We find that the technology could benefit computer security, but must be fixed to ensure that the computer owner is always in control.
That's simple enough to solve. The computer will just be both owned and "0wnz0red" by someone else, most likely by the entity that licensed the operating system to the user, and the hardware imprinted for that specific operating system and all others irrevocably locked out.
And it will all be done with the click on a seemingly innocuous little virtual button that reads simply, "I Agree".
Back when all television was black and white and broadcast live, it was quite common for sitcom characters to extoll the virtues of their latest purchase such as a new refrigerator on the set of The Honeymooners.
This doesn't mean we want a return to such things, or more of the more insidious instances we see today, but it does stand out when there are no brand names present whatsoever, or worse, when they attempt to cover the "hast" of Shasta with a large "od", or a character holds a can in a bizarre way to conceal the label from the camera.
But of course. They need to use the region encoding to protect against a DVD release in one area cutting into the profits of a theatrical release in anoth--
Waitaminute, this is a television show that ended its run years ago!
If someone tells you they bought a brand new car engine would you expect to see a whole car?
And what if he said he bought a new set of wheels? Would you expect a whole car or four tires?
But hard drive == computer is just wrong. I've never heard of such a reference before today. It is far more reasonable to hear someone refer to the computer case and all it encloses as the CPU, even if the computer inside actually has multiple CPUs.
Tab generates a character. Caps lock, num lock, shift, control, alt, option, command, window, menu, power, these don't cause the generation of a character from the keyboard, or it is intercepted before it can reach the program. (Apple's power key generates a character when connected to a Linux box.)
Multimedia keyboards may add more to the set of keys that aren't the any key, as well as function keys.
There is no uploading involved in P2P. You don't upload to a server which then shares your data; your machine is your server, and it doesn't move. Everything is downloaded.
Remember that to upload is to push data to another machine and to download is to pull data from another machine. Upload/download isn't just direction of transfer; it also involves who is the actor causing the transfer and where he is in relation to that transfer (not physical location).
(Aside: FTP allows someone to transfer files from one system to another from a system which is neither source or destination. Either this is still considered uploading or it is neither uploading nor downloading.)
So, back to the thought of backing up your system with KaZaA: you have your original system, the whole system shared on the network. Then you wait for the rest of the world to pull it from your system (download). Only then do you have your backup stored on a myriad of servers on the net. (This will take a very long time as some files are not as interesting as others.) Then reformat, reinstall, (hope you can actually enable the firewall if the system doesn't detect an Internet connection,) reconnect to the net, download the P2P client, and then hope that everyone that pulled bits of your system is still online and sharing long enough for you to get everything back.
And there's the problem that they won't let you put your system on the net to do this sharing anyway.
Drives are cheap these days. Just get a new one (probably bigger) and do a fresh install on it. Then after all necessary precautions are taken, copy the disinfected files from the (???)-hazard drive to the new one.
Re:In defense of them unskilled blue collar types.
on
Are You On Time To Work?
·
· Score: 2, Funny
So what you are saying is that a McDonald's worker should be paid the same as a doctor?
"So, I have you down for one coronary bypass. Do you want fries with that?"
And apparently their redesign is incompatible with my window width of 660 pixels and client-side stylesheet in Mozilla 1.3 for Linux. Part of the page is off the left side of the window to which you cannot scroll. These are hallmarks of a page that tries to use CSS positioning to make sure it is centered in the browser window, forgetting that if the content is wider than the window, centering places content outside the bounds of the window, particularly the left side.
Stories are also affected.
Also uses the iframe tag, thereby preventing easy source editing with Mozilla 1.3 to diagnose the exact problem or work around it.
I suspect these interacting stylesheet rules are the culprits:
The fixed-by-CSS "width: 750px;" of #container (a div that wraps the whole content of body) in combination with the "text-align:center" on body are my prime suspects.
I used to be able to get by with just disabling presentational HTML markup (triggered by its presence) to correct the design errors of webpages. But now that the mistakes of the past are taking root in site's CSS rules I'm hesitant to override them for fear of breaking good sites' use of the same CSS rules. I have to decide whether to put "body { text-align: left ! important; }" in my userContent.css file. I really don't want to have to use "* { width: auto ! important; }".
as Apple Computer has always marketed their product as the "iTunes Music Store" and not "the Apple Music Store", there is the very good chance that a judge will say "There is no confusion in these matters, case dismissed."
Lie AND call from: a) A payphone b) A caller-ID-blocked phone (which the original author said he did)
But you can't block caller-ID to a 1-800 number! Nor 1-888, 1-877, 1-866, the soon-to-be-if-not-already 1-855, 1-900, or 911. They use ANI which is not blockable.
And all the toll-free numbers will get the number on their billing statements too, since they pay for the calls made. (I get detailed billing on my cell phone that lists every number called in or out, but that still doesn't get me CNID-blocked numbers.)
And unfortunately payphones are becoming increasingly rare.
sure they knew. the second system beep developed for the mac (after "sysbeep") was called "sosumi" - which is pronounced "so sue me". it was in direct reference to apple records and the whole "can't make music" clause.
But before it was named sosumi, it was named xylophone.
I thought Apple was taking a risk when they changed from the rainbow logo to the multiple solid color logos. The green apple on the green iMac was the first slap in the face to EMI/Apple Records. Though Apple doesn't use that same green apple for their iTunes store, they do color it green: green notes on the iTunes application, green folders for the service in iTunes, and a green menubar at the page to which AppleMusic.com redirects ("Apple Music? Oh, you must mean Apple Computer's iTunes page!" Talk about trademark confusion; such a redirect practically fosters it!)
Not that Apple Records has any prior right to the color green (or to edible green apples).
In any case, Jobs has a strange approach to calling Apple Records to the bargaining table.
Except this time, if Apple Computer doesn't want to cease and desist, they have to renegotiate the deal.
But isn't EMI an RIAA member? Who is really pulling the strings here? They may not want to renegotiate the contract and instead want to shut iTunes down.
OK, now to split hairs. I popped open my dictionary and the rather lengthy definition of 'steal' includes "to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully"
May I split the hair further?
To appropriate is, "To take possession of or make use of exclusively for oneself, often without permission." So appropriation is still denying possession to another, still a word rooted in the physical world.
So IP infringement is still not stealing nor theft. It is only "infringement". Still illegal, but just not as buzzy of a word.
This is akin to someone setting up a fake checkout in a store. Who would be prosecuted in that case? I would imagine in any court in the land would prosecute the person who put up the fake checkout. She had no intent to break the law, and the website in question had intent to mislead her.
Remind me to check the ECCA (Exiting Customer Checkout Agreement) posted at the checkout lane the next time I buy something in case it says that some items I may have purchased may in fact be illegal to possess and that they disclaim all responsibility for selling me a region-free DVD player or Macrovision-immune VCR.
Because assuredly there was such an EULA for the P2P software the mother bought.
Not that I think for a moment that that 12 year old girl actually cost the RIAA $2,000 worth of music sales.
Well, they could have tried to buy out all the patents related to creating MP3 files and gotten their cut by charging ridiculous royalties for use of the MP3 format. Then repeat for the next format, and so on. And if even one wouldn't sell, then sue or buy legislation demanding royalties.
and making sure the song you get is from the album and not from the radio.
You may have touched on something there. If the song is from the radio, then the copying is (somewhat) defensible. It is legal to record songs off the radio. (Surely someone can cite the relevant law, if only to prove me wrong.)
And with the frequency of airplay it may even be possible to edit together a complete song without having to do a quick fade to eliminate DJ chatter.
As to trading songs online, the only one I want is Madonna's "What The Fuck Do You Think You're Doing?". That should be perfectly legal to trade, seeing as she had it put online intending it to be shared, yes?
you certainly couldn't get the source to those written in assembly language.
Maybe not, but you were running those programs on hardware that had a built-in disassembler. Can you imagine the ire of every software publishing company if someone started designing that in again?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes it is. RAID 1 writes data to two disks simultaneosly. Thus you have complete and total fault tolerance.
As long as you keep them paired. If both drives have non-matching faults, they'll continue to work as a pair, but each drive by itself may be damaged.
And remember, don't carry two drives in the same pocket.
GB, not GiB. DVD and CD media capacities are measured in wholly metric units.
Unlike 1.44 "MB" 3.5" disks, which are actually 1440 KiB. (1.44 KKiB if it were legal to combine multipliers like that.)
We find that the technology could benefit computer security, but must be fixed to ensure that the computer owner is always in control.
That's simple enough to solve. The computer will just be both owned and "0wnz0red" by someone else, most likely by the entity that licensed the operating system to the user, and the hardware imprinted for that specific operating system and all others irrevocably locked out.
And it will all be done with the click on a seemingly innocuous little virtual button that reads simply, "I Agree".
Back when all television was black and white and broadcast live, it was quite common for sitcom characters to extoll the virtues of their latest purchase such as a new refrigerator on the set of The Honeymooners.
This doesn't mean we want a return to such things, or more of the more insidious instances we see today, but it does stand out when there are no brand names present whatsoever, or worse, when they attempt to cover the "hast" of Shasta with a large "od", or a character holds a can in a bizarre way to conceal the label from the camera.
I wonder if it's region encoded.
But of course. They need to use the region encoding to protect against a DVD release in one area cutting into the profits of a theatrical release in anoth--
Waitaminute, this is a television show that ended its run years ago!
If someone tells you they bought a brand new car engine would you expect to see a whole car?
And what if he said he bought a new set of wheels? Would you expect a whole car or four tires?
But hard drive == computer is just wrong. I've never heard of such a reference before today. It is far more reasonable to hear someone refer to the computer case and all it encloses as the CPU, even if the computer inside actually has multiple CPUs.
If your inbox looks anything like mine, it's full of low-interest loan offers, porn offers, and penile enlargement stuff.
Really? My inbox is full of messages from "Microsoft" wanting me to install an attached security patch to protect me from viruses and worms.
Tab generates a character. Caps lock, num lock, shift, control, alt, option, command, window, menu, power, these don't cause the generation of a character from the keyboard, or it is intercepted before it can reach the program. (Apple's power key generates a character when connected to a Linux box.)
Multimedia keyboards may add more to the set of keys that aren't the any key, as well as function keys.
Nice tying of the topic together, but no.
There is no uploading involved in P2P. You don't upload to a server which then shares your data; your machine is your server, and it doesn't move. Everything is downloaded.
Remember that to upload is to push data to another machine and to download is to pull data from another machine. Upload/download isn't just direction of transfer; it also involves who is the actor causing the transfer and where he is in relation to that transfer (not physical location).
(Aside: FTP allows someone to transfer files from one system to another from a system which is neither source or destination. Either this is still considered uploading or it is neither uploading nor downloading.)
So, back to the thought of backing up your system with KaZaA: you have your original system, the whole system shared on the network. Then you wait for the rest of the world to pull it from your system (download). Only then do you have your backup stored on a myriad of servers on the net. (This will take a very long time as some files are not as interesting as others.) Then reformat, reinstall, (hope you can actually enable the firewall if the system doesn't detect an Internet connection,) reconnect to the net, download the P2P client, and then hope that everyone that pulled bits of your system is still online and sharing long enough for you to get everything back.
And there's the problem that they won't let you put your system on the net to do this sharing anyway.
Drives are cheap these days. Just get a new one (probably bigger) and do a fresh install on it. Then after all necessary precautions are taken, copy the disinfected files from the (???)-hazard drive to the new one.
So what you are saying is that a McDonald's worker should be paid the same as a doctor?
"So, I have you down for one coronary bypass. Do you want fries with that?"
Verisign's current practices imply that Verisign owns veritable rights to all domain names, EXCEPT those which have been registered by others.
Imagine all the domain squatting charges they'll have levied!
I think we should find a way to block Live activity from the xbox out.
It's called a firewall.
I wasn't dyslexic before, but I have a feeling I will be by the time I finish reading all the repsonses to this story.
Stories are also affected.
Also uses the iframe tag, thereby preventing easy source editing with Mozilla 1.3 to diagnose the exact problem or work around it.
I suspect these interacting stylesheet rules are the culprits:The fixed-by-CSS "width: 750px;" of #container (a div that wraps the whole content of body) in combination with the "text-align:center" on body are my prime suspects.
I used to be able to get by with just disabling presentational HTML markup (triggered by its presence) to correct the design errors of webpages. But now that the mistakes of the past are taking root in site's CSS rules I'm hesitant to override them for fear of breaking good sites' use of the same CSS rules. I have to decide whether to put "body { text-align: left ! important; }" in my userContent.css file. I really don't want to have to use "* { width: auto ! important; }".
as Apple Computer has always marketed their product as the "iTunes Music Store" and not "the Apple Music Store", there is the very good chance that a judge will say "There is no confusion in these matters, case dismissed."
And you don't think Apple's registration of AppleMusic.com and its redirection to Apple's iTunes page isn't a smoking gun?
Lie AND call from:
a) A payphone
b) A caller-ID-blocked phone (which the original author said he did)
But you can't block caller-ID to a 1-800 number! Nor 1-888, 1-877, 1-866, the soon-to-be-if-not-already 1-855, 1-900, or 911. They use ANI which is not blockable.
And all the toll-free numbers will get the number on their billing statements too, since they pay for the calls made. (I get detailed billing on my cell phone that lists every number called in or out, but that still doesn't get me CNID-blocked numbers.)
And unfortunately payphones are becoming increasingly rare.
Here's some fun thing to try: listen to the album "One". The first 10 songs or so (up until Yesterday, IIRC) are the *exact* *same* *thing*
And everything made by ZZ Top isn't?
sure they knew. the second system beep developed for the mac (after "sysbeep") was called "sosumi" - which is pronounced "so sue me". it was in direct reference to apple records and the whole "can't make music" clause.
But before it was named sosumi, it was named xylophone.
I thought Apple was taking a risk when they changed from the rainbow logo to the multiple solid color logos. The green apple on the green iMac was the first slap in the face to EMI/Apple Records. Though Apple doesn't use that same green apple for their iTunes store, they do color it green: green notes on the iTunes application, green folders for the service in iTunes, and a green menubar at the page to which AppleMusic.com redirects ("Apple Music? Oh, you must mean Apple Computer's iTunes page!" Talk about trademark confusion; such a redirect practically fosters it!)
Not that Apple Records has any prior right to the color green (or to edible green apples).
In any case, Jobs has a strange approach to calling Apple Records to the bargaining table.
Except this time, if Apple Computer doesn't want to cease and desist, they have to renegotiate the deal.
But isn't EMI an RIAA member? Who is really pulling the strings here? They may not want to renegotiate the contract and instead want to shut iTunes down.
OK, now to split hairs.
I popped open my dictionary and the rather lengthy definition of 'steal' includes "to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully"
May I split the hair further?
To appropriate is, "To take possession of or make use of exclusively for oneself, often without permission." So appropriation is still denying possession to another, still a word rooted in the physical world.
So IP infringement is still not stealing nor theft. It is only "infringement". Still illegal, but just not as buzzy of a word.
This is akin to someone setting up a fake checkout in a store. Who would be prosecuted in that case? I would imagine in any court in the land would prosecute the person who put up the fake checkout. She had no intent to break the law, and the website in question had intent to mislead her.
Remind me to check the ECCA (Exiting Customer Checkout Agreement) posted at the checkout lane the next time I buy something in case it says that some items I may have purchased may in fact be illegal to possess and that they disclaim all responsibility for selling me a region-free DVD player or Macrovision-immune VCR.
Because assuredly there was such an EULA for the P2P software the mother bought.
Not that I think for a moment that that 12 year old girl actually cost the RIAA $2,000 worth of music sales.
Well, they could have tried to buy out all the patents related to creating MP3 files and gotten their cut by charging ridiculous royalties for use of the MP3 format. Then repeat for the next format, and so on. And if even one wouldn't sell, then sue or buy legislation demanding royalties.
and making sure the song you get is from the album and not from the radio.
You may have touched on something there. If the song is from the radio, then the copying is (somewhat) defensible. It is legal to record songs off the radio. (Surely someone can cite the relevant law, if only to prove me wrong.)
And with the frequency of airplay it may even be possible to edit together a complete song without having to do a quick fade to eliminate DJ chatter.
As to trading songs online, the only one I want is Madonna's "What The Fuck Do You Think You're Doing?". That should be perfectly legal to trade, seeing as she had it put online intending it to be shared, yes?
you certainly couldn't get the source to those written in assembly language.
Maybe not, but you were running those programs on hardware that had a built-in disassembler. Can you imagine the ire of every software publishing company if someone started designing that in again?