I'm surprised that there aren't hacks available yet that would take care of that issue.
But at least Nintendo could have resolved this in a more user-friendly manner if they wanted to make it easy and still limit piracy. HASP modules is one solution. Each console equipped with a key allowing the user to move the key to another console in case there is an upgrade or a warranty problem.
On a note - whoever classed parent as "Troll" must be the real troll.
Anyway - for some reason we have been living through an era of too many years where accountability for defects in a product never have been applied to software, only on most other products around us.
Today there are tools available for ensuring code quality (functional quality, not cosmetic quality) - like FindBugs, so there is no excuse except the weak excuse of pressed time schedules, which often is caused by improper time management in the administration.
Of course - there are no tools available to understand the business model of a customer to be able to create a workflow in a software solution to suit that customer. That takes time and requires a study of work process. But that doesn't mean that it can't be done in a different way in a new software since it leaves room for improvement.
Of course - there will always be bugs and quirks, the important thing is to make sure that the bugs and quirks aren't fatal for the operation. Flexibility of an application also allows the users to handle the application in an unexpected manner which can cause problems. However a too strict application will cause more trouble.
Testing is important, but it's important to realize that unit testing can be a problem as well as a help. A minor software change can cause a cascade failure of the tests cases written causing a minor change of the core code to be a major overhaul of the test cases. This may of course be caused by bad overall design, or bad test case design. At some time in the lifecycle of a solution it's time to raise the level from the individual modules to the system as a whole. Module testing can in no way save an application from troubles caused by a bad overall design.
System verification is always late in a project, and since time is running short at the end of a project that phase is often pressed through in a hurry leaving design mistakes big as grand canyon open for the future. Performance testing is also something that is left to be resolved later. Of course - you can't fix all performance issues during development and system verification - just give it the best shot. It takes a lot of experience to design a system that scales well - however sometimes it contains some bottlenecks. The skill is to identify and hide the bottlenecks in the best possible way, usually by doing background processing unless a redesign can resolve the performance problem. However some performance problems are hard to resolve and others are expensive in the cost of man-hours and application complexity. An example would be a statistics module executed quarterly in an organization. That usually uses a predefined set of rules and is ideal for background execution.
An example of a bad solution when it comes to user experience is the fact that in Windows when you have mounted drive on a remote server over a slow connection it can slow down some operations incredibly since the computer "needs" to address and get a response from that drive before it permits you to continue a simple operation like a "Save As..." even though you didn't have that drive in mind.
Anyway - if everyone uses the same software it means that everyone knows how it works which also means that more people are able to crack any security measures involved. This also makes it easy for people making malicious software.
A more mixed environment causes other types of trouble. So what's necessary is to find a balance between standard software and custom softwares.
Just wait for the patent trolls to take their toll of free software and hardware platforms able to execute free software.
Anyway - most of the figures presented by BSA is vapor since they are assuming that people actually would have purchased the software they are running. Reality is that they wouldn't.
By having GSM as the only alternative the competition was a lot better since the customers weren't locked to the same carrier in the same way as they were in the US, and the GSM system uses the SIM cards which makes it easy for a user to switch terminal without problem. Even temporary terminal switch is no problem in the GSM system.
Unfortunately the situation in the US was to lock the customers to one telecom operator and make roaming hard for visitors from elsewhere by using different frequencies for the GSM networks that are available. These days most terminals are quad band to resolve that inconvenience.
I think that the big issue here is that there are patents provided for small details that often are obvious and can easily be re-invented almost as an afterthought by someone else.
Effectively the patent system is containing too much noise.
Then the patent holders of existing patents are often requesting settlements and license fees that aren't really reasonable, which causes some cases to end up in court before a settlement is made.
And as a general rule - the world is developing at a breakneck speed which means that patent processing is often slowing down the development. This is one reason why countries in East Asia are offering new versions and items almost every week. They aren't limited to the same level by their patent system as the companies in the US are.
Only catch is that a lot of products are sold in the US which means that now and then there are a call for a product ban due to some possible patent infringement. So even companies in East Asia needs to keep an eye on patents. However it also means that some products may appear earlier on other markets than on the US market - if at all - since they have to work out the patent maze first.
I may want to select Erlang as a competitor for writing a more secure web service, but it still depends on the overall design.
Security is on so many levels, one is buffer overflow, but another is verification that the data in a request is valid for the calling user.
Imagine a simple situation where you have a single database accessed by two departments. They may not see each others data but what's done is that the department is provided as a hidden input field that isn't validated against the user when the form is posted. So anyone with some skill may generate a faked request with the data for the other department. It may be sufficient to just hack the URL field in a web browser. And that is a pure design flaw that doesn't depend on the programming language used.
Assume that users will abuse the system in every conceivable fashion.
All languages have their own problems, risks and limitations.
If you select a language that has a lot of built in checks you will end up with bad performance as well as limitations in functionality. A language with few checks like C demands more of the programmer in order to verify that things don't go out of hand but it will also offer a lot more performance.
There are a lot of "funny" implementations that can be found, some relies on garbage collection as the ultimate savior others rely on absolute object-orientation and yet others rely on typing the variable as it is assigned (as often is done in Basic among other languages).
What really matters for security is not only the language - the language is just a basic tool like a screwdriver, the design is more important. And if you have tools that supports you in order to avoid mistakes - like Lint or Findbugs you are a few steps further into a secure solution. But if the overall design still is bad then it doesn't matter what tools you are using. A moron can use a finely tuned instrument as a hammer.
Then there are different causes for security problems. Bad basic design is one, but another is extensions and maintenance of a legacy system. Adding new features exposes functionality in the original system that wasn't intended to be exposed and may therefore lack security constraints. The security constraints may have been in the calling procedure of the original system, so it wasn't a problem there.
The major problem we actually are suffering from is that the world depends way too much on a single environment. And that environment is a kludge.
I'm not saying that Linux is much better - just somewhat better since it isn't as integrated as Windows.
As for losing the battle - this is a battle you only lose when you give up. As long as you persist you won't lose. You may get some beating now and then, but that's not a big issue since you can come back.
I agree - I have one in the belt that I hook another into.
The one in the belt is just spring-locking while the one with the keys do have a safety lock ring - and is supposed to be used for climbing. On this I have one or more key ring.
OK, rattles a bit when I'm walking, but keeps the pocket free and in good shape.
What I would like to see is a unified bus - right now we do have USB and SATA, both are very similar to use and behavior. If there were fewer types of interfaces in a computer then the number of components should go down and the hardware should be both cheaper and more reliable.
If you have problems with using other types of painkillers you may end up using heroin.
There are people that may be oversensitive to the common types or suffer from conditions/medications that makes the alternatives impossible.
As for using a Wii Fit - it may be that it's easier to get a record of doing the exercise correct. And if the Wii is a tenth of the price of a custom adapted equipment it's probably easier to subsidize the Wii than to go through all the custom adaptations needed for a customized unit.
Relate the price of a Wii fit to the cost wasted to adapt any kind of custom support device and you can figure out the reasoning from the doctor.
Motivation is fed by a combination of pressure, reward and recognition.
A bonus shall only be provided if the result has exceeded expectations and the company as a whole has had a positive revenue. Any other reason for a bonus is insufficient.
But in order to ship something in time you must also make sure that there are sufficient time available to complete the task. However the startup process for a project may sometimes eat up more than half of the available time that a project is expected to be completed in. That is one of the reasons why the end date of a project often is passed - the start date that was initially planned was delayed due to some red tape or absent accountant.
In my opinion the finance industry have to live with some minor differences in timing.
What this has really done now is to provide an idea of an opening for fraudulent behavior in the finance industry. Just imagine what would happen if someone was able to inject timing faults into the servers when their favorite transaction was executed.
Iceland would be even better since their weather is always on the cold side. And they have close access to geothermal energy too so you won't need to burn oil or use nuclear energy to power your computers.
Just hope that you haven't built your data center on top of a volcano.
In any case - one thing that usually is forgotten is that you can be able to cool data centers by using water in a river. The water is usually relatively cold even in hot summer days.
In any case - whenever I have encountered problems with Windows I have never been able to get any useful recovery by using the "Last known good configuration..." It has always been a reinstall if I weren't able to boot normally.
So I would say that the system recovery feature is erratic as it is at best.
I ditched the pay channels for my cable operator about half a year ago, and stick to the free to view channels. Luckily we only have three commercial breaks per hour except for the national channels who are paid through TV license (must always be paid if you have a TV receiver) and are completely free from commercials. At least the news on the national channels is in general rather good.
The only thing that I do miss is that I no longer am able to view Discovery and Formula 1 live, but I'm not willing to ditch my arm and leg to the cable company again.
Anyway - Internet contains more whenever I need it - and I can access the information whenever it suits me, not the other way around.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm surprised that there aren't hacks available yet that would take care of that issue.
But at least Nintendo could have resolved this in a more user-friendly manner if they wanted to make it easy and still limit piracy. HASP modules is one solution. Each console equipped with a key allowing the user to move the key to another console in case there is an upgrade or a warranty problem.
On a note - whoever classed parent as "Troll" must be the real troll.
Anyway - for some reason we have been living through an era of too many years where accountability for defects in a product never have been applied to software, only on most other products around us.
Today there are tools available for ensuring code quality (functional quality, not cosmetic quality) - like FindBugs, so there is no excuse except the weak excuse of pressed time schedules, which often is caused by improper time management in the administration.
Of course - there are no tools available to understand the business model of a customer to be able to create a workflow in a software solution to suit that customer. That takes time and requires a study of work process. But that doesn't mean that it can't be done in a different way in a new software since it leaves room for improvement.
Of course - there will always be bugs and quirks, the important thing is to make sure that the bugs and quirks aren't fatal for the operation. Flexibility of an application also allows the users to handle the application in an unexpected manner which can cause problems. However a too strict application will cause more trouble.
Testing is important, but it's important to realize that unit testing can be a problem as well as a help. A minor software change can cause a cascade failure of the tests cases written causing a minor change of the core code to be a major overhaul of the test cases. This may of course be caused by bad overall design, or bad test case design. At some time in the lifecycle of a solution it's time to raise the level from the individual modules to the system as a whole. Module testing can in no way save an application from troubles caused by a bad overall design.
System verification is always late in a project, and since time is running short at the end of a project that phase is often pressed through in a hurry leaving design mistakes big as grand canyon open for the future. Performance testing is also something that is left to be resolved later. Of course - you can't fix all performance issues during development and system verification - just give it the best shot. It takes a lot of experience to design a system that scales well - however sometimes it contains some bottlenecks. The skill is to identify and hide the bottlenecks in the best possible way, usually by doing background processing unless a redesign can resolve the performance problem. However some performance problems are hard to resolve and others are expensive in the cost of man-hours and application complexity. An example would be a statistics module executed quarterly in an organization. That usually uses a predefined set of rules and is ideal for background execution.
An example of a bad solution when it comes to user experience is the fact that in Windows when you have mounted drive on a remote server over a slow connection it can slow down some operations incredibly since the computer "needs" to address and get a response from that drive before it permits you to continue a simple operation like a "Save As..." even though you didn't have that drive in mind.
Already forgotten NSA?
In case you live in the US.
Anyway - if everyone uses the same software it means that everyone knows how it works which also means that more people are able to crack any security measures involved. This also makes it easy for people making malicious software.
A more mixed environment causes other types of trouble. So what's necessary is to find a balance between standard software and custom softwares.
Just wait for the patent trolls to take their toll of free software and hardware platforms able to execute free software.
Anyway - most of the figures presented by BSA is vapor since they are assuming that people actually would have purchased the software they are running. Reality is that they wouldn't.
The employer may be committing a GPL violation. You should bring that up with your employer and also inform them that it can cause a lot of badwill.
By having GSM as the only alternative the competition was a lot better since the customers weren't locked to the same carrier in the same way as they were in the US, and the GSM system uses the SIM cards which makes it easy for a user to switch terminal without problem. Even temporary terminal switch is no problem in the GSM system.
Unfortunately the situation in the US was to lock the customers to one telecom operator and make roaming hard for visitors from elsewhere by using different frequencies for the GSM networks that are available. These days most terminals are quad band to resolve that inconvenience.
I think that the big issue here is that there are patents provided for small details that often are obvious and can easily be re-invented almost as an afterthought by someone else.
Effectively the patent system is containing too much noise.
Then the patent holders of existing patents are often requesting settlements and license fees that aren't really reasonable, which causes some cases to end up in court before a settlement is made.
And as a general rule - the world is developing at a breakneck speed which means that patent processing is often slowing down the development. This is one reason why countries in East Asia are offering new versions and items almost every week. They aren't limited to the same level by their patent system as the companies in the US are.
Only catch is that a lot of products are sold in the US which means that now and then there are a call for a product ban due to some possible patent infringement. So even companies in East Asia needs to keep an eye on patents. However it also means that some products may appear earlier on other markets than on the US market - if at all - since they have to work out the patent maze first.
For some obscure reason it seems like they do a great effort of copying items instead of selling it as clones.
Maybe they have 3D copying machines!
I may want to select Erlang as a competitor for writing a more secure web service, but it still depends on the overall design.
Security is on so many levels, one is buffer overflow, but another is verification that the data in a request is valid for the calling user.
Imagine a simple situation where you have a single database accessed by two departments. They may not see each others data but what's done is that the department is provided as a hidden input field that isn't validated against the user when the form is posted. So anyone with some skill may generate a faked request with the data for the other department. It may be sufficient to just hack the URL field in a web browser. And that is a pure design flaw that doesn't depend on the programming language used.
Assume that users will abuse the system in every conceivable fashion.
All languages have their own problems, risks and limitations.
If you select a language that has a lot of built in checks you will end up with bad performance as well as limitations in functionality. A language with few checks like C demands more of the programmer in order to verify that things don't go out of hand but it will also offer a lot more performance.
There are a lot of "funny" implementations that can be found, some relies on garbage collection as the ultimate savior others rely on absolute object-orientation and yet others rely on typing the variable as it is assigned (as often is done in Basic among other languages).
What really matters for security is not only the language - the language is just a basic tool like a screwdriver, the design is more important. And if you have tools that supports you in order to avoid mistakes - like Lint or Findbugs you are a few steps further into a secure solution. But if the overall design still is bad then it doesn't matter what tools you are using. A moron can use a finely tuned instrument as a hammer.
Then there are different causes for security problems. Bad basic design is one, but another is extensions and maintenance of a legacy system. Adding new features exposes functionality in the original system that wasn't intended to be exposed and may therefore lack security constraints. The security constraints may have been in the calling procedure of the original system, so it wasn't a problem there.
The major problem we actually are suffering from is that the world depends way too much on a single environment. And that environment is a kludge.
I'm not saying that Linux is much better - just somewhat better since it isn't as integrated as Windows.
As for losing the battle - this is a battle you only lose when you give up. As long as you persist you won't lose. You may get some beating now and then, but that's not a big issue since you can come back.
I agree - I have one in the belt that I hook another into.
The one in the belt is just spring-locking while the one with the keys do have a safety lock ring - and is supposed to be used for climbing. On this I have one or more key ring.
OK, rattles a bit when I'm walking, but keeps the pocket free and in good shape.
What I would like to see is a unified bus - right now we do have USB and SATA, both are very similar to use and behavior. If there were fewer types of interfaces in a computer then the number of components should go down and the hardware should be both cheaper and more reliable.
I have used a Wiimote together with a Windows Mobile device to collect data in a mobile solution. Inspection of railroad ties.
1500 button presses per kilometer. And the Wiimote has a decent ergonomic design.
If you have problems with using other types of painkillers you may end up using heroin.
There are people that may be oversensitive to the common types or suffer from conditions/medications that makes the alternatives impossible.
As for using a Wii Fit - it may be that it's easier to get a record of doing the exercise correct. And if the Wii is a tenth of the price of a custom adapted equipment it's probably easier to subsidize the Wii than to go through all the custom adaptations needed for a customized unit.
Relate the price of a Wii fit to the cost wasted to adapt any kind of custom support device and you can figure out the reasoning from the doctor.
Motivation is fed by a combination of pressure, reward and recognition.
A bonus shall only be provided if the result has exceeded expectations and the company as a whole has had a positive revenue. Any other reason for a bonus is insufficient.
But in order to ship something in time you must also make sure that there are sufficient time available to complete the task. However the startup process for a project may sometimes eat up more than half of the available time that a project is expected to be completed in. That is one of the reasons why the end date of a project often is passed - the start date that was initially planned was delayed due to some red tape or absent accountant.
In my opinion the finance industry have to live with some minor differences in timing.
What this has really done now is to provide an idea of an opening for fraudulent behavior in the finance industry. Just imagine what would happen if someone was able to inject timing faults into the servers when their favorite transaction was executed.
And a lot of the sound energy is absorbed by the walls ending up as heat anyway.
Iceland would be even better since their weather is always on the cold side. And they have close access to geothermal energy too so you won't need to burn oil or use nuclear energy to power your computers.
Just hope that you haven't built your data center on top of a volcano.
In any case - one thing that usually is forgotten is that you can be able to cool data centers by using water in a river. The water is usually relatively cold even in hot summer days.
I didn't know that there is an Edison car out there. I know of the Tesla.
In any case - whenever I have encountered problems with Windows I have never been able to get any useful recovery by using the "Last known good configuration..." It has always been a reinstall if I weren't able to boot normally.
So I would say that the system recovery feature is erratic as it is at best.
Lost always had me lost anyway so I'll prefer the obnoxious attitude of House.
I ditched the pay channels for my cable operator about half a year ago, and stick to the free to view channels. Luckily we only have three commercial breaks per hour except for the national channels who are paid through TV license (must always be paid if you have a TV receiver) and are completely free from commercials. At least the news on the national channels is in general rather good.
The only thing that I do miss is that I no longer am able to view Discovery and Formula 1 live, but I'm not willing to ditch my arm and leg to the cable company again.
Anyway - Internet contains more whenever I need it - and I can access the information whenever it suits me, not the other way around.
If you can combine computer gaming with physical activities you may end up with an interesting camp. Both at the same time could be really good.
Use laser tag vests, GPS and a lot of other stuff and you may get an exercise worth it.
Correction - a true fanboy uses the Macintosh Portable.