I use the 10.04 beta, and did when it used Yahoo as the default as well. Canonical actually made it so if you changed your default search engine in the search box on the upper right, it would actually change the home page back to a Google search rather than a Yahoo one as well.
I'm quite sure both of these are simply escalating revenue sharing deals, but nobody can make the argument that Canonical was trying to force us over to Yahoo.
This is unfortunately very true. A friend of mine's significant other regularly checks into the psyche ward at the local hospital, and she still has full custody over their child, while he has to pay ridiculously unsympathetic child support amounts.
Hint: Child support is supposed to be based on your income. In practice, it's anything but.
You're insane, or you're simply not looking in the right places. LAMP jobs are everywhere, and almost always like open source experience.
Bitch about your job-finding experience if you like, but don't claim that only Microsoft folks are hired, it's just simply not true. Plus, your argument conveniently ignores companies like Canonical, where open source simply is everything.
They did something similar to FB Purity, a Greasemonkey script that allows users to filter out apps and other stuff they don't want to see in their feed. Facebook argued that they were misusing their "FB" trademark... eventually they let them continue under the name "fluff busting purity", probably due to the PR backlash that shutting them down would bring.
They've also shut down the Facebook portion of the Web 2.0 Suicide Machine, which runs scripts that allow a user to delete their social profiles as thoroughly as sites will allow. In that case, they argued that the Suicide Machine was violating their "Statement of Rights and Responsibilities"... which isn't even a law! Nonetheless, the Suicide Machine didn't have the financial ability to fight even frivolous claims like that, so they folded that section.
Facebook apparently believes that its users will continue using the site regardless of the ridiculous access policies that their legal department create and defend. I hope they're wrong.
Could we stop with the whole "ZOMG this post is going to be modded to oblivion" thing? I moderate frequently, and whenever most of us see something like that, we ignore the post (or possibly even mod it down for being off topic). Most moderators actually do take the job seriously.
I'd inject randomness into the surrounding pixels where such steganography was used; the algorithm would know which pixels actually held data using some sort of hash value from a specific frame of the movie.
John Holdren was worried about overpopulation (in a book from 1977, mind you), yes. And the very next sentence from that book is this:
Few today consider the situation in the United States serious enough to justify compulsion, however.
But you'd never quote the whole thing, would you? That just wouldn't work for your agenda.
In response to the comments from Beck and others, Holdren's office issued this statement: "The quotations used to suggest that Dr. Holdren supports coercive approaches to limiting population growth were taken from a 1977 college textbook on environmental science and policy, of which he was the third author. The quoted material was from a section of the book that described different possible approaches to limiting population growth and then concluded that the authors’ own preference was to employ the noncoercive approaches before the environmental and social impacts of overpopulation led desperate societies to employ coercive ones. Dr. Holdren has never been an advocate of compulsory abortions or other repressive means of population limitation."
Holdren's office also provided a statement from Annie and Paul Ehrlich, the co-authors: "We have been shocked at the serious mischaracterization of our views and those of John Holdren in blog posts based on misreadings of our jointly-authored 1000-page 1977 textbook, ECOSCIENCE. We were not then, never have been, and are not now 'advocates' of the Draconian measures for population limitation described — but not recommended — in the book's 60-plus small-type pages cataloging the full spectrum of population policies that, at the time, had either been tried in some country or analyzed by some commentator."
Under questioning by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., during his Senate confirmation hearing, Holdren said he "no longer thinks it's productive to focus on optimum population for the United States.... I think the key thing today is that we need to work to improve the conditions that all of our citizens face economically, environmentally, and in other respects. And we need to aim for something that I have for years been calling 'sustainable prosperity.'"
It's not entrapment if they're not law enforcement. (Which does make one wonder if local law enforcement could simply hire a third party to do things like this for them, but that's a separate question.)
Connecting to a torrent and reading a publicly available database of what peers are currently downloading is also not a wire tap, since you are actually just a client of the tracker in this instance; you're not actually performing a man in the middle read.
They can tell if the files are fake by checking themselves, which, as the agent of the copyright owner, is not illegal.
This is all stuff that MediaSentry does now. As to what they'll gain from hiring college students, I have no clue. Perhaps they're just looking for new ideas.
Plus, one can get around simple video editing with a trade secret digital watermarking method for the film.
Encrypt a unique customer identifier into pixels in the film, the time and placement of which are determined by a secret algorithm that the company only runs under court seal in the investigation / litigation of a leak. With enough randomness and slight enough changes in pixel intensities / luminosities thrown in, determining the steganography algorithm used (and thus where the information was stored) would be very difficult.
I think the MPAA is already doing this with screeners, albeit for a slightly different purpose.
This has potential as a business but only if one was able to convince the studios to play ball. Hmm...
Hey copyright holders! Would you like to sell copies of your IP at our online store? You'll get a (small) cut, but at least you'll get something! And, if you don't play ball, maybe uploaded versions of your files take a few weeks to get deleted. Maybe they don't get deleted at all. You wouldn't want that to happen, right?
Microsoft is always late to the party. GUI, LANs, the internet, and now internet search.
They figure they'll make up for it with superior marketing and product placement within their own software; don't underestimate the power that these things can have.
Sure, Vista/7 ships with drivers, and so could Linux if the GPL didn't prohibit it.
What part of the GPL prohibits shipping a completely separately licensed binary with it? Ubuntu's graphics are more encumbered than the GPL and yet they ship on the CD.
Now, nVidia's license, that's a more likely reason.
I am aware of Steam; what I was saying is that now they can use this locking DRM on consoles, preventing even the resale of console games.
PC games have been toying with DRM and hardware locking for a while; I see this one-time DLC as the beginnings of an attempt to kill resale entirely on consoles.
I don't agree with the verdict in the bnetd case, so my point stands. I think that a user's local machine is their own domain, and what they do with the software within is their business alone.
I'm surprised that game companies haven't started doing this whole one-time console locking code business for the whole game. It would completely destroy the used games market for that game, forcing people to buy it new if they wanted to play the game at all.
You can't delete your Facebook account unless you contact them with a (good) lawyer. You can only disable it, which only stops the emails. Your account remains accessible to everyone and, of course, every last shred of information about you remains in their database.
Slashdot Mirror
I use the 10.04 beta, and did when it used Yahoo as the default as well. Canonical actually made it so if you changed your default search engine in the search box on the upper right, it would actually change the home page back to a Google search rather than a Yahoo one as well.
I'm quite sure both of these are simply escalating revenue sharing deals, but nobody can make the argument that Canonical was trying to force us over to Yahoo.
In reality, the person leaking the video will likely be found guilty of treason and shot.
This is unfortunately very true. A friend of mine's significant other regularly checks into the psyche ward at the local hospital, and she still has full custody over their child, while he has to pay ridiculously unsympathetic child support amounts.
Hint: Child support is supposed to be based on your income. In practice, it's anything but.
Wouldn't this mean you could claim that any name that has been given to anyone is a valid word?
You're insane, or you're simply not looking in the right places. LAMP jobs are everywhere, and almost always like open source experience.
Bitch about your job-finding experience if you like, but don't claim that only Microsoft folks are hired, it's just simply not true. Plus, your argument conveniently ignores companies like Canonical, where open source simply is everything.
The funny thing is that the first thing I wondered was if I could get actual filesystem access through that somehow.
I love my blackhat side.
They did something similar to FB Purity, a Greasemonkey script that allows users to filter out apps and other stuff they don't want to see in their feed. Facebook argued that they were misusing their "FB" trademark... eventually they let them continue under the name "fluff busting purity", probably due to the PR backlash that shutting them down would bring.
They've also shut down the Facebook portion of the Web 2.0 Suicide Machine, which runs scripts that allow a user to delete their social profiles as thoroughly as sites will allow. In that case, they argued that the Suicide Machine was violating their "Statement of Rights and Responsibilities"... which isn't even a law! Nonetheless, the Suicide Machine didn't have the financial ability to fight even frivolous claims like that, so they folded that section.
Facebook apparently believes that its users will continue using the site regardless of the ridiculous access policies that their legal department create and defend. I hope they're wrong.
Could we stop with the whole "ZOMG this post is going to be modded to oblivion" thing? I moderate frequently, and whenever most of us see something like that, we ignore the post (or possibly even mod it down for being off topic). Most moderators actually do take the job seriously.
Just give the idiot plaintiff a double blind test, and we can move on with our lives.
We're not your friend, guy!
I'd inject randomness into the surrounding pixels where such steganography was used; the algorithm would know which pixels actually held data using some sort of hash value from a specific frame of the movie.
John Holdren was worried about overpopulation (in a book from 1977, mind you), yes. And the very next sentence from that book is this:
Few today consider the situation in the United States serious enough to justify compulsion, however.
But you'd never quote the whole thing, would you? That just wouldn't work for your agenda.
In response to the comments from Beck and others, Holdren's office issued this statement: "The quotations used to suggest that Dr. Holdren supports coercive approaches to limiting population growth were taken from a 1977 college textbook on environmental science and policy, of which he was the third author. The quoted material was from a section of the book that described different possible approaches to limiting population growth and then concluded that the authors’ own preference was to employ the noncoercive approaches before the environmental and social impacts of overpopulation led desperate societies to employ coercive ones. Dr. Holdren has never been an advocate of compulsory abortions or other repressive means of population limitation."
Holdren's office also provided a statement from Annie and Paul Ehrlich, the co-authors: "We have been shocked at the serious mischaracterization of our views and those of John Holdren in blog posts based on misreadings of our jointly-authored 1000-page 1977 textbook, ECOSCIENCE. We were not then, never have been, and are not now 'advocates' of the Draconian measures for population limitation described — but not recommended — in the book's 60-plus small-type pages cataloging the full spectrum of population policies that, at the time, had either been tried in some country or analyzed by some commentator."
Under questioning by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., during his Senate confirmation hearing, Holdren said he "no longer thinks it's productive to focus on optimum population for the United States. ... I think the key thing today is that we need to work to improve the conditions that all of our citizens face economically, environmentally, and in other respects. And we need to aim for something that I have for years been calling 'sustainable prosperity.'"
You really can't do any better than taking sentences from a 70s textbook out of context?
How's that universe you've imagined for yourself?
It's not entrapment if they're not law enforcement. (Which does make one wonder if local law enforcement could simply hire a third party to do things like this for them, but that's a separate question.)
Connecting to a torrent and reading a publicly available database of what peers are currently downloading is also not a wire tap, since you are actually just a client of the tracker in this instance; you're not actually performing a man in the middle read.
They can tell if the files are fake by checking themselves, which, as the agent of the copyright owner, is not illegal.
This is all stuff that MediaSentry does now. As to what they'll gain from hiring college students, I have no clue. Perhaps they're just looking for new ideas.
Plus, one can get around simple video editing with a trade secret digital watermarking method for the film.
Encrypt a unique customer identifier into pixels in the film, the time and placement of which are determined by a secret algorithm that the company only runs under court seal in the investigation / litigation of a leak. With enough randomness and slight enough changes in pixel intensities / luminosities thrown in, determining the steganography algorithm used (and thus where the information was stored) would be very difficult.
I think the MPAA is already doing this with screeners, albeit for a slightly different purpose.
This has potential as a business but only if one was able to convince the studios to play ball. Hmm...
Hey copyright holders! Would you like to sell copies of your IP at our online store? You'll get a (small) cut, but at least you'll get something! And, if you don't play ball, maybe uploaded versions of your files take a few weeks to get deleted. Maybe they don't get deleted at all. You wouldn't want that to happen, right?
Microsoft is always late to the party. GUI, LANs, the internet, and now internet search.
They figure they'll make up for it with superior marketing and product placement within their own software; don't underestimate the power that these things can have.
Do I buy games from the Playstation store?
Sure, Vista/7 ships with drivers, and so could Linux if the GPL didn't prohibit it.
What part of the GPL prohibits shipping a completely separately licensed binary with it? Ubuntu's graphics are more encumbered than the GPL and yet they ship on the CD.
Now, nVidia's license, that's a more likely reason.
I am aware of Steam; what I was saying is that now they can use this locking DRM on consoles, preventing even the resale of console games.
PC games have been toying with DRM and hardware locking for a while; I see this one-time DLC as the beginnings of an attempt to kill resale entirely on consoles.
I don't agree with the verdict in the bnetd case, so my point stands. I think that a user's local machine is their own domain, and what they do with the software within is their business alone.
I'm surprised that game companies haven't started doing this whole one-time console locking code business for the whole game. It would completely destroy the used games market for that game, forcing people to buy it new if they wanted to play the game at all.
No distribution is happening, which means no copyright infringement is taking place.
You can't delete your Facebook account unless you contact them with a (good) lawyer. You can only disable it, which only stops the emails. Your account remains accessible to everyone and, of course, every last shred of information about you remains in their database.
Nah. To a certain extent, people *will* shy away from things like a fully Flash interface, due to the accessibility problems it causes.