While Wintel users continued to fret about the oncoming loss of control over their own PC's at the hands of Microsoft, the RIAA/MPAA, Intel, and TCPA, I was always at ease, secure in the knowledge I had my Mac, on a completely differnt software/hardware platform, immune to all this. I looked forward to the time when Mac market share grew as the TCPA forced users to flee for "more liberated" computers.
Now I don't know what to expect. What will become of Mac computing as Intel adds more "not unannounced" DRM technology to it's processors?
Note that these viruses exploit some of the same classes of vulnerabilities seen under Windows. The first one relies on a MacOS X hole that allows any unprivileged program to specify that a program should be run at startup. The second comes from implicit script execution. The third is a file type spoof. Those are all very similar to Windows attacks.
Uh, these are not viruses. A big clue is the fact they all say "trojan" in their description. A trojan is not a virus, becase viruses spread by themselves, and trojans require the user to open a file, run a scripts, ect (read: user stupidity) to do their damage.
Also, the fact the the MacOS has some of the same class of attacks possible as a Windows PC, does not mean the MacOS is as insecure and as prone to viruses as Windows.
There's a bin for depositing old phones and batteries at Best Buy stores. The problem is they don't give you any kind of discount for doing it, and I've heard they take the phones in good condition, refirbish, and resell them to consumers with new plans.
There are also programs in existance where you can donate your old cellphone and they are given to battere women so they have an emergency phone to call for help if needed.
You can find these and other ideas what to do with your old cellphone here.
"Although there are currently only two main players in the CPU market, AMD and Intel, the number of choices is still enough to make the typical consumer's head spin."
Maybe this is why there's a near monolopy in operating systems, it's a good thing. Giving customers an actual choice seems to be enough to make their heads spin.
Okay, if Alan Moore is dissassociating himself for the movie V For Vendetta then I'm definetly not going to see it.
The studios have to learn that many people in the market audience for a movie based on a comic book are interested specifically because the movie is supposed to be based on the comic book. They can't just "do as they please" and expect to get the same people to come see it.
If the novel's own author is disgusted enough with the way the movie veers off from the actual story that he considers the fact both carry the same name as an odd coincidence, it's no longer the movie I want to see.
While a service like this is truly incredible, as people from the UK (who have had it for a few years) have pointed out, these services usually only work on "popular" songs. Songs that probably get played twenty times a day on U.S. top-40 radio, with oppertunities to find out the name quite often.
The branches of music this would be most useful for (Indie Rock, Electronic, Jazz and Classical) are unfortunately the ones the system will rarely recognize.
Most broadband connections will have a pool of IP's for a given area. If that IP range was registered with the VoIP provider, it would help detect when a person moved by checking if they are still within the same range. It would require assistance from the ISP's to provide possible ranges to the VoIP provider.
The only probelm with this is it requires the cooperation of the ISPs. And since many ISP's are cable and telcos offering phone service, you can imagine how eager they'll be to assist a direct competitor, even if it is for the public good.:-\
Also, to help detect -- VoIP providers could utilize the NCOA (National Change of Address) database from the post office. Since, most people have their mail forwarded.
This would be a great use for the NCOA database, but I can hear the red tape being wrapped around this project already. Privacy concerns being raised for one.
Due to the topology of the Internet it is difficult to find out a persons physical location based on the IP address.
This whole thing reminds me of that story a few months back about the guy who was suing to take his IP address with him when he changed hosting providers, and he won (at least the preliminary hearing). I didn't hear what happened after that.
Duh. Hence the phrase "assuming you aren't using a router" in my post. The point is there is certainly a way to identify who is who on the VoIP network. So it can be tracked who is making the call and what address to pass on to 911.
A VoIP device can be seen by its MAC address if it is hooked directly to the broadband connection, so it is concievable it be tracked the same way. Also the device can choose to send its MAC to the provider when it connects, can it not?
Not having VoIP service I can't confirm or deny that. You can interchange IP address, username/password, whatever you need to instead.
But since your broadband provider can see the MAC of your network card on your PC (assuming you aren't using a router), I don't see why it isn't possible for your VoIP provider to be able to see, or even be sent, the MAC by the adapter itself.
The provider has to authenticate the user as a paying customer somehow don't they?
How ironic! the Internet is designed to circumvent problems and survive anything that any kind of catestrophy throws at it.
Actually, wasn't that really DARPAnet that was designed that way? It was completely decentralized and everyone used IP addresses to ring each other. Once we start relying on centralized backbone networks and DNS servers, the internet stops being so unstoppable.
While I did misunderstand the probelm, the solution would be the same. Plus it would be even easier if they just need the approximate location for call routing purposes. An IVR system for people to call into can be set up as opposed to the VoIP's staff having to update records since a Zip Code would be enough info.
What if the customer had to register the MAC Address of their VOIP adapter (or router) with their provider and gave the address 911 should respond to. Lots of people use VoIP as a substitute for their regular phone line so their location does not change realative to this. When they make a 911 call, the VOIP provider would send this address to the dispatch center as the location of the caller.
This address would be changable either by calling the VoIP provider or can be changed online. The customer would be responsible for keeping the address up to date if their location changes.
If they make a 911 call and the router isn't at the location they have listed and they don't tell the operator their real location otherwise, they would have no one to blame but themselves. Their VoIP provider isn't psycic as to where they are.
Microsoft is developing a version of Windows to run on old machines that currently run 95 or 98. The move is to appease businesses and universities that don't want to scrap the old hardware. This is likely aimed at preventing Linux from gaining market share where MS is currently alienating their customers."
So instead they are going to alienate their OEM-builder customers, which are looking forward to the next version of Windows spurring a wave of purchases as consumer toss their Win98/ME machines for new ones necessary to run a new version of Windows decently.
Or, is Microsoft going to only make this Windows version available to eduaction and business customers, spurring howls from consumer watchdog groups and cheapos?
yes, but they sold me the phone and they were the ones who told me those specs, so I expect them to stand behind them.
They just repeat what they were told. Wireless carriers don't actually test phone for themselves, so they have no numbers to use other than what the manufacturer says. Quoting lower numbers would anger the phone vendors.
Before buying a phone, I would check it out on an actual review site like MobileBurn where they actaully use the phone for a while and tell you how often charging was required, if the phone met talk time specs, ect.
Pardon me if this sounds cynical but expecting a service company to stand behind the specifications of hardware they are selling outright to you and have no control over is not something I would ever expect. They aren't interested in taking responsibility for anything they don't have to.
I bought a phone at Verizon that said it had a battery life of 110 hours. When I actually used it, it lasted 48 hours or less. Now I understand that they fudge it a little, but less than half? So I went down there, and they had the audacity to tell me that the battery life listed was for when the phone was turned off!
This is exactly what I meant in another comment I made in this article. The phone does not live up to the specified battery specs and you're blaming Verizon? They didn't manufacture the cell phone. Cell phones not meeting marketing's claims of battery life isn't new. Verizon's reps' responses were certainly dumb, but they don't write the numbers, they just repeat what the manuafacturer said too.
Not much to this site. Mostly a great place to bitch and make businesses look bad. One thing I do notice is there is no way to reply to a story, which is awfully convienent because leafing through what's posted I realize lots of the stories are:
* People who didn't read the fine print on contractual agreements.
* Customer's who don't understand economics of scale (i.e. one person having troubles with cell phone reception in a given area of town does not justify the cost to put in a new tower for the company).
* People who are blaming the wrong person (i.e. a la carte cable)
Don't blame Comcast because you can't buy channels one at a time. Comcast can't buy their stations from Viacom, ect like that, that is why they don't offer it to you. If you hate this arrangement, talk to TimeWarner (Entertainmant) or NBC Universal, not Comcast.
The complaint he was referring to was probably the ones from DSL providers offering a six month introductory rate and supposedly failing to disclose the price after that point or cancellation fees.
Being someone who gets postcards from SBC all the time, I can attest that I look for the fine print about the actual cost after that time. I do not have much difficulty finding it, and it always does state the cost after that time and the cancellation fees if you leave the contract, and none of them are in hard to understand legalese.
Most go something like this: "Introductory rate of $29.95 applies for the first six months of contract preiod, after which time the price is $XX.95 thereafter..."
With this system, inmates carry a wrist bracelet which issues a signal every two seconds and is caught by RFID readers installed everywhere in the prison.
I thought RFID was a passive technology that only emits a signal when reader is putting out it's field. But that statement seems to imply the bracelets themselves are transmitting (which would require a power supply) and the readers are the passive devices, simply taking what signals are beamed at it. Am I missing smething here?
Wouldn't the phrasing be: With this system, inmates carry a wrist bracelet which is caught by RFID readers installed everywhere in the prison that emit a signal every two seconds.
This.sig is free shareware. Register now for only $49.95 to get its full 10MB version!
There's no such thing as "free shareware". It's either freeware (as in free) or shareware (as in please pass this copy around and pay for your copy to show your support - and perhaps get rid of the nag screens).
Also, shareware is ususlly not crippled in any way, the differnece between the registered and unregistered copies is genrally a couple small features or the lack of a nag screen. But the software is still 100% useable in it's basic functions without registering.
Software that only comes in a limited version and requires payment to recieve the "full 10MB version" is trialware.
OSIA says it has been trying for over two years to make headway with these government agencies but 'they tell me that they are scared of doing anything which will upset Microsoft.
Wow, who's working for who in this relationship again?
Firefox. Firefox is not bundled with Windows but it can be installed by the user. Before 1.0.4, there are several known security holes. Is the operating system to blame for any of these?
Actually, yes. Several of the security holes that have effected Firefox in the past have been due to problems with Windows (which is why these bugs did not effect the Linux or OSX versions of Firefox).
Slashdot Mirror
While Wintel users continued to fret about the oncoming loss of control over their own PC's at the hands of Microsoft, the RIAA/MPAA, Intel, and TCPA, I was always at ease, secure in the knowledge I had my Mac, on a completely differnt software/hardware platform, immune to all this. I looked forward to the time when Mac market share grew as the TCPA forced users to flee for "more liberated" computers.
Now I don't know what to expect. What will become of Mac computing as Intel adds more "not unannounced" DRM technology to it's processors?
Note that these viruses exploit some of the same classes of vulnerabilities seen under Windows. The first one relies on a MacOS X hole that allows any unprivileged program to specify that a program should be run at startup. The second comes from implicit script execution. The third is a file type spoof. Those are all very similar to Windows attacks.
Uh, these are not viruses. A big clue is the fact they all say "trojan" in their description. A trojan is not a virus, becase viruses spread by themselves, and trojans require the user to open a file, run a scripts, ect (read: user stupidity) to do their damage.
Also, the fact the the MacOS has some of the same class of attacks possible as a Windows PC, does not mean the MacOS is as insecure and as prone to viruses as Windows.
There's a bin for depositing old phones and batteries at Best Buy stores. The problem is they don't give you any kind of discount for doing it, and I've heard they take the phones in good condition, refirbish, and resell them to consumers with new plans.
There are also programs in existance where you can donate your old cellphone and they are given to battere women so they have an emergency phone to call for help if needed.
You can find these and other ideas what to do with your old cellphone here.
Maybe this is why there's a near monolopy in operating systems, it's a good thing. Giving customers an actual choice seems to be enough to make their heads spin.
In Mother Russia, to computer you are My User!
... It's OUR computer
... Computer owns YOU!
... computer is State property!
Okay, if Alan Moore is dissassociating himself for the movie V For Vendetta then I'm definetly not going to see it.
The studios have to learn that many people in the market audience for a movie based on a comic book are interested specifically because the movie is supposed to be based on the comic book. They can't just "do as they please" and expect to get the same people to come see it.
If the novel's own author is disgusted enough with the way the movie veers off from the actual story that he considers the fact both carry the same name as an odd coincidence, it's no longer the movie I want to see.
Then again, you could take that 99 and use it to buy the song on iTunes and own it legally.
But you have to figure out what the song is first!
While a service like this is truly incredible, as people from the UK (who have had it for a few years) have pointed out, these services usually only work on "popular" songs. Songs that probably get played twenty times a day on U.S. top-40 radio, with oppertunities to find out the name quite often.
The branches of music this would be most useful for (Indie Rock, Electronic, Jazz and Classical) are unfortunately the ones the system will rarely recognize.
Cool Beans!
Good thoughts.
:-\
Most broadband connections will have a pool of IP's for a given area. If that IP range was registered with the VoIP provider, it would help detect when a person moved by checking if they are still within the same range. It would require assistance from the ISP's to provide possible ranges to the VoIP provider.
The only probelm with this is it requires the cooperation of the ISPs. And since many ISP's are cable and telcos offering phone service, you can imagine how eager they'll be to assist a direct competitor, even if it is for the public good.
Also, to help detect -- VoIP providers could utilize the NCOA (National Change of Address) database from the post office. Since, most people have their mail forwarded.
This would be a great use for the NCOA database, but I can hear the red tape being wrapped around this project already. Privacy concerns being raised for one.
Due to the topology of the Internet it is difficult to find out a persons physical location based on the IP address.
This whole thing reminds me of that story a few months back about the guy who was suing to take his IP address with him when he changed hosting providers, and he won (at least the preliminary hearing). I didn't hear what happened after that.
Duh. Hence the phrase "assuming you aren't using a router" in my post. The point is there is certainly a way to identify who is who on the VoIP network. So it can be tracked who is making the call and what address to pass on to 911.
A VoIP device can be seen by its MAC address if it is hooked directly to the broadband connection, so it is concievable it be tracked the same way. Also the device can choose to send its MAC to the provider when it connects, can it not?
Not having VoIP service I can't confirm or deny that. You can interchange IP address, username/password, whatever you need to instead.
But since your broadband provider can see the MAC of your network card on your PC (assuming you aren't using a router), I don't see why it isn't possible for your VoIP provider to be able to see, or even be sent, the MAC by the adapter itself.
The provider has to authenticate the user as a paying customer somehow don't they?
How ironic! the Internet is designed to circumvent problems and survive anything that any kind of catestrophy throws at it.
Actually, wasn't that really DARPAnet that was designed that way? It was completely decentralized and everyone used IP addresses to ring each other. Once we start relying on centralized backbone networks and DNS servers, the internet stops being so unstoppable.
While I did misunderstand the probelm, the solution would be the same. Plus it would be even easier if they just need the approximate location for call routing purposes. An IVR system for people to call into can be set up as opposed to the VoIP's staff having to update records since a Zip Code would be enough info.
What if the customer had to register the MAC Address of their VOIP adapter (or router) with their provider and gave the address 911 should respond to. Lots of people use VoIP as a substitute for their regular phone line so their location does not change realative to this. When they make a 911 call, the VOIP provider would send this address to the dispatch center as the location of the caller.
This address would be changable either by calling the VoIP provider or can be changed online. The customer would be responsible for keeping the address up to date if their location changes.
If they make a 911 call and the router isn't at the location they have listed and they don't tell the operator their real location otherwise, they would have no one to blame but themselves. Their VoIP provider isn't psycic as to where they are.
Microsoft is developing a version of Windows to run on old machines that currently run 95 or 98. The move is to appease businesses and universities that don't want to scrap the old hardware. This is likely aimed at preventing Linux from gaining market share where MS is currently alienating their customers."
So instead they are going to alienate their OEM-builder customers, which are looking forward to the next version of Windows spurring a wave of purchases as consumer toss their Win98/ME machines for new ones necessary to run a new version of Windows decently.
Or, is Microsoft going to only make this Windows version available to eduaction and business customers, spurring howls from consumer watchdog groups and cheapos?
yes, but they sold me the phone and they were the ones who told me those specs, so I expect them to stand behind them.
They just repeat what they were told. Wireless carriers don't actually test phone for themselves, so they have no numbers to use other than what the manufacturer says. Quoting lower numbers would anger the phone vendors.
Before buying a phone, I would check it out on an actual review site like MobileBurn where they actaully use the phone for a while and tell you how often charging was required, if the phone met talk time specs, ect.
Pardon me if this sounds cynical but expecting a service company to stand behind the specifications of hardware they are selling outright to you and have no control over is not something I would ever expect. They aren't interested in taking responsibility for anything they don't have to.
I bought a phone at Verizon that said it had a battery life of 110 hours. When I actually used it, it lasted 48 hours or less. Now I understand that they fudge it a little, but less than half? So I went down there, and they had the audacity to tell me that the battery life listed was for when the phone was turned off!
This is exactly what I meant in another comment I made in this article. The phone does not live up to the specified battery specs and you're blaming Verizon? They didn't manufacture the cell phone. Cell phones not meeting marketing's claims of battery life isn't new. Verizon's reps' responses were certainly dumb, but they don't write the numbers, they just repeat what the manuafacturer said too.
Not much to this site. Mostly a great place to bitch and make businesses look bad. One thing I do notice is there is no way to reply to a story, which is awfully convienent because leafing through what's posted I realize lots of the stories are:
* People who didn't read the fine print on contractual agreements.
* Customer's who don't understand economics of scale (i.e. one person having troubles with cell phone reception in a given area of town does not justify the cost to put in a new tower for the company).
* People who are blaming the wrong person
(i.e. a la carte cable)
Don't blame Comcast because you can't buy channels one at a time. Comcast can't buy their stations from Viacom, ect like that, that is why they don't offer it to you. If you hate this arrangement, talk to TimeWarner (Entertainmant) or NBC Universal, not Comcast.
The complaint he was referring to was probably the ones from DSL providers offering a six month introductory rate and supposedly failing to disclose the price after that point or cancellation fees.
Being someone who gets postcards from SBC all the time, I can attest that I look for the fine print about the actual cost after that time. I do not have much difficulty finding it, and it always does state the cost after that time and the cancellation fees if you leave the contract, and none of them are in hard to understand legalese.
Most go something like this: "Introductory rate of $29.95 applies for the first six months of contract preiod, after which time the price is $XX.95 thereafter..."
With this system, inmates carry a wrist bracelet which issues a signal every two seconds and is caught by RFID readers installed everywhere in the prison.
I thought RFID was a passive technology that only emits a signal when reader is putting out it's field. But that statement seems to imply the bracelets themselves are transmitting (which would require a power supply) and the readers are the passive devices, simply taking what signals are beamed at it. Am I missing smething here?
Wouldn't the phrasing be:
With this system, inmates carry a wrist bracelet which is caught by RFID readers installed everywhere in the prison that emit a signal every two seconds.
This .sig is free shareware. Register now for only $49.95 to get its full 10MB version!
There's no such thing as "free shareware". It's either freeware (as in free) or shareware (as in please pass this copy around and pay for your copy to show your support - and perhaps get rid of the nag screens).
Also, shareware is ususlly not crippled in any way, the differnece between the registered and unregistered copies is genrally a couple small features or the lack of a nag screen. But the software is still 100% useable in it's basic functions without registering.
Software that only comes in a limited version and requires payment to recieve the "full 10MB version" is trialware.
OSIA says it has been trying for over two years to make headway with these government agencies but 'they tell me that they are scared of doing anything which will upset Microsoft.
Wow, who's working for who in this relationship again?
Actually, yes. Several of the security holes that have effected Firefox in the past have been due to problems with Windows (which is why these bugs did not effect the Linux or OSX versions of Firefox).
Apparently it is OK to record TV as long as your aren't sharing it.
:rolleyes:
Yeah, that would be the whole "for private home exhibitation only" clause you saw scroll by when watching rented movies.
Really, would the fact you are distributing the program for free interfere with the studio's business of selling the series on DVD? I wonder...