More accurately they were such a minor player the government trust types left Apple alone, until iPod and iPhone (before they could really react Android come along and made the problem mute). M$ of course did get in trouble no where near enough was done but it looks to be coming to an end anyhow (Android on phone => Android on smartbooks => Android on big screens).
As for stealing patent ideas, greedy pathetic employees hunting bonuses, stealing ideas from across the net and legal teams turning a blind eye, with management to self involved to care as long as they get the credit. Honesty and integrity, the idea became outmoded, until the internet started rubbing their faces in their lack of it.
What, no classic pinball machines to go with the classic arcade machines, how could they (own a Meteor). The old fashioned shared gaming experience never translated well to watching someone play a PC, game play time makes it boring.
True, there is no place left for psychopaths to prosper as chaos and anarchy are eliminated. However policing becomes less of a focus as the worst instigators of crime and violence, at government, corporate, military and law enforcement level, are prevented from ever gaining access to those positions. As they say, cut the head off the snake and the evil it fosters no longer is a threat hence less policing required.
There is nothing to fear from a more homogenised and self controlling state and we are already witness to what there is to fear in a chaotic, fractured, psychotic state. So individuality in harmony with human society (many people working together to achieve happiness, consensus and self expression) or individuality at the expense of human society (selfish greed preying upon the rest of humanity to feed ego).
Google does best on open networks. Google wins on the internet with search. Google is starting to win on mobile phones by opening them up with android. For google to win on social media, the choice is obvious, pick one of the upcoming more popular open social media networks and push it.
So Google has the best chance to get it's piece by promoting and supporting open social networking. It doesn't need to beat facebook and myspace, it just needs to cripple them. Hey, both are fads eventually doomed to fail, both are abused by corporate greed, so no great loss and, to be honest open social networking is better for everyone, well at least 99.99999 percent odd not of course facebook and myspace investors;D.
It's called escalation idiot. Once it starts where does it stop. Why hack networks, why not cripple the hardware, it stays down longer. Main cable trunks, main network junctions, one hole, some battery acid and your down for days.
Then why stop at network infrastructure, why not start bringing down all the other infrastructure, power, water and sewerage. Once your there why not start in on food supply, too easy, box of matches and your done.
Escalation, escalation, escalation, that is the consequence of idiot thinking, we can do this and get away with it and they will just have to suck it up stupid brown, yellow, olive, pink, black people. You want to uphold justice then you pursue justice not unjust criminal behaviour.
Peace brings more peace, violence propagates more violence, a willingness to break laws in other countries 'WILL' result in identical or worse, likely worse behaviour in turn. The global internet is a shared global resources, anybody absolutely anybody that attempts to corrupt and destroy parts of are committing a crime against humanity, it is a crime against humanity because of the opportunity for global communication and understanding that the internet provides. The internet is the single most important tool for global justice and peace.
Actually quite true not for the science of climate change bur definitely for the science of Economics, we profit today and someone else pays the cost tomorrow style of economics. The high priests of mass media advertising where worth is not measured in truth but in how well you can convince people of anything.
The God of Greed, should be well known by now, all you have to do is look at US paper currency and see it printed right there, a declaration to all and sundry who the US God is, well at least the corporate one. You only have to read the grand parent to know the only High Priests he believes are the ones that sign his pay check and that is the truth.
So you are saying regulations are required and that corporations can't be trusted without them. Your only real proviso is that only 'YOU' be allowed to write them because no one else can be trusted. You chose your name well, law unto yourself;D.
The maths is all a bit off, unknown survey, with unknown breakdown, using unknown group, says 15 percent of cows jump over the moon (not maths that wrong). Seriously your playing with numbers from a survey with undeclared methods, you have got to be joking.
The reality is the majority of smart phone users will end up going with Android for two main reasons, lots of hardware choice (including a lot of cheaper hardware), service supplier choice and of course 'free' application choice. Google only ever produced it's own branded phone to kick up interest in Android, once that was done and it did work really well, they dropped it.
Even the android demo on PC under windows is popular, hopefully Google will produce a 'one click' download and install so that more people can more readily play with it (rather a smack in M$'s nose if people really like it and continue to use is as a app). The Apple market'droids' are working overtime pretending to be fanbois and it isn't really working and is really starting to become rather distasteful.
Apple has some really creative people, perhaps it is time to shift to a web focus and show M$ how a better company can creative a far more successful version of MSN under another name, hmm, how about, the 'core';).
Lets see on the one hand corrupt corporate driven regulation with only greed defining the public lack of rights and on the other hand net neutrality with the public rights subject to public review. I would have to say Franken ain't the dope but likely someone else is, hmmm.
Corporations have proven time and time again that they absolutely cannot be trusted with power, the more power they have the more greed obsessed the corporate executives pursuing their own bonuses become and ultimately the more self destructive behaviour they demonstrate.
Regulation helps to block the boom and inevitably bust to force some sensibility and stability on corporations.
The arse holes that complain the most about the government that 'controls us' are the very same arse holes that are really trying to 'control us' that minority of psychopathic corporate executives with a complete absence of conscience, empathy and morality, the very worst that humanity has to offer. Make no mistake, you need to be controlled.
The flies in the face of the original claims and marketing for the xbox. Ballmer made the claim it would dominate the market and generate huge revenues. The second version was an engineering failure based on readily stupid decision making.
Now M$ is er and umming about going back to focusing on PC gaming because that is the only thing that really drives the windows OS going forward (Android on mobile devices and Linux on servers and it's looks like Android and Linux will soon be 'harmonised')
Of course PC gaming is where they should have focused and made money right from the start instead of losing money.
M$ biggest failure, ie. Ballmers biggest failure is the money losing MSM. There are hundreds, thousands even tens of thousands of companies generating huge profitable revenues from the internet, M$ is the only company losing money. The whole search engine name double name change debacle was a pathetic attempt to finally generate an income from the internet in the end another failure.
All M$ has managed to do on the internet is steal other peoples ideas and laughably lose money doing it, really lame. That is what is destroying Ballmers rep, not just that the first OS under his control was a disaster and that most people hate the ribbon killing uptake of office upgrades.
So what. Both major parties will rarely agree on any issue and with that the balance of power get's given to the 'currently' minor parties. Want to disrupt the two party duopoly carefully nurtured and coerced by corporate interests, than vote for the other parties.
I was concerned about the near exact nature of both parties with regard to censoring and clamping down on the free exchange of information between adults. So I actually joined the Green Party, paid my membership dues (first time ever for any party) and that is how you shake things up. Reality is, if you want a safe internet for children, than you need to create a completely separate one for them, just like any other activity, in fact all other activities where child and adult stranger participation is completely separated.
Rather than the fringe view the right put on the Australian Greens, I take the viewpoint that they are by far the most conservative party in Australia, careful and cautious about any decision they make, their focus is about conserving Australian families and the environment they live in. It is pretty obvious some care and caution needs to be implemented when it comes to exploiting the environment and the resources it contains, failure really can turn around and not only bite this generation on the arse but future generations as well.
Easy answer, as a PC gamer (apparently according to you slashdot 'P'olitically 'C'orrect), I like to have my big screen TV running in the background playing a DVD while gaming, so I can alternate between the two. I also stop gaming the moment it gets boring and switch over to, hmm, slashdotting, browsing the web or random stumbling or creating rather than consuming content. So a 'game' console doesn't fit in my digital lifestyle.
Now sure if I could get a cheap Linux PC (accordong to the xbox softies, really truly slashdot 'P'olitically 'C'orrect) with say a free playstation DRMed video card, so that I could browse the web et al and then window across to the playstation for 3d gameplay, whilst leaving the TV running for passive content, well, that is about as close as I would get to a game console (a console card in my PC and dual dvd drives, one for the DRMed games and the other for everything else).
So I dual boot, use windows for gameplay ad other stuff whilst gaming and DVD in the background and don't ever touch or even think of touching a game console, WTFF;).
Is this a whole far right scheme, your allowed to do what ever you want as long as you are rich of have political power and you stand up a cheer and victimise poor people and progressives upon the slightest accusation of anything.
Of course buying (with a credit card) and downloading illegal content using a government computer during work hours is to put it bluntly really, really stupid. These people should likely be sacked not for what they did but for a complete and total absence of common sense. Clearly because of their position they think they are above the law and this can be indicative of much worse practices with regard to national security. Do these people need to be blackmailed or is this a list of people that can quite readily and easily be corrupted ie bribed.
That is the problem, their analysis failed in two regards. Firstly it was not a truly random sampling but only the 1000 most active seed, which they claimed as random by glossing over the fact there were many equally popular seeds. Their second failure was in not defining the method they used to validate what was and was not infringing content, they just made an assumption, a guess, now that's really quite unscientific and a major fail.
It would also be interesting to note of those 1000 files how many contained identical content under different names, reflecting a likely reality of children using torrent to exchange the latest fad content that produces the highest peak torrents and not the torrents that for example have the largest number of downloads/uploads over time. Also the length of the files, how many hours of content where reviewed and actually checked. Overall not very good science.
One question if a TV show is re-transmitted over the internet with it's commercials intact, is it copyright infringement, as you are only extending the range of it's broadcast.
Net neutrality, means neutral net, no censoring, no throttling, no monitoring, no filtering. Basically treatig the internet like a phone call, for the telco mind you own business and sell the bandwidth you claim to sell and provided the interconnections. That is all end of story.
The telco double speak of handing all control of private digital communications to for profit who can then censoring, throttle, monitor, filter and even corrupt and add alternate data, all based upon greed with no thought placed upon public good except B$ market schemes.
Yeah, we have woken the fuck up to corporate lies, to psychopaths in suits, to the deceit of mass media. What do we want, net neutrality. We do we want net neutrality, now.
Who will I trust first, the government or a private for corporation, seriously dude, the government in that choice every single time. Given a real choice I of course trust people I know well and based upon passed experience I will adjust that level of trust accordingly. In this instance it is all done at a distance so private corporations BP, Enron, Monsanto, Halliburton, Goldman Sachs, Philip Morris, Blackwater, Roche, Pfizer, Microsoft, Koch Industries, Newscorp, what are you nucking futz, need I go on, trust a major for profit corporation, you have got to be joking (either that or your being paid).
What happened was M$ went really performance based in their bonus schemes, the more code you produced the more you got paid and the quicker you produced that code the sooner you got your money. Catch with that, performance often does not equal quality and unwittingly they penalised coders who produced well crafted, carefully thought out, compact code (the code you actually want). They did this for long enough to establish bad bloated coding styles as the norm, hence the problem.
Why M$ wont pay for bug bounties, has slashdot gone quitely loopy. Why would M$ marketdoids pay people to make their products look bad. Oddly enough for open source paying bug bonuses looks good and demonstrates responsibility but, for closed source their marketing claims are that their products are perfect the best software there ever has been and paying bug bonuses directly undermines that claim. With open source the claim is, it is the best we can do and we will continue to work at making it better and be honest about it qualities and faults, so bug bonuses makes real sense.
It is a fairly powerful intoxicant that can seriously impair judgement and those that produce and use it have a requirement to ensure that it is kept out of minors reach and not imbibed unknowingly as a practical joke. So permits all round, secured growing and storage, and reminders of responsibilities and accountability, with escalation of same for commercial operations.
As an intoxicant even minor sales should be controlled and it is simpler to band them. You are consuming it, so inappropriate pesticides or fertilisers or any production impurities needs to be monitored and controlled and the is simply not possible in the backyard situation.
Basically if you allow your backyard plot to get in the hands of minors, you will find yourself staring down the barrel of a raid and a prison sentence as such some annual reminders of your responsibilities are appropriate as well as definitions of what are secure growing and storage facilities in the domestic environment.
More accurately it is not illegal for a government to insert code into a product manufactured locally that will be exported. It has been reported that the US has done this exact same thing in the past.
The real problem is Dell outsourcing everything and palming of warranty repair costs directly onto the component manufacturer. This creates a mind state a Dell where they don't have to check anything because the cost of repairs wont affect them. As such they become known for this behaviour and foreign companies and foreign intelligence agencies will exploit it ( the companies illegally and the intelligence agencies both legally and illegally).
A real difficult problem to tackle. Safe thing to do all, where possible only government technology infrastructure should be locally sourced, whether local state or federal. Where it can not be locally sourced it should be checked and validated as secure by a government controlled clearing house, a federally mandated security assessment technology bond store. This in affect re-localises the security risk and evades the whole it is legal for foreign intelligence agencies to insert network insecurities into exported products.
You seem to have a complete failure to grasp the principles of law. Perhaps this will help 'the letter of the law'. Similes are stupidly inappropriate, you deal with the offence at hand and only the offence at hand. Not just likes, no maybe ifs, no fairies at the end of the garden, you only look at the actual offence and the proven valid damages.
The offence in this case, was to legally access a web site and then type in 'administrator' and 'password' or similar to gain illegal access to restricted information. So the value of the secrets claimed stolen (not the cost of security damage assessment because that should occur immediately following discovery of default user names and passwords, let's be realistic and legally correct).
So the network 'hacking' wasn't hacking at all, required no implanted code, no disruption of the network and, no disruption of existing security systems, no fraudulent misrepresentation, no attempt at illegal hardware insertion (hmm, that kind of reminds me of a recent US case, where republican agents/Fox News contributors did exactly that and what was the penalty in that case). The only thing that needs to be accessed is the value of the information stolen, it's true financial or national security value.
So he damaged nothing, he killed no one, he denied no one control of anything (he copied information he did not take it and delete the original), he corrupted nothing (neither data or some truly lame arsed security procedures). It appears that he most definitely did commit a crime but as per the letter of the law and he should be charged for the crime he actually committed not for wildly inflated exaggerations of it. Likely honest penalty, fine, good behaviour bond, restricted internet access for some period of the bond (perhaps monitored only access), combined with full cooperation and disclosure, as well as signing a national security secrecy agreement with attached penalties.
I see you really just don't understand greedy people. They are greedy, they want it all, they don't just want all their stuff, they also want all your stuff, in fact they want all of everyone's stuff.
In this case it seems like some asshat stole an idea and took that idea to someone else to fund it's development and then stole it again to resell to someone else but retain significantly greater ownership.
You can almost bet the next big stink will be about a whole bunch of stolen code. "They trust me, Dumb fucks" somehow that psychopathic statement seems to be really ring true, perhaps Facebook can use it as their new marketing meme. I really have to think that people, companies and organisations looking to align their image with Facebooks, should step back and take a long hard think about whether it is really appropriate. Anyone just like any other youth driven fade it will inevitably fade to be replaced by the new hot social site.
Perhaps a new open social network site, hosted and linked across many ISP's, with open source code with clear locked into client agreements with pre-defined and limited revenue methods can be created. A place where clients and service providers can safely mix, all absent "They trust me, Dumb fucks".
Hmm, but I smell the high smell of marijuana growing being handed over to licensed only agro-corporations and individuals will be fined for attempting to grow it themselves under penalties of tax evasion. Only four licensed operation, hmm, corporate drug cartels with government lobbied grossly inflated profit margins.
Still better than throwing away billions destroying peoples lives with militaristic raids and extended prison sentences in order to protect them from 'er' destroying the lives having a 'good time' getting high but not being dutiful mass consuming worker drones whilst doing it.
As long as they allow and provide grow your own permits, not for sale or distribution. This allows for a measure of product control, ensures simpler taxation management and means that those who can only afford to grow their own can continue to do so.
Smaller plants can of course get by this problem by running low reaction, low temperature reactors. For example if you were to pulse the reaction rather than have a sustained reaction you can substantially reduce the temperature of the reactor whilst increasing the life of fuel and use a hydrocarbon lubricating reactant (liquid to vapour) in a closed cycle turbine, where the nuclear reaction is enclosed within the main active turbine blades and the reaction then drives an array of passive turbine blades. So a shipping container sized reactor ie many smaller, simpler, safer, reactors in a power plant (they are safer because of course the substantially reduced operating temperatures and the fuel rods last the life of the reactor, no refuelling).
I find in extraordinary that anybody could consider corporations lying as routine aesthetics. Why would any consider the individuals hiding behind the façade of a corporation have gained the moral right to lie to every person outside of the corporation.
Substantive misrepresentation of company or product capabilities for one can 'illegally' alter the public's perception of the value of the company and artificially inflate it's share price. It is the responsibility of the regulatory to investigated artificial inflation of the company share prices especially when insiders start selling stock.
Most countries have consumer protection agencies and in the event of sufficient registered consumer complaints they will investigate and if appropriate prosecute (don't forget to make formal complaints they count). Truth in advertising, it was tackled before by people in the fifties and sixties and it is pretty bloody obvious not enough was done. It is time that truth in advertising became a major political issue again so that it can be further tightened up, especially advertising as news B$ (lies for profit).
The big thing about this story, lamed arsed British Petroleum, is too slack and stupid not to do a better job of it web PR=B$ efforts, it seems pretty obvious it needs to let go of it's current antiquated amateurish staff and replace them with some quality amoral professionals. There a many major corporations who all recognise the power and the danger of the internet, yet time and time again they show some real noob like efforts, you can't help but imagine all those BP marketdroids sitting in a office together nodding and agreeing with each others brilliance, wiping white powder off their noses as they launch yet another ill fated marketing stunt.
Interesting point, as a line of sight area weapon with highly limited targeted ability, is it appropriate to torture innocent people in the background because you are targeted people in the foreground. Will it be child abuse when children are tortured by burning pain.
So a device that inflicts extreme pain and suffering, with no record of who it is aimed at and for what reason and all neatly wrapped up in it doesn't directly cause 'permanent harm' as such tough luck for collateral victims sitting quietly within their own properties.
Using it on ill informed peoples will undoubtedly trigger claims of it generating harmful radiation that will cause sterility in children (that claim can last for many years until it is logically disproved).
Here's betting where ever the device is use it will cause an escalation of retaliatory violence, even in domestic protest, that kind of torture device will likely alter the nature of protest and trigger long term violent retaliatory hostilities. A very bad idea in concept that will inevitably be abused, in the worst possible ways against the most vulnerable people.
Slashdot Mirror
More accurately they were such a minor player the government trust types left Apple alone, until iPod and iPhone (before they could really react Android come along and made the problem mute). M$ of course did get in trouble no where near enough was done but it looks to be coming to an end anyhow (Android on phone => Android on smartbooks => Android on big screens).
As for stealing patent ideas, greedy pathetic employees hunting bonuses, stealing ideas from across the net and legal teams turning a blind eye, with management to self involved to care as long as they get the credit. Honesty and integrity, the idea became outmoded, until the internet started rubbing their faces in their lack of it.
What, no classic pinball machines to go with the classic arcade machines, how could they (own a Meteor). The old fashioned shared gaming experience never translated well to watching someone play a PC, game play time makes it boring.
True, there is no place left for psychopaths to prosper as chaos and anarchy are eliminated. However policing becomes less of a focus as the worst instigators of crime and violence, at government, corporate, military and law enforcement level, are prevented from ever gaining access to those positions. As they say, cut the head off the snake and the evil it fosters no longer is a threat hence less policing required.
There is nothing to fear from a more homogenised and self controlling state and we are already witness to what there is to fear in a chaotic, fractured, psychotic state. So individuality in harmony with human society (many people working together to achieve happiness, consensus and self expression) or individuality at the expense of human society (selfish greed preying upon the rest of humanity to feed ego).
Google does best on open networks. Google wins on the internet with search. Google is starting to win on mobile phones by opening them up with android. For google to win on social media, the choice is obvious, pick one of the upcoming more popular open social media networks and push it.
So Google has the best chance to get it's piece by promoting and supporting open social networking. It doesn't need to beat facebook and myspace, it just needs to cripple them. Hey, both are fads eventually doomed to fail, both are abused by corporate greed, so no great loss and, to be honest open social networking is better for everyone, well at least 99.99999 percent odd not of course facebook and myspace investors ;D.
It's called escalation idiot. Once it starts where does it stop. Why hack networks, why not cripple the hardware, it stays down longer. Main cable trunks, main network junctions, one hole, some battery acid and your down for days.
Then why stop at network infrastructure, why not start bringing down all the other infrastructure, power, water and sewerage. Once your there why not start in on food supply, too easy, box of matches and your done.
Escalation, escalation, escalation, that is the consequence of idiot thinking, we can do this and get away with it and they will just have to suck it up stupid brown, yellow, olive, pink, black people. You want to uphold justice then you pursue justice not unjust criminal behaviour.
Peace brings more peace, violence propagates more violence, a willingness to break laws in other countries 'WILL' result in identical or worse, likely worse behaviour in turn. The global internet is a shared global resources, anybody absolutely anybody that attempts to corrupt and destroy parts of are committing a crime against humanity, it is a crime against humanity because of the opportunity for global communication and understanding that the internet provides. The internet is the single most important tool for global justice and peace.
Actually quite true not for the science of climate change bur definitely for the science of Economics, we profit today and someone else pays the cost tomorrow style of economics. The high priests of mass media advertising where worth is not measured in truth but in how well you can convince people of anything.
The God of Greed, should be well known by now, all you have to do is look at US paper currency and see it printed right there, a declaration to all and sundry who the US God is, well at least the corporate one. You only have to read the grand parent to know the only High Priests he believes are the ones that sign his pay check and that is the truth.
So you are saying regulations are required and that corporations can't be trusted without them. Your only real proviso is that only 'YOU' be allowed to write them because no one else can be trusted. You chose your name well, law unto yourself ;D.
The maths is all a bit off, unknown survey, with unknown breakdown, using unknown group, says 15 percent of cows jump over the moon (not maths that wrong). Seriously your playing with numbers from a survey with undeclared methods, you have got to be joking.
The reality is the majority of smart phone users will end up going with Android for two main reasons, lots of hardware choice (including a lot of cheaper hardware), service supplier choice and of course 'free' application choice. Google only ever produced it's own branded phone to kick up interest in Android, once that was done and it did work really well, they dropped it.
Even the android demo on PC under windows is popular, hopefully Google will produce a 'one click' download and install so that more people can more readily play with it (rather a smack in M$'s nose if people really like it and continue to use is as a app). The Apple market'droids' are working overtime pretending to be fanbois and it isn't really working and is really starting to become rather distasteful.
Apple has some really creative people, perhaps it is time to shift to a web focus and show M$ how a better company can creative a far more successful version of MSN under another name, hmm, how about, the 'core' ;).
Lets see on the one hand corrupt corporate driven regulation with only greed defining the public lack of rights and on the other hand net neutrality with the public rights subject to public review. I would have to say Franken ain't the dope but likely someone else is, hmmm.
Corporations have proven time and time again that they absolutely cannot be trusted with power, the more power they have the more greed obsessed the corporate executives pursuing their own bonuses become and ultimately the more self destructive behaviour they demonstrate.
Regulation helps to block the boom and inevitably bust to force some sensibility and stability on corporations.
The arse holes that complain the most about the government that 'controls us' are the very same arse holes that are really trying to 'control us' that minority of psychopathic corporate executives with a complete absence of conscience, empathy and morality, the very worst that humanity has to offer. Make no mistake, you need to be controlled.
The flies in the face of the original claims and marketing for the xbox. Ballmer made the claim it would dominate the market and generate huge revenues. The second version was an engineering failure based on readily stupid decision making.
Now M$ is er and umming about going back to focusing on PC gaming because that is the only thing that really drives the windows OS going forward (Android on mobile devices and Linux on servers and it's looks like Android and Linux will soon be 'harmonised')
Of course PC gaming is where they should have focused and made money right from the start instead of losing money.
M$ biggest failure, ie. Ballmers biggest failure is the money losing MSM. There are hundreds, thousands even tens of thousands of companies generating huge profitable revenues from the internet, M$ is the only company losing money. The whole search engine name double name change debacle was a pathetic attempt to finally generate an income from the internet in the end another failure.
All M$ has managed to do on the internet is steal other peoples ideas and laughably lose money doing it, really lame. That is what is destroying Ballmers rep, not just that the first OS under his control was a disaster and that most people hate the ribbon killing uptake of office upgrades.
So what. Both major parties will rarely agree on any issue and with that the balance of power get's given to the 'currently' minor parties. Want to disrupt the two party duopoly carefully nurtured and coerced by corporate interests, than vote for the other parties.
I was concerned about the near exact nature of both parties with regard to censoring and clamping down on the free exchange of information between adults. So I actually joined the Green Party, paid my membership dues (first time ever for any party) and that is how you shake things up. Reality is, if you want a safe internet for children, than you need to create a completely separate one for them, just like any other activity, in fact all other activities where child and adult stranger participation is completely separated.
Rather than the fringe view the right put on the Australian Greens, I take the viewpoint that they are by far the most conservative party in Australia, careful and cautious about any decision they make, their focus is about conserving Australian families and the environment they live in. It is pretty obvious some care and caution needs to be implemented when it comes to exploiting the environment and the resources it contains, failure really can turn around and not only bite this generation on the arse but future generations as well.
Easy answer, as a PC gamer (apparently according to you slashdot 'P'olitically 'C'orrect), I like to have my big screen TV running in the background playing a DVD while gaming, so I can alternate between the two. I also stop gaming the moment it gets boring and switch over to, hmm, slashdotting, browsing the web or random stumbling or creating rather than consuming content. So a 'game' console doesn't fit in my digital lifestyle.
Now sure if I could get a cheap Linux PC (accordong to the xbox softies, really truly slashdot 'P'olitically 'C'orrect) with say a free playstation DRMed video card, so that I could browse the web et al and then window across to the playstation for 3d gameplay, whilst leaving the TV running for passive content, well, that is about as close as I would get to a game console (a console card in my PC and dual dvd drives, one for the DRMed games and the other for everything else).
So I dual boot, use windows for gameplay ad other stuff whilst gaming and DVD in the background and don't ever touch or even think of touching a game console, WTFF ;).
What this proves is the US haw really twisted views about the subject for example http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/21/jeffrey-epstein-disgraced_n_654674.html. A convicted paedophile gets confined to his mansion for a year, WTF, the place where a lot of the crimes supposedly were committed.
Is this a whole far right scheme, your allowed to do what ever you want as long as you are rich of have political power and you stand up a cheer and victimise poor people and progressives upon the slightest accusation of anything.
Of course buying (with a credit card) and downloading illegal content using a government computer during work hours is to put it bluntly really, really stupid. These people should likely be sacked not for what they did but for a complete and total absence of common sense. Clearly because of their position they think they are above the law and this can be indicative of much worse practices with regard to national security. Do these people need to be blackmailed or is this a list of people that can quite readily and easily be corrupted ie bribed.
That is the problem, their analysis failed in two regards. Firstly it was not a truly random sampling but only the 1000 most active seed, which they claimed as random by glossing over the fact there were many equally popular seeds. Their second failure was in not defining the method they used to validate what was and was not infringing content, they just made an assumption, a guess, now that's really quite unscientific and a major fail.
It would also be interesting to note of those 1000 files how many contained identical content under different names, reflecting a likely reality of children using torrent to exchange the latest fad content that produces the highest peak torrents and not the torrents that for example have the largest number of downloads/uploads over time. Also the length of the files, how many hours of content where reviewed and actually checked. Overall not very good science.
One question if a TV show is re-transmitted over the internet with it's commercials intact, is it copyright infringement, as you are only extending the range of it's broadcast.
Net neutrality, means neutral net, no censoring, no throttling, no monitoring, no filtering. Basically treatig the internet like a phone call, for the telco mind you own business and sell the bandwidth you claim to sell and provided the interconnections. That is all end of story.
The telco double speak of handing all control of private digital communications to for profit who can then censoring, throttle, monitor, filter and even corrupt and add alternate data, all based upon greed with no thought placed upon public good except B$ market schemes.
Yeah, we have woken the fuck up to corporate lies, to psychopaths in suits, to the deceit of mass media. What do we want, net neutrality. We do we want net neutrality, now.
Who will I trust first, the government or a private for corporation, seriously dude, the government in that choice every single time. Given a real choice I of course trust people I know well and based upon passed experience I will adjust that level of trust accordingly. In this instance it is all done at a distance so private corporations BP, Enron, Monsanto, Halliburton, Goldman Sachs, Philip Morris, Blackwater, Roche, Pfizer, Microsoft, Koch Industries, Newscorp, what are you nucking futz, need I go on, trust a major for profit corporation, you have got to be joking (either that or your being paid).
What happened was M$ went really performance based in their bonus schemes, the more code you produced the more you got paid and the quicker you produced that code the sooner you got your money. Catch with that, performance often does not equal quality and unwittingly they penalised coders who produced well crafted, carefully thought out, compact code (the code you actually want). They did this for long enough to establish bad bloated coding styles as the norm, hence the problem.
Why M$ wont pay for bug bounties, has slashdot gone quitely loopy. Why would M$ marketdoids pay people to make their products look bad. Oddly enough for open source paying bug bonuses looks good and demonstrates responsibility but, for closed source their marketing claims are that their products are perfect the best software there ever has been and paying bug bonuses directly undermines that claim. With open source the claim is, it is the best we can do and we will continue to work at making it better and be honest about it qualities and faults, so bug bonuses makes real sense.
It is a fairly powerful intoxicant that can seriously impair judgement and those that produce and use it have a requirement to ensure that it is kept out of minors reach and not imbibed unknowingly as a practical joke. So permits all round, secured growing and storage, and reminders of responsibilities and accountability, with escalation of same for commercial operations.
As an intoxicant even minor sales should be controlled and it is simpler to band them. You are consuming it, so inappropriate pesticides or fertilisers or any production impurities needs to be monitored and controlled and the is simply not possible in the backyard situation.
Basically if you allow your backyard plot to get in the hands of minors, you will find yourself staring down the barrel of a raid and a prison sentence as such some annual reminders of your responsibilities are appropriate as well as definitions of what are secure growing and storage facilities in the domestic environment.
More accurately it is not illegal for a government to insert code into a product manufactured locally that will be exported. It has been reported that the US has done this exact same thing in the past.
The real problem is Dell outsourcing everything and palming of warranty repair costs directly onto the component manufacturer. This creates a mind state a Dell where they don't have to check anything because the cost of repairs wont affect them. As such they become known for this behaviour and foreign companies and foreign intelligence agencies will exploit it ( the companies illegally and the intelligence agencies both legally and illegally).
A real difficult problem to tackle. Safe thing to do all, where possible only government technology infrastructure should be locally sourced, whether local state or federal. Where it can not be locally sourced it should be checked and validated as secure by a government controlled clearing house, a federally mandated security assessment technology bond store. This in affect re-localises the security risk and evades the whole it is legal for foreign intelligence agencies to insert network insecurities into exported products.
You seem to have a complete failure to grasp the principles of law. Perhaps this will help 'the letter of the law'. Similes are stupidly inappropriate, you deal with the offence at hand and only the offence at hand. Not just likes, no maybe ifs, no fairies at the end of the garden, you only look at the actual offence and the proven valid damages.
The offence in this case, was to legally access a web site and then type in 'administrator' and 'password' or similar to gain illegal access to restricted information. So the value of the secrets claimed stolen (not the cost of security damage assessment because that should occur immediately following discovery of default user names and passwords, let's be realistic and legally correct).
So the network 'hacking' wasn't hacking at all, required no implanted code, no disruption of the network and, no disruption of existing security systems, no fraudulent misrepresentation, no attempt at illegal hardware insertion (hmm, that kind of reminds me of a recent US case, where republican agents/Fox News contributors did exactly that and what was the penalty in that case). The only thing that needs to be accessed is the value of the information stolen, it's true financial or national security value.
So he damaged nothing, he killed no one, he denied no one control of anything (he copied information he did not take it and delete the original), he corrupted nothing (neither data or some truly lame arsed security procedures). It appears that he most definitely did commit a crime but as per the letter of the law and he should be charged for the crime he actually committed not for wildly inflated exaggerations of it. Likely honest penalty, fine, good behaviour bond, restricted internet access for some period of the bond (perhaps monitored only access), combined with full cooperation and disclosure, as well as signing a national security secrecy agreement with attached penalties.
I see you really just don't understand greedy people. They are greedy, they want it all, they don't just want all their stuff, they also want all your stuff, in fact they want all of everyone's stuff.
In this case it seems like some asshat stole an idea and took that idea to someone else to fund it's development and then stole it again to resell to someone else but retain significantly greater ownership.
You can almost bet the next big stink will be about a whole bunch of stolen code. "They trust me, Dumb fucks" somehow that psychopathic statement seems to be really ring true, perhaps Facebook can use it as their new marketing meme. I really have to think that people, companies and organisations looking to align their image with Facebooks, should step back and take a long hard think about whether it is really appropriate. Anyone just like any other youth driven fade it will inevitably fade to be replaced by the new hot social site.
Perhaps a new open social network site, hosted and linked across many ISP's, with open source code with clear locked into client agreements with pre-defined and limited revenue methods can be created. A place where clients and service providers can safely mix, all absent "They trust me, Dumb fucks".
Hmm, but I smell the high smell of marijuana growing being handed over to licensed only agro-corporations and individuals will be fined for attempting to grow it themselves under penalties of tax evasion. Only four licensed operation, hmm, corporate drug cartels with government lobbied grossly inflated profit margins.
Still better than throwing away billions destroying peoples lives with militaristic raids and extended prison sentences in order to protect them from 'er' destroying the lives having a 'good time' getting high but not being dutiful mass consuming worker drones whilst doing it.
As long as they allow and provide grow your own permits, not for sale or distribution. This allows for a measure of product control, ensures simpler taxation management and means that those who can only afford to grow their own can continue to do so.
Smaller plants can of course get by this problem by running low reaction, low temperature reactors. For example if you were to pulse the reaction rather than have a sustained reaction you can substantially reduce the temperature of the reactor whilst increasing the life of fuel and use a hydrocarbon lubricating reactant (liquid to vapour) in a closed cycle turbine, where the nuclear reaction is enclosed within the main active turbine blades and the reaction then drives an array of passive turbine blades. So a shipping container sized reactor ie many smaller, simpler, safer, reactors in a power plant (they are safer because of course the substantially reduced operating temperatures and the fuel rods last the life of the reactor, no refuelling).
I find in extraordinary that anybody could consider corporations lying as routine aesthetics. Why would any consider the individuals hiding behind the façade of a corporation have gained the moral right to lie to every person outside of the corporation.
Substantive misrepresentation of company or product capabilities for one can 'illegally' alter the public's perception of the value of the company and artificially inflate it's share price. It is the responsibility of the regulatory to investigated artificial inflation of the company share prices especially when insiders start selling stock.
Most countries have consumer protection agencies and in the event of sufficient registered consumer complaints they will investigate and if appropriate prosecute (don't forget to make formal complaints they count). Truth in advertising, it was tackled before by people in the fifties and sixties and it is pretty bloody obvious not enough was done. It is time that truth in advertising became a major political issue again so that it can be further tightened up, especially advertising as news B$ (lies for profit).
The big thing about this story, lamed arsed British Petroleum, is too slack and stupid not to do a better job of it web PR=B$ efforts, it seems pretty obvious it needs to let go of it's current antiquated amateurish staff and replace them with some quality amoral professionals. There a many major corporations who all recognise the power and the danger of the internet, yet time and time again they show some real noob like efforts, you can't help but imagine all those BP marketdroids sitting in a office together nodding and agreeing with each others brilliance, wiping white powder off their noses as they launch yet another ill fated marketing stunt.
Interesting point, as a line of sight area weapon with highly limited targeted ability, is it appropriate to torture innocent people in the background because you are targeted people in the foreground. Will it be child abuse when children are tortured by burning pain.
So a device that inflicts extreme pain and suffering, with no record of who it is aimed at and for what reason and all neatly wrapped up in it doesn't directly cause 'permanent harm' as such tough luck for collateral victims sitting quietly within their own properties.
Using it on ill informed peoples will undoubtedly trigger claims of it generating harmful radiation that will cause sterility in children (that claim can last for many years until it is logically disproved).
Here's betting where ever the device is use it will cause an escalation of retaliatory violence, even in domestic protest, that kind of torture device will likely alter the nature of protest and trigger long term violent retaliatory hostilities. A very bad idea in concept that will inevitably be abused, in the worst possible ways against the most vulnerable people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEr0zzCjPeg&feature=channel and, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIKgeBhh9sI&feature=channel.