If you happen to be there. Ask him lots of questions. Let's get something on the record. Here are some I can think of. Make up your own.
Could Microsoft ever open its code and make more money from support than developement?
What's up with Microsoft and Linux? Seems like you guys have the same goal of wanting to write
geat software for the benefit of everyone. Why not collaborate?
Microsoft was recently sued by 20 states and found guilty of violatling the Clayton and Sherman anti trust acts. What have you done to rectify that?
It's still not possible to buy an MS-free computer from many vendords. Why?
Will you personally pledge you will put no pressure on an vendors to sell
"microsoft only" systems.
Holding developers liable really means hiring more lawyers and filing more lawsuits which I think is not the way to go.
Qaulity software is probably more likely to come about as a result of competition and free market forces and many of the most infamous security breaches for the average user were a result of security flaws in the OS not the programs. Why not break the single OS monopoply and encourage competition as a way of enhancing security? Let the consumer vote for the the most secure software with his pocketbook.
It would be an even bigger story if Activision could determine your age from your credit card number. I might be wrong but I doubt they can. Just because you have a credit card doesn't mean you're necessarily over 18, does it?
Well now we know the true cause of violence in America: Video games.
What utter nonsense. America is a country that was founded on terrorism and violence.
Violence in video games is just a reflection of culture not the cause of it.
According to Yee:
scientific evidence linked the playing of the games by impressionable teenagers and preteenagers to acts of violence or hostile attitudes toward girls and women.
Most of this comes from bogus studies which basically find that people with violent tendancies also like to play violent video games.
But they don't establish cause and effect and are mostly unscientific.
This is just a feel-good bill and will have zero affect on violence in America. These guys are truly misguided.
Micrososft was sued by 20 states and found guilty of violating the Sherman and Clayton antitrust acts. IIRC Microsoft had more or less said to OEMs, "put MS on everything you sell or we'll have to renegotiate your volume licenses." This appartently was a violation of the antitrust laws.
Five years on not much has changed. Dell and others still have to negotiate license agreements with Microsoft and those negotiations are always secret. You never what MS tells the OEMs. They probably have some obscure language ambigiuous enough to be legal yet lets the OEMs know they better play ball.
Even though MS lost and was found guilty, nothing much has changed for the consumer.
Sure the opportunity exists. But the idea behind wiki is that the legit folks far
out number the vandals and will fix errors at a far greater rate than they occur.
I just looked up the electro magentic phenomena of "Eddy
Currents" on wiki yesterday and found the info to be pretty accurate.
If such a page were vandalized I (and many others) would just cut and paste the correct info back into wiki until the vandals eventually gave up. We outnumber them and we will ultimately prevail in maintaining the correct info by a democratic consensus. Jeez, as if the vandals would even care about Eddy Currents.
Probably because you can do a lot more with a PC like transfer files across the net, organize you data, upgrade, add new features, connect to P2P, etc.. DVD players tend to be locked-down devices. Having used my (linux) laptop for movies and music for the past few years I find conventional CD/DVD players irritatingly dumb.
The author claims that the growth of Linux has slowed but offers no stats to support his argument.
Then he tries to explain what he hasn't proven with two points which are are basically the same.
GPL and related licensing issues, combined with considerable FUD over patents and copyrights.
IBM's endorsement of Linux, the SCO law suit in response,
I've been developing Linux business systems for nearly 10 years and I've never heard of a company not adopting Linux for legal reasons. Also wasn't aware that Linux is having a growth problem.
The combination of Nikon camera, in-camera image processing, NEF file format and in-computer image processing with original Nikon Capture software was developed as a system that faithfully saved image files that represent the camera settings made manually or automatically by the photographer at the time a picture was taken.
Nikon's preservation of its unique technology in the NEF file is employed as an action that protects the uniqueness of the file.
Sounds like they're saying that saving settings in a file is unique technology?
The FCC limits 802.11 power so buying expensive access points isn't going increase your range.
soekris boards, if you can afford them, have the advantage of "power over ethernet" and no moving parts, plus they fit nicely into a weather proof boxes so can be mounted high up. If you don't need these advantages any old sub $50 access points should work.
Mostly, it's all about the antennas. In some experimetns I've read about, directional antennas have enabled signals to broadcast and receive across several kilometers (line of site).
Check out these guys to see what's available as far as antennas go.
Also, sign up for the bay area wireless mailing list while you're building this. This is one of the better lists I've been on. There are some people that really know their stuff and you'll get lots of help and advice.
someone will have to design it, someone will have to upgrade it, someone will have to maintain it and someone will have to run it.
Ivan Seidenberg (who's an MBA not an enigineer) makes this sound way more complicated than it needs to be.
In my experience most bandwidth (business, residential, government) is mostly unused. San Francisco has a lot of surplus bandwidth that taxpayers have already paid for. What we'd like is for the city to fund wireless nodes via sflan that give some of this bandwidth back to the people.
I think Seidenberg's real concern is that Verizon won't be able to charge $29.95/month for something that should be practically free.
What interest would Comcast have in giving away personal customer info to a debt collector? It's bad publicity and what could Comcast possibly gain?
Verizon, for example, fought the RIAA even when they had court subpoenas, RIAA v Verizon. So I have trouble believing that Comcast is going to violate a user's privacy and perhaps drive customers to Verizon, a competitor. Something is not right here. Perhaps Comcast gave away this user's info by mistake?
There's an FCC power restriction of about 20mW per channel for 802.11.
You can crank up the power but you have to pay off the FCC first, see auctions.
To me the selling off of public airways to the highest bidder amounts to a totally corrupt system where cell phone providers, as one example, have to give the FCC millions and then stick it to the consumer in what is basically a tax on the electromagnetic spectrum.
Seems a bit arbitrary to me. Why not have dot-freedom, dot-books, dot-stupidity...? How are they coming up with these TLDs?
Forgive my ignorance but isn't the DNS hierarchy a throwback to the days when bandwidth was low and most data was kept in flat files?
With modern database technology and highspeed connectivity how difficult would it be to map an IP address to any name with or without any number of dots distributed over a couple of hundred strategically placed name servers? Like a global telephone book.
the broadcast flag, will be required after July 1.......It would permit entertainment companies to designate, or flag, programs to prevent viewers from copying shows or distributing them over the Internet.
I'll just feed the analog video cable into my computer and rip the high def signal. Should be pretty good quality.
I'm involved with sflan and all we're saying is buy some nodes and we'll give the city free wi-fi.
Of course if you want to give your money to SBC I'm sure they could have their MBAs find a lot of creative ways to spend it on credit card schemes, free airline miles, etc.
I understand your point. But the current telcoms haven't done such a could job of providing internet access.
Most of them are content to keep voice and internet seperate so the can bill us twice. There's little incentive to give consumers more bandwidth because then the internet may compete with cable television, a service that many ISPs provide for a seperate charge, read conflict-of-interest.
Many of us still pay $30/mo for DSL over 50+ year old copper wires that have been paid for thousands of times over.
The telcos have also been using consumer profits to run investment scams with airline and credit card companies that have nothing to do with telecommunications.
Remeber, one telco tried to buy Disney for $60 billion. Yeah, that's $60,000,000,000. So instead of investing money to give consumers more bandwidth the MBAs, who run the company are more interesting in investing on behalf of shareholders than customers.
So, though you make a good point about government involvement in internet access I think we need to see a lot of reforms before we entrust this to the current telcos.
Slashdot Mirror
If you happen to be there. Ask him lots of questions. Let's get something on the record. Here are some I can think of. Make up your own.
Could Microsoft ever open its code and make more money from support than developement?
What's up with Microsoft and Linux? Seems like you guys have the same goal of wanting to write geat software for the benefit of everyone. Why not collaborate?
Microsoft was recently sued by 20 states and found guilty of violatling the Clayton and Sherman anti trust acts. What have you done to rectify that?
It's still not possible to buy an MS-free computer from many vendords. Why? Will you personally pledge you will put no pressure on an vendors to sell "microsoft only" systems.
Just keep asking questions. We want to know.
Holding developers liable really means hiring more lawyers and filing more lawsuits which I think is not the way to go.
Qaulity software is probably more likely to come about as a result of competition and free market forces and many of the most infamous security breaches for the average user were a result of security flaws in the OS not the programs. Why not break the single OS monopoply and encourage competition as a way of enhancing security? Let the consumer vote for the the most secure software with his pocketbook.
It would be an even bigger story if Activision could determine your age from your credit card number. I might be wrong but I doubt they can. Just because you have a credit card doesn't mean you're necessarily over 18, does it?
protect children and strengthen families?
Well now we know the true cause of violence in America: Video games. What utter nonsense. America is a country that was founded on terrorism and violence. Violence in video games is just a reflection of culture not the cause of it.
According to Yee: scientific evidence linked the playing of the games by impressionable teenagers and preteenagers to acts of violence or hostile attitudes toward girls and women.
Most of this comes from bogus studies which basically find that people with violent tendancies also like to play violent video games. But they don't establish cause and effect and are mostly unscientific.
This is just a feel-good bill and will have zero affect on violence in America. These guys are truly misguided.
Micrososft was sued by 20 states and found guilty of violating the Sherman and Clayton antitrust acts. IIRC Microsoft had more or less said to OEMs, "put MS on everything you sell or we'll have to renegotiate your volume licenses." This appartently was a violation of the antitrust laws.
Five years on not much has changed. Dell and others still have to negotiate license agreements with Microsoft and those negotiations are always secret. You never what MS tells the OEMs. They probably have some obscure language ambigiuous enough to be legal yet lets the OEMs know they better play ball.
Even though MS lost and was found guilty, nothing much has changed for the consumer.
I saw a few (600MB+) copies of this on gnutella recently. Probably the whole movie. Good luck.
Why not build your own? Check out somewhere like pricewatch
You can get a 400G HD for about $190 and a P4 combo board for about $160.
Install slackware and you're ready to rock and roll.
Good luck.
Sure the opportunity exists. But the idea behind wiki is that the legit folks far out number the vandals and will fix errors at a far greater rate than they occur.
I just looked up the electro magentic phenomena of "Eddy Currents" on wiki yesterday and found the info to be pretty accurate. If such a page were vandalized I (and many others) would just cut and paste the correct info back into wiki until the vandals eventually gave up. We outnumber them and we will ultimately prevail in maintaining the correct info by a democratic consensus. Jeez, as if the vandals would even care about Eddy Currents.
Long live wiki.
Probably because you can do a lot more with a PC like transfer files across the net, organize you data, upgrade, add new features, connect to P2P, etc.. DVD players tend to be locked-down devices. Having used my (linux) laptop for movies and music for the past few years I find conventional CD/DVD players irritatingly dumb.
This article is flawed.
The author claims that the growth of Linux has slowed but offers no stats to support his argument.
Then he tries to explain what he hasn't proven with two points which are are basically the same.
GPL and related licensing issues, combined with considerable FUD over patents and copyrights.
IBM's endorsement of Linux, the SCO law suit in response,
I've been developing Linux business systems for nearly 10 years and I've never heard of a company not adopting Linux for legal reasons. Also wasn't aware that Linux is having a growth problem.
The combination of Nikon camera, in-camera image processing, NEF file format and in-computer image processing with original Nikon Capture software was developed as a system that faithfully saved image files that represent the camera settings made manually or automatically by the photographer at the time a picture was taken.
Nikon's preservation of its unique technology in the NEF file is employed as an action that protects the uniqueness of the file.
Sounds like they're saying that saving settings in a file is unique technology?
The FCC limits 802.11 power so buying expensive access points isn't going increase your range.
soekris boards, if you can afford them, have the advantage of "power over ethernet" and no moving parts, plus they fit nicely into a weather proof boxes so can be mounted high up. If you don't need these advantages any old sub $50 access points should work.
If you're really on a budget you can build your own.
Mostly, it's all about the antennas. In some experimetns I've read about, directional antennas have enabled signals to broadcast and receive across several kilometers (line of site). Check out these guys to see what's available as far as antennas go.
Also, sign up for the bay area wireless mailing list while you're building this. This is one of the better lists I've been on. There are some people that really know their stuff and you'll get lots of help and advice.
Hope that helps.
There's more to life than testing and saying cannabis adversely affects your intelligence is like say the Beatles couldn't write songs.
someone will have to design it, someone will have to upgrade it, someone will have to maintain it and someone will have to run it.
Ivan Seidenberg (who's an MBA not an enigineer) makes this sound way more complicated than it needs to be.
In my experience most bandwidth (business, residential, government) is mostly unused. San Francisco has a lot of surplus bandwidth that taxpayers have already paid for. What we'd like is for the city to fund wireless nodes via sflan that give some of this bandwidth back to the people.
I think Seidenberg's real concern is that Verizon won't be able to charge $29.95/month for something that should be practically free.
I have 3 words for this guy. Get a job.
What interest would Comcast have in giving away personal customer info to a debt collector? It's bad publicity and what could Comcast possibly gain?
Verizon, for example, fought the RIAA even when they had court subpoenas, RIAA v Verizon. So I have trouble believing that Comcast is going to violate a user's privacy and perhaps drive customers to Verizon, a competitor. Something is not right here. Perhaps Comcast gave away this user's info by mistake?
$15-$20 million AND you have to pay monthly?
Let's suppose you buy 400 top of the line $500 access points from some wf-fi company. That's only $200,0000.
They should hold back on the fiber and use the access points to relay to a few key wired points like sflan does. Cuts down on the cost.
There's an FCC power restriction of about 20mW per channel for 802.11.
You can crank up the power but you have to pay off the FCC first, see auctions.
To me the selling off of public airways to the highest bidder amounts to a totally corrupt system where cell phone providers, as one example, have to give the FCC millions and then stick it to the consumer in what is basically a tax on the electromagnetic spectrum.
Seems a bit arbitrary to me. Why not have dot-freedom, dot-books, dot-stupidity...? How are they coming up with these TLDs?
Forgive my ignorance but isn't the DNS hierarchy a throwback to the days when bandwidth was low and most data was kept in flat files?
With modern database technology and highspeed connectivity how difficult would it be to map an IP address to any name with or without any number of dots distributed over a couple of hundred strategically placed name servers? Like a global telephone book.
I agree he should have kept his site up to date but is there really any need for big brother to get involved.
Perhaps that's why there's no Nobel Price for mathematics.
I call it a news story in a Word document. I'd rather see a copy of the court order.
the broadcast flag, will be required after July 1 .......It would permit entertainment companies to designate, or flag, programs to prevent viewers from copying shows or distributing them over the Internet.
I'll just feed the analog video cable into my computer and rip the high def signal. Should be pretty good quality.
Then I'll stick it on the Internet.
We're not crying "fix it!." It's already fixed.
I'm involved with sflan and all we're saying is buy some nodes and we'll give the city free wi-fi.
Of course if you want to give your money to SBC I'm sure they could have their MBAs find a lot of creative ways to spend it on credit card schemes, free airline miles, etc.
I understand your point. But the current telcoms haven't done such a could job of providing internet access.
Most of them are content to keep voice and internet seperate so the can bill us twice. There's little incentive to give consumers more bandwidth because then the internet may compete with cable television, a service that many ISPs provide for a seperate charge, read conflict-of-interest.
Many of us still pay $30/mo for DSL over 50+ year old copper wires that have been paid for thousands of times over.
The telcos have also been using consumer profits to run investment scams with airline and credit card companies that have nothing to do with telecommunications.
Remeber, one telco tried to buy Disney for $60 billion. Yeah, that's $60,000,000,000. So instead of investing money to give consumers more bandwidth the MBAs, who run the company are more interesting in investing on behalf of shareholders than customers.
So, though you make a good point about government involvement in internet access I think we need to see a lot of reforms before we entrust this to the current telcos.
Unable to convince us about MS superiority on security, TCO, and interoperability Bill now gets emotional and starts calling us all communists.