It is exactly the same argument as "guns are not made for killing people" - and both arguments are correct.
Blaming a gun for a murder is senseless and sophmoric and blaming a file distribution technology for piracy is as well. People have "warez" ftp sites where piracy occurs, does this mean ftp needs to be abolished? How about the internet in general?
It is a simple mathematical case of failing to find the common denominator. People pirate files using ftp. People pirate files using http. People pirate files using P2P. Do you see the common denominator here?
People kill with knives. People kill with vehicles. People kill with guns. People kill with clubs. Did you find the common denominator in this one?
In case you missed it - the answer is "people". If you want to stop piracy you have to make "people" stop doing it - not disable or outlaw the technology and if you want to stop murders you have to make people stop killing each other, not outlaw or abandon guns, knives, etc.
But that's not easy, is it? It's easier to abolish guns than address the *REAL* problem of dealing with people. It's a cop-out.
reminds me of a story: One night a woman is on a street corner looking for something when a man wanders up. He can see the lady's distress and asks what the problem is. The lady tells him that she lost a hundred dollar bill and is looking for it - so the man starts helping her look. After a bit of searching he asks the lady where she thinks she may have dropped it and the lady responds by pointing down the street through the darkness a block away. Puzzled, the man asks the lady why she is searching here? Pointing to the overhead streetlamp above them the lady responds "because the light is better".
We cannot, as a society, try to find the answer to problems where it is easiest to look because, quite simply, the answer simply isn't there. It is far more difficult to find the "answer" to murder is in people, the "answer" to piracy is in people. A far more daunting fix may be in order but it is the correct one. Anything else is as futile as looking for lost money in a place where the light is better.
...and if you notice OpenBSD doesn't have 90% of the market share.
Ease of use.
I used to think users were lazy but after I got over myself I realized that they are simply clueless and have no idea how to install/tweak/secure an OS any more than I have any idea how to run multiphase electrical legs into my house and offset the phases manually if necessary (some shit my electrical contractor was telling me - he might as well have been telling me that my foot looked like an owl penis in swahili).
An earlier post was absolutely correct about running by default all kinds of network services and, consequently, opening all kinds of ports on the machine. The beauty of installing an OS, walking to another machine and browsing to the default web page on the fresh machine was more attractive to users than the nebulous security caveats such practices imposed. People understand (and can see) failing to hit a page, or a file share, or printer share whereas they cannot see the glaring hole in their security profile until, of course, it is compromised - but that begets experience and the experienced tech or power user eschews the lack of security that is often the directly proportionate consquence of ease of use.
However there are a lot more inexperienced users than there are techs/power users.
Microsoft simply assumed it would be far easier install and use their OS if security was low at first and tightened later. Windows 9x/Me/NT4 was an example of this. Win2k was a foray into the concept of balancing both in such a way as to maintain the ease of use yet improve security. It is far more secure than 9x/Me/NT4 but unfortunately still vulnerable as Blaster, SoBig and others have shown. Win2k3 may get it right - time will tell.
The key point in all this is that one of the very things that gave Microsoft 90% of the desktop was the sacrifice of security for ease of use. An interesting point is that Win2k can be made to be as secure an operating system as any other. The secret lies in proper firewalling and removing network services that are not required and (everyone seems to miss this one) oversight - watching every connect and monitoring network activity down to the byte - not necessarily with eyeballs but with event driven network monitoring tools which oversee things such as disk space, CPU usage, port connections, file activity, etc. For instance - there should be no reason for IUSR_WHATEVER to access \System32\cmd.exe - this can be audited and tracked. Had this simple rule been put in place CodeRed and Nimda would never have wreaked the havoc they did.
In the OSS community we need to be aware that there are a lot more "users" out there than "geeks". We sit on our high horse patting ourselves on the back for our default security profile but forget that the remaining 80% of the world just wants to install the OS and play with it - just like many of us "geeks" simply want to insert the key into our vehicles and drive to the store - we are not interested in consumer crash test reports, or airbag safety results.
At least we aren't interested until we get in a wreck - then we become a little more "experienced"
Jeez dude - you really are some piece of work. You're the kind of jackass that drives down the road and laughs at someone broke down on the side needing just a little help.
I'd bet that the clerk you screwed over might (and this is a big maybe) make $10/hour. That's two days pay for the guy, he might have a family too and that ~$150 you effectively stole from him might have been his electric bill. Maybe not - maybe it was just his beer money but in any case it was his. And even if he didn't pay and the store did the bottom line was that the money wasn't yours.
People like you make me sick. You're probably also one of the first assholes to bitch about how shitty things are in the world - how the establishment is holding you down and you can probably find some way to justify what you did so ultimately it isn't your fault - instead it's the responsibility of the clerk to be more careful, or the store to be less stupid, or how it's ok because it was Microsoft, or whatever.
In reality there is nothing wrong with the world - there's nothing bad about an ~8000 mile diameter ball of rock - it's the people that make it suck and you, jerkwad, are one of them...
Dinosaurs, then humans, then ??? Whatever creature is next could you please step up the plate and get this over with...?
Many US and state government agencies, schools etc require ONLY Windows for their networks? How is that any different?
It isn't different and it should be changed - a worthy goal indeed. My only point is that changing the rules and forcing these same institutions to install OSS is no better than the current situation - the choice never appeared - only a change in regime.
My question (more a rhetorical musing I suppose) was where the OSS community took a stance in that regard. There are some postings here on/. that would intonate Open Source proliferation by any means necessary, sort of an "end justifies the means" platform.
We must realize that *WE* find the OSS model superior to closed source alternatives but in the long run consumer acceptance must ultimately decide market share.
Anything else is simply replacing one oppressive solution with another and in the end we (and the consumer) are no better off than when we started.
I sometimes wonder if a decree was issued by the United Nations "Requiring" all citizens, companies and governments of every country to run open source software - would that be considered a "win" by the OSS community or not?
If your technology gains market share via dictate then I feel it is a slap in your product's face. There are simply too many ways that "dictate" can arise by subversive means such as bribes, kickbacks, the "dictator's" portfolio, etc. The secret lies in user choice, however stupid or uninformed the user may be. Acceptance at that point requires (novel thought here) educating and informing the consumer - and of course, having a product that withstands educated consumer scrutiny (i.e. doesn't suck).
The kind of crap in this article should be viewed as a pyhrric victory at best - in fact - I don't think it should be viewed as a victory at all.
It's shameful - Open Source is better than this...
Congratulations! one of the few posts I've read yet on this subject that shows a reasoned, intelligent and well articulated opinion (not to mention absolutely correct) - hat's off to you!
Congratulations on the purchase of your new vehicle! You must activate your new system using our License Activation Service for proper operation. For your safety and convenience the system will record default speed of 95 mph until licensed...
I see posts on here asking what's wrong with the concept of monitoring kids/people/etc. It is really simple. It works TOO well. How can children learn the difference between right and wrong if you remove their ability to do wrong, chance being discovered, and suffering the ramifications?
At what point in a society equipped with oversight such as this do our children "learn" to choose the right path?
There is a very real correlation to abused children becoming irresponsible adults, it is a common psychological side effect of the abuse. The reason? Because every experience the child knows to adulthood is something that was done to/for the child - never was the child exposed to the effect of properly or improperly handled responsibility. Thus later in life they are simply regurgitating the only thing they have ever known.
How can you learn responsibility when the option to choose is removed? Some will say you can simply explain it to them. Talk to them. Sure, and I can explain the color red to blind person too - doesn't mean they will ever really grok it, in fact - I assure you they won't - and even if they could how can you hope that they will ever show the slightest innovation in their decision-making skills if they are simply clones of YOUR thought process.
Dealing with children is like a chess game - to be good at it you have to think more than one move in advance. Sometimes it is better to let the child make a decision and suffer the consequences so they truly see what can/will happen to them due to questionable decision-making practices.
Achieving complete compliance from our kids in this arena is probably what's best for those in charge. For the teachers, the parents, law enforcement, the government, whatever... but it is categorically the worst thing we can do to/for our children.
Well, I don't have any input on whether or not you "come back" but speaking for ONE American - I'd rather you simply stay gone.
The imbecile posted incorrect data about migration statistics and I set him straight so my post was not "just as bad" - it was in defense of something I believe in - my country.
Most Canadians give American's grief about being motivated too much by money and not enough by... well... whatever Canadians are motivated by. Where the hell do you stand? Are the U.S. and Canadian Dollar values your only motivation? Then I suppose that makes you the worst of both worlds. "Money grubbing" Americans are at least notoriously patriotic and Canadians are... well... Canadians.
If you really believe in what you post - why not do it under your login? Posting as Anonymous Coward is... well... Just what it says..
Now, point for point:
Ashcroft: Personally - I'd say as socialist as they come and there are many in America who think too many personal freedoms are being surrendered, including myself. One nice thing about America (which Canadians love to bitch about) lies in the fact that should our government get too many "Ashcrofts" they will have an armed populace to deal with - and trust me - they know it. Part of our checks and balances and it's been working for over 200 years.
Feeble diatribe about patriotism Actually I have been outside of my country - probably more times than you have been outside of yours. My visits include Norway many times, Canada:), Honduras, Nicaragua, Ireland, England, Suadi Arabia, Germany, (All of the Middle east), Russia, Greenland, Iceland and others I am sure I am forgetting. My wife is Jamaican and has been to Portugal, France, Spain and Canada as well. So I think I (we) are cosmopolitan enough to speak from a position of knowledge. So.... from that position I can tell you: NO Most of the rest of the world Absolutely does not enjoy more personal freedom than America - those who think so are fooling themselves, which is fine - that belief lines up nicely with the sentiment their governments would have them believe - including yourself, mountie boy.
Policy crapYou reference some propaganda site that has the professionalism of a Las Vegas showgirl - but then - that is another personal freedom we enjoy as well, we even have that chartered in our constitution. Do you...?
Standard of living Now here you hit your only valid point. Standard of living. The one big problem with a capitalist nation. Why? Because there will always be have nots as any educated individual is aware. America chooses, instead, to reward personal initiative and creative entrepreneurial endeavors as opposed to one creative individual "shoring up" the less productive. And before you ask - yes I do call that progress. Difference of opinion? Maybe, but my opinion is mine and I value my right to have it. Besides, who sets the definition of "Standard of Living?" In the site I referenced it was the United Nations prattling on about how everyone has access to health care, education, etc. etc. ad nauseum. Well, everyone does have that here in America - in fact - most of it is prescribed by law to be available to everyone, regardless of income or socio-economic status. So the real difference in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland (note the conspicuous absence of Canada in this list) and the United States is per capita income. Well, America has a welfare system for it's poor - maybe less than these Nordic countries but then our harder workers are better compensated. The bottom line in America: work and get rewarded. Sit on your arse and get a meager handout barely capable of sustaining life - you have a choice - and that choice is what fuels the American Patriotism you so cleverly dismiss.
Bury my head? Nah - I don't think so. As for showing any amount of intelligence - well... opinions vary. I have approximately 280 million that would agree with me to some degree or another based solely on where they lay their head, and that number keeps growing each year - much of that growth is from your beloved Canada, pal - at least those found worthy of emigration visas. Personally - I'd prefer to allow more easterners into America - at least they have something to offer. I found (and still find) that Canadians have a level of pride far greater than their achievements warrant. You have been weighed, measured and found wanting.
So.... From the U.S. into Canada we have 5,815(2000), 5,902(2001) and 5,288(2002), However from Canada to the United States we have 19,519(2000), 21,933(2001) and 16,210(2002).
As with any true liberal, socialistic drone - rhetoric is preferable to actual facts because a real basis for discussion is absent and when presented with conclusive, contraindicative evidence they resort to the only defense in which they have a slight skill, namely, name calling and unstantiated accusations. I would be more than happy to bring up more statistical errata to show that your pathetic third world country FAILS IT!!!
Communism: Big Brother controls everything at gunpoint.
Either way it's a crap governmental style that surrenders personal freedoms willingly to governmental oversight and control. Is it more efficient? Who cares..?!? A dictatorship is more "efficient" than all of them but you don't see everyone crowing about how great THAT is.
American's like a Republican government because we like the freedom it gives us and as the #1 economic force on the planet, the #1 military force on the planet, the #1 immigration target on the planet and #1 in a whole bunch of other things too numerous to mention - I would tend to think we're doing things pretty well.
Besides - "Americans" are made up of everyone else - it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that some innovative thinkers got sick of their country's shitty oppressive crap and decided to go where the freedom was. The result? Well... see above...
Yeah... I have been driving since I was 12 years old (38 now) which is probably longer than you've been alive with zero - that's right ZERO - accidents - fender benders, whatever - all inclusive.
The proof is in the pudding. I have a record that proves myself, do you?
My post only suggested giving alternative transporation options to people that shouldn't be driving in the first place which leaves people who like to drive (which usually means they're good at it) a more open freeway.
And hell no - I won't pay higher insurance rates until I have a wreck - I don't really give a shit how much safer a "bot" supposedly is. That's some socialistic crap - make someone pay more if they don't submit to someone else's form of control - That's crap.
And another thing - I have to assume since you are posting on a technology board that you are accustomed to working with computerized systems. Can you REALLY tell me you believe a computer is infallible...? Or even better than human judgement...? You should really iron out your self-esteem issues - I can promise you that computer driven automobiles will never be superior to instinctive drivers.
You go ahead and surrender control to the collective "Mr. Socialist Drone" - meanwhile - I'll have fun driving and feeling the car vector under me...
You know... You're right. And reading your article I was getting more and more riled up about removing YET another right to the few things I actually enjoy on this planet - driving.
But the more I think about it the more I like the idea of having alternative transportation for those deemed "incapable" of driving a vehicle.
This way you would have to earn the right to actually control the vehicle you drive. We could test drivers like other countries do - inclement weather condition tests, obstacle tests, reaction tests, vehicle control skill measurements, etc.
I have raced professionally (mostly dirt track) and I can tell you that many people who have licenses shouldn't be allowed to drive a vacuum cleaner.
Unions are crap. Socialism at its worst and, IMO, what is killing (has killed?) America's ability to compete on a world stage. Auto industry, steel industry, electronics, etc.
But the idea of a professional association business model is one I have espoused for some time now.
The problem? I recently attended a meeting of IT professionals in my area. I grabbed a stack of business cards, donned my Hugo Boss suit, threw on my Ferragamo's, silk tie, haircut, shave, etc. and went to the meeting.
What do you think I saw there? Khaki shorts, jeans, unkempt beards, fat & overweight slobs. It was a circus and people had the gall to ask me "if I was going to a funeral".
There is an incredible amount of attention to detail, knowledge and intelligence required to perform the duties we perform and we deserve to have that attibute recognized. Call it a Maslo thing but people have a hard time seeing through to our brilliance when we look like - well - nerds.
Each and every one of us is a reflection of our industry, this includes the 15 year old script kiddie to the 50 year old Mainframe Geezer and, most importantly, this includes YOU. Doctors and Lawyers (Read : Professionals) don't downtalk each other and if they do it's considered unprofessional. They present a unified front of academic solidarity. In short - they act professional. They dress the part. Do clothes make you smarter? No... but they make you appear more professional. We don't need to be running around like that idiot in the Washington state march on Microsoft event (covered by the press) in an Obi-Wan-Kenobi outfit. What a fool. The press covered this event and he presented an image of the IT industry. Quite simply - we looked like idiots.
So, if you'd like to be taken seriously GROW UP!! Ditch the nose ring, the eye ring, the lip ring, get a haircut, wash your hair, throw out the tshirts with PGP code all over it, slather your face with some Oxy5 (and wash it occasionally), get a treadmill (and use it) so you can shed a few hundred pounds, clean your teeth, laugh without snorting, untape the glasses (or better yet look into LASIK) and, in general - clean up your act.
Ditch the Linux/Microsoft war and the Linux(Debian)/Linux(Suse)/Linux(RedHat)/Linux(Mand rake)/Linux(Insert_Distro_Here) war and start acting professional.
Other things we can do: start making certain software implementations require certifications (general or specific). Develop an Engineer Certification (not branded to a specific company) and rally around it. Develop a Coding certification - and rally around it. Virus package solutions that are serious must be Engineered/Implemented by certified professionals or you simply can't buy the software. If enough of us rally to this cause it will become a standard because we make the standard with our daily recommendations to the customers that pay us. Security installations - same certification requirements. This software packages that play ball with us - we recommend and we buy. Is that fair? Probably not - but Doctors and Lawyers don't play fair and they make a hell of a lot more money than we do and their jobs are not going overseas. If a doctor comes to America from another country then they have to acquire a license here in America before they can practice. We can do that too. Lawyers and Doctors have effectively said: "We don't really care how you did it where you come from. Over here, for right or wrong, we do it our way - and so will you - or you won't work here."
Doctors and Lawyers protected their profession long ago by establishing this system. Our industry is still young and the future lies with all of us. What will we be like in 50 years, 100?
So you're saying that our *nix systems DO turn on/off ports as needed then...?
Because if not, the original statement placing security in the hands (and head) of the user/administrator is correct. Proper security methodologies can never, will never, have never been a function of the OS. While some OS's are more conscious of security than others in their design they are not the "base" for implementation.
That "base" is conceptual and subject to the intelligence and wisdom of the user.
After all - I trust NO OS for security implementations because I have effectively trusted someone else at that point and quite simply - that doesn't sit well with me.
Gene Hackman said it best in The Replacements about who wanted to carry the ball when it really counted - "Winner's always do..." - When it comes to security I don't want Symantec, DLink, Cisco, LinkSys, Microsoft, Linux, BSD, CheckPoint, etc... carrying the ball for me...
I will carry that ball myself... and I trust no-one...
I had a conversation today about legislative requirements to mark spam as an advertisement. Invariably the subject arose concerning utilization of compromised computers making enforcement of any anti-spam law rather difficult.
I have a thought about that... We are permitted to own vehicles which participate on various public transportation infrastructure facilities such as state roads, the interstate system, etc. We are required to ensure the road-worthiness of the vehicle we own. We are required (more or less in differing states) to ensure our vehicle meets certain emission control requirements as well. Why then is it a leap to imagine that we must ensure (to the best of our ability) that our computers are kept up to date to prevent them from becoming criminal tools. I understand that we can't all be liable for the repercussion of the latest hack. I even understand that some people aren't as tech savvy as others just like I understand I am not a mechanic but it is my responsibility to ensure the tires on my car are securely fastened before using it to participate on a public roadway. If I don't know how to tighten lug nuts there are mechanics who can help me ensure my vehicle is safe. There are technical types who can help the "computer clueless" batten down the hatches a bit.
For example, I think if there is currently a computer out there that is STILL a nimda or code-red shit pump the owner of the computer should share some level of negligent liability, criminal or civil. If you are going to connect your computer to the internet then you need to take some responsibility for that action. For too long we just let anyone connect to the net any way they like. Let's tighten up the ship a bit...
Slashdot Mirror
Studying various stress induced odors of flying testicles produced from the exploding trousers of nigerians swimming in congealed black penguin poo...
uhhhh.... and an alarm clock ran away.
It is exactly the same argument as "guns are not made for killing people" - and both arguments are correct.
Blaming a gun for a murder is senseless and sophmoric and blaming a file distribution technology for piracy is as well. People have "warez" ftp sites where piracy occurs, does this mean ftp needs to be abolished? How about the internet in general?
It is a simple mathematical case of failing to find the common denominator. People pirate files using ftp. People pirate files using http. People pirate files using P2P. Do you see the common denominator here?
People kill with knives. People kill with vehicles. People kill with guns. People kill with clubs. Did you find the common denominator in this one?
In case you missed it - the answer is "people". If you want to stop piracy you have to make "people" stop doing it - not disable or outlaw the technology and if you want to stop murders you have to make people stop killing each other, not outlaw or abandon guns, knives, etc.
But that's not easy, is it? It's easier to abolish guns than address the *REAL* problem of dealing with people. It's a cop-out.
reminds me of a story: One night a woman is on a street corner looking for something when a man wanders up. He can see the lady's distress and asks what the problem is. The lady tells him that she lost a hundred dollar bill and is looking for it - so the man starts helping her look. After a bit of searching he asks the lady where she thinks she may have dropped it and the lady responds by pointing down the street through the darkness a block away. Puzzled, the man asks the lady why she is searching here? Pointing to the overhead streetlamp above them the lady responds "because the light is better".
We cannot, as a society, try to find the answer to problems where it is easiest to look because, quite simply, the answer simply isn't there. It is far more difficult to find the "answer" to murder is in people, the "answer" to piracy is in people. A far more daunting fix may be in order but it is the correct one. Anything else is as futile as looking for lost money in a place where the light is better.
You are so right - my apologies... :)
...and if you notice OpenBSD doesn't have 90% of the market share.
Ease of use.
I used to think users were lazy but after I got over myself I realized that they are simply clueless and have no idea how to install/tweak/secure an OS any more than I have any idea how to run multiphase electrical legs into my house and offset the phases manually if necessary (some shit my electrical contractor was telling me - he might as well have been telling me that my foot looked like an owl penis in swahili).
An earlier post was absolutely correct about running by default all kinds of network services and, consequently, opening all kinds of ports on the machine. The beauty of installing an OS, walking to another machine and browsing to the default web page on the fresh machine was more attractive to users than the nebulous security caveats such practices imposed. People understand (and can see) failing to hit a page, or a file share, or printer share whereas they cannot see the glaring hole in their security profile until, of course, it is compromised - but that begets experience and the experienced tech or power user eschews the lack of security that is often the directly proportionate consquence of ease of use.
However there are a lot more inexperienced users than there are techs/power users.
Microsoft simply assumed it would be far easier install and use their OS if security was low at first and tightened later. Windows 9x/Me/NT4 was an example of this. Win2k was a foray into the concept of balancing both in such a way as to maintain the ease of use yet improve security. It is far more secure than 9x/Me/NT4 but unfortunately still vulnerable as Blaster, SoBig and others have shown. Win2k3 may get it right - time will tell.
The key point in all this is that one of the very things that gave Microsoft 90% of the desktop was the sacrifice of security for ease of use. An interesting point is that Win2k can be made to be as secure an operating system as any other. The secret lies in proper firewalling and removing network services that are not required and (everyone seems to miss this one) oversight - watching every connect and monitoring network activity down to the byte - not necessarily with eyeballs but with event driven network monitoring tools which oversee things such as disk space, CPU usage, port connections, file activity, etc. For instance - there should be no reason for IUSR_WHATEVER to access \System32\cmd.exe - this can be audited and tracked. Had this simple rule been put in place CodeRed and Nimda would never have wreaked the havoc they did.
In the OSS community we need to be aware that there are a lot more "users" out there than "geeks". We sit on our high horse patting ourselves on the back for our default security profile but forget that the remaining 80% of the world just wants to install the OS and play with it - just like many of us "geeks" simply want to insert the key into our vehicles and drive to the store - we are not interested in consumer crash test reports, or airbag safety results.
At least we aren't interested until we get in a wreck - then we become a little more "experienced"
Jeez dude - you really are some piece of work. You're the kind of jackass that drives down the road and laughs at someone broke down on the side needing just a little help.
I'd bet that the clerk you screwed over might (and this is a big maybe) make $10/hour. That's two days pay for the guy, he might have a family too and that ~$150 you effectively stole from him might have been his electric bill. Maybe not - maybe it was just his beer money but in any case it was his. And even if he didn't pay and the store did the bottom line was that the money wasn't yours.
People like you make me sick. You're probably also one of the first assholes to bitch about how shitty things are in the world - how the establishment is holding you down and you can probably find some way to justify what you did so ultimately it isn't your fault - instead it's the responsibility of the clerk to be more careful, or the store to be less stupid, or how it's ok because it was Microsoft, or whatever.
In reality there is nothing wrong with the world - there's nothing bad about an ~8000 mile diameter ball of rock - it's the people that make it suck and you, jerkwad, are one of them...
Dinosaurs, then humans, then ??? Whatever creature is next could you please step up the plate and get this over with...?
Instead of pirated WMA files use the new WMD format - the U.S. government has a hard time finding them on your system...
Many US and state government agencies, schools etc require ONLY Windows for their networks? How is that any different?
/. that would intonate Open Source proliferation by any means necessary, sort of an "end justifies the means" platform.
It isn't different and it should be changed - a worthy goal indeed. My only point is that changing the rules and forcing these same institutions to install OSS is no better than the current situation - the choice never appeared - only a change in regime.
My question (more a rhetorical musing I suppose) was where the OSS community took a stance in that regard. There are some postings here on
We must realize that *WE* find the OSS model superior to closed source alternatives but in the long run consumer acceptance must ultimately decide market share.
Anything else is simply replacing one oppressive solution with another and in the end we (and the consumer) are no better off than when we started.
I sometimes wonder if a decree was issued by the United Nations "Requiring" all citizens, companies and governments of every country to run open source software - would that be considered a "win" by the OSS community or not?
If your technology gains market share via dictate then I feel it is a slap in your product's face. There are simply too many ways that "dictate" can arise by subversive means such as bribes, kickbacks, the "dictator's" portfolio, etc. The secret lies in user choice, however stupid or uninformed the user may be. Acceptance at that point requires (novel thought here) educating and informing the consumer - and of course, having a product that withstands educated consumer scrutiny (i.e. doesn't suck).
The kind of crap in this article should be viewed as a pyhrric victory at best - in fact - I don't think it should be viewed as a victory at all.
It's shameful - Open Source is better than this...
Maybe we can use the vouchers to pay our $699.00 SCO licensing fee...
Congratulations! one of the few posts I've read yet on this subject that shows a reasoned, intelligent and well articulated opinion (not to mention absolutely correct) - hat's off to you!
Congratulations on the purchase of your new vehicle! You must activate your new system using our License Activation Service for proper operation. For your safety and convenience the system will record default speed of 95 mph until licensed...
I can see geeks getting pulled over and cops plugging into the car for the last 5 minutes speed information.
"Sir, I suppose I was wrong - your vehicle appeared to be doing 55 all the time... in fact - it appears to be doing 55 right now..."
I see posts on here asking what's wrong with the concept of monitoring kids/people/etc. It is really simple. It works TOO well. How can children learn the difference between right and wrong if you remove their ability to do wrong, chance being discovered, and suffering the ramifications?
At what point in a society equipped with oversight such as this do our children "learn" to choose the right path?
There is a very real correlation to abused children becoming irresponsible adults, it is a common psychological side effect of the abuse. The reason? Because every experience the child knows to adulthood is something that was done to/for the child - never was the child exposed to the effect of properly or improperly handled responsibility. Thus later in life they are simply regurgitating the only thing they have ever known.
How can you learn responsibility when the option to choose is removed? Some will say you can simply explain it to them. Talk to them. Sure, and I can explain the color red to blind person too - doesn't mean they will ever really grok it, in fact - I assure you they won't - and even if they could how can you hope that they will ever show the slightest innovation in their decision-making skills if they are simply clones of YOUR thought process.
Dealing with children is like a chess game - to be good at it you have to think more than one move in advance. Sometimes it is better to let the child make a decision and suffer the consequences so they truly see what can/will happen to them due to questionable decision-making practices.
Achieving complete compliance from our kids in this arena is probably what's best for those in charge. For the teachers, the parents, law enforcement, the government, whatever... but it is categorically the worst thing we can do to/for our children.
Well, I don't have any input on whether or not you "come back" but speaking for ONE American - I'd rather you simply stay gone.
The imbecile posted incorrect data about migration statistics and I set him straight so my post was not "just as bad" - it was in defense of something I believe in - my country.
Most Canadians give American's grief about being motivated too much by money and not enough by... well... whatever Canadians are motivated by. Where the hell do you stand? Are the U.S. and Canadian Dollar values your only motivation? Then I suppose that makes you the worst of both worlds. "Money grubbing" Americans are at least notoriously patriotic and Canadians are... well... Canadians.
You're neither...
If you really believe in what you post - why not do it under your login? Posting as Anonymous Coward is... well... Just what it says..
:), Honduras, Nicaragua, Ireland, England, Suadi Arabia, Germany, (All of the Middle east), Russia, Greenland, Iceland and others I am sure I am forgetting. My wife is Jamaican and has been to Portugal, France, Spain and Canada as well. So I think I (we) are cosmopolitan enough to speak from a position of knowledge. So.... from that position I can tell you: NO Most of the rest of the world Absolutely does not enjoy more personal freedom than America - those who think so are fooling themselves, which is fine - that belief lines up nicely with the sentiment their governments would have them believe - including yourself, mountie boy.
Now, point for point:
Ashcroft: Personally - I'd say as socialist as they come and there are many in America who think too many personal freedoms are being surrendered, including myself. One nice thing about America (which Canadians love to bitch about) lies in the fact that should our government get too many "Ashcrofts" they will have an armed populace to deal with - and trust me - they know it. Part of our checks and balances and it's been working for over 200 years.
Feeble diatribe about patriotism Actually I have been outside of my country - probably more times than you have been outside of yours. My visits include Norway many times, Canada
Policy crapYou reference some propaganda site that has the professionalism of a Las Vegas showgirl - but then - that is another personal freedom we enjoy as well, we even have that chartered in our constitution. Do you...?
Standard of living Now here you hit your only valid point. Standard of living. The one big problem with a capitalist nation. Why? Because there will always be have nots as any educated individual is aware. America chooses, instead, to reward personal initiative and creative entrepreneurial endeavors as opposed to one creative individual "shoring up" the less productive. And before you ask - yes I do call that progress. Difference of opinion? Maybe, but my opinion is mine and I value my right to have it. Besides, who sets the definition of "Standard of Living?" In the site I referenced it was the United Nations prattling on about how everyone has access to health care, education, etc. etc. ad nauseum. Well, everyone does have that here in America - in fact - most of it is prescribed by law to be available to everyone, regardless of income or socio-economic status. So the real difference in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland (note the conspicuous absence of Canada in this list) and the United States is per capita income. Well, America has a welfare system for it's poor - maybe less than these Nordic countries but then our harder workers are better compensated. The bottom line in America: work and get rewarded. Sit on your arse and get a meager handout barely capable of sustaining life - you have a choice - and that choice is what fuels the American Patriotism you so cleverly dismiss.
Bury my head? Nah - I don't think so. As for showing any amount of intelligence - well... opinions vary. I have approximately 280 million that would agree with me to some degree or another based solely on where they lay their head, and that number keeps growing each year - much of that growth is from your beloved Canada, pal - at least those found worthy of emigration visas. Personally - I'd prefer to allow more easterners into America - at least they have something to offer. I found (and still find) that Canadians have a level of pride far greater than their achievements warrant. You have been weighed, measured and found wanting.
Post the IPAddress, username and password and we /.'ers will come telnet in and help you too!!!
French server, decent bandwidth, out of the reach of any DMCA-wielding company
Hmmm.... French huh? I portscanned it and got "HTTP ERROR 498: We Surrender"
Canada Immigration figures from the United States
United States immigration figures from Canada
So.... From the U.S. into Canada we have 5,815(2000), 5,902(2001) and 5,288(2002), However from Canada to the United States we have 19,519(2000), 21,933(2001) and 16,210(2002).
As with any true liberal, socialistic drone - rhetoric is preferable to actual facts because a real basis for discussion is absent and when presented with conclusive, contraindicative evidence they resort to the only defense in which they have a slight skill, namely, name calling and unstantiated accusations. I would be more than happy to bring up more statistical errata to show that your pathetic third world country FAILS IT!!!
oh yeah, American's know the difference:
Socialism: Big Brother controls everything
Communism: Big Brother controls everything at gunpoint.
Either way it's a crap governmental style that surrenders personal freedoms willingly to governmental oversight and control. Is it more efficient? Who cares..?!? A dictatorship is more "efficient" than all of them but you don't see everyone crowing about how great THAT is.
American's like a Republican government because we like the freedom it gives us and as the #1 economic force on the planet, the #1 military force on the planet, the #1 immigration target on the planet and #1 in a whole bunch of other things too numerous to mention - I would tend to think we're doing things pretty well.
Besides - "Americans" are made up of everyone else - it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that some innovative thinkers got sick of their country's shitty oppressive crap and decided to go where the freedom was. The result? Well... see above...
Yeah... I have been driving since I was 12 years old (38 now) which is probably longer than you've been alive with zero - that's right ZERO - accidents - fender benders, whatever - all inclusive.
The proof is in the pudding. I have a record that proves myself, do you?
My post only suggested giving alternative transporation options to people that shouldn't be driving in the first place which leaves people who like to drive (which usually means they're good at it) a more open freeway.
And hell no - I won't pay higher insurance rates until I have a wreck - I don't really give a shit how much safer a "bot" supposedly is. That's some socialistic crap - make someone pay more if they don't submit to someone else's form of control - That's crap.
And another thing - I have to assume since you are posting on a technology board that you are accustomed to working with computerized systems. Can you REALLY tell me you believe a computer is infallible...? Or even better than human judgement...? You should really iron out your self-esteem issues - I can promise you that computer driven automobiles will never be superior to instinctive drivers.
You go ahead and surrender control to the collective "Mr. Socialist Drone" - meanwhile - I'll have fun driving and feeling the car vector under me...
You know... You're right. And reading your article I was getting more and more riled up about removing YET another right to the few things I actually enjoy on this planet - driving.
But the more I think about it the more I like the idea of having alternative transportation for those deemed "incapable" of driving a vehicle.
This way you would have to earn the right to actually control the vehicle you drive. We could test drivers like other countries do - inclement weather condition tests, obstacle tests, reaction tests, vehicle control skill measurements, etc.
I have raced professionally (mostly dirt track) and I can tell you that many people who have licenses shouldn't be allowed to drive a vacuum cleaner.
This actually make a wonderful solution...
Have fun stormin' Redmond!!
Unions are crap. Socialism at its worst and, IMO, what is killing (has killed?) America's ability to compete on a world stage. Auto industry, steel industry, electronics, etc.
d rake)/Linux(Insert_Distro_Here) war and start acting professional.
But the idea of a professional association business model is one I have espoused for some time now.
The problem? I recently attended a meeting of IT professionals in my area. I grabbed a stack of business cards, donned my Hugo Boss suit, threw on my Ferragamo's, silk tie, haircut, shave, etc. and went to the meeting.
What do you think I saw there? Khaki shorts, jeans, unkempt beards, fat & overweight slobs. It was a circus and people had the gall to ask me "if I was going to a funeral".
There is an incredible amount of attention to detail, knowledge and intelligence required to perform the duties we perform and we deserve to have that attibute recognized. Call it a Maslo thing but people have a hard time seeing through to our brilliance when we look like - well - nerds.
Each and every one of us is a reflection of our industry, this includes the 15 year old script kiddie to the 50 year old Mainframe Geezer and, most importantly, this includes
YOU. Doctors and Lawyers (Read : Professionals) don't downtalk each other and if they do it's considered unprofessional. They present a unified front of academic solidarity. In short - they act professional. They dress the part. Do clothes make you smarter? No... but they make you appear more professional. We don't need to be running around like that idiot in the Washington state march on Microsoft event (covered by the press) in an Obi-Wan-Kenobi outfit. What a fool. The press covered this event and he presented an image of the IT industry. Quite simply - we looked like idiots.
So, if you'd like to be taken seriously GROW UP!! Ditch the nose ring, the eye ring, the lip ring, get a haircut, wash your hair, throw out the tshirts with PGP code all over it, slather your face with some Oxy5 (and wash it occasionally), get a treadmill (and use it) so you can shed a few hundred pounds, clean your teeth, laugh without snorting, untape the glasses (or better yet look into LASIK) and, in general - clean up your act.
Ditch the Linux/Microsoft war and the Linux(Debian)/Linux(Suse)/Linux(RedHat)/Linux(Man
Other things we can do: start making certain software implementations require certifications (general or specific). Develop an Engineer Certification (not branded to a specific company) and rally around it. Develop a Coding certification - and rally around it. Virus package solutions that are serious must be Engineered/Implemented by certified professionals or you simply can't buy the software. If enough of us rally to this cause it will become a standard because we make the standard with our daily recommendations to the customers that pay us. Security installations - same certification requirements. This software packages that play ball with us - we recommend and we buy. Is that fair? Probably not - but Doctors and Lawyers don't play fair and they make a hell of a lot more money than we do and their jobs are not going overseas. If a doctor comes to America from another country then they have to acquire a license here in America before they can practice. We can do that too. Lawyers and Doctors have effectively said: "We don't really care how you did it where you come from. Over here, for right or wrong, we do it our way - and so will you - or you won't work here."
Doctors and Lawyers protected their profession long ago by establishing this system. Our industry is still young and the future lies with all of us. What will we be like in 50 years, 100?
Think about it...
So you're saying that our *nix systems DO turn on/off ports as needed then...?
Because if not, the original statement placing security in the hands (and head) of the user/administrator is correct. Proper security methodologies can never, will never, have never been a function of the OS. While some OS's are more conscious of security than others in their design they are not the "base" for implementation.
That "base" is conceptual and subject to the intelligence and wisdom of the user.
After all - I trust NO OS for security implementations because I have effectively trusted someone else at that point and quite simply - that doesn't sit well with me.
Gene Hackman said it best in The Replacements about who wanted to carry the ball when it really counted - "Winner's always do..." - When it comes to security I don't want Symantec, DLink, Cisco, LinkSys, Microsoft, Linux, BSD, CheckPoint, etc... carrying the ball for me...
I will carry that ball myself... and I trust no-one...
I had a conversation today about legislative requirements to mark spam as an advertisement. Invariably the subject arose concerning utilization of compromised computers making enforcement of any anti-spam law rather difficult.
I have a thought about that... We are permitted to own vehicles which participate on various public transportation infrastructure facilities such as state roads, the interstate system, etc. We are required to ensure the road-worthiness of the vehicle we own. We are required (more or less in differing states) to ensure our vehicle meets certain emission control requirements as well. Why then is it a leap to imagine that we must ensure (to the best of our ability) that our computers are kept up to date to prevent them from becoming criminal tools. I understand that we can't all be liable for the repercussion of the latest hack. I even understand that some people aren't as tech savvy as others just like I understand I am not a mechanic but it is my responsibility to ensure the tires on my car are securely fastened before using it to participate on a public roadway. If I don't know how to tighten lug nuts there are mechanics who can help me ensure my vehicle is safe. There are technical types who can help the "computer clueless" batten down the hatches a bit.
For example, I think if there is currently a computer out there that is STILL a nimda or code-red shit pump the owner of the computer should share some level of negligent liability, criminal or civil. If you are going to connect your computer to the internet then you need to take some responsibility for that action. For too long we just let anyone connect to the net any way they like. Let's tighten up the ship a bit...