I guess I can't say the same thing about MICROSOFT. Between DRM Schemes, lies, overpriced consoles, ripoffs of genuinely innovative technology, and just their brash arrogance in thinking that they can do whatever they hell they want and people will still purchase their crap because they're "MICROSOFT", I just start to get more irritated with them every time I see a MICROSOFT headline. I think they're in for a very rude awakening come the Xbox 360 release.
Well, I'll be... I couldn't agree more.
Other than the fact that SONY has, or has tried to, one up the level of "evil" in every single one of those categories, I can't say that I disagree with you. (And I capitalize SONY because that's how the SONY logo is, not to try and be a dick, FYI).
I also respectfully disagree with your analysis of the coming years in gaming (in saying that Microsoft and/or SONY will dominate). I happen to agree with Nintendo's strategy, and I think that we're going to find that the bulk of consumers don't want to try to save up paychecks for months in order to be able to afford the latest and greatest in gaming consoles.
It really bugs me to see all this hype around hi-def graphics. Most of the people doing the hyping don't even have hi-def TV's, and just because a game is displayed at a higher resolution doesn't make it any more realistic. When I watch my Twins play baseball on FSN each night, I don't sit there and think that the game looks any less realistic because it isn't in high definition. If a baseball game could look as real as a real baseball game, it doesn't matter whether or not it's in high-definition. It's still going to look good regardless.
Those are the first two words that came to my mind when I read the headline. THANK. GOD.
I guess somebody at Nintendo heard my pleas. I'm starting to love this company more and more by the day.
I guess I can't say the same thing about SONY. Between rootkits, lies, overpriced consoles, ripoffs of genuinely innovative technology, and just their brash arrogance in thinking that they can do whatever they hell they want and people will still purchase their crap because they're "SONY", I just start to get more irritated with them every time I see a SONY headline. I think they're in for a very rude awakening come the PS3 release.
Please don't get me wrong. I don't feel that there shouldn't be any regulations. I don't even feel that the FDA shouldn't oversee nanotechnologies that affect the products that enter our bodies. My point was that you can't blanket the entire tech and engineering sectors under the FDA as the article suggests. Now, it does seem silly to even assume that this is even the intentions, but it's all about common sense, and our government seems to have a distinct lack of it these days.
Well, to be fair, what department WOULD regulate nanotechnology? I mean it's quite new, and has applications in MANY areas, including foods and drugs. Someone's going to regulate it eventually. I mean, congress COULD directly pass laws to regulate it, but that seems far less friendly to industry.
Once you realize that "nanotechnology" plays a part in almost every part of your daily life, from the clothes you wear, to the wheels your car rides on, to the TV you watch, to, well... you get my drift.
Nanotechnology isn't some tangible thing to be regulated. It's a word that encompases a part of almost everything in our lives, because it is, simply put, technology on a small scale. If this article is accurate, this petition was submitted out of pure ignorance.
How about the FDA regulate... food and drugs? This is kind of broad, don'tcha think? I mean, jeez, "nanotechnology" encompases a whole load of things that have absolutely nothing to do with the FDA, including the equipment that I'm writing this message with, and the equipment you're reading this with. Hell, why not ask the FCC to regulate nanotechnology. It would make just as much sense. Or the Department of Homeland Security. Or any other government bureaucracy with interests to protect.
Or better yet, how about the government just stay the eff out of things for a change and let's see what happens, and deal with issues as they arise? That would be a novel idea, wouldn't it? The last thing I need is the FDA telling me I can't buy the latest and greatest geeky ballpoint pen because the ink might be poisonous - or, god forbid, get me high.
Of course, maybe TFA just failed to mention that they only wanted things that actually deal with F&D regulated. I guess neither would surprise me at this point.
It was the best I could come up with in the few minutes I had before leaving for work, though. 'Fraid I don't have a killer arsenal at my immediate disposal =/
Is this hack future-proof for unreleased games? Or will it only work with already-existing games? If this is only a "temporary" hack until Microsoft includes updated code in a future game release, then it doesn't serve much purpose for me.
Somebody "in the know" please provide some insight!
It protects you from the government censoring your opinion, but when your speech begins to infringe on the rights of others (harassment, libel, revealing of trade secrets, etc.) Oddly enough, I hold my first ammendment guaranteed right to free speech at a lot higher level than any trade secret.
Come to think of it, I don't know that the constitution guarantees me the right to trade secrets. Hmm.
Below is an email that I received, which pretty much confirms that they have been hacked.
----
You are being emailed because you are a user of BlueSecurity's well-known software "BlueFrog." http://www.bluesecurity.com/
Today, the BlueSecurity database became known to the worst spammers worldwide. Within 48 hours, the database will be published on the Internet, and your email address will be open to them all. After this, you will see the spam sent to your mailbox increase 10 - 20 fold.
BlueSecurity was illegally attacking email marketers, and doing so with your help. Many websites have been targeted and hit, including non-spam sites. BlueSecurity's software has been fully analyzed, and contains an abundance of malicious code. This includes: ability to send mass mail to users; the ability to attack websites with Distributed Denial of Service attack (DDoS); the ability to open hidden doors on any machine on which it is running; and a hidden auto-update code function, which can install anything on your computer and open it up to anyone.
BlueSecurity lists a USA address as their place of business, whereas their main office is in Tel Aviv. BlueSecurity is run by a few Russian-born Jews, who have previously been spamming themselves. When all is said and done, they will be able to run, hide and change their identities, leaving you to take the fall. YOU CANNOT PARTICIPATE IN ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES and expect to get away with it. This email ensures that you are well aware of the situation. Soon, you will be found guilty of computer crimes such as DDOS attacking of websites, conspiracy, and sending mass unsolicited bulk email messages for everything from viagra to porn, as long as you continue to run BlueFrog.
They do not take money for downloading their software, they do not take money for removing emails from their lists, and they have no visible revenue stream. What they DO have is 500,000 computers sitting there awaiting their next command. What are they doing now?
1. Using your computer to send spam ? 2. Using your computer to attack competitor websites? 3. Phishing through your files for your identity and banking information?
If you think you can merely change your email address and be safe while still running BlueFrog, you are in for a big surprise. This is just the beginning...
The cost of a signed driver will be barely visible as a line item on page 36. Insignificant compared to the other barriers to entry in this market : engineering, production, marketing and sales.
Besides the principle of the matter (Microsoft abusing its monopoly where it shouldn't), your "who cares" rant really only applies to $400 graphics cards. What about the $50 hard drive that Joe Blow wants to purchase because it's in his budget range? All of a sudden that $2 (or whatever, I pulled that number out of my butt) driver signing line item starts to add up.
I have more than tripled that uptime on Windows XP without disabling much of anything. XP really is a pretty stable OS, contrary to what Microsoft booboys what you to believe.
The biggest killer of my uptime for Windows XP has been the security updates that require a restart in order for them to be installed. If it wasn't for these, gawd knows how long my uptime would be.
Somebody please correct me if I have been mistaken.
I understand and respect Microsoft wanting to be able to ensure that as many copies of their software is legit as possible, but from what I understand, Vista is going to *require* signed drivers for it to work, which I would also assume plays some part in the Windows Genuine Advantage program. I would assume that it costs money and requires licensing and such to get a driver signed. Doesn't this qualify as a form of extortion and abuse of Microsoft's monopoly? By requiring signed drivers, they're effectively forcing everybody to pay them an "extortion fee" in order for other companies to be able to make hardware for users to run their systems. Doesn't this present problems for Microsoft? How can they be allowed to do this, considering their monopoly status?
I really don't like the idea of Microsoft forcing me into using signed drivers and such in order to take advantage of the software I legally purchased. There's countless reasons for this, but I would think that Microsoft's monopoly status alone would be enough to stop them from abusing these sorts of practices.
I think the key point in all this is that Microsoft is a convicted monopoly. You really can't say enough that this isn't about comparing Apple to Microsoft, or anybody else to Microsoft, because they're not being held to the same standards. From a shallower perspective, yeah, it seems unfair to hold Microsoft to different standards. However, when you understand *why* they are being held to different standards, this becomes much more clear.
As I've stated 100x over, though, I think *ALL* communications protocols should be required by law to be open standards. But somehow I don't really seem to get much of a backing on that position.
Is there really a point in trying to perfectly represent an analogy? They're different industries. The simple fact remains that Microsoft is a monopoly, and has historically tried to leverage that to try and keep a stranglehold on the market. Nobody's telling Microsoft to stop selling Windows, but just to tell us how to communicate back and forth between a Windows box and a non-Windows box. It really isn't that big of a deal, and I don't understand why Microsoft is dragging their feet on the matter so much. It's not like Windows has that much less market share today because HTML is an open standard. IMNSHO, all communications protocols should be legally required to be open standards.
The "highway" is the "communications protocols" that Microsoft doesn't want to open up. In other words, your BMW is Linux, and your Ford is Windows, and we all want to drive on the same "road", even though both "cars" have different components that aren't necessarily interchangable. But Microsoft is claiming they own the road.
By bombing Iran Bush and flagging the abortion and gay marriage issues the republicans will be assured of a win in the next election.
Nobody cares about the size of the govt. The republican party has a sure fire button to push with their electorate who are much more alarmed with homosexual "rights" then the size of the govt.
Don't kid yourself. I tend to say that a lot of "conservatives" don't really care about the whole gay rights issue as much as you want to believe. Abortion, however, is probably the single biggest line-drawing vote-swaying issue in the country.
Before anyone screams that they should be protected just remember if it was protected then using a network sniffer would become illegal! You can not have it both ways.
No, I don't think so. If I own all the computers on my network, then I am free to do with them as I please, including sniffing the network. Companies and businesses have always had these kinds of exemptions.
Have you ever tried Maxthon? It is easily the best IE replacement on the market, in my mind. I like it better than Firefox, Opera, or anything else I have tried. I have tried Avant as well, but it seems Maxthon is more full featured and less buggy. There's lots of plugins and stuff for it as well, though the only one I really use is a "find" plugin to replace the crappy default IE one (this one works similar to how FF's find works).
How is $3,750 an excessive settlement amount (not a fine), considering that a lawyer appearing in court on her behalf for one day incurs that fee?
Well, let's see. A few months ago, I got pulled over for speeding, and was also ticketed with no proof of insurance. Due to various issues, I ended up not getting this paid for and had a cop pop by my house one afternoon a few weeks ago. He told me that I either pay him $300 bail, or I go to jail. Of course, I chose the bail.
I ended up going to court, and all in all my costs came out to about $400-500, after everything was said and done.
Now, by speeding, I was putting somebody's life in danger, blah blah blah. We know the bit. And even after all the hassle I went through, I still ended up paying "only" ~$400-$500, which I felt was a bit obnoxious for what I felt wasn't really that big of a deal. After seeing thousands of dollars for "settlement" flying around here like it's candy, though, I think I have a new idea of what "excessive fines" really is.
Of course, not that any of that really matters - I believe all of this only applies to criminal cases, not civil cases anyway. But IANAL.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I'll be... I couldn't agree more.
Other than the fact that SONY has, or has tried to, one up the level of "evil" in every single one of those categories, I can't say that I disagree with you. (And I capitalize SONY because that's how the SONY logo is, not to try and be a dick, FYI).
I also respectfully disagree with your analysis of the coming years in gaming (in saying that Microsoft and/or SONY will dominate). I happen to agree with Nintendo's strategy, and I think that we're going to find that the bulk of consumers don't want to try to save up paychecks for months in order to be able to afford the latest and greatest in gaming consoles.
It really bugs me to see all this hype around hi-def graphics. Most of the people doing the hyping don't even have hi-def TV's, and just because a game is displayed at a higher resolution doesn't make it any more realistic. When I watch my Twins play baseball on FSN each night, I don't sit there and think that the game looks any less realistic because it isn't in high definition. If a baseball game could look as real as a real baseball game, it doesn't matter whether or not it's in high-definition. It's still going to look good regardless.
Great idea. I just finished doing exactly that.
Those are the first two words that came to my mind when I read the headline. THANK. GOD.
I guess somebody at Nintendo heard my pleas. I'm starting to love this company more and more by the day.
I guess I can't say the same thing about SONY. Between rootkits, lies, overpriced consoles, ripoffs of genuinely innovative technology, and just their brash arrogance in thinking that they can do whatever they hell they want and people will still purchase their crap because they're "SONY", I just start to get more irritated with them every time I see a SONY headline. I think they're in for a very rude awakening come the PS3 release.
Please don't get me wrong. I don't feel that there shouldn't be any regulations. I don't even feel that the FDA shouldn't oversee nanotechnologies that affect the products that enter our bodies. My point was that you can't blanket the entire tech and engineering sectors under the FDA as the article suggests. Now, it does seem silly to even assume that this is even the intentions, but it's all about common sense, and our government seems to have a distinct lack of it these days.
Once you realize that "nanotechnology" plays a part in almost every part of your daily life, from the clothes you wear, to the wheels your car rides on, to the TV you watch, to, well... you get my drift.
Nanotechnology isn't some tangible thing to be regulated. It's a word that encompases a part of almost everything in our lives, because it is, simply put, technology on a small scale. If this article is accurate, this petition was submitted out of pure ignorance.
How about the FDA regulate... food and drugs? This is kind of broad, don'tcha think? I mean, jeez, "nanotechnology" encompases a whole load of things that have absolutely nothing to do with the FDA, including the equipment that I'm writing this message with, and the equipment you're reading this with. Hell, why not ask the FCC to regulate nanotechnology. It would make just as much sense. Or the Department of Homeland Security. Or any other government bureaucracy with interests to protect.
Or better yet, how about the government just stay the eff out of things for a change and let's see what happens, and deal with issues as they arise? That would be a novel idea, wouldn't it? The last thing I need is the FDA telling me I can't buy the latest and greatest geeky ballpoint pen because the ink might be poisonous - or, god forbid, get me high.
Of course, maybe TFA just failed to mention that they only wanted things that actually deal with F&D regulated. I guess neither would surprise me at this point.
I, for one, welcome our new white overlords.
Yep, I'm the one on the left right!
I don't doubt it =(
It was the best I could come up with in the few minutes I had before leaving for work, though. 'Fraid I don't have a killer arsenal at my immediate disposal =/
Hey, you insensitive clod! I met MY wife on Slashdot, and I hardly think we're that bad of a couple! >=(
We're quite a happy couple, tyvm.
Is this hack future-proof for unreleased games? Or will it only work with already-existing games? If this is only a "temporary" hack until Microsoft includes updated code in a future game release, then it doesn't serve much purpose for me.
Somebody "in the know" please provide some insight!
It protects you from the government censoring your opinion, but when your speech begins to infringe on the rights of others (harassment, libel, revealing of trade secrets, etc.)
Oddly enough, I hold my first ammendment guaranteed right to free speech at a lot higher level than any trade secret.
Come to think of it, I don't know that the constitution guarantees me the right to trade secrets. Hmm.
Below is an email that I received, which pretty much confirms that they have been hacked.
----
You are being emailed because you are a user of BlueSecurity's well-known software "BlueFrog." http://www.bluesecurity.com/
Today, the BlueSecurity database became known to the worst spammers worldwide. Within 48 hours, the database will be published on the Internet, and your email address will be open to them all. After this, you will see the spam sent to your mailbox increase 10 - 20 fold.
BlueSecurity was illegally attacking email marketers, and doing so with your help. Many websites have been targeted and hit, including non-spam sites. BlueSecurity's software has been fully analyzed, and contains an abundance of malicious code. This includes: ability to send mass mail to users; the ability to attack websites with Distributed Denial of Service attack (DDoS); the ability to open hidden doors on any machine on which it is running; and a hidden auto-update code function, which can install anything on your computer and open it up to anyone.
BlueSecurity lists a USA address as their place of business, whereas their main office is in Tel Aviv. BlueSecurity is run by a few Russian-born Jews, who have previously been spamming themselves. When all is said and done, they will be able to run, hide and change their identities, leaving you to take the fall. YOU CANNOT PARTICIPATE IN ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES and expect to get away with it. This email ensures that you are well aware of the situation. Soon, you will be found guilty of computer crimes such as DDOS attacking of websites, conspiracy, and sending mass unsolicited bulk email messages for everything from viagra to porn, as long as you continue to run BlueFrog.
They do not take money for downloading their software, they do not take money for removing emails from their lists, and they have no visible revenue stream. What they DO have is 500,000 computers sitting there awaiting their next command. What are they doing now?
1. Using your computer to send spam ?
2. Using your computer to attack competitor websites?
3. Phishing through your files for your identity and banking information?
If you think you can merely change your email address and be safe while still running BlueFrog, you are in for a big surprise. This is just the beginning...
The Power Glove was *NOT* a Nintendo product.
This really can't be stated enough, and it is entirely relevent to this discussion, should any moderators notice.
Besides the principle of the matter (Microsoft abusing its monopoly where it shouldn't), your "who cares" rant really only applies to $400 graphics cards. What about the $50 hard drive that Joe Blow wants to purchase because it's in his budget range? All of a sudden that $2 (or whatever, I pulled that number out of my butt) driver signing line item starts to add up.
I have more than tripled that uptime on Windows XP without disabling much of anything. XP really is a pretty stable OS, contrary to what Microsoft booboys what you to believe.
The biggest killer of my uptime for Windows XP has been the security updates that require a restart in order for them to be installed. If it wasn't for these, gawd knows how long my uptime would be.
Somebody please correct me if I have been mistaken.
I understand and respect Microsoft wanting to be able to ensure that as many copies of their software is legit as possible, but from what I understand, Vista is going to *require* signed drivers for it to work, which I would also assume plays some part in the Windows Genuine Advantage program. I would assume that it costs money and requires licensing and such to get a driver signed. Doesn't this qualify as a form of extortion and abuse of Microsoft's monopoly? By requiring signed drivers, they're effectively forcing everybody to pay them an "extortion fee" in order for other companies to be able to make hardware for users to run their systems. Doesn't this present problems for Microsoft? How can they be allowed to do this, considering their monopoly status?
I really don't like the idea of Microsoft forcing me into using signed drivers and such in order to take advantage of the software I legally purchased. There's countless reasons for this, but I would think that Microsoft's monopoly status alone would be enough to stop them from abusing these sorts of practices.
Care to give us some more information?
I think the key point in all this is that Microsoft is a convicted monopoly. You really can't say enough that this isn't about comparing Apple to Microsoft, or anybody else to Microsoft, because they're not being held to the same standards. From a shallower perspective, yeah, it seems unfair to hold Microsoft to different standards. However, when you understand *why* they are being held to different standards, this becomes much more clear.
As I've stated 100x over, though, I think *ALL* communications protocols should be required by law to be open standards. But somehow I don't really seem to get much of a backing on that position.
Is there really a point in trying to perfectly represent an analogy? They're different industries. The simple fact remains that Microsoft is a monopoly, and has historically tried to leverage that to try and keep a stranglehold on the market. Nobody's telling Microsoft to stop selling Windows, but just to tell us how to communicate back and forth between a Windows box and a non-Windows box. It really isn't that big of a deal, and I don't understand why Microsoft is dragging their feet on the matter so much. It's not like Windows has that much less market share today because HTML is an open standard. IMNSHO, all communications protocols should be legally required to be open standards.
The "highway" is the "communications protocols" that Microsoft doesn't want to open up. In other words, your BMW is Linux, and your Ford is Windows, and we all want to drive on the same "road", even though both "cars" have different components that aren't necessarily interchangable. But Microsoft is claiming they own the road.
Make sense now?
Don't kid yourself. I tend to say that a lot of "conservatives" don't really care about the whole gay rights issue as much as you want to believe. Abortion, however, is probably the single biggest line-drawing vote-swaying issue in the country.
No, I don't think so. If I own all the computers on my network, then I am free to do with them as I please, including sniffing the network. Companies and businesses have always had these kinds of exemptions.
Have you ever tried Maxthon? It is easily the best IE replacement on the market, in my mind. I like it better than Firefox, Opera, or anything else I have tried. I have tried Avant as well, but it seems Maxthon is more full featured and less buggy. There's lots of plugins and stuff for it as well, though the only one I really use is a "find" plugin to replace the crappy default IE one (this one works similar to how FF's find works).
Well, let's see. A few months ago, I got pulled over for speeding, and was also ticketed with no proof of insurance. Due to various issues, I ended up not getting this paid for and had a cop pop by my house one afternoon a few weeks ago. He told me that I either pay him $300 bail, or I go to jail. Of course, I chose the bail.
I ended up going to court, and all in all my costs came out to about $400-500, after everything was said and done.
Now, by speeding, I was putting somebody's life in danger, blah blah blah. We know the bit. And even after all the hassle I went through, I still ended up paying "only" ~$400-$500, which I felt was a bit obnoxious for what I felt wasn't really that big of a deal. After seeing thousands of dollars for "settlement" flying around here like it's candy, though, I think I have a new idea of what "excessive fines" really is.
Of course, not that any of that really matters - I believe all of this only applies to criminal cases, not civil cases anyway. But IANAL.