: search engine can't do what I want. There are missing something and that's what Semantic Web is all about.
Still, we are far from there...
In fact capitalism have no problem with bogus software.
;-)
I suggest that the fault goes to the manager who decided to make the transition from UNIX to Windows.
This is done on purpose, at least much of the time.
This is to be taken with a sense of humour.
Happy Simpons!
Here's the story...
My computer crashed because of a power failure. I booted, everything was fine. Even the bash process continued running with no power!! Amazing you say? I dropped the computer in the furnace by inadvertency (at 600F for an hour) and in spite of the destruction of the hard disk, no corruption at all. Reiser rebuild the hard disk bit per bit. Now if this is not rock solid, what is?
Obviously, this isn't a real story.
But believe me it's the greatest filesystem; in the world in stability, performance and capability. The plug-in architecture is completely new.
There is nothing left behind in Reiser4, no fs can compete. That's it. Give it a try.
This is a more subtile way of doing so. Including it in the OS would mean it's "free" as Internet Explorer and it would put attention of anti-trust officals on their back.
Now M$ makes the bugs, the patchs, the anti-viruses... and they have enough ressources to make viruses if they want to. ;)
1. Make bugs / holes 2. Make patch / anti-virus 3. Profits! $$
Or, for short... rectum
For example, a 3000+ is not 3Ghz but an estimate Mhz comparison with Intel's processors.
Here the comparison is made against VIA processors. So a 1500 is a 1Ghz comparable with a 1500Mhz VIA processor.
It is better explained here http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/24/amd_geode/