I agree with your second paragraph, but there's something in your first that bothers me.... alcohol and tobacco companies aren't liable (and shouldn't be) for kids getting to their products. I place that responsbility on the parents, not on the companies. Advertising to kids (Joe Camel) is one thing, but blaming music companies (or video games, or movies, or South Park) for "corruption of innocents" while the parents stand by and let it happen is pretty far out there.
"Gosh if the world was perfect, the RIAA would be charged criminally for trying to push explicit lyrics on children."
1. Are they trying to push explicit lyrics on children? I guess I could see where you're coming from if you're thinking Eminem and the fan base that has embraced him, but the same can be said for South Park.
My mail provider has some filtering software which lets me customize the threshold that I want filtered. On my side, Thunderbird has filters. Finally, I use a wildcard email that forwards to my actual address. When I use my email somewhere that might spam me, I simply describe the potential spammer like this:
slashdotspam@mydomain.com
If I get mail from there, I know how it came in. The combination of all these keeps my total spam to probably three or four a week.
My first experience with computers was in the early 90s, on my friend's Mac. IIRC, it was rife with virus problems - all from his thousands of downloads from AOL.
"The flawed security in Windows is a result of closed source. It has absolutely nothing to do with the knowledge level of the user base."
Do you run as root? Do you open every email attachment you get? Do you install CometCursor, five file-sharing programs with spyware, and click Yes to install whenever a box comes up?
If you want the power to make a system more or less secure (hint: it's necessary for any network) then you have to accept that idiot users will cause problems. They will run with relaxed security, they will install programs that will make you cringe, they will not patch their OS, and they will become infected with viruses.
Hopefully, OpenOffice will be accepted in major areas like that - because then it would help to polish up the software and close any gaps that might exist between OpenOffice and MSOffice.
Personally, I've been trying to switch but find little things that make it harder to do - incompatibilities with my clients, things that aren't as usable as I'd like, etc. Without getting too much into it, I just think that MSOffice has had the benefit of time (which has good and bad consequences).
Many critical systems can have enormous monetary implications... but there are still quite a few instances where death or physical damage could be done.
The systems that run airplanes, power plants, any kind of transportation, or life support processes - all of them could result in deaths, even from a single bug.
Then there are countless security and privacy concerns, including banks, account information, etc. that could be compromised; information leaks can have consequences we cannot fathom.
Most programmers are not involved in systems like these, but the ones that are should be held to a higher standard than just an MCSE or a CompSci degree. However, I expect that most of those programmers are held to that standard already - not by degree or certs, but by experience and demonstrated ability.
I agree. With architect and engineer (and doctor, lawyer, etc.) there are requirements and licensing programs in place. With a slew of network engineers and software architects coming from colleges and these certification programs, people are quickly deceived by all the titles and certifications. The fact is, an MCSE is not an engineer.
We require a professional license for these other occupations because of how easy it is to be conned, and because of how much damage they can do. I consider some computer-related occupations to be just as dangerous.
The problem is this: Where you can teach yourself C and learn your networking at home in your basement, you cannot become a doctor through self-education. So a licensing program for computer professionals would have to account for the self-taught. I don't think it will happen.
It might be something like the NVidia deal from a while back: They had similar products that were priced differently, and with a firmware update you could get the more expensive product without buying it. A lot of hardware sites describe a chip by comparing its overclocked state to a higher-up product. For example, a 2.6GHz overclocked CPU that runs like a 3.0 - but you save $150.
No, these help their business. The percentage of people that overclock their machines is probably very small. However, the people that are willing to spend money upgrading their hardware are much more common. So Intel capitalizes on the fact that more people are willing to spend money on upgrades than to overclock.
Very few people will "not buy into" Intel because there are mechanisms like this in place... because most people don't know that overclocking exists, and many of the people who do aren't going to overclock anyway. No loss for Intel.
On the other hand, it's worth pointing out that it's the US Military - a 1566 XServe cluster won't get you decent FPS if you're only willing to shell out $40 for a video card.
Your first line is that advertisers shouldn't care how many people visit... but then you go on to talk about how you increase traffic to your own website.
If your site uses an ad-supported business model, you (and your advertisers) should care how many people are visiting your site. Advertisers want to spend their money somewhere that they know will be seen.
The Super Bowl charges more for a 30-second spot than your local cable channel; that's because of the sheer number of people that will be watching. If you (and your advertisers) know how many people are visiting the site, then you can put some numbers to your business model - and that's a smart way to run a business.
I was trying to include the not-so-successful consoles in my estimate.
1995 Sega Saturn 1998 Dreamcast
There are an awful lot that didn't last even three years.
Playstation came out in 94, but by the time 1999 rolled around the popularity was waning; if PS2 didn't come out in 2000 they might have lost a lot of customers.
I'd guess that the average game console life is probably around three years. Whether that comes from the obsolete technology, the natural decline of sales, or the short attention spans of the public (especially those that play video games?), I don't know. Xbox 2 might capitalize on the lull between PS2 and PS3. But you bring up a really good point about the movies - timing isn't everything. Quality means a hell of a lot more.
Not at all! I have a G5 cluster powering my custom PVR system, built a windmill to run the light on my front porch, and I recently installed a small nuclear power plant in my shed so I could power the lawn sprinkler system.
It sounds like the screams of thousands of users, as I hit that red button marked: Power.
Re:That's a genuine problem
on
Linux Unwired
·
· Score: 1
As I tell many of my users:
If I can't recreate and experience the problem, I can't fix it. Microsoft has heard these complaints, and has probably investigated the problem; if they can't experience the problem on their own, the logical conclusion is that it's not on their side. Of course, with something as complex as an OS and the associated software, hardware, drivers, etc. for the wirelesss, it's much harder to track down a bug, let alone find the exact settings that cause it.
Re:Windows Wireless Zero Configuration Problem
on
Linux Unwired
·
· Score: 1
I've never had this problem with Windows XP on any of my machines. They're all configured approximately the same, too.
I first encountered it yesterday, when a friend of mine installed a Linksys WUSB11 and complained about the drops. His network did not broadcast the SSID... and there are no other SSIDs being broadcast (that he can detect).
This is the first I've heard of this problem... but I've been configuring and using wireless networks for myself and friends for almost two years.
Reasonable doubt doesn't play into contract law the same as it does in a criminal case. There are a lot of gray areas as EULAs become ubiqitous - such as whether they constitue an actual contract or not. Many of the things that companies put in their privacy policies and EULAs are not legally binding and would not hold up in court if challenged.
It would be interesting to see a court rule on the effectiveness of EULAs in general... and hopefully establish a legally effective method for a EULA.
Comcast sells their cable and their internet separately. As a result, they have to keep their systems separate. When you call Comcast cable to inquire about your bill, they can't help you with anything related to the Internet charges - and vice versa. Maybe it's just how they have it set up (badly) or maybe it's a consequence of having the two areas split.
In a similar vein, but unrelated to these industries: My car/home insurance is through GMAC. I bought my insurance through their website. My fiancee bought hers through GMAC over the phone. Our accounts are completely different, are not accessible to each other, and the GMAC web reps cannot access phone-created accounts and vice versa.
Is it just me, or do these companies run their systems badly?
If the person is presented with the contract, given an unhindered opportunity to read and comprehend the contract, and signs it... it's binding. Nobody will overturn it just because you signed a contract without reading it. If it was intentionally vague or deceptive, then that's cause for breaking the contract.
You can never verify that they actually read and understood the contents of the EULA, but you can certainly verify that they were given the opportunity and that they "agreed" to the EULA.
Even if you skip the EULA and just click "I Agree" it signifies that you were presented with the document...
The judge wouldn't throw out a contract that you signed just because you said you didn't read it before signing. He'd probably call you an idiot.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with your second paragraph, but there's something in your first that bothers me.... alcohol and tobacco companies aren't liable (and shouldn't be) for kids getting to their products. I place that responsbility on the parents, not on the companies. Advertising to kids (Joe Camel) is one thing, but blaming music companies (or video games, or movies, or South Park) for "corruption of innocents" while the parents stand by and let it happen is pretty far out there.
"Gosh if the world was perfect, the RIAA would be charged criminally for trying to push explicit lyrics on children."
1. Are they trying to push explicit lyrics on children? I guess I could see where you're coming from if you're thinking Eminem and the fan base that has embraced him, but the same can be said for South Park.
2. Are you arguing for censorship?
The RIAA has to be seeing these CDs and thinking, "If people aren't buying Willenium, what are we doing wrong?"
They try to spin this component of the settlement as a heroic act, giving back to the community. Now they won't be able to do even that.
My mail provider has some filtering software which lets me customize the threshold that I want filtered. On my side, Thunderbird has filters. Finally, I use a wildcard email that forwards to my actual address. When I use my email somewhere that might spam me, I simply describe the potential spammer like this:
slashdotspam@mydomain.com
If I get mail from there, I know how it came in. The combination of all these keeps my total spam to probably three or four a week.
My first experience with computers was in the early 90s, on my friend's Mac. IIRC, it was rife with virus problems - all from his thousands of downloads from AOL.
"The flawed security in Windows is a result of closed source. It has absolutely nothing to do with the knowledge level of the user base."
Do you run as root? Do you open every email attachment you get? Do you install CometCursor, five file-sharing programs with spyware, and click Yes to install whenever a box comes up?
If you want the power to make a system more or less secure (hint: it's necessary for any network) then you have to accept that idiot users will cause problems. They will run with relaxed security, they will install programs that will make you cringe, they will not patch their OS, and they will become infected with viruses.
Hopefully, OpenOffice will be accepted in major areas like that - because then it would help to polish up the software and close any gaps that might exist between OpenOffice and MSOffice.
Personally, I've been trying to switch but find little things that make it harder to do - incompatibilities with my clients, things that aren't as usable as I'd like, etc. Without getting too much into it, I just think that MSOffice has had the benefit of time (which has good and bad consequences).
Many critical systems can have enormous monetary implications... but there are still quite a few instances where death or physical damage could be done.
The systems that run airplanes, power plants, any kind of transportation, or life support processes - all of them could result in deaths, even from a single bug.
Then there are countless security and privacy concerns, including banks, account information, etc. that could be compromised; information leaks can have consequences we cannot fathom.
Most programmers are not involved in systems like these, but the ones that are should be held to a higher standard than just an MCSE or a CompSci degree. However, I expect that most of those programmers are held to that standard already - not by degree or certs, but by experience and demonstrated ability.
I agree. With architect and engineer (and doctor, lawyer, etc.) there are requirements and licensing programs in place. With a slew of network engineers and software architects coming from colleges and these certification programs, people are quickly deceived by all the titles and certifications. The fact is, an MCSE is not an engineer.
We require a professional license for these other occupations because of how easy it is to be conned, and because of how much damage they can do. I consider some computer-related occupations to be just as dangerous.
The problem is this: Where you can teach yourself C and learn your networking at home in your basement, you cannot become a doctor through self-education. So a licensing program for computer professionals would have to account for the self-taught. I don't think it will happen.
It might be something like the NVidia deal from a while back: They had similar products that were priced differently, and with a firmware update you could get the more expensive product without buying it. A lot of hardware sites describe a chip by comparing its overclocked state to a higher-up product. For example, a 2.6GHz overclocked CPU that runs like a 3.0 - but you save $150.
No, these help their business. The percentage of people that overclock their machines is probably very small. However, the people that are willing to spend money upgrading their hardware are much more common. So Intel capitalizes on the fact that more people are willing to spend money on upgrades than to overclock.
Very few people will "not buy into" Intel because there are mechanisms like this in place... because most people don't know that overclocking exists, and many of the people who do aren't going to overclock anyway. No loss for Intel.
Silly rabbit, games aren't for Macs.
On the other hand, it's worth pointing out that it's the US Military - a 1566 XServe cluster won't get you decent FPS if you're only willing to shell out $40 for a video card.
BMW owners are different - they have the money for a BMW.
Your first line is that advertisers shouldn't care how many people visit... but then you go on to talk about how you increase traffic to your own website.
If your site uses an ad-supported business model, you (and your advertisers) should care how many people are visiting your site. Advertisers want to spend their money somewhere that they know will be seen.
The Super Bowl charges more for a 30-second spot than your local cable channel; that's because of the sheer number of people that will be watching. If you (and your advertisers) know how many people are visiting the site, then you can put some numbers to your business model - and that's a smart way to run a business.
I was trying to include the not-so-successful consoles in my estimate.
1995 Sega Saturn
1998 Dreamcast
There are an awful lot that didn't last even three years.
Playstation came out in 94, but by the time 1999 rolled around the popularity was waning; if PS2 didn't come out in 2000 they might have lost a lot of customers.
I'd guess that the average game console life is probably around three years. Whether that comes from the obsolete technology, the natural decline of sales, or the short attention spans of the public (especially those that play video games?), I don't know. Xbox 2 might capitalize on the lull between PS2 and PS3. But you bring up a really good point about the movies - timing isn't everything. Quality means a hell of a lot more.
Not at all. I use MS Word because my Word documents won't open in vi.
Not at all! I have a G5 cluster powering my custom PVR system, built a windmill to run the light on my front porch, and I recently installed a small nuclear power plant in my shed so I could power the lawn sprinkler system.
Overkill? Nah. We Americans like power!
It sounds like the screams of thousands of users, as I hit that red button marked: Power.
As I tell many of my users:
If I can't recreate and experience the problem, I can't fix it. Microsoft has heard these complaints, and has probably investigated the problem; if they can't experience the problem on their own, the logical conclusion is that it's not on their side. Of course, with something as complex as an OS and the associated software, hardware, drivers, etc. for the wirelesss, it's much harder to track down a bug, let alone find the exact settings that cause it.
I've never had this problem with Windows XP on any of my machines. They're all configured approximately the same, too.
I first encountered it yesterday, when a friend of mine installed a Linksys WUSB11 and complained about the drops. His network did not broadcast the SSID... and there are no other SSIDs being broadcast (that he can detect).
This is the first I've heard of this problem... but I've been configuring and using wireless networks for myself and friends for almost two years.
Reasonable doubt doesn't play into contract law the same as it does in a criminal case. There are a lot of gray areas as EULAs become ubiqitous - such as whether they constitue an actual contract or not. Many of the things that companies put in their privacy policies and EULAs are not legally binding and would not hold up in court if challenged.
It would be interesting to see a court rule on the effectiveness of EULAs in general... and hopefully establish a legally effective method for a EULA.
Comcast sells their cable and their internet separately. As a result, they have to keep their systems separate. When you call Comcast cable to inquire about your bill, they can't help you with anything related to the Internet charges - and vice versa. Maybe it's just how they have it set up (badly) or maybe it's a consequence of having the two areas split.
In a similar vein, but unrelated to these industries: My car/home insurance is through GMAC. I bought my insurance through their website. My fiancee bought hers through GMAC over the phone. Our accounts are completely different, are not accessible to each other, and the GMAC web reps cannot access phone-created accounts and vice versa.
Is it just me, or do these companies run their systems badly?
If the person is presented with the contract, given an unhindered opportunity to read and comprehend the contract, and signs it... it's binding. Nobody will overturn it just because you signed a contract without reading it. If it was intentionally vague or deceptive, then that's cause for breaking the contract.
You can never verify that they actually read and understood the contents of the EULA, but you can certainly verify that they were given the opportunity and that they "agreed" to the EULA.
Even if you skip the EULA and just click "I Agree" it signifies that you were presented with the document...
The judge wouldn't throw out a contract that you signed just because you said you didn't read it before signing. He'd probably call you an idiot.