Probably the distribution of Major League Baseball games recorded with HTPC software. ESPN and FSN getting pissed at their distribution rights being tranmpled.
(after all, do they avoid Microsoft's OSes for security reasons?)
No, but they don't use them because they think they are secure, either.
It's a tradeoff for the general public IMHO. They don't think Windows is secure, but they want a computer to function. I think many still operate under misconception gained from various FUD campaigns of years passed. Ideas like...
You can't get on the Internet with a Macintosh. Linux is written by Hackers. You can't get Microsoft Office on Mac. There's no support for Open Source software. There are no other operating systems besides Windows. You have to be using Windows to use most digital camrass, printers, ect. There is no software for Linux. (I heard that one the other day).
Plus the fact most people buy PC's (because of price) and practically all PC come with Windows on them. Why change what works, they say.
But, the legitimate source wouldn't be distributing the malware version, would it?
On a P2P network, there's no such thing as a "legitimate source" for the file, because everyone is sharing. Any file can be copyrighted. And I can't tell if something is a Malware version until I open it, and then the damage is done.
It's a common misconceptio that Linux-based OS's are free. What if I got a copy of the new Xandros Desktop 3 off P2P/torrent? Release 2 is available as an Open distibution, but the only way to get 3 is to buy it right now. I could easily think release 3 was available but instead be infringing on copyrights for using it. The exact same mistake can be made with music.
What if the RIAA subcontractor was distributing files of independant bands laden with malware?
This still cuts down to the subcontractor distributing files over a P2P network that will knowingly damage a user's system.
What if I took a copy of SoBig and named it great_rock_song.mp3? Then I spread it on P2P and issue a press release saying I did it to scare people into stop downloading files online named great_rock_song.mp3
Sounds just like what the subcontractor is doing, but I would obviously get in some deep hot water for it.
However, at the same time, said people are admitting in court that they downloaded (or attempted to download) media for which they didn't hold the copyright.
All they are admitting is that they downloaded a file and got malware installed by the RIAA. Perhaps they were not aware the music was copyrighted. There's plenty of bands I don't know about.
I can't tell by looking at a filename if I'm downloading a signed artist or a local group just trying to promote itself. And P2P isn't just used for copyright infringement, so the fact I used Kazaa to get the file doesn't implicate me.
Even the fact it's a nationally recognized band doesn't prove anything. I have an mp3 file of U2's "Beautiful Day". It is NOT stolen. It was downloaded from Interscope's website back when they were promoting All You Can't Leave Behind.
But the record industry can't deny they're ruining people's computers with their files. Is a single download mistake justify a computer being wrecked and the user perhaps loosing data?
Also, given that Microsoft's loophole is making all this possible, and the RIAA is exploiting that loophole. Since it is now a recognised error M$ either will have to fix it (putting an end to the music industry's little scheme) or they could be named as co defendants in any lawsuit that might arise from this (but then, IANAL, and there is that pesky EULA with 'at your own risk' clauses).
If it comes into my system without my permission, it's a bad thing. I don't care if it's coming with good intentions or not, any kind of unauthorized access is unacceptable
For users that know what they are doing, I would agree with that sentiment. But for all the consoomers out there who dont know how to install updates, I think a white worm can be a good thing.
There are many users (especially on dialup) who don't want to deal with the hassle or have the updates bogging down their internet connection (which they don't really). Their unpatched systems cause the spread of worms and viruses that effect the quality of everyone's Internet expierience. Is it fair for us to be effected by their laziness?
In any enterprise system, you should be testing the patches and updates before you deploy them to your users. For instance, many of us wait to see if Service Pack 2 is stable before installing it.
That would be an example of a group that should be exempt from such worms.
For people like this, I think the forced update of a white worm is justified. After all, we're talking about patching venerabilities that should have never been in the software to begin with.
For instance, many of us wait to see if Service Pack 2 is stable before installing it. I haven't put it on my own machine yet (partly for fear of instability and partly out of laziness). If a worm came around that forced users to upgrade to SP2 right after it was released, that could be a very bad thing.
What if the worm didn't come out right after the software was released? What if it was put out, lets say after three to six months or even a year considering how old some exploits still being used are. That would give adequate time for testing before it becomes manditory.
If they were rung up as lower priced items, then wouldn't it show the wrong items on the cash register/receipts?
Yup. Doesn't matter, though. Just check the policy of misscans at any store you go to. Some will give you the item for free if it's below a certain amount. Some will give you a 10% discount on the correct price of the item. But some have to give you the item at the price it scans up at/is shown on the store sign.
For example, when someone finds an item in a bin at Target for one price and then scans up at another (because it wasn't supposed to be there, some lazy shopper just discarded it in the wrong place), if they make their case strongly enough that shopper will probably get the price they thought it was.
They must have not adjusted the prices too low. The cashier would have noticed a TV ringing up at the price of a CD and they probably would not have gotten away with it.
I usually do both at the same time, I have the TV running while I'm on the Internet. So am I being just as antisocial as before since I'm not taking up so much "extra time" to do email follow up?
EGM: Before this came out in compilations, we used to put quarters in arcade machines. Parker: You wasted quarters on this? EGM: Yeah. Parker: That's so sad. He does have a point...
I dunno. There's something about an arcade game that makes it easier to plunk quarters into than a "normal" modern video game. I guess It's that the overall game doesn't have a plot to follow through on. I wouldn't start playing Doom in an arcade because I would just be like "well I wont get very far since the game's so long".
Last night I was at the laundromat, washing some rugs my own washer can't handle, and there was a Galaga machine. I have Namco Museum for my Gameboy Advance (it was at home) but still, even though I could have played Galaga for free at home I must have put $2.00 in quarters into that machine while I was there. And I put up with the fire button with the worn out spring (the ship was always firing, and when I got onto the highscore list twice my name came out as 'AAA') and the dusty screen (I couldn't clean because it was UNDER the top cover) and I still had a good time playing it.
The McDonald's jobs are being outsourced from within the U.S., lots of illegal workers taking substandard wages under the table for things like foodservice and custodial work.
The fact that 480 Mbps is a BURST transfer rate, not a sustained rate?
Not that Firewire makes 400Mbps in sustained rate either, but it's sustained rate is higher than that of USB2. Why do you think digital video production uses Firewire instead of USB2?
To paraphrase the reply before you: typical PC user, only looking at the numbers marketing shows you.
I don't know what's available on the PC for this. It is known that USB really isn't up to the requirements for streaming video. On the Mac side there the new El Gato EyeTV 500. The choice in Firewire is mostly because it is required for HD video streaming, not to alleviate some USB silliness.
Wouldn't the computers sue their owners for installing the malware filled program to begin with?
Hey, for once being stupid about computers will cost the user more than it costs the rest of us to put up with the viruses, spam ect their zombie machines spew. I see a great self-correction about to occur in the population of PC users.
But then, I also wonder about the Zombie PC with malware making it spam frivolous lawsuits at everyone with it's newly aquired legal rights.
I actually hear this is how it works for most European providers. I thik that as landline phones become less and less "normal" people will begin to demand their cellphone service is billed more like their landline, and European cellphone providers do.
First of all, free incoming calls is HUGE. As it stands now, my minutes are tapped only for outgoing calls made on the weekday during the day. I have a 600 minute free incoming plan and I use at least 2,000 minutes every month.
Can it really be said you have free incoming minutes if there is a 600 minute limit in there. Sounds like just another plan stipulation.
I have an older T-Mobile plan that gives me the first incoming minute free, unlimited.
You know what? Business needs remain the same regardless of how fast hackers are writing exploits. Few companies, Microsoft included, could afford to have a 24x7 staff of patch writers for all of the applications they have deployed.
Well, maybe if they tested the software better and built it more secure from the start they wouldn't need a 24x7 staff of patchers.
Haha. But that would imply the product is being driven by developers and engineers, not marketting people.
It would be nice for the FCC to define what is indecent..
No it wouldn't!
How would that be any differnet than PTC deciding what is indecent? Just a differnt group of the few saying what is and is not proper to broadcast on the public airwaves. And a federal agency too? Yeah, there won't be any partisan meddling in a group like that.
If anything the FCC should protect the right of the broadcasters to air what they decide to. Let the public decide what they hate and the FCC be their tool, not the scapel AND the hand.
In a perfect world the tasteless and vulgur shows wouldn't air because people wouldn't want to watch them. Market economics would say to play more consumer-friendly shows as shows nobody is watching aren't going to generate many ad sales. But we live nowhere near perfect. And like the few in a thousand who buy products advertised in spam, we have no one to blame for the profitability of these shows but the populace who's willing to watch them.
I would mod this down but I wanted to post a reply instead and I can't do both.
I'm sure when the first major medical problem happens and there's a lawsuit because the working conditions of the employee were shown to be a contributing factor the company will rethink their policy.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple has to protect their trade secrets. If their competition found out Apple was releasing a $500 Mac, they might release a $500 Mac first.
Oh, wait...
Well, they might release a $500 computer first.
Oh, wait...
Office of the Commisioner of Baseball (wtf?)
Probably the distribution of Major League Baseball games recorded with HTPC software. ESPN and FSN getting pissed at their distribution rights being tranmpled.
(after all, do they avoid Microsoft's OSes for security reasons?)
No, but they don't use them because they think they are secure, either.
It's a tradeoff for the general public IMHO. They don't think Windows is secure, but they want a computer to function. I think many still operate under misconception gained from various FUD campaigns of years passed. Ideas like...
You can't get on the Internet with a Macintosh.
Linux is written by Hackers.
You can't get Microsoft Office on Mac.
There's no support for Open Source software.
There are no other operating systems besides Windows.
You have to be using Windows to use most digital camrass, printers, ect.
There is no software for Linux. (I heard that one the other day).
Plus the fact most people buy PC's (because of price) and practically all PC come with Windows on them. Why change what works, they say.
But, the legitimate source wouldn't be distributing the malware version, would it?
On a P2P network, there's no such thing as a "legitimate source" for the file, because everyone is sharing. Any file can be copyrighted. And I can't tell if something is a Malware version until I open it, and then the damage is done.
It's a common misconceptio that Linux-based OS's are free. What if I got a copy of the new Xandros Desktop 3 off P2P/torrent? Release 2 is available as an Open distibution, but the only way to get 3 is to buy it right now. I could easily think release 3 was available but instead be infringing on copyrights for using it. The exact same mistake can be made with music.
What if the RIAA subcontractor was distributing files of independant bands laden with malware?
This still cuts down to the subcontractor distributing files over a P2P network that will knowingly damage a user's system.
What if I took a copy of SoBig and named it great_rock_song.mp3? Then I spread it on P2P and issue a press release saying I did it to scare people into stop downloading files online named great_rock_song.mp3
Sounds just like what the subcontractor is doing, but I would obviously get in some deep hot water for it.
However, at the same time, said people are admitting in court that they downloaded (or attempted to download) media for which they didn't hold the copyright.
All they are admitting is that they downloaded a file and got malware installed by the RIAA. Perhaps they were not aware the music was copyrighted. There's plenty of bands I don't know about.
I can't tell by looking at a filename if I'm downloading a signed artist or a local group just trying to promote itself. And P2P isn't just used for copyright infringement, so the fact I used Kazaa to get the file doesn't implicate me.
Even the fact it's a nationally recognized band doesn't prove anything. I have an mp3 file of U2's "Beautiful Day". It is NOT stolen. It was downloaded from Interscope's website back when they were promoting All You Can't Leave Behind.
But the record industry can't deny they're ruining people's computers with their files. Is a single download mistake justify a computer being wrecked and the user perhaps loosing data?
Also, given that Microsoft's loophole is making all this possible, and the RIAA is exploiting that loophole. Since it is now a recognised error M$ either will have to fix it (putting an end to the music industry's little scheme) or they could be named as co defendants in any lawsuit that might arise from this (but then, IANAL, and there is that pesky EULA with 'at your own risk' clauses).
If it comes into my system without my permission, it's a bad thing. I don't care if it's coming with good intentions or not, any kind of unauthorized access is unacceptable
For users that know what they are doing, I would agree with that sentiment. But for all the consoomers out there who dont know how to install updates, I think a white worm can be a good thing.
There are many users (especially on dialup) who don't want to deal with the hassle or have the updates bogging down their internet connection (which they don't really). Their unpatched systems cause the spread of worms and viruses that effect the quality of everyone's Internet expierience. Is it fair for us to be effected by their laziness?
In any enterprise system, you should be testing the patches and updates before you deploy them to your users. For instance, many of us wait to see if Service Pack 2 is stable before installing it.
That would be an example of a group that should be exempt from such worms.
For people like this, I think the forced update of a white worm is justified. After all, we're talking about patching venerabilities that should have never been in the software to begin with.
For instance, many of us wait to see if Service Pack 2 is stable before installing it. I haven't put it on my own machine yet (partly for fear of instability and partly out of laziness). If a worm came around that forced users to upgrade to SP2 right after it was released, that could be a very bad thing.
What if the worm didn't come out right after the software was released? What if it was put out, lets say after three to six months or even a year considering how old some exploits still being used are. That would give adequate time for testing before it becomes manditory.
If they were rung up as lower priced items, then wouldn't it show the wrong items on the cash register/receipts?
Yup. Doesn't matter, though. Just check the policy of misscans at any store you go to. Some will give you the item for free if it's below a certain amount. Some will give you a 10% discount on the correct price of the item. But some have to give you the item at the price it scans up at/is shown on the store sign.
For example, when someone finds an item in a bin at Target for one price and then scans up at another (because it wasn't supposed to be there, some lazy shopper just discarded it in the wrong place), if they make their case strongly enough that shopper will probably get the price they thought it was.
They must have not adjusted the prices too low. The cashier would have noticed a TV ringing up at the price of a CD and they probably would not have gotten away with it.
I usually do both at the same time, I have the TV running while I'm on the Internet. So am I being just as antisocial as before since I'm not taking up so much "extra time" to do email follow up?
EGM: Before this came out in compilations, we used to put quarters in arcade machines.
Parker: You wasted quarters on this?
EGM: Yeah.
Parker: That's so sad.
He does have a point...
I dunno. There's something about an arcade game that makes it easier to plunk quarters into than a "normal" modern video game. I guess It's that the overall game doesn't have a plot to follow through on. I wouldn't start playing Doom in an arcade because I would just be like "well I wont get very far since the game's so long".
Last night I was at the laundromat, washing some rugs my own washer can't handle, and there was a Galaga machine. I have Namco Museum for my Gameboy Advance (it was at home) but still, even though I could have played Galaga for free at home I must have put $2.00 in quarters into that machine while I was there. And I put up with the fire button with the worn out spring (the ship was always firing, and when I got onto the highscore list twice my name came out as 'AAA') and the dusty screen (I couldn't clean because it was UNDER the top cover) and I still had a good time playing it.
The McDonald's jobs are being outsourced from within the U.S., lots of illegal workers taking substandard wages under the table for things like foodservice and custodial work.
Argh! and here I just turned 24. That means I am now middle aged!
*edit* - Not that I mean I'm a middle aged virgin, as replying to this post would seem to imply.
The fact that 480 Mbps is a BURST transfer rate, not a sustained rate?
Not that Firewire makes 400Mbps in sustained rate either, but it's sustained rate is higher than that of USB2. Why do you think digital video production uses Firewire instead of USB2?
To paraphrase the reply before you: typical PC user, only looking at the numbers marketing shows you.
If RPM did indeed "suck" by all reasonable standards I don't think you'd see Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake, and the Linux Standards Base using it.
What a dumb statement. Not that I'm debating whether or not RPM sucks, but the idea that because everyone is using it, then it must be good.
Let me rewrite that...
If Windows did indeed "suck" by all reasonable standards I don't think you'd see consumers, businesses, the Military, and governments using it.
I don't know what's available on the PC for this. It is known that USB really isn't up to the requirements for streaming video. On the Mac side there the new El Gato EyeTV 500. The choice in Firewire is mostly because it is required for HD video streaming, not to alleviate some USB silliness.
Does this mean AOL is trying to become something which it is not?
That's the discussion (joke) hook, right?
Let me try...
A company expanding and growing rather than a giant in its twilight years?
A company that knows what it's doing?
An innovator?
Wouldn't the computers sue their owners for installing the malware filled program to begin with?
Hey, for once being stupid about computers will cost the user more than it costs the rest of us to put up with the viruses, spam ect their zombie machines spew. I see a great self-correction about to occur in the population of PC users.
But then, I also wonder about the Zombie PC with malware making it spam frivolous lawsuits at everyone with it's newly aquired legal rights.
Ah, I see.
I actually hear this is how it works for most European providers. I thik that as landline phones become less and less "normal" people will begin to demand their cellphone service is billed more like their landline, and European cellphone providers do.
First of all, free incoming calls is HUGE. As it stands now, my minutes are tapped only for outgoing calls made on the weekday during the day. I have a 600 minute free incoming plan and I use at least 2,000 minutes every month.
Can it really be said you have free incoming minutes if there is a 600 minute limit in there. Sounds like just another plan stipulation.
I have an older T-Mobile plan that gives me the first incoming minute free, unlimited.
A loon is a water-loving fowl like ducks.
You know what? Business needs remain the same regardless of how fast hackers are writing exploits. Few companies, Microsoft included, could afford to have a 24x7 staff of patch writers for all of the applications they have deployed.
Well, maybe if they tested the software better and built it more secure from the start they wouldn't need a 24x7 staff of patchers.
Haha. But that would imply the product is being driven by developers and engineers, not marketting people.
Really, it's like people look for things to complain about.
What do you think uses more bandwidth, 20,000 people loading a webpage with the latest news, or 20,000 people loading an RSS feed?
It would be nice for the FCC to define what is indecent..
No it wouldn't!
How would that be any differnet than PTC deciding what is indecent? Just a differnt group of the few saying what is and is not proper to broadcast on the public airwaves. And a federal agency too? Yeah, there won't be any partisan meddling in a group like that.
If anything the FCC should protect the right of the broadcasters to air what they decide to. Let the public decide what they hate and the FCC be their tool, not the scapel AND the hand.
In a perfect world the tasteless and vulgur shows wouldn't air because people wouldn't want to watch them. Market economics would say to play more consumer-friendly shows as shows nobody is watching aren't going to generate many ad sales. But we live nowhere near perfect. And like the few in a thousand who buy products advertised in spam, we have no one to blame for the profitability of these shows but the populace who's willing to watch them.
I would mod this down but I wanted to post a reply instead and I can't do both.
Please, we are "people", not "consumers". You're using the language of the oppressors.
I beg to differ. We are not the consumers, we are the non-consumers. We are above them. We are informed.
The consumers are the ones who wont catch any of this until they start hearing the phone ring more often.
Han answers the phone before it rings.
I'm sure when the first major medical problem happens and there's a lawsuit because the working conditions of the employee were shown to be a contributing factor the company will rethink their policy.