...a non-Microsoft OS that we can use to do everything we can do on Windows...
Such a system is called Mac OSX. Well maybe not EVERYTHING, such as many games, but most things a computer can do can be done on a Mac. The X-plane sim I just got recently works really well on my Mac. The Mac will even run Windows, still kinda slow in emulation right now, but that will change when the x86 Macs come on the market.
....A printer which can print $20 dollar bills....
Most decent inkjets will do a pretty good job here, but the US Govt. takes a rather dim view of such activity.
as for immediate start computers...
The wake up from sleep on Macs is essentially instantaneous. Unless an installation of new software requires a restart, there is no real reason to ever shut down a Mac. My PB has never even once failed to wake up properly from sleep. Who cares if a computer takes a few minutes to boot up if that only happens maybe once or twice a month, if that.
.....a legitimate interest in verifying the identity of the user......
Disney, in this case is only interested in enforcing the non-transferability of the ticket. They could'nt care less about any of your other personal information. If they start asking for the same kind of information that you have to give to an airline and then still do the fingerprint stuff as well, they may be stepping over the line.
....So it is not a finger print, but can be used as a unique identifier..
In order to get into the Disney parks, do you also have to give then your SS number, Name, Address etc? if not, how can this be an identifier of YOU or any other individual. They just want to enforce the terms of the ticket which says it is not transferable. The finger scan ties you and the ticket together, that's all.
In order to view or hear a digital data stream it has to be decrypted at some point. The adpator could fool the software into thinking that the computer box was connected to an "acceptable" monitor or sound system. If the legally decrypted data stream is accessible, it can be copied/diverted and used in any way otherwise consistent with the law. Putting out a copy of the decrypted data for anyone to use is definitely both illegal and immoral.
The key for content providers is to make the price, quality and convenience of their products compelling enough so that protections like this are not needed for them to make enough money for their efforts. I recently bought a release on DVD of the great classic movie "Gone with the Wind". I'm sure that this film is available for free somewhere on the Internet. Why spend time looking for a second rate pirated copy of an award winning movie such as this, when it is so much easier to get a genuine professionally done DVD for a reasonable price?
....and are only available on longhorn and/or higher versions....
Of course, by the time longjohn or whatever they'll finally call it arrives, you'll be able to buy a cheap Intel Mac with OSX 10.5, making MS OS entirely optional. MSNBC is optional right now already. There are plenty of better places for news besides them.
....Anti-circumvention measures bit of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act......
Actually such a box would not be a circumvention device, but a simple display adaptor. Sort of like making a CD or DVD drive ignore and properly read messed up formatted disks. Some copy protections take advantage of certain disk drive flaws or limitations. Designing a drive WITHOUT such limitations is NOT against the DMCA. That is some brand disk drives read and play so called copy protected disks and some don't. Making an adaptor that ignores all special signals that properly displays ALL video on ANY otherwise capable monitor would be like that also. Also, unless the computer is hermetically sealed or has special DRM hardware, there will always be access to the digital data stream.
Any time a properly decoded stream of bits is existing inside of a PC, it can be copied or re-routed. I wonder if *any* DRM or copy protection has EVER worked for any length of time? Any DRM scheme that is going to force large numbers of users to spend hundreds will certainly be hacked just like the present DVD "security" schemes.
Besides all this, what's so great about being able to clearly see the lousy shave job of your favorite news anchor or whoever in glorious HD video? Wouldn't it be wonderful if the content provider spent all that money for DRM and lawyers on improving the quality of their content instead?
....and the right to pay an arm and a leg for connection....
If the UN runs the Internet, everybody will get their Internet, Cable TV, Phone, Water, Sewer, electric power etc. for free. Of course all ads, spam, porn and other negatives will also be gone forever the day after the UN takes over the Internet from those "greedy" corporations.
....I don't want your government telling me what I can or cannot do on the net.....
Exactly what is the American Government telling you that you can't do on the net?
If the UN disappeared today, would life here on earth really change the least little bit tomorrow or anytime thereafter? For sure, the Internet would keep running just as it has so far. Why fix something that is not broken. I can access sites in Argentinia and Italy just fine without the UN or anyone else changing a thing right now. What is these people's beef, other than wanting control and power that they now don't have.
..... haven't rebooted my machine in over a month....
Indeed, I just close the lid on my PB which makes it sleep. When I open it again everything is exactly as it was and I just resume whatever I was doing. Ocasionally for installing software, I have to log out since I don't have fast user switching turned on and don't normally run with administrator rights. The wake up from sleep is instantaneous as far as I can tell.
....In 25 years expect computers to be largely hack/virus proof,....
No security system can ever be absolute. No human has ever made a lock that another humand could or did not break. However, security can be good enough so it is not worth for most, the work it takes to break it. The Mac OSX is pretty close to that right now. However, since computers are run by people, social engineering will always get around the best technological solutions. People are also corruptible and bribery can also be used to get around the best technological security efforts. In the end, if people don't want to be good, it is impossible to force all of them to be good. There will always be some who will do whatever they can to be disruptive and cause injury to others.
....discourage a particular behavior, you simply have to raise the price....
It is the surety of getting caught that is a much bettrer deterrent to crime, not the severity of the punishment. If it were 99% certain that every time you speed you have to pay say $50 fine, it is not likely you'd speed very often. On the other hand if there were only a 1% chance of getting caught speeding, but the fine were $1000, there would be far more speeders willing to take the chance. Unfortunately, the chance of getting caught for a cybercrime is quite low. Also, cybercrime is global and the justice systems are national. A viruswriter in Russia is quite safe against being called on the carpet in the USA. The German kid who released the Sasser worm would likely get a much tougher sentence in the US.
....Probably because it's not especially difficult to have a Windows machines that does not suffer from these problems....
For a relative expert, like most here on/. that is very much true. I have not have had much trouble I could not deal with on my Windows machines either, other than Windows seems to want to be re-installed periodically for other reasons not always related to malware. Many, if not most here have had to revive dead or dysfunctional Windows machines for others who know nothing or very little about computers. This kind of rescue operation is much less frequent for Macs. Even when a Mac acts up, a non geek user is more likely to get it working again than Windows.
You may not be planning it now, but you may end up using OSX more after your Apple Mac running Windows gets hosed a few times by malware, while the OSX partition continues to operate unscathed. If the new OS that MS promises is going to be at all secure, you'll be buying most of your software again anyway, so you might as well spend the money on OSX programs at that time. It is SO nice not to have to worry about all of the thousands of Windows malwares out there messing up my Mac. That is not likely to change just because of a processor change in the future Macs. Constantly having to keep updating all the anti-malware programs is a big hassle for my Windows boxes.
....but who out there wants to buy something that's purposefully crippled?.....
What makes you think that Apple will purposely want to cripple their OSX? Have they not always designed their hardware and software as a unit, regardless of the different chips they used over the years? Why should they design their products now with any other consideration besides building a reliable over all system? If that means the OS and hardware are tailored for each other as before, it is highly likely that the software will not run on an existing generic white box x86. A processor alone is still a long ways from a complete integrated computer system, encompassing all aspects, including all sofware. Apple will certainly not supply all the software for a million different PC designs, as Microsoft does now. They are also not very likely to release a set of specs to computer makers, detailing exactly what is needed to make an OSX compatible box.
I suspect that some very highly skilled geeks, such as those populating/. will figure out how to get OSX running on a few select non Apple machines, but the vast majority of users will buy an Apple product with OSX pre-installed. If, and that is a big if, Apple's new x86 systems sell in huge numbers, such as their ipods, someone big like Dell may try to make a computer compatible with OSX. At that point Apple will have to decide whether to use their legal department to stop that on the basis of some patents or whatever. Hopefully, they'll decide at that point, that licensing their exact designs would be better for their bottom line.
.....I think OS X is the worst of the three OSes I use regularly.....
I wonder if Windows is one of those three, since you don't name them. How anyone could rank the insecure, malware prone often crashing Windows above OSX is something I cannot fathom. The great iLife suite of programs included with every new Mac makes it a very compelling platform for anyone with even a small artistic bent. For games a console is much better and for business a Windows machine is usually required because much special software for business only works with that OS. When the processor switch is complete, I suspect that many Apple boxes will also run Windows. Even at present processor performance, the kind of chips in a computer are much less important than the software running on the hardware.
They may not be the only terrorists, but because of them being in posession of so much oil wealth, they are the ones who have exported their terrror all over the globe. Appeasing violent agressors has never been a way to stop their agression. It matters not whether these agressors are in charge of some Government somwhere or some groups such as Al Queda not officially affiliated with any particular Government or nation. In the past, when violent fanatic men rose to power in nations such as Germany, Japan, Soviet Russia and many others, were exporting their violence, they had to be stopped at great cost of lives of money. Now, to stop such people, it will be much harder, because first they have to be found and identified, before they can be eliminated. Back then, it was generally known where and who they were. The question is whether the present generation is willing to pay the kind of price that was required of those who opposed the national terrorists of the previous century.
....The only thing that will stop terrorism is to stop pissing off people....
The problem with the Muslim fanatics is that anyone who is not a Muslim of their particular type pisses them off and will be a target. They believe that anyone who is not a Muslim is an infidel who must be converted by force or eliminated. They want everybody to knuckle under and become a Muslim of their particular view of the Muslim religion.
You don't get it do you -- Someone obviously clicked a mouse, but there is no way to prove WHO did. I have multiple users on my computers and they click the mouse (mice) on all sorts of stuff all the time. Nobody ever knows who clicked what and when.
...'criminal intent' is proven simply by you being aware and doing nothing....
All that is irrelevant, since in a valid contract it has to be established WHO the parties to the contract are. THAT is IMPOSSIBLE to do in the case of mouse clicks. There is no way to PROVE who clicked a mouse. As far as I know clicking a mouse is not a crime.
If the Russian court decides to award the full amount doesn't mean that she'll collect so much as one red cent. Since when does a Russian court have jurisdiction over anyone in the US?
...the infection routes on Windows still haven't been closed....
And it is not likely that they will be any time soon. MS has to make their OS secure from the ground up and that means you buy all new software. Unless you have a rather top of the line system now, be prepared to buy new hardware as well. Like in the physical world, good security is neither easy nor cheap. A Mac with OSX, because of a large number of factors is about as secure a computer you can buy. If you are an expert, like most here on/. you CAN make Windows quite secure also, but be prepared to spend considerable time and money doing so, both initially, and in an ongoing battle with the thousands of malware programs which are constantly changing to get past security measures.
It is almost certain that Intel OSX won't run on any existing PC box any more than the present PPC OSX does. You might as well save your money right now for a new Mac with "Intel inside". Just because computers have the same processor type doesn't mean they are software compatible.
Yeah, sure, and an eight year old installing a game he got for his birthday in his computer is criminal!? Obviously not and any "contract' or "agreement" supossedly done when he clicks "I agree" has legal force? Give me a break! Through at all ages in all legal systems, a binding agreement is always between knowing, clearly identifyable parties, often in front of witnesses. There is NO WAY to prove WHO clicked a mouse, therefore it can never be ascertained WHO agreed to what. Something may have been agreed to in the usesless verbiage of ALL of these mouse click agreements, but the WHO factor can NEVER be proved in a court of law unless there are some witnesses who under oath can identify the mouse clicker and the circumstances of the clicking. When push comes to shove, all these click agreements are unenforceable garbage.
Slashdot Mirror
...a non-Microsoft OS that we can use to do everything we can do on Windows...
Such a system is called Mac OSX. Well maybe not EVERYTHING, such as many games, but most things a computer can do can be done on a Mac. The X-plane sim I just got recently works really well on my Mac. The Mac will even run Windows, still kinda slow in emulation right now, but that will change when the x86 Macs come on the market.
....A printer which can print $20 dollar bills....
Most decent inkjets will do a pretty good job here, but the US Govt. takes a rather dim view of such activity.
as for immediate start computers...
The wake up from sleep on Macs is essentially instantaneous. Unless an installation of new software requires a restart, there is no real reason to ever shut down a Mac. My PB has never even once failed to wake up properly from sleep. Who cares if a computer takes a few minutes to boot up if that only happens maybe once or twice a month, if that.
.....What if a double upper-limb amputee buys a season ticket? What about a paralytic?....
They'll let those kinds of people in for free or at least let them passs their ticket onto another amputee/paralytic.
.....a legitimate interest in verifying the identity of the user. .....
Disney, in this case is only interested in enforcing the non-transferability of the ticket. They could'nt care less about any of your other personal information. If they start asking for the same kind of information that you have to give to an airline and then still do the fingerprint stuff as well, they may be stepping over the line.
....So it is not a finger print, but can be used as a unique identifier..
In order to get into the Disney parks, do you also have to give then your SS number, Name, Address etc? if not, how can this be an identifier of YOU or any other individual. They just want to enforce the terms of the ticket which says it is not transferable. The finger scan ties you and the ticket together, that's all.
....The data stream is encrypted....
In order to view or hear a digital data stream it has to be decrypted at some point. The adpator could fool the software into thinking that the computer box was connected to an "acceptable" monitor or sound system. If the legally decrypted data stream is accessible, it can be copied/diverted and used in any way otherwise consistent with the law. Putting out a copy of the decrypted data for anyone to use is definitely both illegal and immoral.
The key for content providers is to make the price, quality and convenience of their products compelling enough so that protections like this are not needed for them to make enough money for their efforts. I recently bought a release on DVD of the great classic movie "Gone with the Wind". I'm sure that this film is available for free somewhere on the Internet. Why spend time looking for a second rate pirated copy of an award winning movie such as this, when it is so much easier to get a genuine professionally done DVD for a reasonable price?
....and are only available on longhorn and/or higher versions....
Of course, by the time longjohn or whatever they'll finally call it arrives, you'll be able to buy a cheap Intel Mac with OSX 10.5, making MS OS entirely optional. MSNBC is optional right now already. There are plenty of better places for news besides them.
....Anti-circumvention measures bit of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act......
Actually such a box would not be a circumvention device, but a simple display adaptor. Sort of like making a CD or DVD drive ignore and properly read messed up formatted disks. Some copy protections take advantage of certain disk drive flaws or limitations. Designing a drive WITHOUT such limitations is NOT against the DMCA. That is some brand disk drives read and play so called copy protected disks and some don't. Making an adaptor that ignores all special signals that properly displays ALL video on ANY otherwise capable monitor would be like that also. Also, unless the computer is hermetically sealed or has special DRM hardware, there will always be access to the digital data stream.
Any time a properly decoded stream of bits is existing inside of a PC, it can be copied or re-routed. I wonder if *any* DRM or copy protection has EVER worked for any length of time? Any DRM scheme that is going to force large numbers of users to spend hundreds will certainly be hacked just like the present DVD "security" schemes.
Besides all this, what's so great about being able to clearly see the lousy shave job of your favorite news anchor or whoever in glorious HD video? Wouldn't it be wonderful if the content provider spent all that money for DRM and lawyers on improving the quality of their content instead?
....and the right to pay an arm and a leg for connection....
If the UN runs the Internet, everybody will get their Internet, Cable TV, Phone, Water, Sewer, electric power etc. for free. Of course all ads, spam, porn and other negatives will also be gone forever the day after the UN takes over the Internet from those "greedy" corporations.
....I don't want your government telling me what I can or cannot do on the net.....
Exactly what is the American Government telling you that you can't do on the net?
If the UN disappeared today, would life here on earth really change the least little bit tomorrow or anytime thereafter? For sure, the Internet would keep running just as it has so far. Why fix something that is not broken. I can access sites in Argentinia and Italy just fine without the UN or anyone else changing a thing right now. What is these people's beef, other than wanting control and power that they now don't have.
..... haven't rebooted my machine in over a month....
Indeed, I just close the lid on my PB which makes it sleep. When I open it again everything is exactly as it was and I just resume whatever I was doing. Ocasionally for installing software, I have to log out since I don't have fast user switching turned on and don't normally run with administrator rights. The wake up from sleep is instantaneous as far as I can tell.
....In 25 years expect computers to be largely hack/virus proof,....
No security system can ever be absolute. No human has ever made a lock that another humand could or did not break. However, security can be good enough so it is not worth for most, the work it takes to break it. The Mac OSX is pretty close to that right now. However, since computers are run by people, social engineering will always get around the best technological solutions. People are also corruptible and bribery can also be used to get around the best technological security efforts. In the end, if people don't want to be good, it is impossible to force all of them to be good. There will always be some who will do whatever they can to be disruptive and cause injury to others.
....discourage a particular behavior, you simply have to raise the price....
It is the surety of getting caught that is a much bettrer deterrent to crime, not the severity of the punishment. If it were 99% certain that every time you speed you have to pay say $50 fine, it is not likely you'd speed very often. On the other hand if there were only a 1% chance of getting caught speeding, but the fine were $1000, there would be far more speeders willing to take the chance. Unfortunately, the chance of getting caught for a cybercrime is quite low. Also, cybercrime is global and the justice systems are national. A viruswriter in Russia is quite safe against being called on the carpet in the USA. The German kid who released the Sasser worm would likely get a much tougher sentence in the US.
....Probably because it's not especially difficult to have a Windows machines that does not suffer from these problems....
/. that is very much true. I have not have had much trouble I could not deal with on my Windows machines either, other than Windows seems to want to be re-installed periodically for other reasons not always related to malware. Many, if not most here have had to revive dead or dysfunctional Windows machines for others who know nothing or very little about computers. This kind of rescue operation is much less frequent for Macs. Even when a Mac acts up, a non geek user is more likely to get it working again than Windows.
For a relative expert, like most here on
....I'm still not planning on switching, .....
You may not be planning it now, but you may end up using OSX more after your Apple Mac running Windows gets hosed a few times by malware, while the OSX partition continues to operate unscathed. If the new OS that MS promises is going to be at all secure, you'll be buying most of your software again anyway, so you might as well spend the money on OSX programs at that time. It is SO nice not to have to worry about all of the thousands of Windows malwares out there messing up my Mac. That is not likely to change just because of a processor change in the future Macs. Constantly having to keep updating all the anti-malware programs is a big hassle for my Windows boxes.
....but who out there wants to buy something that's purposefully crippled?.....
/. will figure out how to get OSX running on a few select non Apple machines, but the vast majority of users will buy an Apple product with OSX pre-installed. If, and that is a big if, Apple's new x86 systems sell in huge numbers, such as their ipods, someone big like Dell may try to make a computer compatible with OSX. At that point Apple will have to decide whether to use their legal department to stop that on the basis of some patents or whatever. Hopefully, they'll decide at that point, that licensing their exact designs would be better for their bottom line.
What makes you think that Apple will purposely want to cripple their OSX? Have they not always designed their hardware and software as a unit, regardless of the different chips they used over the years? Why should they design their products now with any other consideration besides building a reliable over all system? If that means the OS and hardware are tailored for each other as before, it is highly likely that the software will not run on an existing generic white box x86. A processor alone is still a long ways from a complete integrated computer system, encompassing all aspects, including all sofware. Apple will certainly not supply all the software for a million different PC designs, as Microsoft does now. They are also not very likely to release a set of specs to computer makers, detailing exactly what is needed to make an OSX compatible box.
I suspect that some very highly skilled geeks, such as those populating
.....I think OS X is the worst of the three OSes I use regularly.....
I wonder if Windows is one of those three, since you don't name them. How anyone could rank the insecure, malware prone often crashing Windows above OSX is something I cannot fathom. The great iLife suite of programs included with every new Mac makes it a very compelling platform for anyone with even a small artistic bent. For games a console is much better and for business a Windows machine is usually required because much special software for business only works with that OS. When the processor switch is complete, I suspect that many Apple boxes will also run Windows. Even at present processor performance, the kind of chips in a computer are much less important than the software running on the hardware.
....Muslims are not the only terrorists....
They may not be the only terrorists, but because of them being in posession of so much oil wealth, they are the ones who have exported their terrror all over the globe. Appeasing violent agressors has never been a way to stop their agression. It matters not whether these agressors are in charge of some Government somwhere or some groups such as Al Queda not officially affiliated with any particular Government or nation. In the past, when violent fanatic men rose to power in nations such as Germany, Japan, Soviet Russia and many others, were exporting their violence, they had to be stopped at great cost of lives of money. Now, to stop such people, it will be much harder, because first they have to be found and identified, before they can be eliminated. Back then, it was generally known where and who they were. The question is whether the present generation is willing to pay the kind of price that was required of those who opposed the national terrorists of the previous century.
....The only thing that will stop terrorism is to stop pissing off people....
The problem with the Muslim fanatics is that anyone who is not a Muslim of their particular type pisses them off and will be a target. They believe that anyone who is not a Muslim is an infidel who must be converted by force or eliminated. They want everybody to knuckle under and become a Muslim of their particular view of the Muslim religion.
....required YOU to agree to the license ....
You don't get it do you -- Someone obviously clicked a mouse, but there is no way to prove WHO did. I have multiple users on my computers and they click the mouse (mice) on all sorts of stuff all the time. Nobody ever knows who clicked what and when.
...'criminal intent' is proven simply by you being aware and doing nothing....
All that is irrelevant, since in a valid contract it has to be established WHO the parties to the contract are. THAT is IMPOSSIBLE to do in the case of mouse clicks. There is no way to PROVE who clicked a mouse. As far as I know clicking a mouse is not a crime.
....this woman stands to gain $300 million....
If the Russian court decides to award the full amount doesn't mean that she'll collect so much as one red cent. Since when does a Russian court have jurisdiction over anyone in the US?
...the infection routes on Windows still haven't been closed....
/. you CAN make Windows quite secure also, but be prepared to spend considerable time and money doing so, both initially, and in an ongoing battle with the thousands of malware programs which are constantly changing to get past security measures.
And it is not likely that they will be any time soon. MS has to make their OS secure from the ground up and that means you buy all new software. Unless you have a rather top of the line system now, be prepared to buy new hardware as well. Like in the physical world, good security is neither easy nor cheap. A Mac with OSX, because of a large number of factors is about as secure a computer you can buy. If you are an expert, like most here on
...trying out Mac OS on my Intel machines...
It is almost certain that Intel OSX won't run on any existing PC box any more than the present PPC OSX does. You might as well save your money right now for a new Mac with "Intel inside". Just because computers have the same processor type doesn't mean they are software compatible.
...All they have to prove is criminal intent....
Yeah, sure, and an eight year old installing a game he got for his birthday in his computer is criminal!? Obviously not and any "contract' or "agreement" supossedly done when he clicks "I agree" has legal force? Give me a break! Through at all ages in all legal systems, a binding agreement is always between knowing, clearly identifyable parties, often in front of witnesses. There is NO WAY to prove WHO clicked a mouse, therefore it can never be ascertained WHO agreed to what. Something may have been agreed to in the usesless verbiage of ALL of these mouse click agreements, but the WHO factor can NEVER be proved in a court of law unless there are some witnesses who under oath can identify the mouse clicker and the circumstances of the clicking. When push comes to shove, all these click agreements are unenforceable garbage.