Unfortunately, embarrassing a government employee almost always guarantees that you will get shafted somehow. There are just too many ways for them to "get even" with people who interfere in their little "kingdoms."
Congress has to change the law - they are the ultimate caretakes of Patent and Copyright law. And Congress is beholden to a few major copyright holders (Disney, anyone?) and major corporations who WANT the status quo. Think Microsoft is going to encourage Congress to change? Or any of the IP pseudo-companies?
The problem is that it's hard to get the electorate interested in this problem, and unless the masses start chasing Congress-critters with placards (or worse), things aren't going to change.
Yeah, I've seen XP's interface. It's a pain in the butt, unless you disable all the new XP stuff (which tries to hide everything that's really useful). I've seen 2003's interfrace. It's OK.
There is nothing about 2003 or XP that 'rocks'. Lots of glitz, very little utility. Unless of course you configure it to work like 2000, but then why upgrade?
On my desk here is RedHat 9, RedHat ES, Mac OS 10.3, Windows 2K. Of all of them, OS X has the best interface. Hands down. For shear elegance, ease of use and clarity, it puts XP to shame. And without trying to hide all the useful bits. Oh yeah, and the "home" version of OS X doesn't come with the user set to run in "root" mode by default. XP Home does.
I play poker. Both at home, in tourneys and occasionally on-line. I've been playing some form of poker since I was a teenager (ie 70's). The Hold 'Em craze is like nothing I've seen before. It's brought all kinds of people into poker games that might never have really been interested before.
The problem is, that most home poker games (or those held in bars, etc) are illegal. Maybe, just maybe, the explosive interest in Texas Hold'Em (through the WPT, WSOP - which is down to about 70 players for 2004 now, and other TV events) will lead to a push in every state to legalize card rooms. Most states have legal gambling of some kind (lottery, riverboat casinos, etc) - why not legalize card rooms like California? I've thought about starting a Political Action Committee in my state (IL) to lobby for legalizing cardrooms. It sure seems like time to strike while the iron is hot!
Maybe we can get the libertarians to support this movement!
And, said regulated industry has high-priced, professional lobbyists who are constantly making sure that a) their monopoly (if they have one) is protected; b) new entrants who try to offer a different, but competing service are barred from entry by regulation, taxes, etc , and c) that "shared" resources are priced high enough that startups have problems using them.
Look at the battle going on between the satellite companies and cable cos. Most cable cos are regulated locally, and have significant taxes. Satellite companies have been able (for the most part) to avoid this because of their model (only downlink located in most localities, and that downlink is privately owned).
I'm not surprised by this classification - every level of government believes that it has a $DEITY-given right to tax and regulate everything. Heck, hosting a home poker game in my state can get you a year in jail! I'm not opposed to all regulation by any stretch of the imagination, but regulation stifles creativity and needs to be applied only in very clear, very limited ways.
This is not inexpensive to setup - the hardware isn't cheap (though you might find it on E-bay). BUT, the major issue is that in the US, you have to have a licensed installer because the DW6000 has a built-in uplink. Of course, if you know someone who has is licensed and is willing to do it, you can save there.
And, having had quite a bit of experience with Direcway, if you have any kind of bad weather, you may have no connectivity. Rain is your enemy.
If they are running Win2k or XP, delete the user profiles and create new ones. That will clear up a lot. Next, get AdAware and run it on the machine until it reports no problems. Then, install some kind of pop-up blocker (Google toolbar will do). Better yet, install Mozilla or another browser and remove the icons for IE. And of course, AV software.
Next, scan the hard disk for any.jpg,.gif files, etc. Remove any and all not needed on the machine. Get 'eraser' or a similar program which will 'shred' the files when you delete them.
Maybe. But do you want to bet your future on your lawyer convincing a skeptical judge and jury that it was a technology problem? After all, they have evidence that the pictures were on your machine, under your control. I don't think I'd want to bet my future on that.
Moral of the story - use pop-up blockers. Run AdAware. Run AV software. Get some software that wipes unused areas of your hard disk and "shreds" files you delete. Be paranoid.
And yes, in the "old" days I ran into the same problem that the person described in the artcile had, but I was savvy enough to clear up my machine, wipe out the last vestige of those files and run software to wipe the unused area of the hard disk with random data.
I read the article - I can't believe that the editors (are there any?) let this article see the light of day. Sure, there are security holes in Mac OS. It's a given that any OS has some kind of bug or flaw that, when properly exploited, will cause a DOS, crash or improper security. But this author is speculating (or, using speculation as source material).
Any OS based on a solid Unix core (Darwin, Linux, AIX) is going to be much more secure than any Windows kernel - at least at this point. It remains to be seen if Microsoft can build a reliable, secure kernel.
Oh, and by the way, how many flaws, and how bad are they, are in Linux and Mac OS compared to windows? Having administered global networks of >1000 Windows workstations and servers, I'll take a similarly sized Linux network ANY day, if security is paramount.
I generally agree with you. As for legal action, I just don't see how that would work, unless the person was verbatim publishing the question and answer sets (ie exact texts of the questions). And even then, as you say, many of them are minors.
That said, they can certainly refuse to provide your scores to any college if you don't follow their rules. It may not be nice, and in fact, may well be evil to do so, but since it's their test, they can make the rules about how they report the scores.
Of course, standardized tests are mostly a crock anyway. I know of >1350+ SAT kids who couldn't hack college.
I am sure that there are some/. posters who think they have some absolute right to use content any way they want, but I'm not one of them.
Where my concern comes is that DRM can be made very invasive and there exists a non-null probability that DRM will become so restrictive that no material that lacks DRM signatures will be able to be used. And I can just see the argument for making equipment without DRM illegal. It follows the slippery slope we're going down now.
I don't download music, I don't RIP CD's and share them with friends, I don't copy software. But I'll be damned if I will put up with DRM monitoring/control of everything I do.
So long as I can legally buy non-DRM equipment, and play non-DRM content, no problem. But I fear the day is coming when THAT will be illegal.
Looks to me like the days of the "home brew" computer are coming back. There will very quickly be a market for non-DRM computers. Of course, then we can expect the government to make it illegal to own non-DRM'd computing equipment. You know what this sounds like? Stallman's "right to read" dystopia. (Check it out on GNU.org).
Countering this is going to be quick an adventure. How do you convince Joe 6-pack - who already believes that the Patriot Act is necessary to prevent terrorism, that the war on drugs is a good thing and that the it's OK to give up rights for some mythical security - to object to these things and vote against people who try to impose them on him.
I don't hold out a lot of hope, but if we can keep the governement from making non-DRM equipment illegal, we may have a chance. I won't hold my breath, though.
Pretty much true, though Americans can be charged with crimes committed outside the US in certain situations. And certain types of crimes against Americans already have extradition treaties with some countries. In the end, only treaties can ensure that the offenders can be dealt with across borders, and even then, there will likely be countries that, for whatever reason, refuse to sign extradition treaties with the US.
There's no doubt the survey is accurate - as an independant consultant, I deal with this all the time. I run Ad-Aware on badly behaving Windows boxes and show their 'owners' just what a mess they have. Record so far is 500+ items tagged by AdAware. Unreal.
This problem is on par with SPAM and viruses, and consumes serious IT cycles to manage. My usual couse of action for any new client is: SOPHOS AntiVirus, pop-up blocker, AdAware, alternative browser (eg Netscape, Firebird), alternative email client (eg. thunderbird). Not to mention religious use of Windows Update, a strong permiter firewall and replacing NT/2000 servers with Linux boxes running SAMBA, themselves fully hardened agaisnt attack. Of course, SpamAssassin is a must on the mail server.
The difference is that Viacom is not the only game in town. Viacom is free to offer their "entertainment" package on whatever terms they want. Dish or DirecTV or any Cable network are free to accept or reject the terms. If enough reject the terms, Viacom will have to change.
In the end, it's the Dish network subscribers who will decide - they will put pressure on one side or the other, and one of the two will give in.
If Viacom had a monopoly on entertainemtn, it would be different. But they don't. They are just one choice of many. And Dish has decided that it's not in their interest to carry the Viacom package.
I've run into this many times. Or if the company exists, they have dropped support for the older version. And many times, the newer versions are not providing anything useful *except* support for the new OS. Not worth the upgrade price.
With open source, I can nearly always manage the problem - recompile works most of the time, and if not, I can either fix it myself, or find someone who has or will fix it, either for free or for a reasonable fee. More and more of my clients are starting to see the value of Linux and open source applications, especially in the server area. And these are small to medium sized businesses who tend to be very conservative about how they spend their computing money.
I even have customers asking about switching to Mac - something that hasn't happened in ages, if ever!
Just what John Ashcroft ordered (heard he's sick - hope he makes a full recovery AFTER resigning for health reasons). Hmm. Maybe this is M$'s offering the the gods to keep the Department of Justice at bay. Nah, they would never do something like that, would they?
And we were worried that the Department of Homeland Security was going to check our video rentals and library books? Next will come currency scanners that track serial numbers and are used by vendors to track where the money has been.
Most legislatures are made up of at least a plurality, if not a majority of lawyers. And they have, so far, pretty much prevented any real reform in the legal system. In fact, the slower it goes, and the more complicated it gets, the more benefit to the lawyers. If the cases drag for years, they can bill for years.
The entire system needs to be simplified and speedier. It can takes years to get simple cases resolved. Even ones that are downright silly.
But legal reform isn't the only thing needed - the entire federal and state criminal and civil codes need to be re-written and simplified, along with IRS codes, etc, etc. Just think about the time and money wasted because of the foolish complexity of the system. Any party that is truly committed to simplification of the system will get my vote. And neither the GOP nor the Democrats are interested in anything but more complexity - which allows them to help their pet special interests at the expense of the public.
and now the suggestion is for them to carry internet service? I see a number of issues here, not the least of which are:
Who pays to install the infrastructure? If it's the rate-payers, this will be a non-starter.
Who pays for the hardware at the customer end?
Why does the FCC seem to ignore the frequency problems?
So, the proposal is to have mega-monopolies managing more infrastructure, delivering service that's not in their core area, and requiring huge infrastructre changes?
Hmm. Why does this look bad? Especialy when the local power company has a horrible reputation for maintaining their existing power infrastructure. I think I'll pass on this one.
Uhm, yes, it is. SCO's latest amended complaint makes it clear that the issue is that SCO believes IBM is violating their copyright. SCO has a novel theory that AIX and Dynix are derrivative works, in and of themselves, and that ANY part of those derrivative works is covered by SCO's copyright and license agreement. Go to GROKLAW and see.
ZDNet is, effectively, advising their readership to pay protection money to SCO, in order to protect their image? Gee, that's a nice house you have there, be a shame if something happened to it. And those are nice kids you have...be a shame if something happened to them.
Give me a break. First of all, what are your chances of actually being sued by SCO? Fairly slim, I suspect. And even then, a simple motion that says "Your honor, Novell claims they have the copyrights to this material, and SCO is involved in legal process with them. Until such time as SCO can demonstrate that they actually own the property they are claiming, I move the case be placed on hold.
Second, so SCO sues you - I don't believe that they can win (see Groklaw for exhaustive details. You don't look bad to anyone except perhaps a few SCO or MS shills. Everybody else thinks you are a hero!
Finally, even assuming that SCO does own the copyrights, they still have yet to prove that any of their code is in Linux. That's what the IBM lawsuit is all about. And if you check the analysis on Groklaw, SCO is digging their own grave at warp speed.
Ziff Davis is being irresponsible and is givnig VERY bad advise.
I mean seriously - I was a director-level IT manager at two multi-national companies over the past 12 years, and neither I, nor any of my peers, would even think about hiring someone from one of these tech schools.
Even the smallest amount of real-world experience was far more useful than several months of training at these schools. Sure, they learned a few rote solutions, but I can teach those to a new recruit who shows a bit of intelligence in a short time.
In fact, for an entry-level position, give me a liberal arts grad with a bit of tech knowledge learned on their home computer, and I've got the makings of an excellent eomployee. People who can read, write and converse are better candiates than many of the "tech school" grads I ran into.
Frankly, I never felt these schools were worth anything, and if they are now closing, all the better.
If I were in HP's position, I'd certainly be disposed to selecting Apple as my partner over Napster. iPods are wildly popular, and iTunes is a going concern run by a company that is a profitable going concern. If I'm HP looking for business partners, I am certainly going to select the one who looks like the way of the future.
Say what you want about Apple, but they keep coming up with great innovations and products that are slick, well designed and quite useful. HP made a very wise choice here and I think they will make a handsome profit from it. Not to mention Apple being "validated" by someone in the WinTel clique, and having a WinTel producer OEM their gear and install their software by default. This is win-win for Apple and HP, and not bad for consumers.
Yes, there is the DRM issue, but is it realistic to think that there will ever be a time when there is no DRM on material like songs? While I wish DRM wasn't necessary, Apple's license is pretty good - use on multiple machines, use on multiple iPods and burn them onto MP3 disks. Perfect? No. Good enough for the vast majority? I'd say so.
Dave - I think we mean the same things. I wasn't trying to be technical with "probable cause" but was trying to say that the officer needed some reasonable answer as to why he feels it is necessary to require me to speak with him if I don't feel like doing so.
Yes, there are times when giving your ID is required, I had a breakdown and when the local police arrived, and asked for ID, I showed it. Why? Because I had been driving my car, and last I checked, my state law requires that I carry my license when I'm driving, and surrender it to a police officer who asks. That's one of the prices of driving - you have to follow the regulations surrounding the license you've been granted.
As an aside, the request for the license was for the contact report, which our local police are required to file anytime they talk to someone in an official capacity. Had the situation been different (ie not vehicle related), simply giving my name and address would have sufficed.
The ordinance that requires these contact reports was put in place to keep the police in check. And it's a good one.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, embarrassing a government employee almost always guarantees that you will get shafted somehow. There are just too many ways for them to "get even" with people who interfere in their little "kingdoms."
Congress has to change the law - they are the ultimate caretakes of Patent and Copyright law. And Congress is beholden to a few major copyright holders (Disney, anyone?) and major corporations who WANT the status quo. Think Microsoft is going to encourage Congress to change? Or any of the IP pseudo-companies?The problem is that it's hard to get the electorate interested in this problem, and unless the masses start chasing Congress-critters with placards (or worse), things aren't going to change.
Yeah, I've seen XP's interface. It's a pain in the butt, unless you disable all the new XP stuff (which tries to hide everything that's really useful). I've seen 2003's interfrace. It's OK.
There is nothing about 2003 or XP that 'rocks'. Lots of glitz, very little utility. Unless of course you configure it to work like 2000, but then why upgrade?
On my desk here is RedHat 9, RedHat ES, Mac OS 10.3, Windows 2K. Of all of them, OS X has the best interface. Hands down. For shear elegance, ease of use and clarity, it puts XP to shame. And without trying to hide all the useful bits. Oh yeah, and the "home" version of OS X doesn't come with the user set to run in "root" mode by default. XP Home does.
I play poker. Both at home, in tourneys and occasionally on-line. I've been playing some form of poker since I was a teenager (ie 70's). The Hold 'Em craze is like nothing I've seen before. It's brought all kinds of people into poker games that might never have really been interested before.
The problem is, that most home poker games (or those held in bars, etc) are illegal. Maybe, just maybe, the explosive interest in Texas Hold'Em (through the WPT, WSOP - which is down to about 70 players for 2004 now, and other TV events) will lead to a push in every state to legalize card rooms. Most states have legal gambling of some kind (lottery, riverboat casinos, etc) - why not legalize card rooms like California? I've thought about starting a Political Action Committee in my state (IL) to lobby for legalizing cardrooms. It sure seems like time to strike while the iron is hot!
Maybe we can get the libertarians to support this movement!
And, said regulated industry has high-priced, professional lobbyists who are constantly making sure that a) their monopoly (if they have one) is protected; b) new entrants who try to offer a different, but competing service are barred from entry by regulation, taxes, etc , and c) that "shared" resources are priced high enough that startups have problems using them.
Look at the battle going on between the satellite companies and cable cos. Most cable cos are regulated locally, and have significant taxes. Satellite companies have been able (for the most part) to avoid this because of their model (only downlink located in most localities, and that downlink is privately owned).
I'm not surprised by this classification - every level of government believes that it has a $DEITY-given right to tax and regulate everything. Heck, hosting a home poker game in my state can get you a year in jail! I'm not opposed to all regulation by any stretch of the imagination, but regulation stifles creativity and needs to be applied only in very clear, very limited ways.
This is not inexpensive to setup - the hardware isn't cheap (though you might find it on E-bay). BUT, the major issue is that in the US, you have to have a licensed installer because the DW6000 has a built-in uplink. Of course, if you know someone who has is licensed and is willing to do it, you can save there.
And, having had quite a bit of experience with Direcway, if you have any kind of bad weather, you may have no connectivity. Rain is your enemy.
If they are running Win2k or XP, delete the user profiles and create new ones. That will clear up a lot. Next, get AdAware and run it on the machine until it reports no problems. Then, install some kind of pop-up blocker (Google toolbar will do). Better yet, install Mozilla or another browser and remove the icons for IE. And of course, AV software.
Next, scan the hard disk for anyMaybe. But do you want to bet your future on your lawyer convincing a skeptical judge and jury that it was a technology problem? After all, they have evidence that the pictures were on your machine, under your control. I don't think I'd want to bet my future on that.
Moral of the story - use pop-up blockers. Run AdAware. Run AV software. Get some software that wipes unused areas of your hard disk and "shreds" files you delete. Be paranoid.
And yes, in the "old" days I ran into the same problem that the person described in the artcile had, but I was savvy enough to clear up my machine, wipe out the last vestige of those files and run software to wipe the unused area of the hard disk with random data.
I read the article - I can't believe that the editors (are there any?) let this article see the light of day. Sure, there are security holes in Mac OS. It's a given that any OS has some kind of bug or flaw that, when properly exploited, will cause a DOS, crash or improper security. But this author is speculating (or, using speculation as source material).
Any OS based on a solid Unix core (Darwin, Linux, AIX) is going to be much more secure than any Windows kernel - at least at this point. It remains to be seen if Microsoft can build a reliable, secure kernel.Oh, and by the way, how many flaws, and how bad are they, are in Linux and Mac OS compared to windows? Having administered global networks of >1000 Windows workstations and servers, I'll take a similarly sized Linux network ANY day, if security is paramount.
I generally agree with you. As for legal action, I just don't see how that would work, unless the person was verbatim publishing the question and answer sets (ie exact texts of the questions). And even then, as you say, many of them are minors.
That said, they can certainly refuse to provide your scores to any college if you don't follow their rules. It may not be nice, and in fact, may well be evil to do so, but since it's their test, they can make the rules about how they report the scores.Of course, standardized tests are mostly a crock anyway. I know of >1350+ SAT kids who couldn't hack college.
I am sure that there are some /. posters who think they have some absolute right to use content any way they want, but I'm not one of them.
Where my concern comes is that DRM can be made very invasive and there exists a non-null probability that DRM will become so restrictive that no material that lacks DRM signatures will be able to be used. And I can just see the argument for making equipment without DRM illegal. It follows the slippery slope we're going down now.I don't download music, I don't RIP CD's and share them with friends, I don't copy software. But I'll be damned if I will put up with DRM monitoring/control of everything I do.
So long as I can legally buy non-DRM equipment, and play non-DRM content, no problem. But I fear the day is coming when THAT will be illegal.Looks to me like the days of the "home brew" computer are coming back. There will very quickly be a market for non-DRM computers. Of course, then we can expect the government to make it illegal to own non-DRM'd computing equipment. You know what this sounds like? Stallman's "right to read" dystopia. (Check it out on GNU.org).
Countering this is going to be quick an adventure. How do you convince Joe 6-pack - who already believes that the Patriot Act is necessary to prevent terrorism, that the war on drugs is a good thing and that the it's OK to give up rights for some mythical security - to object to these things and vote against people who try to impose them on him.
I don't hold out a lot of hope, but if we can keep the governement from making non-DRM equipment illegal, we may have a chance. I won't hold my breath, though.
Pretty much true, though Americans can be charged with crimes committed outside the US in certain situations. And certain types of crimes against Americans already have extradition treaties with some countries. In the end, only treaties can ensure that the offenders can be dealt with across borders, and even then, there will likely be countries that, for whatever reason, refuse to sign extradition treaties with the US.
There's no doubt the survey is accurate - as an independant consultant, I deal with this all the time. I run Ad-Aware on badly behaving Windows boxes and show their 'owners' just what a mess they have. Record so far is 500+ items tagged by AdAware. Unreal.
This problem is on par with SPAM and viruses, and consumes serious IT cycles to manage. My usual couse of action for any new client is: SOPHOS AntiVirus, pop-up blocker, AdAware, alternative browser (eg Netscape, Firebird), alternative email client (eg. thunderbird). Not to mention religious use of Windows Update, a strong permiter firewall and replacing NT/2000 servers with Linux boxes running SAMBA, themselves fully hardened agaisnt attack. Of course, SpamAssassin is a must on the mail server.
It's a war. And I fight to win.
The difference is that Viacom is not the only game in town. Viacom is free to offer their "entertainment" package on whatever terms they want. Dish or DirecTV or any Cable network are free to accept or reject the terms. If enough reject the terms, Viacom will have to change.
In the end, it's the Dish network subscribers who will decide - they will put pressure on one side or the other, and one of the two will give in.
If Viacom had a monopoly on entertainemtn, it would be different. But they don't. They are just one choice of many. And Dish has decided that it's not in their interest to carry the Viacom package.
I've run into this many times. Or if the company exists, they have dropped support for the older version. And many times, the newer versions are not providing anything useful *except* support for the new OS. Not worth the upgrade price.
With open source, I can nearly always manage the problem - recompile works most of the time, and if not, I can either fix it myself, or find someone who has or will fix it, either for free or for a reasonable fee. More and more of my clients are starting to see the value of Linux and open source applications, especially in the server area. And these are small to medium sized businesses who tend to be very conservative about how they spend their computing money.
I even have customers asking about switching to Mac - something that hasn't happened in ages, if ever!
Just what John Ashcroft ordered (heard he's sick - hope he makes a full recovery AFTER resigning for health reasons). Hmm. Maybe this is M$'s offering the the gods to keep the Department of Justice at bay. Nah, they would never do something like that, would they?
And we were worried that the Department of Homeland Security was going to check our video rentals and library books? Next will come currency scanners that track serial numbers and are used by vendors to track where the money has been.
Paranoia is a way of life.
Most legislatures are made up of at least a plurality, if not a majority of lawyers. And they have, so far, pretty much prevented any real reform in the legal system. In fact, the slower it goes, and the more complicated it gets, the more benefit to the lawyers. If the cases drag for years, they can bill for years.
The entire system needs to be simplified and speedier. It can takes years to get simple cases resolved. Even ones that are downright silly.
But legal reform isn't the only thing needed - the entire federal and state criminal and civil codes need to be re-written and simplified, along with IRS codes, etc, etc. Just think about the time and money wasted because of the foolish complexity of the system. Any party that is truly committed to simplification of the system will get my vote. And neither the GOP nor the Democrats are interested in anything but more complexity - which allows them to help their pet special interests at the expense of the public.
No, more like paying the mob for protection. "Hey, that's a nice little datacenter you have there. Be a real shame if anything happened to it."
- Who pays to install the infrastructure? If it's the rate-payers, this will be a non-starter.
- Who pays for the hardware at the customer end?
- Why does the FCC seem to ignore the frequency problems?
So, the proposal is to have mega-monopolies managing more infrastructure, delivering service that's not in their core area, and requiring huge infrastructre changes?Hmm. Why does this look bad? Especialy when the local power company has a horrible reputation for maintaining their existing power infrastructure. I think I'll pass on this one.
Uhm, yes, it is. SCO's latest amended complaint makes it clear that the issue is that SCO believes IBM is violating their copyright. SCO has a novel theory that AIX and Dynix are derrivative works, in and of themselves, and that ANY part of those derrivative works is covered by SCO's copyright and license agreement. Go to GROKLAW and see.
ZDNet is, effectively, advising their readership to pay protection money to SCO, in order to protect their image? Gee, that's a nice house you have there, be a shame if something happened to it. And those are nice kids you have...be a shame if something happened to them.
Give me a break. First of all, what are your chances of actually being sued by SCO? Fairly slim, I suspect. And even then, a simple motion that says "Your honor, Novell claims they have the copyrights to this material, and SCO is involved in legal process with them. Until such time as SCO can demonstrate that they actually own the property they are claiming, I move the case be placed on hold.
Second, so SCO sues you - I don't believe that they can win (see Groklaw for exhaustive details. You don't look bad to anyone except perhaps a few SCO or MS shills. Everybody else thinks you are a hero!
Finally, even assuming that SCO does own the copyrights, they still have yet to prove that any of their code is in Linux. That's what the IBM lawsuit is all about. And if you check the analysis on Groklaw, SCO is digging their own grave at warp speed.
Ziff Davis is being irresponsible and is givnig VERY bad advise.
I mean seriously - I was a director-level IT manager at two multi-national companies over the past 12 years, and neither I, nor any of my peers, would even think about hiring someone from one of these tech schools.
Even the smallest amount of real-world experience was far more useful than several months of training at these schools. Sure, they learned a few rote solutions, but I can teach those to a new recruit who shows a bit of intelligence in a short time.
In fact, for an entry-level position, give me a liberal arts grad with a bit of tech knowledge learned on their home computer, and I've got the makings of an excellent eomployee. People who can read, write and converse are better candiates than many of the "tech school" grads I ran into.
Frankly, I never felt these schools were worth anything, and if they are now closing, all the better.
If I were in HP's position, I'd certainly be disposed to selecting Apple as my partner over Napster. iPods are wildly popular, and iTunes is a going concern run by a company that is a profitable going concern. If I'm HP looking for business partners, I am certainly going to select the one who looks like the way of the future.
Say what you want about Apple, but they keep coming up with great innovations and products that are slick, well designed and quite useful. HP made a very wise choice here and I think they will make a handsome profit from it. Not to mention Apple being "validated" by someone in the WinTel clique, and having a WinTel producer OEM their gear and install their software by default. This is win-win for Apple and HP, and not bad for consumers.
Yes, there is the DRM issue, but is it realistic to think that there will ever be a time when there is no DRM on material like songs? While I wish DRM wasn't necessary, Apple's license is pretty good - use on multiple machines, use on multiple iPods and burn them onto MP3 disks. Perfect? No. Good enough for the vast majority? I'd say so.
Dave - I think we mean the same things. I wasn't trying to be technical with "probable cause" but was trying to say that the officer needed some reasonable answer as to why he feels it is necessary to require me to speak with him if I don't feel like doing so.
Yes, there are times when giving your ID is required, I had a breakdown and when the local police arrived, and asked for ID, I showed it. Why? Because I had been driving my car, and last I checked, my state law requires that I carry my license when I'm driving, and surrender it to a police officer who asks. That's one of the prices of driving - you have to follow the regulations surrounding the license you've been granted.
As an aside, the request for the license was for the contact report, which our local police are required to file anytime they talk to someone in an official capacity. Had the situation been different (ie not vehicle related), simply giving my name and address would have sufficed.
The ordinance that requires these contact reports was put in place to keep the police in check. And it's a good one.