You'd be surprised at the level of monitoring these days.
I'll second that. I also work for a large bank, and about a year ago we went through a training program to bring us into compliance with recent amendments to the Bank Secrecy Act (so named, I imagine, to be confused with bank secrecy). Topics included common illegal financial practices and how to detect them, and reporting requirements that our back office must fulfill on a regular basis (e.g. check customer names against government watch lists, etc.). The only thing particularly creepy that I found in all this was that tellers can't tell customers that a suspicious activity report is being filed on them (as opposed to a currency transaction report, of which the customer is aware on account of all the nosey questions I have to ask him).
I'd be curious to see where the GP got the $3,000.00 reporting figure. As far as I know, tellers only have to file a currency transaction report for transactions in excess of $10,000.00. Tellers are also required to look out for people who look like they're structuring their deposits to fly under the CTR requirements, who are sending a lot of wires, who are buying or depositing large sequences of negotiables (money orders, travelers' checks, etc.), or who just say the wrong thing. I don't think this is all bad--the kid in this article got nabbed because a bank teller was paying attention and noticed behavior consistent with illegal activity (as others have noted, he could also have been profiting from human or drug trafficking). In a similar vein, we've also just gone through a training program to identify and intervene in cases of potential elder abuse. It's now my job to question suspicious transactions made by our elderly customers, and report situations were I think someone is taking advantage of the customer. Some people may think that we're overstepping our bounds (I've gotten some angry remarks when asking people about their withdrawals), but since tellers are the ones in contact with customers, they have a lot of opportunity to prevent abuse (or fraud, or money laundering). The elderly abuse reporting is in response to a recent California law, but it's my company's policy to enforce the same reporting requirements in of the states in which we operate.
Just some thoughts from someone who used to be a heavy user of GNUstep and Objective-C.
I think that that a more ambitious and useful plan would be if GNUStep project were rebooted to implement Cocoa / OS X rather than a dead operating system (NextStep 3.3). There are indeed GNUstep developers who hold this as a priority. It's worth noting, I think, that GNUstep is not a re-implementation of a dead operating system, but rather Yet Another Implementation of the OPENSTEP specification, which Apple also implements via their Cocoa APIs. Not that I don't get your point, though. On the one hand you have people who want to chase Apple's additions and revisions to the OPENSTEP specification, thereby ensuring a level of source compatability in Linux (and Windows, and wherever else GNUstep is ported) with apps written for Mac OS X; but on the other hand you have people who just want to focus on having a solid implementation of OPENSTEP, without which no user in the world is going to want to deal with GNUstep. In the first case, you get a potential WINE-like situation with no real hope of success, in the second case you get a desktop with no compelling features to attract users and developers, because GNOME and KDE are Good Enough.
It wouldn't hurt either if it adopted the GTK theme engine and other modern UI guidelines so at least it looked and felt like just another application rather than some weirdo UI with its own window manager. The problem with running GNUstep apps in GNOME is less about the theme (which, by default, is ugly but functional), and more about the different approach to how an application is presented to the user. "Regular" apps and GNUstep apps don't fit together because they follow different interface paradigms. There are efforts to make GNUstep apps play better with GNOME and KDE, but I don't personally see how that is a good thing for the user interface. I hate how GNOME, KDE, and Windows apps run (menus under window title bar, app closes when the window does). I equally hate how NeXT and GNUstep have the menu floating in a vertical way instead of anchored to the top of the screen. It gets in the way of maximized windows.
I tried for a long time to use GNUstep+WindowMaker, because like the way it operates. It makes more sense to me (and, to expose my bias, feels more Mac-like). Unfortunately, it is in a very rough state. But the most important parts of OPENSTEP have been implemented, so here's hoping for a future free world run on Debian GNU/Hurd+GNUstep+WindowMaker!
If astronomers can solve the solar neutrino problem then surely they can solve the 'define planet' problem.
Different types of problems, different types of solutions. The Solar Neutrino problem is by nature a scientific one, with a scientific solution. The "define planet" problem is, on the other hand, an emotional problem. People really, really want there to be nine "planets" in our solar system. If Pluto is a "planet" then a bunch of other stuff seems to be as well. If Pluto isn't a planet, well, then we have eight "planets" and hunk of ice with a special name.
People won't come to an agreement on this question until either a) a definition of "planet" is proposed that includes Pluto but excludes everything else that is essentially the same as pluto; or b) the next generation of scientists enters the field and, having grown up with an awareness of the ambiguity of the problem, is less emotionally attached to the old model.
If Apple says that software pirates are the only reason, don't believe them.
Okay, so what was the real reason? To make life hard for those who really loved "Darwin the OS" and wanted to run it on their x86 machines whithout paying for all the nonsense and bloat of Mac OS X? That's just silly. The only parties interested in the source to XNU are pirates and Mac OS X devs, and the latter don't need the thing to be ASPL'd to do their jobs.
Everything that was actually cool and useful about "Darwin the project" is still out there.
Oh, and as regards the title of your post, pirates will care because their lives are now harder. Give me the compilable source over some disassembled representation of the source anyday.
Building your own computer makes you technically competent in the same way that paint-by-numbers makes you an artist.
Agreed in part, but consider that one can not know what parts to buy unless one has at least a passing familiarity with the different roles of CPUs, graphics and sound processors, storage interface controllers, peripheral component interface types, etc. Not to mention that, even if you know what parts generally go into what slots, you still have to match the CPU to the board's bus speed, be aware of how fast the PCI/AGP bus is, be aware of what sort of IDE controller you have, know how the RAM should be spec'd, know how to select a PSU that will meet the needs of the components you have...
In other words, the ability to build a computer does not an electrical engineer make, but it does require more understanding of computer systems than painting by numbers requires of color theory.
When interviewed, the majority of congressmen said point blank that person to person "dormroom" sharing of music was fair use and in no way objectionable. Were they even aware of what they were being asked? How was the question worded? Link?
Further, the DMCA's notice and takedown only applies to the internet, not local area networks. What are you trying to say? The DMCA isn't about the Internet, it's about data decryption and copyright violation prevention.
Any university complying with these bs "complaints" has to have the stupidest administration ever... There are universities in this country that aren't run by imbeciles? Not in California, certainly. Where do you live, and what's the cost of tuition for out-of-staters?
...and any claims made by the RIAA are now utterly specious. When were they not?
I know you're just trolling, but statements like these give me the shivers. Perhaps McCarthy found communists--but why was it ever a crime to be a communist in the service of the United States government? The whole point of our system of government is that citizens with opinions--unpopular ones, even--are supposed to be involved.
If you're looking to contribute to the likes of AppKit, take a peek at GNUstep. If you haven't heard of it, it's an opensource implementation of the OPENSTEP specification, of which Cocoa is a proprietary implementation. It's not as shiny as Apple software (yet!), but it allows one, with some care, to write code that will run natively in Mac OS X and any platform with GNUstep. And they can certainly use talented coders!
If this drug was passed, and everybody who took it got rid of their AIDS, but developed some other condition which killed them in a year, then we'd all look a little stupid, and the drug company would probably be under a lot of scrutiny.
Well, killing all the hosts is certainly one way of stopping a virus...
Did anyone see any ref ANYWHERE to any requirement that any site not use any materials at hand to 'up' their search standing?? ive never seen such a thing!
This new one's definitely lacking in the interior design department.
Actually, its pretty much the same as the iMac G5 w/iSight. Granted, the iMac G5 before that looked a bit neater on the inside, but I hardly see how that matters, since the machine is not meant to be user-serviceable.
...Jobs and his ilk should just admit that the value of Apple is its OS...
The value of Apple is its end-to-end comitment to user experience. Take away Apple's hardware, and you have what most of Apple's users would see as a half-assed product.
That, and Apple's profits would vaporize overnight.
Does the dude at the record store pop round your house "to say hi" and then look through your stuff?
No, of course not. That would be creepy. It'd be creepy if Apple were to do that, too. Yes, they should provide a privacy statement, but as has already been pointed out in so many other places on this forum, there doesn't seem to be a lot of indication that Apple is acting invasively. You click on a song, it gives recomendations. But only if you click. If the song comes up by itself in a playlist, no recomendations are given. Plus, and this can't be stressed enough, you close the freakin' window and the feature is disabled.
I would expect that Microsoft, or any other content provider, would do the same thing in Apple's position. Opera does (or did?) the same thing with ads based on the pages you're viewing. Gmail does the same thing with my email (which is really quite worse--this brings up another oft-made remark: corporations have a bank of trust. I trust Google alot more than, say, Sony or Real). It's called personalized service, and you have to let them know something about yourself in order to get it. At least Apple's is easy to turn off for those who don't want it.
The guy at my local record store knows me pretty well because I'm in there a lot. He tends to notice the music I buy, and has lately been making some pretty good suggestions about other kinds of music that I haven't necesarily heard before. I like the guy, he's cool.
But after reading this thread, I too have become concerned about data mining. Who is he to record information about my music tastes without my permission? I don't even think this is a case of opt-in/opt-out--I bet he'd remember my purchases even if I told him not too! The nerve!
So I've decided to take matters into my own hands. Next time I go into the store, I'm just going to erase his database myself. With a 2x4 upside the head.
If I had the right SDK installed, I could have added -arch i386. Building fat binaries with GCC and ICC will probably require the use of lipo(1).
Huh. I'd forgotten about PPC64.
I am under the impression that NeXT's method for supporting multipe architectures with one.app was to have a binary for each different archtecture stored in a separate subdirectory within the.app. Was this not the case? Were they unable to produce fat binaries? I had always assumed that Apple would do multiple subdirectories for Universal Binaries, but I am clearly wrong:
But still, it seems Jobs prefers the term Universal over fat for marketspeak. Anyone recall what they were "officially" called during the 68k/PPC transition?
Well, not quite. In OS X lingo, they're Univeral Binaries. The term fat binary was used during the 68k/PPC switchover. However, the idea is pretty much the same.
Maybe Jobs doesn't like his apps being called fat?
Ahem.
In this case, he is indeed meaning to use "reason" as a discrete quantity. But observe the following sentence:
There is little reason in spending your weekdays posting to Slashdot.
I assert that the above is a perfectly valid use of "reason" as an indiscrete quantity. Further, when you have a few spare moments, you should google for "Descriptive Lingustics."
Slashdot Mirror
You'd be surprised at the level of monitoring these days.
I'll second that. I also work for a large bank, and about a year ago we went through a training program to bring us into compliance with recent amendments to the Bank Secrecy Act (so named, I imagine, to be confused with bank secrecy). Topics included common illegal financial practices and how to detect them, and reporting requirements that our back office must fulfill on a regular basis (e.g. check customer names against government watch lists, etc.). The only thing particularly creepy that I found in all this was that tellers can't tell customers that a suspicious activity report is being filed on them (as opposed to a currency transaction report, of which the customer is aware on account of all the nosey questions I have to ask him).
I'd be curious to see where the GP got the $3,000.00 reporting figure. As far as I know, tellers only have to file a currency transaction report for transactions in excess of $10,000.00. Tellers are also required to look out for people who look like they're structuring their deposits to fly under the CTR requirements, who are sending a lot of wires, who are buying or depositing large sequences of negotiables (money orders, travelers' checks, etc.), or who just say the wrong thing. I don't think this is all bad--the kid in this article got nabbed because a bank teller was paying attention and noticed behavior consistent with illegal activity (as others have noted, he could also have been profiting from human or drug trafficking). In a similar vein, we've also just gone through a training program to identify and intervene in cases of potential elder abuse. It's now my job to question suspicious transactions made by our elderly customers, and report situations were I think someone is taking advantage of the customer. Some people may think that we're overstepping our bounds (I've gotten some angry remarks when asking people about their withdrawals), but since tellers are the ones in contact with customers, they have a lot of opportunity to prevent abuse (or fraud, or money laundering). The elderly abuse reporting is in response to a recent California law, but it's my company's policy to enforce the same reporting requirements in of the states in which we operate.
Just some thoughts from someone who used to be a heavy user of GNUstep and Objective-C.
I think that that a more ambitious and useful plan would be if GNUStep project were rebooted to implement Cocoa / OS X rather than a dead operating system (NextStep 3.3).
There are indeed GNUstep developers who hold this as a priority. It's worth noting, I think, that GNUstep is not a re-implementation of a dead operating system, but rather Yet Another Implementation of the OPENSTEP specification, which Apple also implements via their Cocoa APIs. Not that I don't get your point, though. On the one hand you have people who want to chase Apple's additions and revisions to the OPENSTEP specification, thereby ensuring a level of source compatability in Linux (and Windows, and wherever else GNUstep is ported) with apps written for Mac OS X; but on the other hand you have people who just want to focus on having a solid implementation of OPENSTEP, without which no user in the world is going to want to deal with GNUstep. In the first case, you get a potential WINE-like situation with no real hope of success, in the second case you get a desktop with no compelling features to attract users and developers, because GNOME and KDE are Good Enough.
It wouldn't hurt either if it adopted the GTK theme engine and other modern UI guidelines so at least it looked and felt like just another application rather than some weirdo UI with its own window manager.
The problem with running GNUstep apps in GNOME is less about the theme (which, by default, is ugly but functional), and more about the different approach to how an application is presented to the user. "Regular" apps and GNUstep apps don't fit together because they follow different interface paradigms. There are efforts to make GNUstep apps play better with GNOME and KDE, but I don't personally see how that is a good thing for the user interface. I hate how GNOME, KDE, and Windows apps run (menus under window title bar, app closes when the window does). I equally hate how NeXT and GNUstep have the menu floating in a vertical way instead of anchored to the top of the screen. It gets in the way of maximized windows.
I tried for a long time to use GNUstep+WindowMaker, because like the way it operates. It makes more sense to me (and, to expose my bias, feels more Mac-like). Unfortunately, it is in a very rough state. But the most important parts of OPENSTEP have been implemented, so here's hoping for a future free world run on Debian GNU/Hurd+GNUstep+WindowMaker!
-CB
Interesting. See Plato on his opinions of the value and power of rhetoric.
Because the exploit had nothing to do with the OS.
According to TFS, user error was only half of it. Once the attacker had local access, the OS was indeed exploited.
People won't come to an agreement on this question until either a) a definition of "planet" is proposed that includes Pluto but excludes everything else that is essentially the same as pluto; or b) the next generation of scientists enters the field and, having grown up with an awareness of the ambiguity of the problem, is less emotionally attached to the old model.
If Apple says that software pirates are the only reason, don't believe them.
Okay, so what was the real reason? To make life hard for those who really loved "Darwin the OS" and wanted to run it on their x86 machines whithout paying for all the nonsense and bloat of Mac OS X? That's just silly. The only parties interested in the source to XNU are pirates and Mac OS X devs, and the latter don't need the thing to be ASPL'd to do their jobs.
Everything that was actually cool and useful about "Darwin the project" is still out there.
Oh, and as regards the title of your post, pirates will care because their lives are now harder. Give me the compilable source over some disassembled representation of the source anyday.
The Darwin kernel? But I suppose you'd argue that it isn't fast, or it isn't popular, or it isn't competitive.
This is admittedly an area in which I have only a general understanding.
Building your own computer makes you technically competent in the same way that paint-by-numbers makes you an artist.
Agreed in part, but consider that one can not know what parts to buy unless one has at least a passing familiarity with the different roles of CPUs, graphics and sound processors, storage interface controllers, peripheral component interface types, etc. Not to mention that, even if you know what parts generally go into what slots, you still have to match the CPU to the board's bus speed, be aware of how fast the PCI/AGP bus is, be aware of what sort of IDE controller you have, know how the RAM should be spec'd, know how to select a PSU that will meet the needs of the components you have...
In other words, the ability to build a computer does not an electrical engineer make, but it does require more understanding of computer systems than painting by numbers requires of color theory.
I mean, do the editors even read this site? This has to be the fourth or fifth time I've seen this story posted here!
Some thoughts:
...and any claims made by the RIAA are now utterly specious.
When interviewed, the majority of congressmen said point blank that person to person "dormroom" sharing of music was fair use and in no way objectionable.
Were they even aware of what they were being asked? How was the question worded? Link?
Further, the DMCA's notice and takedown only applies to the internet, not local area networks.
What are you trying to say? The DMCA isn't about the Internet, it's about data decryption and copyright violation prevention.
Any university complying with these bs "complaints" has to have the stupidest administration ever...
There are universities in this country that aren't run by imbeciles? Not in California, certainly. Where do you live, and what's the cost of tuition for out-of-staters?
When were they not?
I know you're just trolling, but statements like these give me the shivers. Perhaps McCarthy found communists--but why was it ever a crime to be a communist in the service of the United States government? The whole point of our system of government is that citizens with opinions--unpopular ones, even--are supposed to be involved.
If you're looking to contribute to the likes of AppKit, take a peek at GNUstep. If you haven't heard of it, it's an opensource implementation of the OPENSTEP specification, of which Cocoa is a proprietary implementation. It's not as shiny as Apple software (yet!), but it allows one, with some care, to write code that will run natively in Mac OS X and any platform with GNUstep. And they can certainly use talented coders!
If this drug was passed, and everybody who took it got rid of their AIDS, but developed some other condition which killed them in a year, then we'd all look a little stupid, and the drug company would probably be under a lot of scrutiny.
Well, killing all the hosts is certainly one way of stopping a virus...
Did anyone see any ref ANYWHERE to any requirement that any site not use any materials at hand to 'up' their search standing?? ive never seen such a thing!
Webmaster Guidelines. You're welcome.
As many slashdotters have already pointed out, this is pretty impractical.
Those unfortunate enough to be deaf AND blind must surely think otherwise.
This new one's definitely lacking in the interior design department.
Actually, its pretty much the same as the iMac G5 w/iSight. Granted, the iMac G5 before that looked a bit neater on the inside, but I hardly see how that matters, since the machine is not meant to be user-serviceable.
See for yourself.
...Jobs and his ilk should just admit that the value of Apple is its OS...
The value of Apple is its end-to-end comitment to user experience. Take away Apple's hardware, and you have what most of Apple's users would see as a half-assed product.
That, and Apple's profits would vaporize overnight.
Does the dude at the record store pop round your house "to say hi" and then look through your stuff?
No, of course not. That would be creepy. It'd be creepy if Apple were to do that, too. Yes, they should provide a privacy statement, but as has already been pointed out in so many other places on this forum, there doesn't seem to be a lot of indication that Apple is acting invasively. You click on a song, it gives recomendations. But only if you click. If the song comes up by itself in a playlist, no recomendations are given. Plus, and this can't be stressed enough, you close the freakin' window and the feature is disabled.
I would expect that Microsoft, or any other content provider, would do the same thing in Apple's position. Opera does (or did?) the same thing with ads based on the pages you're viewing. Gmail does the same thing with my email (which is really quite worse--this brings up another oft-made remark: corporations have a bank of trust. I trust Google alot more than, say, Sony or Real). It's called personalized service, and you have to let them know something about yourself in order to get it. At least Apple's is easy to turn off for those who don't want it.
Anyway, mod me -1 Redundant.
The guy at my local record store knows me pretty well because I'm in there a lot. He tends to notice the music I buy, and has lately been making some pretty good suggestions about other kinds of music that I haven't necesarily heard before. I like the guy, he's cool.
But after reading this thread, I too have become concerned about data mining. Who is he to record information about my music tastes without my permission? I don't even think this is a case of opt-in/opt-out--I bet he'd remember my purchases even if I told him not too! The nerve!
So I've decided to take matters into my own hands. Next time I go into the store, I'm just going to erase his database myself. With a 2x4 upside the head.
Seriously. Sometimes people just cross the line.
He's just this guy, you know?
I write everything in machine code.
But I bet you use a hex editor for it. Wuss.
Huh. I'd forgotten about PPC64.
I am under the impression that NeXT's method for supporting multipe architectures with one
OS X calls these fat binaries
Well, not quite. In OS X lingo, they're Univeral Binaries. The term fat binary was used during the 68k/PPC switchover. However, the idea is pretty much the same.
Maybe Jobs doesn't like his apps being called fat?
Next article (I'm a subscriber):
Ask Slashdot: Using my laptop seems to drain the battery. Can anyone confirm this?