My vote is for MAC:
1) Don't have to worry about wep keys (and typos)
2) Don't have to worry about formatting my hard drive and then trying to find that piece of paper with my WEP
3) I have been told that WEP slows down the computer signal since it has to utilize the WEP. SInce MAC is always being utilized there is no real extra step (am i right about this)?
4) I give a spare wireless card to when I have a guest over with a laptop - and thusly take it back when they leave - so I don't have to reconfigure my router.
I find it odd that people do not rename their networks. In the office high rise I work, there are three linksys SSIDs, and two of them are wide open (just gotta guess which one it is). I kinda like naming my SSID for convenience and a little bit of pride.
Now a better question, how many people change their network IP address? I for one can't stand the default IP address (sucks if you have to VPN to a place that also has a default IP address).
I had a neighbor once (kinda weird--45 and lives with his mother, and just weird). And the first time he met me he started chatting about computers boasting how great he was (I just was creeped out by this guy...and hell I am a guy). He was telling me how there was this "honey pot" in the neighborhood that he was thinking of breaking into because it didn't have any security. First I had no idea about the term "honey pot" and it took me five minutes to shut him up to get an answer about what that meant. So, I was thinking it odd about this "honey pot" because I had never detected another wireless connection in the area except my own. Then he mentioned the name of the SSID, and I realized he was looking at mine. I told him to go see if he could hack it. A week later I saw him and he said he had been trying to hack it and for the life of him could not...so much for absolutely needing WEP:) Long live MAC address. I prefer MAC address since I do not have to worry about writing down my wep key (typos) in case of hard drive reformatting. And I have an extra wireless card for friends.
If they can gaurantee me an atmosphere to breathe - as the saying goes "Beam me up Scotty" - I wanna go. It would be an adventure of a lifetime. Yea I would spend years in space - but the end result might just be worth it (especially if they create a big enough space ship that contains the population of a small town). Ok this sounds geeky and far fetched - but why not? The only thing stopping us is greed and fear.
Maybe they need to say no more often. Unless you work in the patent office or have some great insider knowledge, you do not necessarily know whats going on in there. So maybe they do need to say no more often - but not because something is "trivial" which is subjective. They need to say no to things that are un-original or have been utilized by others PRIOR to this person claiming the patent: "I would like to patent the process of sitting on a chair"...that qualifies as a "no". However, if someone comes along and says "I would like to patent the process to ", even though XYZ might be inane - as long as it is something original (or as close as you can get to originality) then it should be patented. Obviously as always everything should be handled on a case by case basis. But saying "Your idea is kinda stupid, no" is just wrong and beyond the scope of the patent office.
IMHO CS undegrad is good - then get a lot of experience so you actually know how to do something - then get an MBA so you can manage a team of geeks - get paid a lot of money and not have to worry when jobs are outsourced because you are the CTO making 150k+ a year.
I did not say I have a solution I just said that you need to have these factors in the solution. And if the current IP laws are the best solution then that is what we are stuck with. My point was not to create a solution (since again I do not have the answer) my point was that you need to work within the system - otherwise you will not accomplish what you want (unless what you want is to consistantly have to crack programs and hope you dont get caught).
So if intolerable restrictions were to begin to affect both Mac and x86 PC platforms, then which platform should one buy instead?
Work within the system to get things changed. Hacking and saying "ha i p0wn3d you guys" doesn't work. The whole steal from the rich give to the poor mentality only works for Robin Hood. Arguing your points, informing people, trying to change things by writing to the companies (with huge petitions), and working with legislation is the method. If someone believes in an issue so much then these things will be easy to do (certainly easier then writing a program).
Now when you do argue these points, keep this in mind:
1) You are trying to convince a company to change a practice they believe will protect their IP. Do not tell them that IP is evil, because they apparantly disagree.
2) Telling a company they are evil and monopolistic will put your suggestion in the box that has a paper shredder right underneath it.
3) Changing IP laws, DRM laws will not work unless you completely satisfy the reason for these laws with a better solution. Meaning - you need to a) show they can continue make a profit the way they see fit, & b) have their IP protected from hacking and copying.
If you can do these things, trust me, the companies will love to implement them...why? Because it costs them a lot of money to research and protect their IP. They would rather use that time and money to fatten their wallets.
So why should game publishers be allowed to control who can develop software for a PC? The infrastructure of Treacherous Computing seems to allow this
You know, up until the originating post I never really heard anyone use Treacherous Computering, but it seems to be thrown into almost all of your statements? Why? (rhetorical)
Why should game publishers be allowed to do this? Well because what they are doing is not violating any criminal laws, and as such they can do this. It is their business practice - and it is deemed a fair one. If you do not like their terms of service - do not use their product. It is that simple. If enough people do not like it - they will see it when it hits their bottom line. But apparantly a lot of people don't care - they enjoy the product within its "restrictive" grounds. Though to be honest, in all the years of playing my games I have never felt restricted because of the EULA.
So to your points:
1) If you do not like the restrictions on a certain platform - don't buy it. While you may argue that the restrictions these guys are placing is wrong it is a matter of opinion. However, what you are doing - breaking the restrictions - is DEFINITLY wrong. Remember, by installing these programs you are agreeing to the contract in the EULA. Breaking a contract is wrong. If you do not like the contract - don't install the software. If you want to get things done then do it within the system - going outside the system (i.e. hacking and/or stealing software) puts you in the wrong.
2) Businesses will distribute information to residential users in the manner they see best fit for their purposes. If this means DRM then they will utilize DRM.
So most of the public are students and are authorized to use student editions? Do you have usage stats to support that works and student edition of word is the most commonly used ina residential setting.
Just to note the "public" includes companies.
And I did not imply that you implied consoles are the only way. This argument is getting pointless as you are just trying to divert it to technicalities of statements instead of arguing the topic itself.
I was comparing the graphics, sound, etc. The more technical aspects. While games like tetris can and do provide hours of fun (I play spider solitaire for 1-2 hours at a time) they simply do not compare to games like the ones I mentioned, and others.
Step Mania - requires a physical addition to be run properly. And even though you might hack it to run with your keyboard - the whole fun of the game is jumping around like an idiot. So you should not compare this to a purely software game (minus the console and controller which can be used for other games).
And briefly glancing at TOD games - none of these games (while some are cute and fun) compare to games like Halo, Half Life, Final Fantasy, etc. I can't believe you would even use these two sites in your argument. They in no way compare.
Argue that point - the point of the duration of copyrights - instead of the point "copyrights should be brought down". You will get a lot farther.
As for applying worth to innovation and deciding what is trivial improvement, and what is genuine - because that is a purely subjective a opinion it would be hard to pass. Why do you ask? Because it is subjective - and your opinion of trivial is not the same as someone else. Your opinion of genuine is not the same as someoen else.
Also, copying things like software is a lot different then say copying a car. And you know - damn well - that people will not pay for software if they don't have to - but come to buying a car they will walk to the dealership everytime.
And people do make different versions of coke at cheaper prices. If they taste better or worse is argumentative - but they are there (RC cola, Acme cola, pepsi-cola). But this is far different then someone copying Counterstrike and giving it to their buddy. Or copying the counterstrike source code - modifying it a little bit, slapping a new label on it and saying "look at my original work, now pay me 20 bucks less then that other game"
When you buy it, you agree to the terms of service (EULA, contract, whatever). Thats it - you agreed. By breaking that contract you are saying your word and agreement with contracts are worthless. You are in essence a liar. Maybe these big companies are wrong about locking up their software (very very argumentable) but you are 110% wrong for breaking your end of the contract.
When I buy a sweater I did not sign a contract. Also, there is a huge difference between copying a program and giving it to someone and hand sewing a new sweater and giving it to someone. If you don't realize the difference you should go seek some mental help.
For those that argue "well i don't see the contract until after I buy the software" Two points to note to your "full of holes" argument":
1) You can return your product (yes they have to take it)
2) *You* do know what the contracts for these software products will look like. *You* have been around the block - stop acting like the EULA's are something strange and new and a surprise to the community. They have been around for a long long time (longer then some of you have been using computers).
Actually there is a big difference between a modded Xbox and a pc. If you can't figure it out, then I sure as hell can't help you out.
If the PC were invented today, you would be using BASIC at best and Oregan trail would be on the top 10 gaming list..oh and there would probably be only 4 other games on that list.
Well maybe you prefer to play on a game cube and other game consoles - but I know many people who cannot afford the expensive prices of those consoles and games and their own computer. So they opt to have a nice computer handy and buy the games for the computer. While you get along fine with your game cube - my statement is still valid - the best games are the ones that come from proprietary companies that charge.
Most actual companies use work suite or student edition? Thats news to me. Every company I have worked for - from cheap as hell banks to my current employer has used Office professional versions. I could see some businesses using office basic, but office student? That would be in violation; most legitimate companies do not want to deal with potential legal ramifications to save some cash. Plus in all honesty its wrong and abusive of the system. Student edition software is practically a gift from these companies to help students out. I would hate to see such offers stop because a legitimate company making millions is too cheap to pay for legit, full use software.
As much as I like free - I haven't seen any of them produce quality games like Half-Life 2, etc et al.
And, at least for the near future, MS Office is the industry standard, not to mention a ton of other products. Put it this way, if the companies want to do it - they can do it and just bully us. They don't care about the piddilance of/. users. They will toute it under the flag of protecting themselves from those "dammned kids who are nothing more then corrupt hackers and kids."
And face it, we don't need many companies to agree to these standards: Windows, & Intel are good enough; though it seems that AMD & IBM are in that band wagan...so those four major power-horses can turn the industry if they want it.
For some reason I have this feeling that MS put a DRM on the XBox in an attempt to help things like this from happening.
Maybe my sense of morality is screwed, but I can't seem to bring myself to blame a company from trying to keep people from copying their material and giving it away.
No the other guy, who has heard of ripping and being able to get music and movies for free is going to hear the following and THEN go out and buy these computers (which it will be stock on):
"Our new Intel chip comes packed with great new security features to help ensure your privacy. These chips will prevent hackers from modifying your software. These chips will prevent people from stealing all of your products."
Now how can anyone (other then those of us in the field or are highly informed) argue with words such as those? And the marketing department will probably say it a lot better then I will (or they won't mention it at all...just show their logo and "By the new Intel SCREW YOU chip"
You will be buying it when the only other option is to run a processor that is about 2-5 years old, with apps that are just as old because the new ones won't work on it (either from lack of horsepower or the security features).
I know Intels reasons for doing it (I thought I said it) - so isn't that conspiring if they are staggering their chips for a purpose other then the inability to make something better?
They have already had years and years of silicon; how many millions did silicon cost that it could not have been recouped by now ten-fold or more?
Think of it this way - back in the early-mid 90's we would see upgrades going from 33 mhtz, to 66, etc. Small increments (by todays standards) now we see increments going up by 200-500 mhtz at a time. THat is what I am implying. When are going to stop from going to 200-500 mhtz increments to 1 ghtz?
Also, I think as fast as we make our computers, someone will be able to make a nice bloated software to tax it. Isn't the software industry essentially waiting for the hardware industry to make faster components so they can make more demanding programs?
The reason why most enterprises uses second or third generation technology as opposed to first gen is not the price (whats an extra 10-20 grand for a multi-million/billion dollar company?). It is the support, and technical problems. The company I work for will not utlize a new program until revision 1 comes out (for the most part) and it will not use the latest generation in hardware just in case there are serious flaws. We typically wait until it becomes second gen, because then most of the bugs have been worked out and if we call tech support we are less likely to get "well we have never heard of this problem before, thanks for reporting it"
To expect a program to not have flaws is to expect the programmer to be perfect - people are not perfect. Mozilla will have security holes, errors, bugs, etc just like any other program. To hope Mozilla will avoid any of these issues is like hoping Bill Gates will announce the removal of IE and the incorporation of Mozilla into all of his Windows versions (w/o gov't prodding).
When they get off the silicon and hop onto those nice diamond wafers (there is an article in wired), then we will see faster processing.
The main problem - our largest producer (Intel) said they would not stop utilizing silicon until they made more money from it...We know that the industry likes to stagger upgrades. Instead of giving us the latest and greatest - they give us everything in between in nice "slow" steps so we spend more money. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the jumps of 1ghz at a time. This year 2.0 ghz, next year 3.0, following year 4.0, etc...and then eventually increase it further so its 5ghz at a time, etc. et al.
Slashdot Mirror
hence an atmosphere i can breath. If i can survive in the outdoors of this planet I won't have to worry about living in a tiny little sanctuary.
Which do you think is better and why?
My vote is for MAC:
1) Don't have to worry about wep keys (and typos)
2) Don't have to worry about formatting my hard drive and then trying to find that piece of paper with my WEP
3) I have been told that WEP slows down the computer signal since it has to utilize the WEP. SInce MAC is always being utilized there is no real extra step (am i right about this)?
4) I give a spare wireless card to when I have a guest over with a laptop - and thusly take it back when they leave - so I don't have to reconfigure my router.
What do you guys think
I find it odd that people do not rename their networks. In the office high rise I work, there are three linksys SSIDs, and two of them are wide open (just gotta guess which one it is). I kinda like naming my SSID for convenience and a little bit of pride.
Now a better question, how many people change their network IP address? I for one can't stand the default IP address (sucks if you have to VPN to a place that also has a default IP address).
I had a neighbor once (kinda weird--45 and lives with his mother, and just weird). And the first time he met me he started chatting about computers boasting how great he was (I just was creeped out by this guy...and hell I am a guy). He was telling me how there was this "honey pot" in the neighborhood that he was thinking of breaking into because it didn't have any security. First I had no idea about the term "honey pot" and it took me five minutes to shut him up to get an answer about what that meant. So, I was thinking it odd about this "honey pot" because I had never detected another wireless connection in the area except my own. Then he mentioned the name of the SSID, and I realized he was looking at mine. I told him to go see if he could hack it. A week later I saw him and he said he had been trying to hack it and for the life of him could not...so much for absolutely needing WEP :) Long live MAC address. I prefer MAC address since I do not have to worry about writing down my wep key (typos) in case of hard drive reformatting. And I have an extra wireless card for friends.
If they can gaurantee me an atmosphere to breathe - as the saying goes "Beam me up Scotty" - I wanna go. It would be an adventure of a lifetime. Yea I would spend years in space - but the end result might just be worth it (especially if they create a big enough space ship that contains the population of a small town). Ok this sounds geeky and far fetched - but why not? The only thing stopping us is greed and fear.
Maybe they need to say no more often. Unless you work in the patent office or have some great insider knowledge, you do not necessarily know whats going on in there. So maybe they do need to say no more often - but not because something is "trivial" which is subjective. They need to say no to things that are un-original or have been utilized by others PRIOR to this person claiming the patent: "I would like to patent the process of sitting on a chair"...that qualifies as a "no". However, if someone comes along and says "I would like to patent the process to ", even though XYZ might be inane - as long as it is something original (or as close as you can get to originality) then it should be patented. Obviously as always everything should be handled on a case by case basis. But saying "Your idea is kinda stupid, no" is just wrong and beyond the scope of the patent office.
IMHO CS undegrad is good - then get a lot of experience so you actually know how to do something - then get an MBA so you can manage a team of geeks - get paid a lot of money and not have to worry when jobs are outsourced because you are the CTO making 150k+ a year.
I did not say I have a solution I just said that you need to have these factors in the solution. And if the current IP laws are the best solution then that is what we are stuck with. My point was not to create a solution (since again I do not have the answer) my point was that you need to work within the system - otherwise you will not accomplish what you want (unless what you want is to consistantly have to crack programs and hope you dont get caught).
So if intolerable restrictions were to begin to affect both Mac and x86 PC platforms, then which platform should one buy instead?
Work within the system to get things changed. Hacking and saying "ha i p0wn3d you guys" doesn't work. The whole steal from the rich give to the poor mentality only works for Robin Hood. Arguing your points, informing people, trying to change things by writing to the companies (with huge petitions), and working with legislation is the method. If someone believes in an issue so much then these things will be easy to do (certainly easier then writing a program).
Now when you do argue these points, keep this in mind:
1) You are trying to convince a company to change a practice they believe will protect their IP. Do not tell them that IP is evil, because they apparantly disagree.
2) Telling a company they are evil and monopolistic will put your suggestion in the box that has a paper shredder right underneath it.
3) Changing IP laws, DRM laws will not work unless you completely satisfy the reason for these laws with a better solution. Meaning - you need to a) show they can continue make a profit the way they see fit, & b) have their IP protected from hacking and copying.
If you can do these things, trust me, the companies will love to implement them...why? Because it costs them a lot of money to research and protect their IP. They would rather use that time and money to fatten their wallets.
So why should game publishers be allowed to control who can develop software for a PC? The infrastructure of Treacherous Computing seems to allow this
You know, up until the originating post I never really heard anyone use Treacherous Computering, but it seems to be thrown into almost all of your statements? Why? (rhetorical)
Why should game publishers be allowed to do this? Well because what they are doing is not violating any criminal laws, and as such they can do this. It is their business practice - and it is deemed a fair one. If you do not like their terms of service - do not use their product. It is that simple. If enough people do not like it - they will see it when it hits their bottom line. But apparantly a lot of people don't care - they enjoy the product within its "restrictive" grounds. Though to be honest, in all the years of playing my games I have never felt restricted because of the EULA.
So to your points:
1) If you do not like the restrictions on a certain platform - don't buy it. While you may argue that the restrictions these guys are placing is wrong it is a matter of opinion. However, what you are doing - breaking the restrictions - is DEFINITLY wrong. Remember, by installing these programs you are agreeing to the contract in the EULA. Breaking a contract is wrong. If you do not like the contract - don't install the software. If you want to get things done then do it within the system - going outside the system (i.e. hacking and/or stealing software) puts you in the wrong.
2) Businesses will distribute information to residential users in the manner they see best fit for their purposes. If this means DRM then they will utilize DRM.
So most of the public are students and are authorized to use student editions? Do you have usage stats to support that works and student edition of word is the most commonly used ina residential setting.
Just to note the "public" includes companies.
And I did not imply that you implied consoles are the only way. This argument is getting pointless as you are just trying to divert it to technicalities of statements instead of arguing the topic itself.
I was comparing the graphics, sound, etc. The more technical aspects. While games like tetris can and do provide hours of fun (I play spider solitaire for 1-2 hours at a time) they simply do not compare to games like the ones I mentioned, and others.
One more thing that I just checked out:
Step Mania - requires a physical addition to be run properly. And even though you might hack it to run with your keyboard - the whole fun of the game is jumping around like an idiot. So you should not compare this to a purely software game (minus the console and controller which can be used for other games).
And briefly glancing at TOD games - none of these games (while some are cute and fun) compare to games like Halo, Half Life, Final Fantasy, etc. I can't believe you would even use these two sites in your argument. They in no way compare.
Argue that point - the point of the duration of copyrights - instead of the point "copyrights should be brought down". You will get a lot farther.
As for applying worth to innovation and deciding what is trivial improvement, and what is genuine - because that is a purely subjective a opinion it would be hard to pass. Why do you ask? Because it is subjective - and your opinion of trivial is not the same as someone else. Your opinion of genuine is not the same as someoen else.
Also, copying things like software is a lot different then say copying a car. And you know - damn well - that people will not pay for software if they don't have to - but come to buying a car they will walk to the dealership everytime.
And people do make different versions of coke at cheaper prices. If they taste better or worse is argumentative - but they are there (RC cola, Acme cola, pepsi-cola). But this is far different then someone copying Counterstrike and giving it to their buddy. Or copying the counterstrike source code - modifying it a little bit, slapping a new label on it and saying "look at my original work, now pay me 20 bucks less then that other game"
When you buy it, you agree to the terms of service (EULA, contract, whatever). Thats it - you agreed. By breaking that contract you are saying your word and agreement with contracts are worthless. You are in essence a liar. Maybe these big companies are wrong about locking up their software (very very argumentable) but you are 110% wrong for breaking your end of the contract. When I buy a sweater I did not sign a contract. Also, there is a huge difference between copying a program and giving it to someone and hand sewing a new sweater and giving it to someone. If you don't realize the difference you should go seek some mental help.
For those that argue "well i don't see the contract until after I buy the software" Two points to note to your "full of holes" argument":
1) You can return your product (yes they have to take it)
2) *You* do know what the contracts for these software products will look like. *You* have been around the block - stop acting like the EULA's are something strange and new and a surprise to the community. They have been around for a long long time (longer then some of you have been using computers).
Actually there is a big difference between a modded Xbox and a pc. If you can't figure it out, then I sure as hell can't help you out.
If the PC were invented today, you would be using BASIC at best and Oregan trail would be on the top 10 gaming list..oh and there would probably be only 4 other games on that list.
It's about being realistic.
Well maybe you prefer to play on a game cube and other game consoles - but I know many people who cannot afford the expensive prices of those consoles and games and their own computer. So they opt to have a nice computer handy and buy the games for the computer. While you get along fine with your game cube - my statement is still valid - the best games are the ones that come from proprietary companies that charge.
Most actual companies use work suite or student edition? Thats news to me. Every company I have worked for - from cheap as hell banks to my current employer has used Office professional versions. I could see some businesses using office basic, but office student? That would be in violation; most legitimate companies do not want to deal with potential legal ramifications to save some cash. Plus in all honesty its wrong and abusive of the system. Student edition software is practically a gift from these companies to help students out. I would hate to see such offers stop because a legitimate company making millions is too cheap to pay for legit, full use software.
As much as I like free - I haven't seen any of them produce quality games like Half-Life 2, etc et al. /. users. They will toute it under the flag of protecting themselves from those "dammned kids who are nothing more then corrupt hackers and kids."
And, at least for the near future, MS Office is the industry standard, not to mention a ton of other products. Put it this way, if the companies want to do it - they can do it and just bully us. They don't care about the piddilance of
And face it, we don't need many companies to agree to these standards: Windows, & Intel are good enough; though it seems that AMD & IBM are in that band wagan...so those four major power-horses can turn the industry if they want it.
For some reason I have this feeling that MS put a DRM on the XBox in an attempt to help things like this from happening.
Maybe my sense of morality is screwed, but I can't seem to bring myself to blame a company from trying to keep people from copying their material and giving it away.
No the other guy, who has heard of ripping and being able to get music and movies for free is going to hear the following and THEN go out and buy these computers (which it will be stock on):
"Our new Intel chip comes packed with great new security features to help ensure your privacy. These chips will prevent hackers from modifying your software. These chips will prevent people from stealing all of your products."
Now how can anyone (other then those of us in the field or are highly informed) argue with words such as those? And the marketing department will probably say it a lot better then I will (or they won't mention it at all...just show their logo and "By the new Intel SCREW YOU chip"
You will be buying it when the only other option is to run a processor that is about 2-5 years old, with apps that are just as old because the new ones won't work on it (either from lack of horsepower or the security features).
but what if nobody wants to buy it? Is it still vapor ware or is it considered shitty ware?
I know Intels reasons for doing it (I thought I said it) - so isn't that conspiring if they are staggering their chips for a purpose other then the inability to make something better?
They have already had years and years of silicon; how many millions did silicon cost that it could not have been recouped by now ten-fold or more?
Think of it this way - back in the early-mid 90's we would see upgrades going from 33 mhtz, to 66, etc. Small increments (by todays standards) now we see increments going up by 200-500 mhtz at a time. THat is what I am implying. When are going to stop from going to 200-500 mhtz increments to 1 ghtz?
Also, I think as fast as we make our computers, someone will be able to make a nice bloated software to tax it. Isn't the software industry essentially waiting for the hardware industry to make faster components so they can make more demanding programs?
The reason why most enterprises uses second or third generation technology as opposed to first gen is not the price (whats an extra 10-20 grand for a multi-million/billion dollar company?). It is the support, and technical problems. The company I work for will not utlize a new program until revision 1 comes out (for the most part) and it will not use the latest generation in hardware just in case there are serious flaws. We typically wait until it becomes second gen, because then most of the bugs have been worked out and if we call tech support we are less likely to get "well we have never heard of this problem before, thanks for reporting it"
To expect a program to not have flaws is to expect the programmer to be perfect - people are not perfect. Mozilla will have security holes, errors, bugs, etc just like any other program. To hope Mozilla will avoid any of these issues is like hoping Bill Gates will announce the removal of IE and the incorporation of Mozilla into all of his Windows versions (w/o gov't prodding).
When they get off the silicon and hop onto those nice diamond wafers (there is an article in wired), then we will see faster processing.
The main problem - our largest producer (Intel) said they would not stop utilizing silicon until they made more money from it...We know that the industry likes to stagger upgrades. Instead of giving us the latest and greatest - they give us everything in between in nice "slow" steps so we spend more money. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the jumps of 1ghz at a time. This year 2.0 ghz, next year 3.0, following year 4.0, etc...and then eventually increase it further so its 5ghz at a time, etc. et al.