"I read some interesting conspiracy theories on a board somewhere shortly after the keynote."
I have a Johhny Carson "Carnack" prediction to make: When Apple rolls out their first Intel-based products, not only will they use the Intel processor, but also the Intel chipset AND the integrated Intel video. It will also make substantial use of the Intel hardware DRM, which requires both the Intel processor and chipset.
Apple will rely upon fat binaries to support both processor architectures, and an Apple-branded WINE to run many Windows applications. Microsoft will update their VirtualPC product in order to run their stand-alone Windows OS, but they may or may not offer fat binaries for their Office Suite. These are the "carrot and stick" issues that Microsoft will use to force Apple to adopt Intel's draconian embedded DRM.
Intel DRM will be used not only to keep the RIAA and the MPAA happy, but also Microsoft. Windows OS will not run natively on Apple's new X86 kit, but only through VirtualPC. A side benefit (for Microsoft) will be that the Intel DRM will prohibit the ability to dual boot Apple's new kit into LINUX (or Net/Open-BSD) without MSFT's (VirtualPC) "blessing".
Apple has made a deal with two devils (Intel and Microsoft) in order to increase their hardware profit margins (and hopefully their market share.) Do not expect OS X to ever run on commodity Intel hardware like Dell or HP, in competition with Microsoft's OS -- not so long as Apple needs MSFT's Office Suite to compete in the corporate world. And the Intel/Microsoft "Palladium" DRM is IMHO far too high a price to pay for a 3 GHz 32-bit Apple laptop.
Well, okay, you are certainly right. Yet another argument could be made, however, that as Apple starts making the switch from PPC to Intel, they are also dropping back from 64-bit to 32-bit processors. Apple is surrendering to (misguided) market pressure that processor clock speed is the only thing (beyond running OS X) that counts (especially in those laptop computers.)
Apple's move toward dual G5s on the current architecture is a good move -- an even better one would be to switch to dual core G5s as they become available. Somehow I think that Apple is merely trying to "burn up" their contractural quota of G5s from IBM before making the switch to Intel crap.
If I were bound and determined to have a 64-bit laptop, I definitely would not wait for Intel to develop a 3 GHz low power Itanium for Apple. Presuming that money is no object, I could go out and buy a dual processor UltraSPARC laptop from Tadpole. It also will not run at 3 GHz, and is practically chained to mains power.
Apple wants cheaper processor/chipsets for better profit margins, and they will use Intel hardware DRM to limit where OS X will run. It will also prevent GNU/linux or Net/OpenBSD from running on their new kit. Those limitations do not now exist for the Apple G4/G5 platform, which it a bonus as far as I am concerned.
(1) how much additional revenue could be attained by selling this ancillary database on the open market ala Checkpoint Solutions,
(2) how far they could push the limits of corporate criminal liability,
(3) how tolerant the credit card issuers, their customers, would be to violations of their contractual obligations,
(4) how tolerant Federal lawmakers and prosecutors would be toward this company's gross financial malfeasance, or
(5) how big a contract they could get with Dubya's Department of Homeland Security for their data being included in the MATRIX program.
This slimey excuse for a corporation deserves to be legislated, prosecuted, and sued out of existance. The corporate officers need to spend some "quality time" breaking big rocks into small ones in a Federal prison, all while getting their proverbial "cherries" broken daily by their cellmates.
There is absolutely no excuse that the credit card issuers can validly make for continuing to do any further business with these asshats.
While the parent poster does provide some valid arguments in favor of retaining data on hardcopy, the real problem is data overload -- how do you separate the "wheat from the chaff"?
Either CD/DVD media is going to achieve new levels of longevity, or there is going to be one hell of a run on vellum!
"Too often media focusses on the latter, and we wring our hands about the deaths of 5 in location X, while ignoring the deaths of 5 million in location Y."
I am not sure who said it better, but there is a quote that rings true "The death of an individual is a tragedy, but the death of thousands is a statistic."
President Truman undoubtedly saved many Allied soldiers lives that would have been lost in an invasion of Japan's home islands. Gen. MacArthur was always concerned about his place in history. His decision to censor this story was influenced by the knowledge that it might effect his ability to govern Japan during US occupation.
Apple has no intention of letting their new x86 platform run anything but OS X. They will be using both an Intel processor AND chipset with hard-wired DRM that will limit their hardware to their OS. And newer releases of OS X will, most assuredly, be intimitely tied to Intel DRM -- it will not run on just any generic PC box (much as Dell might wish otherwise).
The real impact for GNU/linux users is that their OS of choice will no longer run on Apple hardware (nor NetBSD or OpenBSD, for that matter).
(I know, I know! It's a world turned upside down! But that is what the future truly looks like...)
Come one, come all! See the amazing (NT) new technology being developed by MSFT. Rely no more on even our "Most Secure OS Yet(TM)" without also using Palladium. Your computer will not permit you to make a mistake and load a virus, worm, trojan, or spyware. We trust our "Trusted Computing Environment" and so should you. "You must give up some of your rights (on your computer) if you truly want to be safe." Everyone from Dubya to Ashcroft to Bill Gates is on the same page on this one. Just trust us - we know what's best for you.
Oops! Wrong alternate universe! Better still, forget about all that closed source security software and switch to F/OSS. You still can forget the (current generation) PC if you really want to -- go ahead and dig out that old P-III 800 MHz box from the basement and put SE Linux on it, or perhaps OpenBSD. Save money! Amaze your friends! Frustrate your enemies! Get on the bandwagon now.
for employment with a fresh Masters in CS. For instance:
(1) want to travel abroad, learn new cultures,
meet new people, and kill them -- join the
military.
(2) want to travel abroad, learn new cultures,
meet new people, and learn how they live on
$200 per week -- get recruited by our new
offshore outsourcing overlords.
(3) develop good people skills, some dexterity,
and excellent short term memory -- and find
a better paying job as a waiter in a good
restaurant.
(4) for long term onshore employment, select from
either (a) or (b)
(a) go to law school, get your degree, pass
the bar exam and work as an IP lawyer
(b) find job in the construction trades, learn
Spanish, become a journeyman tradesman
(5) for short term onshore employment, take your
fresh Masters degree to any (pick one) major
employer. Count on being replaced (L1-A or
H1-B visa holder) as soon as you have learned
enough to qualify for mid-level salary. Then
find new entry level job, rinse, repeat.
(6) if you are not burdeoned with massive student
aid debt, go for the "manager trainee" job
at Mickey Dees -- it is stable employment.
Interplanetary travelers using solar sails will be able to "tack" in space, providing that their "keel (or daggerboard)" can "dig into" the dark matter of space.
I can almost picture a swarm of robotic "sailors" keeping the sail in proper "trim".
Of course, with a top speed of 0.1c, any trip will be a rather long one. Once they have reached their destination, hopefully their "sea anchor" will function properly.
But since the Dubya regime can't kill NASA, the administration intends to usurp its mission -- civilian space exploration and the answers to questions of pure science. Dubya replaced one neo-con lacky NASA administrator with another from USAF Space Command. This administration and the US military-industrial complex wants an autonomous robotic military space presence, and developing those capabilities takes deep pockets. Since the US military is so heavily invested in the Iraq (oil) war, it makes sense to the regime to re-task NASA for those robotic development funds. NASA's shrinking civlian space mission can cloak the military-industrial complex's true cost through dual-use technology development for robotic repair and construction on high profile missions like Hubble Space Telescope and the ISS. USAF Space Command will have their autonomous robotic satellite killers long before the ISS sees any autonomous construction robots.
The Dubya regime and its neo-con allies in Congress really have a different plan -- and it is not about preventing new domestic terrorist attacks. (Me puts on tin foil hat.) Ask yourself why the administration is fixated upon violating everyones' privacy instead of tightening up security on air cargo, our seaports, our porous borders, and the 28 million illegal aliens currently in our country. Hint: It's the very same reason why the Senate Democrats had their servers compromised by GOP hackers, and sensitive emails released to the press. Analysis: The more you know about what your political opposition is thinking and planning, the easier it is to circumvent their actions. And with any luck, you might just find some means to exert leverage (eg. blackmail) in order to neutralize the political opposition. This kind of stuff has been going on since the "black bag jobs" of Hoover's FBI. Remember Nixon's CREEP "black bag jobs" at the Watergate? Well, it was illegal as hell back then, but not anymore -- not since the US Patriot Act (I). Conclusion: It is all about seizing political power, absolute political power, and hanging onto it by any means necessary.
Too bad MSFT really, really doesn't like GPL, which is a damn sight less viral than their "Shared Source" license. A very nice little package called "libsafe" handles stack errors on linux pretty nicely. A Windows libsafe DLL that gets called early (and often) would go a long way toward finding most of those pesky vulnerabilities.
Of course, MSFT could also port their entire OS code over to Sun Java and have everything run in a java sandbox, except for Sun's Community Source license.
If MSFT's Longhorn makes use of OS vrtualization in order to (nearly) eliminate BSODs, does that really mean the the coding errors have been fixed? Or that "the tree falling in the woods" really doesn't (illogically) "make any sound"?
I really don't see how a "Blue Hat" conference will make a whit of difference in MSFT's coding practices, any more than Bill Gatus's pledge that "Security is Job One!" did.
"Aren't U.S. citizens supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?"
Well, yes, but only if you consider the Magna Carta and over 300 years of English parlimentary monarchy as part of the basis for the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. The US Patriot Act (I) SHREDDED all of that, in favor of the French judicial system, under which a person is presumed guilty until proven innocent.
The Dubya regime has turned American jurisprudence on its ear. Our government is now ironic and oxymoronic, both at the very same time. Examples are too numerous to list, but anyone who takes the time to study current events (and not only as represented by the USA's TV media) and has not succumbed to the SOMA of government propaganda has the scorecard.
If "our" representatives in the Congress actually believed in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights and had "a pair", they would tell the Dubya regime to "stuff it" and legislate the US Patriot Act (I) out of existence. Unfortunately, our Congress is filled with a bunch of yahoo neo-cons, with the rest too cowed (or intimidated) to put up much of a fight. It's amazing what "wrapping himself in a flag" and stating "If you are not with me, you are against me (and therefore for the terrorists)". (Puts on tin foil hat) That, and some anthrax-laced letters specifically targeting opposition leadership in the press and Congress that, by shear coincidence was an exact DNA match for the Ames anthrax strain stored at the US Army's bio-weapons center at Ft. Detrick Md. (Takes off the tin foil hat).
The last time I checked, every Congress-critter, Cabinet level Executive branch official, President and Vice President swore and oath of office that included "to uphold and protect the Constitution". Of course, the Constitution also includes provisions for oversight of the Executive branch by the Legislative branch, as well as Congress - not the President - having the authority to declare war. Effectively, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights was SHREDDED after 9/11/2001 without the benefit of an obituary, a funeral, or a wake.
Far too few people seem to care to do anything about it, since they are now too busy trying to keep their jobs, food on the table, and Fear Factor/MTV on the television. Pretty sad, really.
"With the eye-candy disabled, XP is just a more up-to-date Win2K - just as stable/unstable really."
Would that that were true, but up until SP2 XP has been far more vulnerable to exploits than Win2K. While the "look and feel" of XP can be rolled back to appear more like Win2K, under the covers there are differences. Also, MS changed the license from Win2K to WinXP -- one of the things that has put me off from any future MS OS upgrade.
Considering that MS is inept with the release of any new OS that does not have more vulnerabilities than its predecessor. Many will wait until the first Service Pack comes out for Longhorn just as a matter of security and stability. Add in the new hardware requirements, I would be surprised to see many businesses make the change from Win2K to Longhorn before there is a compelling need. The mere fact that MS is sunsetting support for Win2K will not be reason enough -- not so long as security patches continue to be made available.
Besides, many of the most attractive new features originally announced for Longhorn have been stripped out in order for MS to meet their self-imposed deadline/release date. If I were MS, I would be worried that this extended transition period will make them vulnerable to customers fleeing to alternative IT solutions, like Novell. Avoiding the desktop hardware upgrade cycle might pay for whatever pain is endured with the switch.
I would go one step further along in this (slightly OT) thread: the George W. Bush regime has placed themselves (and the USA itself) at great longterm risk in their abandonment of the Geneva Accords. They have equated the official militia of the former Islamic Republic of Afghanistan with the Wahhabist terrorist group Al Queda. The United Nations, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Malaysia, People's Republic of China and others all recognised the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. The USA had informal commercial relations (related to oil) with the Taliban government both before and after the US embassy bombings in Africa and the bombing of the USS Cole. The Dubya regime's convenient abandonment of international treaties can be underlined by yet another instance -- harboring a self-acknowledged terrorist who killed many innocent people in the bombing of a commercial airliner and multiple bombings of hotels.
Apparently, the litmus test of claiming innocent civilian lives as a definition of terrorism does not compute within the Bush administration, while copyright infringment and violating the DMCA does. It would appear that the moral "high ground" claimed by this administration is an illusion.
I personally find the principles and machinations of the Taliban government reprehensible, but that does not legally justify the lumping together of the Taliban militia and Al Queda as terrorists. Those members of the Taliban militia captured should be granted POW status under the Geneva Accords, as defined by international law. On the other hand, captured Al Queda terrorists deserve immediate martyrdoom by being burned alive.
The basic premise the parent poster is trying to make is that personal privacy trumps (or should) the government's right to know who you are. (I don't mean to provide flamebait here, but just exactly who the fuck are you and where did you come from? Can you prove it?)
You may (or may not) pay taxes to support your government, and the services that they provide to its citizens. No government nor the taxpayers it supports should be required to furnish services to illegal aliens. No government nor the citizens they represent should be obligated to permit illegal aliens representation in the government by granting them the right to vote.
An illegal alien is the equivalent of a burgler who breaks into your home, and then claims squatter's rights in order to remain there. The burgler/squatter is already a criminal in the eyes of the law (if not the homeowner) -- he/she is using your phone, electricity, water, etcetra and is now using your credit card to order pizza and flashy new clothes.
While identity theft is a mechanism criminals use to commit banking fraud, it is also a mechanism used to cloak the identity of illegal aliens. Persons who have already broken (numerous) laws to reside in this country will not hesitate to break additional laws in order to live in a fashion they have become accustomed to, including banking fraud.
The USA recently passed the RealID Act in order to address the large variance in documentation required by the 50 states to obtain drivers licenses, a primary form of identity here. Only one state, Arizona, has actually passed legislation that attempts to stike illegal aliens from the voter registration lists. In virtually every other state, illegal aliens who have established "good cover" have no difficulty in voting -- a right reserved to citizens alone. With that vote comes political power and a voicc in government that is drowning out the voices and concerns of genuine citizens.
The British (and the larger EU generally) are rejecting the EU Constitution in part over the issues of open borders and illegal immigration. These same issues will prove to be the major sticking point in the entry of Turkey, a NATO member, into the EU -- I suspect that it will never happen so long as Islamic fundamentalist fervor (and the terrorism it breeds) sweeps across the Middle East and Mediterranean.
A biometric National ID implimentation may have some flaws. Rather than take the ultimate libertarian/anarchist position of absolute opposition, why not provide some insight and positive feedback to make such an ID system better? As the world continues to shrink in size due to trade and travel, National IDs will become the norm everywhere. It can no more be stopped than the tides or globalization.
Apple will make use of Intel's newly announced CPU and CHIPSET. The reason is simple: embedded DRM to limit Apple's next generation x86 "iiMacs" from running any other OS, and prohibiting any commodity Wintel box from running an x86 OS X. Apple is in the software and HARDWARE business, and intends to stay there.
Do not expect Apple's new x86 hardware to be as cheap as the commodity Wintel crap that is in the market today. But do expect that Apple's profit margins to increase, substantially.
The basic problem with switching to Intel hardware is one of marketing -- it invites direct comparison between the commodity Wintel market and whatever Apple offers. SGI tried (spectacularly) with their x86 based Visual Workstations, and failed. Neither HP (including Compaq) nor Dell will ever sell as many workstation class computers as they have with their commodity systems. And competing in the swampland of commodity priced Intel boxes where there is no profit margin is not a (longterm) viable business venture.
I seriously doubt this, for one simple reason: anyone that uses encryption would automagically be on the "list".
The more likely scenarios would be (1) nonsensical SPAM messages with a hidden message within, (2) a message steganographically embedded within images posted to a public forum, or (3) some pre-arranged and totally innocent message that has been assigned some other meaning.
The use of encryption for email messages represents such a small proportion of the total number of emails sent that it would automatically trigger further investigation by the authorities.
(That being said, however, I would propose that the vast majority of email users SHOULD engage in the use of strong (4096 bit RSA?) encryption for all their emails in order to protest against the further encroachment of "big brother" into the privacy of their citizens. All that would be needed is some sort of across-the-web agreement upon a start date, encryption s/w used, and key length. Unfortunately, very little is known about just how extensive the power of "big brother" is to break codes, or which encryption s/w doesn't already have secret backdoors for "big brother's use.)
Basically, it's "damned if you do, and damned if you don't (use encryption, use flagged words, etc.)
The only way out of this scenario (, and I would advise it ONLY if you are truly up to no good,) is to register as a Republican and make substantial financial contributions to the GOP. Only by such means can you escape detection. As a positive side note, you might also obtain additional "cover" when asked to serve in the administration of the regime currently in power.
For everyone else out there, well, you're just screwed.
"If any of the folks who run slashdot can score an interview with him, I have a TON of questions I would like the head of NASA to address."
That's a rather vague quantity: imperial or metric TON? short or long TON? Could you please quantify the number of questions on other terms, like MASS?
The real problem is that absolutely no one in leadership positions within the Dubya regime are authorized to answer any questions not submitted in advance and vetted for neo-con political correctness. Anyone who watches US news with a critical eye knows that press interviews are only used in the current regime to propagandise the "party line".
Do not expect either candor or nonpartisanship from the new NASA Director Griffin
"..., I see Apple using Dell/HP/Lenovo to build their hardware."
Either Gateway, or whoever the fuck Wal-Mart's OEM is.
With all of the NRE (Nonrecurring Engineering) expenses Apple must endure to incorporate Intel processor/chipset/DRM while still trying to compete with the commodity market bottom feeders, sacrifices (like quality) will have to be made. Apple cannot afford to piss off both their loyal users AND their shareholders, so a rapid increase in market share must prevail. No doubt, lackluster Mac Mini sales convinced Apple management that their price point was still too high. Whoever told Steve Jobs that Apple could sell just as many Mac Minis as iPods is assuredly no longer in Apple's employ.
Actually, private sector airport security is where all this "anti-terrorism" business started to begin with. It's called "lowest cost bidder" contracting, and unfortunately the DHS (and the Dubya regime) has adopted it already for airport screening.
The Dubya regime and the neo-con allies in Congress are hard at work making private contactor airport security a reality again. They decided (1) that they don't want 60,000 new Federal workers joining Federal unions, (2) that they can't do any better hiring security workers (for what they are willing to pay them) than private contractors can, and (3) they are really only interested in the appearance of better airport security.
The people who service the planes on the tarmack, including the baggage handlers, do not pass through the same security screening that the airline passengers do. The bulk of air cargo never passes through any sort of screening process, just like our seaport cargo doesn't get screened.
A local TV news organization (Metro DC) went out to Dulles International Airport on the heels of a group of FAA security investigators in April or May of 2001. DIA's private airport security had previosly failed FAA security inspections. Someone (within FAA?) tipped off Dulles Airport regarding the "surprise" inspection, and airport security officers refused (on TV) to allow FAA inspectors onto airport property. A short few months later, and a commercial aircraft was hijacked from Dulles airport and flown into the Pentagon. That is the value of private airport security.
The biggest problem with the DHS under the Dubya regime is that the expansion of the Federal workforce is less desirable than the benefit of reducing terror threats. Similar problems can be seen with US Border Patrol, US Customs (seaports), and the TSA -- spending big bucks on flashy high technology equipment (that often doesn't work) is preferable to spending big bucks long term on more Federal employees. I have yet to see a buried seismic sensor or a UAV actually apprehend an unknown terrorist crossing our borders or slipping out of a cargo container -- that takes "boots on the ground".
And that is why I believe the DHS is an oxymoron. Having the DHS spend $6 Billion (plus) USD on a multiyear software contract with Microsoft for their server and desktop OSes merely confirms that conviction. And their inability to facilitate an IT strategy of redundency and viable backups underlines the problem.
These are not so much problems that can be better addressed by the private sector as they are problems with the corrupt regime currently in power.
Slashdot Mirror
"I read some interesting conspiracy theories on a board somewhere shortly after the keynote."
I have a Johhny Carson "Carnack" prediction to make:
When Apple rolls out their first Intel-based products, not only will they use the Intel processor, but also the Intel chipset AND the integrated Intel video. It will also make substantial use of the Intel hardware DRM, which requires both the Intel processor and chipset.
Apple will rely upon fat binaries to support both processor architectures, and an Apple-branded WINE to run many Windows applications. Microsoft will update their VirtualPC product in order to run their stand-alone Windows OS, but they may or may not offer fat binaries for their Office Suite. These are the "carrot and stick" issues that Microsoft will use to force Apple to adopt Intel's draconian embedded DRM.
Intel DRM will be used not only to keep the RIAA and the MPAA happy, but also Microsoft. Windows OS will not run natively on Apple's new X86 kit, but only through VirtualPC. A side benefit (for Microsoft) will be that the Intel DRM will prohibit the ability to dual boot Apple's new kit into LINUX (or Net/Open-BSD) without MSFT's (VirtualPC) "blessing".
Apple has made a deal with two devils (Intel and Microsoft) in order to increase their hardware profit margins (and hopefully their market share.) Do not expect OS X to ever run on commodity Intel hardware like Dell or HP, in competition with Microsoft's OS -- not so long as Apple needs MSFT's Office Suite to compete in the corporate world. And the Intel/Microsoft "Palladium" DRM is IMHO far too high a price to pay for a 3 GHz 32-bit Apple laptop.
Of course, YMMV.
"If people want it, they will buy it."
Well, okay, you are certainly right. Yet another argument could be made, however, that as Apple starts making the switch from PPC to Intel, they are also dropping back from 64-bit to 32-bit processors. Apple is surrendering to (misguided) market pressure that processor clock speed is the only thing (beyond running OS X) that counts (especially in those laptop computers.)
Apple's move toward dual G5s on the current architecture is a good move -- an even better one would be to switch to dual core G5s as they become available. Somehow I think that Apple is merely trying to "burn up" their contractural quota of G5s from IBM before making the switch to Intel crap.
If I were bound and determined to have a 64-bit laptop, I definitely would not wait for Intel to develop a 3 GHz low power Itanium for Apple. Presuming that money is no object, I could go out and buy a dual processor UltraSPARC laptop from Tadpole. It also will not run at 3 GHz, and is practically chained to mains power.
Apple wants cheaper processor/chipsets for better profit margins, and they will use Intel hardware DRM to limit where OS X will run. It will also prevent GNU/linux or Net/OpenBSD from running on their new kit. Those limitations do not now exist for the Apple G4/G5 platform, which it a bonus as far as I am concerned.
CardSystems Solutions was researching:
(1) how much additional revenue could be attained by selling this ancillary database on the open market ala Checkpoint Solutions,
(2) how far they could push the limits of corporate criminal liability,
(3) how tolerant the credit card issuers, their customers, would be to violations of their contractual obligations,
(4) how tolerant Federal lawmakers and prosecutors would be toward this company's gross financial malfeasance, or
(5) how big a contract they could get with Dubya's Department of Homeland Security for their data being included in the MATRIX program.
This slimey excuse for a corporation deserves to be legislated, prosecuted, and sued out of existance. The corporate officers need to spend some "quality time" breaking big rocks into small ones in a Federal prison, all while getting their proverbial "cherries" broken daily by their cellmates.
There is absolutely no excuse that the credit card issuers can validly make for continuing to do any further business with these asshats.
While the parent poster does provide some valid
arguments in favor of retaining data on hardcopy,
the real problem is data overload -- how do you
separate the "wheat from the chaff"?
Either CD/DVD media is going to achieve new levels
of longevity, or there is going to be one hell of
a run on vellum!
"Too often media focusses on the latter, and we wring our hands about the deaths of 5 in location X, while ignoring the deaths of 5 million in location Y."
I am not sure who said it better, but there is a
quote that rings true "The death of an individual
is a tragedy, but the death of thousands is a
statistic."
President Truman undoubtedly saved many Allied
soldiers lives that would have been lost in an
invasion of Japan's home islands. Gen. MacArthur
was always concerned about his place in history.
His decision to censor this story was influenced
by the knowledge that it might effect his ability
to govern Japan during US occupation.
Mod this parent up.
The original article is bollocks, and pure FUD.
Apple has no intention of letting their new x86
platform run anything but OS X. They will be
using both an Intel processor AND chipset with
hard-wired DRM that will limit their hardware to
their OS. And newer releases of OS X will, most
assuredly, be intimitely tied to Intel DRM -- it
will not run on just any generic PC box (much as
Dell might wish otherwise).
The real impact for GNU/linux users is that their
OS of choice will no longer run on Apple hardware
(nor NetBSD or OpenBSD, for that matter).
(I know, I know! It's a world turned upside down!
But that is what the future truly looks like...)
Or, at least, don't use the current version PC.
Come one, come all! See the amazing (NT) new
technology being developed by MSFT. Rely no more
on even our "Most Secure OS Yet(TM)" without also
using Palladium. Your computer will not permit
you to make a mistake and load a virus, worm,
trojan, or spyware. We trust our "Trusted Computing
Environment" and so should you. "You must give up
some of your rights (on your computer) if you truly
want to be safe." Everyone from Dubya to Ashcroft
to Bill Gates is on the same page on this one.
Just trust us - we know what's best for you.
Oops! Wrong alternate universe!
Better still, forget about all that closed source
security software and switch to F/OSS. You still
can forget the (current generation) PC if you really
want to -- go ahead and dig out that old P-III 800
MHz box from the basement and put SE Linux on it,
or perhaps OpenBSD. Save money! Amaze your friends!
Frustrate your enemies! Get on the bandwagon now.
for employment with a fresh Masters in CS. For
instance:
(1) want to travel abroad, learn new cultures,
meet new people, and kill them -- join the
military.
(2) want to travel abroad, learn new cultures,
meet new people, and learn how they live on
$200 per week -- get recruited by our new
offshore outsourcing overlords.
(3) develop good people skills, some dexterity,
and excellent short term memory -- and find
a better paying job as a waiter in a good
restaurant.
(4) for long term onshore employment, select from
either (a) or (b)
(a) go to law school, get your degree, pass
the bar exam and work as an IP lawyer
(b) find job in the construction trades, learn
Spanish, become a journeyman tradesman
(5) for short term onshore employment, take your
fresh Masters degree to any (pick one) major
employer. Count on being replaced (L1-A or
H1-B visa holder) as soon as you have learned
enough to qualify for mid-level salary. Then
find new entry level job, rinse, repeat.
(6) if you are not burdeoned with massive student
aid debt, go for the "manager trainee" job
at Mickey Dees -- it is stable employment.
Interplanetary travelers using solar sails will
be able to "tack" in space, providing that their
"keel (or daggerboard)" can "dig into" the dark
matter of space.
I can almost picture a swarm of robotic "sailors"
keeping the sail in proper "trim".
Of course, with a top speed of 0.1c, any trip
will be a rather long one. Once they have reached
their destination, hopefully their "sea anchor"
will function properly.
Spot on target!
But since the Dubya regime can't kill NASA, the
administration intends to usurp its mission --
civilian space exploration and the answers to
questions of pure science. Dubya replaced one
neo-con lacky NASA administrator with another
from USAF Space Command. This administration
and the US military-industrial complex wants an
autonomous robotic military space presence, and
developing those capabilities takes deep pockets.
Since the US military is so heavily invested in
the Iraq (oil) war, it makes sense to the regime
to re-task NASA for those robotic development
funds. NASA's shrinking civlian space mission
can cloak the military-industrial complex's true
cost through dual-use technology development for
robotic repair and construction on high profile
missions like Hubble Space Telescope and the ISS.
USAF Space Command will have their autonomous
robotic satellite killers long before the ISS
sees any autonomous construction robots.
The Dubya regime and its neo-con allies in Congress really have a different plan -- and it is not about preventing new domestic terrorist attacks. (Me puts on tin foil hat.)
Ask yourself why the administration is fixated upon violating everyones' privacy instead of tightening up security on air cargo, our seaports, our porous borders, and the 28 million illegal aliens currently in our country.
Hint: It's the very same reason why the Senate Democrats had their servers compromised by GOP hackers, and sensitive emails released to the press.
Analysis: The more you know about what your political opposition is thinking and planning, the easier it is to circumvent their actions. And with any luck, you might just find some means to exert leverage (eg. blackmail) in order to neutralize the political opposition. This kind of stuff has been going on since the "black bag jobs" of Hoover's FBI. Remember Nixon's CREEP "black bag jobs" at the Watergate? Well, it was illegal as hell back then, but not anymore -- not since the US Patriot Act (I).
Conclusion: It is all about seizing political power, absolute political power, and hanging onto it by any means necessary.
Too bad MSFT really, really doesn't like GPL, which is a damn sight less viral than their "Shared Source" license. A very nice little package called "libsafe" handles stack errors on linux pretty nicely. A Windows libsafe DLL that gets called early (and often) would go a long way toward finding most of those pesky vulnerabilities.
Of course, MSFT could also port their entire OS code over to Sun Java and have everything run in a java sandbox, except for Sun's Community Source license.
If MSFT's Longhorn makes use of OS vrtualization in order to (nearly) eliminate BSODs, does that really mean the the coding errors have been fixed? Or that "the tree falling in the woods" really doesn't (illogically) "make any sound"?
I really don't see how a "Blue Hat" conference will make a whit of difference in MSFT's coding practices, any more than Bill Gatus's pledge that "Security is Job One!" did.
"Aren't U.S. citizens supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?"
Well, yes, but only if you consider the Magna Carta and over 300 years of English parlimentary monarchy as part of the basis for the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. The US Patriot Act (I) SHREDDED all of that, in favor of the French judicial system, under which a person is presumed guilty until proven innocent.
The Dubya regime has turned American jurisprudence on its ear. Our government is now ironic and oxymoronic, both at the very same time. Examples are too numerous to list, but anyone who takes the time to study current events (and not only as represented by the USA's TV media) and has not succumbed to the SOMA of government propaganda has the scorecard.
Amen! You are preaching to the choir.
If "our" representatives in the Congress actually believed in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights and had "a pair", they would tell the Dubya regime to "stuff it" and legislate the US Patriot Act (I) out of existence. Unfortunately, our Congress is filled with a bunch of yahoo neo-cons, with the rest too cowed (or intimidated) to put up much of a fight. It's amazing what "wrapping himself in a flag" and stating "If you are not with me, you are against me (and therefore for the terrorists)". (Puts on tin foil hat) That, and some anthrax-laced letters specifically targeting opposition leadership in the press and Congress that, by shear coincidence was an exact DNA match for the Ames anthrax strain stored at the US Army's bio-weapons center at Ft. Detrick Md. (Takes off the tin foil hat).
The last time I checked, every Congress-critter, Cabinet level Executive branch official, President and Vice President swore and oath of office that included "to uphold and protect the Constitution".
Of course, the Constitution also includes provisions for oversight of the Executive branch by the Legislative branch, as well as Congress - not the President - having the authority to declare war. Effectively, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights was SHREDDED after 9/11/2001 without the benefit of an obituary, a funeral, or a wake.
Far too few people seem to care to do anything about it, since they are now too busy trying to keep their jobs, food on the table, and Fear Factor/MTV on the television. Pretty sad, really.
Nuke them from space - it's the only way to be sure.
"With the eye-candy disabled, XP is just a more up-to-date Win2K - just as stable/unstable really."
Would that that were true, but up until SP2 XP has been far more vulnerable to exploits than Win2K. While the "look and feel" of XP can be rolled back to appear more like Win2K, under the covers there are differences. Also, MS changed the license from Win2K to WinXP -- one of the things that has put me off from any future MS OS upgrade.
Considering that MS is inept with the release of any new OS that does not have more vulnerabilities than its predecessor. Many will wait until the first Service Pack comes out for Longhorn just as a matter of security and stability. Add in the new hardware requirements, I would be surprised to see many businesses make the change from Win2K to Longhorn before there is a compelling need. The mere fact that MS is sunsetting support for Win2K will not be reason enough -- not so long as security patches continue to be made available.
Besides, many of the most attractive new features originally announced for Longhorn have been stripped out in order for MS to meet their self-imposed deadline/release date. If I were MS, I would be worried that this extended transition period will make them vulnerable to customers fleeing to alternative IT solutions, like Novell.
Avoiding the desktop hardware upgrade cycle might pay for whatever pain is endured with the switch.
Exactly so.
I would go one step further along in this (slightly OT) thread: the George W. Bush regime has placed themselves (and the USA itself) at great longterm risk in their abandonment of the Geneva Accords. They have equated the official militia of the former Islamic Republic of Afghanistan with the Wahhabist terrorist group Al Queda. The United Nations, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Malaysia, People's Republic of China and others all recognised the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. The USA had informal commercial relations (related to oil) with the Taliban government both before and after the US embassy bombings in Africa and the bombing of the USS Cole. The Dubya regime's convenient abandonment of international treaties can be underlined by yet another instance -- harboring a self-acknowledged terrorist who killed many innocent people in the bombing of a commercial airliner and multiple bombings of hotels.
Apparently, the litmus test of claiming innocent civilian lives as a definition of terrorism does not compute within the Bush administration, while copyright infringment and violating the DMCA does. It would appear that the moral "high ground" claimed by this administration is an illusion.
I personally find the principles and machinations of the Taliban government reprehensible, but that does not legally justify the lumping together of the Taliban militia and Al Queda as terrorists. Those members of the Taliban militia captured should be granted POW status under the Geneva Accords, as defined by international law. On the other hand, captured Al Queda terrorists deserve immediate martyrdoom by being burned alive.
The basic premise the parent poster is trying to make is that personal privacy trumps (or should) the government's right to know who you are. (I don't mean to provide flamebait here, but just exactly who the fuck are you and where did you come from? Can you prove it?)
You may (or may not) pay taxes to support your government, and the services that they provide to its citizens. No government nor the taxpayers it supports should be required to furnish services to illegal aliens. No government nor the citizens they represent should be obligated to permit illegal aliens representation in the government by granting them the right to vote.
An illegal alien is the equivalent of a burgler who breaks into your home, and then claims squatter's rights in order to remain there. The burgler/squatter is already a criminal in the eyes of the law (if not the homeowner) -- he/she is using your phone, electricity, water, etcetra and is now using your credit card to order pizza and flashy new clothes.
While identity theft is a mechanism criminals use to commit banking fraud, it is also a mechanism used to cloak the identity of illegal aliens. Persons who have already broken (numerous) laws to reside in this country will not hesitate to break additional laws in order to live in a fashion they have become accustomed to, including banking fraud.
The USA recently passed the RealID Act in order to address the large variance in documentation required by the 50 states to obtain drivers licenses, a primary form of identity here. Only one state, Arizona, has actually passed legislation that attempts to stike illegal aliens from the voter registration lists. In virtually every other state, illegal aliens who have established "good cover" have no difficulty in voting -- a right reserved to citizens alone. With that vote comes political power and a voicc in government that is drowning out the voices and concerns of genuine citizens.
The British (and the larger EU generally) are rejecting the EU Constitution in part over the issues of open borders and illegal immigration. These same issues will prove to be the major sticking point in the entry of Turkey, a NATO member, into the EU -- I suspect that it will never happen so long as Islamic fundamentalist fervor (and the terrorism it breeds) sweeps across the Middle East and Mediterranean.
A biometric National ID implimentation may have some flaws. Rather than take the ultimate libertarian/anarchist position of absolute opposition, why not provide some insight and positive feedback to make such an ID system better? As the world continues to shrink in size due to trade and travel, National IDs will become the norm everywhere. It can no more be stopped than the tides or globalization.
Exactly so.
Apple will make use of Intel's newly announced CPU and CHIPSET. The reason is simple: embedded DRM to limit Apple's next generation x86 "iiMacs" from running any other OS, and prohibiting any commodity Wintel box from running an x86 OS X. Apple is in the software and HARDWARE business, and intends to stay there.
Do not expect Apple's new x86 hardware to be as cheap as the commodity Wintel crap that is in the market today. But do expect that Apple's profit margins to increase, substantially.
The basic problem with switching to Intel hardware is one of marketing -- it invites direct comparison between the commodity Wintel market and whatever Apple offers. SGI tried (spectacularly) with their x86 based Visual Workstations, and failed. Neither HP (including Compaq) nor Dell will ever sell as many workstation class computers as they have with their commodity systems. And competing in the swampland of commodity priced Intel boxes where there is no profit margin is not a (longterm) viable business venture.
I seriously doubt this, for one simple reason: anyone that uses encryption would automagically be on the "list".
The more likely scenarios would be (1) nonsensical SPAM messages with a hidden message within, (2) a message steganographically embedded within images posted to a public forum, or (3) some pre-arranged and totally innocent message that has been assigned some other meaning.
The use of encryption for email messages represents such a small proportion of the total number of emails sent that it would automatically trigger further investigation by the authorities.
(That being said, however, I would propose that the vast majority of email users SHOULD engage in the use of strong (4096 bit RSA?) encryption for all their emails in order to protest against the further encroachment of "big brother" into the privacy of their citizens. All that would be needed is some sort of across-the-web agreement upon a start date, encryption s/w used, and key length. Unfortunately, very little is known about just how extensive the power of "big brother" is to break codes, or which encryption s/w doesn't already have secret backdoors for "big brother's use.)
Basically, it's "damned if you do, and damned if you don't (use encryption, use flagged words, etc.)
The only way out of this scenario (, and I would advise it ONLY if you are truly up to no good,) is to register as a Republican and make substantial financial contributions to the GOP. Only by such means can you escape detection. As a positive side note, you might also obtain additional "cover" when asked to serve in the administration of the regime currently in power.
For everyone else out there, well, you're just screwed.
Okay, well, you did ask...
"If any of the folks who run slashdot can score an interview with him, I have a TON of questions I would like the head of NASA to address."
That's a rather vague quantity: imperial or metric TON? short or long TON?
Could you please quantify the number of questions on other terms, like MASS?
The real problem is that absolutely no one in leadership positions within the Dubya regime are authorized to answer any questions not submitted in advance and vetted for neo-con political correctness. Anyone who watches US news with a critical eye knows that press interviews are only used in the current regime to propagandise the "party line".
Do not expect either candor or nonpartisanship from the new NASA Director Griffin
Exactly so.
..... $199.00 ... $125.00 ...... $010.00 .. $003.00 .. $001.00 ........ $000.00
Let's take a look at prices (all in USD) here:
(1) OEM/Retail Package
(2) OEM/Discount Package
(3) OEM/Bundled Value
(4) Shanghai Street Price
(5) MSFT/Negotiated Value
(6) P2P/BT/DL Price
Looks like somebody needs to inform the BSA about
MSFT's price reduction before their jackboots
come knocking at corporate's doors...
"..., I see Apple using Dell/HP/Lenovo to build their hardware."
Either Gateway, or whoever the fuck Wal-Mart's OEM is.
With all of the NRE (Nonrecurring Engineering) expenses Apple must endure to incorporate Intel processor/chipset/DRM while still trying to compete with the commodity market bottom feeders,
sacrifices (like quality) will have to be made. Apple cannot afford to piss off both their loyal users AND their shareholders, so a rapid increase in market share must prevail. No doubt, lackluster Mac Mini sales convinced Apple management that their price point was still too high. Whoever told Steve Jobs that Apple could sell just as many Mac Minis as iPods is assuredly no longer in Apple's employ.
Actually, private sector airport security is where all this "anti-terrorism" business started to begin with. It's called "lowest cost bidder" contracting, and unfortunately the DHS (and the Dubya regime) has adopted it already for airport screening.
The Dubya regime and the neo-con allies in Congress are hard at work making private contactor airport security a reality again. They decided (1) that they don't want 60,000 new Federal workers joining Federal unions, (2) that they can't do any better hiring security workers (for what they are willing to pay them) than private contractors can, and (3) they are really only interested in the appearance of better airport security.
The people who service the planes on the tarmack, including the baggage handlers, do not pass through the same security screening that the airline passengers do. The bulk of air cargo never passes through any sort of screening process, just like our seaport cargo doesn't get screened.
A local TV news organization (Metro DC) went out to Dulles International Airport on the heels of a group of FAA security investigators in April or May of 2001. DIA's private airport security had previosly failed FAA security inspections. Someone (within FAA?) tipped off Dulles Airport regarding the "surprise" inspection, and airport security officers refused (on TV) to allow FAA inspectors onto airport property. A short few months later, and a commercial aircraft was hijacked from Dulles airport and flown into the Pentagon. That is the value of private airport security.
The biggest problem with the DHS under the Dubya regime is that the expansion of the Federal workforce is less desirable than the benefit of reducing terror threats. Similar problems can be seen with US Border Patrol, US Customs (seaports), and the TSA -- spending big bucks on flashy high technology equipment (that often doesn't work) is preferable to spending big bucks long term on more Federal employees. I have yet to see a buried seismic sensor or a UAV actually apprehend an unknown terrorist crossing our borders or slipping out of a cargo container -- that takes "boots on the ground".
And that is why I believe the DHS is an oxymoron. Having the DHS spend $6 Billion (plus) USD on a multiyear software contract with Microsoft for their server and desktop OSes merely confirms that conviction. And their inability to facilitate an IT strategy of redundency and viable backups underlines the problem.
These are not so much problems that can be better addressed by the private sector as they are problems with the corrupt regime currently in power.