I have spent some time on the Internet looking at the Authors' other works, Ms. Eilperin is clearly a political activist, which would lead me to beleive that this is politics and not news, nor is it science either, simply biased words to sway voters and/or attract funding.
I do beleive that there is a possibility the Mankind has affected the Earth during its existence, however, I would be careful throwing around so many doom and gloom, "The sky is falling" speculations, we are talking geological time here, right?
"It's usually poor management that forces the product to be out the door 6 months before it's ready"
Oh how true this is, and how about the sales force promising the world, forcing changes to be implemented because they had to lie to make the sale.
"In software development, we need to have personal quality assurances from developers that the code they write is secure"
Most anyone can agree, that what is being pointed out here is not a breakdown in the personal quality of the code, it is an entire process, a process of design, development, testing and all of the elements must work properly, otherwise, there is going to be error.
"Howard has gone to an extreme by saying software developers should be held personally responsible for the security of the code they write"
This is completely preposterous, unless it can be demonstrated that the flaw was written in with malice and forthought, otherwise, it is up to the company to QA their products. All this talk about acountability.. The Company that makes the decisions to release a product that is untested is and should be held liable.
I don't know where this goof is coming from, however, by this example, we should hold the machine operators personally liable for an improperly packaged product (example)?? If my paint chips on my car, can I file a lawsuit against the guy who painted it at the factory? (I know, I know, robots paint the cars, just an example).
"But, when that data was sent to the purchasing office, it was sent as a plain text file."
Again, who approved, and signed off on this? the programmer? The programmer was handed a task, performed the task and the outcome/results should have been reviewed and aproved by the person requesting it.
"Businesses themselves should accept some responsibility for the security of the software they purchase, according to the BCS."
Wow, a reasonable statement, finally. Ultimately, when you "accept" something, you "agree" to the terms of use, or you look somewhere else. If you "Accept" something under the pretense that the developer is "not responsible for the fit or fitness of the delivered product" and you simply press "next> without reading, then you are partially to blame.
When it comes to companies peddaling software, suggesting that the developers pay the price for bad/insecure code which more than likely is the result of pushing deadlines, promising things that don't exist (sales force), not having a QA process in place, it all sounds like it points to the leaders of the companies, so, unless it is decided to relinquish any and all control of the development process,QA/QC, company policies, sales practices and so forth to the programmers (including the FAT bonuses regardless of how buggy the software is) then I would look for someone else to blame.
I knew it, I knew it, I knew it. The funny thing about this is that it was a troll to begin with.
There is no doubt that I exageratted the point, However, while linux has gotten much better over the years, there are still moments where one is caught up in dependancy hell installing some application, game or whatever...
Seriously, if you cannot relate to this in some way, shape or form and simply laugh about it, you are in serious denial.
"You must be either lying about using Linux or you are trolling."
This whole article was a joke.
"I _do_ use Linux (Fedora and Ubuntu) and have _NEVER_ had to recompile my system binaries, patch the kernel or update my dependencies to play a game"
again, satire or maybe I should stop using custom installs and just take the "install everything" approach, right?
Windows made a dent in the market because they (at the time) listened to the people and put together an OS that could be easily installed, the achilles heal is the trade off for security (among other reasons).
Futher more and more to the point, I find it somewhat interesting what Novell is doing, Having spent a great deal of my professional career managing Novell environments, I do applaud their current efforts, They have never really been in tune with their customers.
By the way, I use MythTV on Debian and Fedora in 2 rooms of my home. I use Fedora at work as well as Windows. I Monitor our entire environment at work with JFFNMS and implement open source solutions when possible.
Give me a break, I know this is a joke! I like Linux as much as the next guy, and I use it on a daily basis, as well as Windows. Please.... I think that there are 2 primary groups that can identify with this situation, and it really wouldn't be a situation if Linux hadn't paved the way for it...
You have the Linux dependancy, binary, complier nightmares
or
The days of little hardware support in Windows 95/98/NT.
Now, both have come a long way, and there are merits to both OSs, however, the situation of which is being refered to is almost an exclusive problem with Linux.
I have never been required to re-compile all of my system binaries, patch the kernel and update all my dependancies in Windows in order to play a game, however, in Linux, this is standard practice.
Yes, this is actually sad, talk about an invasive, bloated, lousy product. I can't wait for "Vista" with Real Player Technology. I bet it will ask you everytime you start windows to provide email address and other demographic data...
As if there are not enough problems with Spyware on Windows machines, now the OS will come standard filled with it.
"will enable Real to build services and software that enhance consumer's experience with Real's products and services and take advantage of innovations in Windows Vista."
Sure, why not start out on the wrong foot with your new OS.
"Microsoft will enhance consumers' ability to access Real's software products in simple and straightforward ways, enabling consumers easily to choose their preferred settings for playing media files and managing other media experiences.."
Simple and straight forward ways means that it is installed by default, right?
it is a sad state of affairs indeed when sub-par software is perpetuated via some legal processes. If Real player, and all of it's media spin-offs were that good, it wouldn't matter, people would chose what they like. Now they may not have a choice, funny how that works..
"The more ridiculous their licensing gets, the more businesses will look to open source solution"
I couldn't agree more, I have to wonder as to if Microsoft has read the marketing manual written by telcos, banks and maybe insurance companies, see: "Confusopoly
I wonder if I can purchase some virtual licenses with my virtual wallet, where I keep my virtual bank card which of course is drawn from my virtual bank, which no doubt is guaraunteed and protected by some virtual regulatory agency...
You really have to wonder about a company that puts version control on their licensing model!
I think Microsoft is going to learn that the only people interested in participating in their ever-changing license strategies are going to be Virtual Customers
"Having the president appoint supreme court judges is wrong anyway.
Here is an interesting comment.. no basis, no substantiation, nothing... what do you do with this?
"There should be a better process of selecting them"
Another stellar comment. In other words, "I don't like what is going on for no particular reason, and it needs to change. I don't know how. Hmmmm, I wonder what other people are doing, lets ask Russia, or China, or how about North Korea?
I don't want to start a flame war here, but this is exactly the kind of opposition that is toxic to any environment, I agree with standing up for something, but it is useless to stand up, complain for no reason and then offer no solutions..
How about we leave it alone for now, of course the people who do not want to see this appointment are going to argue the processes, and if it were in their favor, it would not be an issue.
At this point, when we elect a politician to office (Like the President) we do so with such things in mind as... who would they appoint to vacancies in government offices? What is their stance on all of the important issues? They make Informed decisions. Learning both sides of the story, and heaven forbid, ignoring the "Parties".
The real problem is the division among our politicians, it is not the "United" States, it is Divided, two parties, squabbling over every stupid little thing like kids in a schoolyard that never grew up or never heard the word "NO".
As for the comments above, it is clear that this type of "decision" making process, the "I don't like it just because." and "We cant' be doing it right, lets see what others are doing" is just the kind of stuff that elects bad politicians.
The way I see it is this, we have marginal politicians and we have uninformed voters, both are a problem. If you are not informed, please, DONT VOTE.
"Because" is not and answer, "I don't know" is not a solution and "Oh yeah!" is not a response.
Government imposition is becoming increasingly more prevelant in our society. "We must protect the children..." is cited in most or all of the cases. Well, I realize that this has been said 99,000 times alerady, but I repeat: WHERE ARE THE PARENTS?
Children need to be governed and protected by their parents, not the Government!
In most cases you will find that the root of the problem are the parent(s), sure, there are genetic dispositions that might make someone more succeptable to commiting violent acts, but for the most part, the way they deal and react in every situation is learned at a very early age and age where most kids are not playing video games. Unfortunately, the kids are thrown into daycare and the parents are too busy working late so then can pay off their $40,000 SUV. So, realy parenting is out of the question..
Where are the parents when these kids are playing the games? The kids are in front of their baby sitter, a video game or the television!
Enter the Governement..."We'll take it from here"
Parents! Pay attention to your kids! spend some time with them instead of shuffling them off to soccer, ballet, etc... and spend some time with them. What a simple concept!
It's not my fault!
What a common theme on our society, I got a question, if it's not your fault, than whose is it?
"It's your fault, or his fault, or her fault, or their fault!"
Enter some government official with an agenda ready to make hasty decisions and judgements about a situation without completely understanding it. "I dont' care whose fault it is, your both wrong"
The problem and the blame and the responsibility needs to be the parents and it is not the Governements job to raise our children.
Poor Video Game Developers...yeah, right!
Here is where I will more than likely get slammed, citing; "You can't be on both sides of the fence", well, yes I can.
There are some real crap video games out there! Grand Theft Auto is Useless. I've played it, I am a gamer, it is completely unecessary killing and violence and everything else rolled into a first person experience. Children should never be allowed near this kind of crap, however,it it not the Governments' job to decide this, it is the PARENTS.
Senator Dinosaur
Lastly, I will make this short and to the point' People over the age of 40 should not be able to make or propose ANY legislation that involves technology! More often than not, they do not understand it, they don't understand the implications, and they are incapable of making an educated decision, so they apply their old school, antiquated ideals and sometimes, bring innovation to a screeching halt.
should is the operative word here, this is far different from what people want. I do agree that no one needs a camera on their phone, noone needs to watch the latest music video on their phone, but they want it.
"...she can't use that phone
more than likely not and while it is a tad bit frustrating, I can accept this, I have all kinds of computer equipment that is useless too.
"...but it only costs her a penny with the two-year contract she has to accept anyway if she wants service
really? no. I would bet that you can go out, purchase a new phone and pay a monthly fee without being in a contract. This is a choice, not an obligation.
"you'll see a mass exodus from AT&T and Cingular and Verizon and the like..."
Huh? This kind of comment makes me laugh.. mass exodus. This is not going to happen anytime soon. There are solutions right now, no contract, pay as you go... I don't see any mass exodus. "Just give me the basics", right, no one wants just the "basics" they all want the model with everything, and if they don't want it, your right, the companies will create the need.
mass exodus... guess what? Open source software is free and better too! You can get back to me and I will say you are right when Micro$oft files bancruptcy....mass exodus.
"I agree that they believe that, but I do not
Companies do what is successful and makes them the most money, if the most money was in simply providing you a solid flat black hunk of plastic with a button pad and speaker that would cost them $.01, beleive me, they would in a second.
"Yes, the phone comes cheap as part of signing a 2-year contract (usually), but after that?..."
After that, you throw away the phone because you dont want it anyway due to the fact that the phone is ridiculously outdated.
The point may be missed on this slightly, however, first of all, nothing is free and there is a price for everything. I agree, of you choose to agree to the contract, then by all means, sign it otherwise, just buy a phone that is not unlocked.
You see, the only way that the companies, at this point, can stay competetive is to lock people in on contracts and the only way people will agree to this is by getting something for "free" or at a special price....
Additionally, cell phone manufacturers are unloading units by the millions, earnings are secure based on contracted revenue allowing for them to secure additional funding for R&D on new cell phones to ensure that you will want the latest and greatest technology when your contract expires.
"When every object we posess contains some amount of copyrighted material, will companies successfully argue that we don't actually "own" anything"
well, thats an interesting point... I think that the only thing you really own is what you came into this world with and what you leave with...Unless of course you are cloned.
"...HOW the things work, and they have no idea. They are really riding on the backs of the 'old folks' like us that built the goodies they enjoy"
I find this comment interesting, while it is somewhat accurate, there just may be more to it.
The 'Old folks' spent their time building a framework, a base, if you will. The young techies need not expend energy understanding how the framework was put together, rather they expend their energy building on the results.
Lets just go back a little ways... I find it somewhat interesting that some institutions of higher learning still require HTML programing... There are so many front ends for HTML development, that I would guess that it would be counter-productive to write straight HTML in a text editor...
"Well, thats riduculous, this breeds lazy coders who don't understand what they are doing, and can't troubleshoot the problems because they don't know what they are looking at"
I would somewhat agree with this philosephy, however, at some point it does become counter-productive to do things "the old fashioned way".
I beleive that in order to move into the future, you must build on the past, use the tools developed in the past and move to the next level.
In addition to all of this with regards to "riding the backs of old folks like us..", I got news for the "old folks", they rode over your backs a long time ago, the people that you are seeing in those lines are riding the backs of the people who rode over your backs 5 years ago....
These continual discussions posted under "your rights online" need to be moved to a new topic of their own. I mean, what does this have to do with rights? since when does infringing upon someone elses product become a right? Since when has freely ditributing someone elses product without their permission or become a right?
I suspect that this term right is being used/misused very loosly, see Websters' definition:
" something to which one has a just claim: as a : the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled b (1) : the interest that one has in a piece of "
I don't see how walking into a movie theatre, paying the money to view the movie, recording the movie, and distributing it to all who want to participate in thievery to download it constitute any type of right. Right?
"something to which one has a just claim"
Please explain how anyone other than the people directly involved in the production of a movie apply to the above? Is it because they paid the $8-$10 to see the movie?
I tell you what, if I spent $50M to make a movie and some schmuck with a $500 CamCorder and a broadband Internet connection was caught up in a frenzy of unauthorized movie distribution with a group of his cyber-buddies, I would exercise every power I could to take that group down. Let's face it, computing power is increasing by leaps and bounds, bandwidth is on the upswing as well, eventually, if this was left around and ignored, it could become a problem.
" the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled "
there are way too many people with the sick beleif of entitilement, again, if you paid the price to produce the film in some way, shape or form and you have an agreement with the production company, I would say that their may be some sort of entitlement, and if you are not getting your share, then I suggest you open up the yellow pages because their are piles of lawyers out there that will get the payment you are entitled to.
"the interest that one has in a piece of"
You more than likely did not contribute anything in the line of creativty or monies, you have no intrest therefore you are again, not entitled
"ok, ok, but this should be a matter if civil leagality, not for the government to step in..."
I would suspect then that we would not be talking about rights rather than some breach of contract, or negligence.
just pay the money, if you don't like the movie, then shrug it off, no one owes you anything... In addition, I agree that all those fatcat movie producers are more-than-likely scum and make too much money, along with those over-paid actors/actresses. I guess if money is your problem, then either boycott the movies, or become and actor/actress or producer.
Please though, don't hand me the line that any of this is some type of right.
"Why don't they care about their product to protect distribution proactively? Like... don't put it in a form where everyone can copy it?"
I think that a best effort should be made to protect something, however, you and I both know that what-ever protection methods you devise, nothing is safe, there is always someone smarter and more capable who is going to get a kick out of breaking your protection and ditributng the intellectual property.
Sure, there are some methods, but this ultimately may change the functionality of the software, or limit the market...
"No, because you've now deprived someone else of a car which cost about $3000 in materials and labor to build"
I think there is a general misunderstanding here, there is a value to intellectual property, otherwise people would not pay for it, just like the $3000 in materials, there may be 1,000,000 dollars in R&D, coding, or whatever...
So, it is still theft, I think GM is making their best effor to protect their cars by using keys and alarms, however, if you could transfer a car across the Internet, trust me, they would be flying across the net faster that porn.
"Because our law enforcement is acting on the behalf of private companies (who should be filing civil suits against these people) instead of going after the rapists/murders/terrorists of the World."
Here we go! what kind of attitiude is this? This is the attitude that condones breaking the law. This is the attitude that says "hey, it's just stealing, it's not like I am hurting anyone"...
Please remember, software is their product, it is the sole means of how they make money, and when you pirate sofware, you are walking into their place of business and taking the product off the shelf and walking out without paying for it.
"Yea, but those big bad software companies are making ridiculous amounts of money, they are ripping US off with their unfair licensing or (insert any gripe here)"
Yes, I agree, some of the companies out there are unscrupulous, hell, I don't like GM,I think that they make crappy cars, would it be ok if I walked onto a car lot and drove off with a car?
This is such a ridiculous argument, ultimately, if you have a problem with the publisher, you have a choice, if you still choose to use the software, the argument is moot and you are just stealing.
This person clearly broke the law, there is no doubt about it. It is not like he ripped off and distributed 1 lousy game, we are talking about an excess of 13,000 titles, this is huge.
As far as: "going after the rapists/murders/terrorists of the World" what you are saying is that stealing on a large scale is not that bad, in fact, it may not event be a crime, right? wrong. What the hell is it with this Robin Hood Attitude about software? Open up your wallet and start paying for the goods.
I agree, I also belive that one of the primary motivating factors for regulation is to somehow squeeze money out of the MILLIONS of people using the Internet.
"oh no, they can't do that the Internet is a global entity"
If you beleive this, you are dreaming
The Internet is not tied to the US, however, that wouldn't stop the government entities from imposing taxes on it. How bad do you think politicians are salavating at the chance to get a piece of that action?
The Internet has grown due to the fact that it has NOT been restrained by government, Governing the Internet will surly hinder the growth.
This fight is worse than the damn US Presidential Election. "My OS is better than your OS". BLAH, BLAH.
Do you know what matters?Cash, sales and total installations and lastly PERCEPTION.
The truth of the matter is that it doesn't matter which is better, it only matters which LOOKS BETTER, or is PERCEIVED AS BETTER or MORE SECURE for that matter.
Microsoft has pumped BILLIONS into making people BELEIVE that there products are the best,the most secure and the easiest to use and maintain. How much money has gone into the marketing of Linux vs. the amount that has goen into the marketing of Windows?
When was the last time you went to a "kick off" of a new version of the Linux Kernel?
Some people just never learn, you can spit the facts out until you are blue in the face, but the winner will have a bigger marketing budget!
People are warming up to Linux and are realizing the benfits of Linux, in addition, they are taking hard looks as to how secure their current OS is. It will tke time for the Linux based ditributions to take a foothold in the enterprise.
The problem is that Linux is so widely dispersed, there is no way that you can compete with the Marketing power of Microsoft.
This is really being taken too far though, I find myself saying the same things over-and-over, How do you expect the feds to gather information?
Maybe that should have been the question, it is plain and clear that the "bad guys" have and use technology to their advantage, why can't we use this to our advantage in our own country?
I think the problem is more that in the past the information was not so readily available and shareable, technology has given us the ability to have information available at the push of a button. Soon a search on a person will travel across and hit databases all around the country, throughout large and small municipalities, but we need this, we need the ability to stay 1 step ahead of the "bad guys"
I just hate the argument from "duh, this is happening, get used to it." Just because it's already going on doesn't make it fair or right.
Again, technology is bringing together information that was always there, just not as accessible, in addition, the Internet has taken off so fast that we need to have our laws reflect the current state of technology.
Fair? please, spare with the that word, it is too vague, everyone has their own opinion of what fair is...
I think of that everytime I look at presidential candidate Kerry spewing out his socialist values, promising that the Gevernment will take care of us all...
How do you expect the law enforcement agencies to collect information? With the Internet literally closing the communication gaps and making real-time communication across the world possible, technology used by terrorist who want to kill us how can we protect ourselves if we currently have laws on the books that prevent us from protecting ourselves?
The thing about it is that you and I both know that the terrorists have the money to bring their organizations together across the world using technology, and if we can't fight them using at least the same technology, you are asking for our agents to work with their hands tied behind their backs.
"In the US, there are supposed to be certain 4th and 14th ammendment rights which guarantee that the states and the federal government can't randomly start collecting information on someone for politically motivated persecution and prosecution.
I don't see anything in this that allows any agent to go willy-nilly and collect information, it appears to me that a conduit is being suggested to make it easier to wiretap, however:
"The FCC says the government must still go through all of the necessary legal steps to obtain the authority to wiretap"
You know, like a written piece of paper from a judge who deems the search necessary for further investigation into a criminal act?
Again, if I were conducting unlawful busniess subject to penalty by the government, I would be concerned, otherwise your email is safe, oh yeah and you can still get that abortion, I didn't see anything in the new wiretap laws discussing that...
"I do understand, however, that delusion is much easier for most people to live in. You derive a large amount of smug self-satisfaction by labeling others as "paranoid" and thus justifying to yourself that you are better than they are."
ok. maybe it is a bit ridiculous to label people as Paranoid, I'll buy into that. I think, however, that it is a sad state of affairs to suggest that we cannot trust anyone. I get a kick out of "watchdog" orgnizations that are waving their hands in the air like the Feds just trampled all over our (US) constitutional rights, the truth of the matter is that there were always laws in place for the Feds to wiretap, now, with the Internet and all of the other methods of communications, the policies in place need to adjusted with the times, see: MATRIX Database Schema Altered Due to Privacy Concerns
The funny thing is that we (the public) are asking for this, the public will be the first to condemn the government for allowing some incident to happen under our noses, when in fact we knew nothing about it because we can't exercise authority to gather intelligence. See: Good for law enforcement, bad for criminals...
The only point that I am trying to make is that if there are safety measures in place to prevent unecessary gathering of information, then there should be little to worry about. There are actually Far more things to worry about than the gevernment reading your email, or intercepting IM traffic, or sniffing network segments, so on...
How about the person right now working tirelessly on some means of stealing you identity?
What about Terrorist opertatives in our country right now using the Internet to comunicate the next act of terror on our country?
What is the bigg issue here? are we afraid that the FBI is going to intercept and read our SPAM? Please do, and while you are at it, delete it for me. Seriously, am I just that naive.? who cares? If anyone thinks that this wasn't happening before, I think their the naive ones.
I said this before, and I will say this again and again, there is nothing private, you are not anonymous, there is simply no-such-thing.
I would suspect that those concerned about wiretap laws and so-called invasion of privacy are truly paranoid, or just plain trying to hide something.
I am not suggesting that the government get carte blanche access to everything, there does need to be some oversight. I know, I know, the oversight commitee will be corrupt, right? (I think that they make pills to ease paranoia).
so, Someone, please draw me a picture, how is this so bad, what the hell is so private, they are not putting cameras in our houses...wait, are they?
I spent some time yesterday watching some shows that I archived about 9/11, I recommend that anyone who doubts why we are in Iraq, watch or read again about this tragedy!
I know this is completely off topic, but c'mon, are you going to actually be like the rest of the media-fed cattle in the US? Why do you think that we don't see or hear much about 9/11 anymore? Do people want to forget? No, John Kerry and his ass-clowns would like to have you forget about it because our President's reaction to this event speaks volumes as to how he is completely intolerant to terrorism, unlike John Kerry who has no idea as to what to do about it.
"If Bush wanted to invade Iraq based solely on humanitarian grounds, he should have made that argument and let the people decide whether it was worth it"
It is clearly obvious that Iraq is harboring terrorists, we (the US) have said time and again, that we will not tolerate harboring of terrorists. At the time that Bush announced this, all the Libs were nodding along. Bush also said that this will take a long time what in the hell was expected? The middle-eastern wack-job terrorists have been conducting this business for decades, it is going to take TIME to root them out and restore order.
It's so pathetic how all of you self-righteous arm-chair quarterbacks can sit back with hindsight and spout off "what should have been done", but is so hilarious how the libs were so "bi partison" shortly after the attack and encouraged the war on terrorism, of courseanything else at that time would have been damaging to their political careers.
Bring on the media
once the liberal media shifted the focus to more "important" things, once they were sucessful in making people forget about this travesty, they began their own war of turning our country into a socialist state.
You know, I could name-call and rant all day long about this, it would be too easy. I will put it this way, if someone you know or love is burned to death in a fiery crash caused by a missle driven by some wack-job middle-eastern terrorist with a "cause". I would suspect that you would have a different opinion of what our President is doing.
By the way, according to google, John Kerry leads the assclown awards by about 20%.
"I have nothing but contempt for someone that would violate the copyright on this"
geesh, does anyone get it? anyone?
"Small and independent"
ok, their small, I applaud their zeal to break some new ground, I truly wish them well! What does that have to do with anything? Do you steal or encourage/condone stealing from Walmart ( after all, they are BIG)?
"Compensating writers fairly"
complete rubbish! Do you feel you are compensated fairly? if not, is it ok then to steal from your employer? What is fair? eveyone has a different opinion of fair, fair is over-rated, nothing is fair.
Are you suggesting that "artists" like Brittney Spears are not being "fairly" compensated? I tell you who isn't be compensated fairly, the engineers who work miracles with her "talent".
"Charging a very Reasonable Price"
You know, you almost got me on that one, however riddle me this: what is reasonable? this is another ridiculous word that everyone has their own opinion of. This is a CAPITALISTIC society, prices are determined by what people are willing to pay, if people stop buying, trust me, they will be forced to lower their prices(whoever they are.
"Choosing not to use DRM"
what is the problem with DRM? if it can be delivered to you in a "reasonable" manner by which you can enjoy the book, music, video, what-ever, than what is the problem in someone trying to prevent you from rifling out copies to all of your friends, neighbors and the entire Kazaa network? If it's worth it, and you want it, you will pay for it.
Slashdot Mirror
I have spent some time on the Internet looking at the Authors' other works, Ms. Eilperin is clearly a political activist, which would lead me to beleive that this is politics and not news, nor is it science either, simply biased words to sway voters and/or attract funding.
I do beleive that there is a possibility the Mankind has affected the Earth during its existence, however, I would be careful throwing around so many doom and gloom, "The sky is falling" speculations, we are talking geological time here, right?
The Earth has endured far more than Mankind could ever dish out in it's entire existence: fires, floods, volcano eruptions, meteor strikes, and so on.
Compared to the Earths life, our existence during the period of time we have been "monitoring" weather patterns is like a drop of water in the ocean.
Can we really be sure about all of this?
Oh how true this is, and how about the sales force promising the world, forcing changes to be implemented because they had to lie to make the sale.
Most anyone can agree, that what is being pointed out here is not a breakdown in the personal quality of the code, it is an entire process, a process of design, development, testing and all of the elements must work properly, otherwise, there is going to be error.
This is completely preposterous, unless it can be demonstrated that the flaw was written in with malice and forthought, otherwise, it is up to the company to QA their products. All this talk about acountability.. The Company that makes the decisions to release a product that is untested is and should be held liable.
I don't know where this goof is coming from, however, by this example, we should hold the machine operators personally liable for an improperly packaged product (example)?? If my paint chips on my car, can I file a lawsuit against the guy who painted it at the factory? (I know, I know, robots paint the cars, just an example).
Again, who approved, and signed off on this? the programmer? The programmer was handed a task, performed the task and the outcome/results should have been reviewed and aproved by the person requesting it.
Wow, a reasonable statement, finally. Ultimately, when you "accept" something, you "agree" to the terms of use, or you look somewhere else. If you "Accept" something under the pretense that the developer is "not responsible for the fit or fitness of the delivered product" and you simply press "next> without reading, then you are partially to blame.
When it comes to companies peddaling software, suggesting that the developers pay the price for bad/insecure code which more than likely is the result of pushing deadlines, promising things that don't exist (sales force), not having a QA process in place, it all sounds like it points to the leaders of the companies, so, unless it is decided to relinquish any and all control of the development process,QA/QC, company policies, sales practices and so forth to the programmers (including the FAT bonuses regardless of how buggy the software is) then I would look for someone else to blame.
I knew it, I knew it, I knew it. The funny thing about this is that it was a troll to begin with.
There is no doubt that I exageratted the point, However, while linux has gotten much better over the years, there are still moments where one is caught up in dependancy hell installing some application, game or whatever...
Seriously, if you cannot relate to this in some way, shape or form and simply laugh about it, you are in serious denial.
see Switch to Linux
"You must be either lying about using Linux or you are trolling."
This whole article was a joke.
"I _do_ use Linux (Fedora and Ubuntu) and have _NEVER_ had to recompile my system binaries, patch the kernel or update my dependencies to play a game"
again, satire or maybe I should stop using custom installs and just take the "install everything" approach, right?
Windows made a dent in the market because they (at the time) listened to the people and put together an OS that could be easily installed, the achilles heal is the trade off for security (among other reasons).
Futher more and more to the point, I find it somewhat interesting what Novell is doing, Having spent a great deal of my professional career managing Novell environments, I do applaud their current efforts, They have never really been in tune with their customers.
By the way, I use MythTV on Debian and Fedora in 2 rooms of my home. I use Fedora at work as well as Windows. I Monitor our entire environment at work with JFFNMS and implement open source solutions when possible.
Give me a break, I know this is a joke! I like Linux as much as the next guy, and I use it on a daily basis, as well as Windows. Please.... I think that there are 2 primary groups that can identify with this situation, and it really wouldn't be a situation if Linux hadn't paved the way for it...
You have the Linux dependancy, binary, complier nightmares
or
The days of little hardware support in Windows 95/98/NT.
Now, both have come a long way, and there are merits to both OSs, however, the situation of which is being refered to is almost an exclusive problem with Linux.
I have never been required to re-compile all of my system binaries, patch the kernel and update all my dependancies in Windows in order to play a game, however, in Linux, this is standard practice.
As if there are not enough problems with Spyware on Windows machines, now the OS will come standard filled with it.
Sure, why not start out on the wrong foot with your new OS.
Simple and straight forward ways means that it is installed by default, right?
it is a sad state of affairs indeed when sub-par software is perpetuated via some legal processes. If Real player, and all of it's media spin-offs were that good, it wouldn't matter, people would chose what they like. Now they may not have a choice, funny how that works..
"The more ridiculous their licensing gets, the more businesses will look to open source solution"
I couldn't agree more, I have to wonder as to if Microsoft has read the marketing manual written by telcos, banks and maybe insurance companies, see: "Confusopoly
I wonder if I can purchase some virtual licenses with my virtual wallet, where I keep my virtual bank card which of course is drawn from my virtual bank, which no doubt is guaraunteed and protected by some virtual regulatory agency...
You really have to wonder about a company that puts version control on their licensing model!
I think Microsoft is going to learn that the only people interested in participating in their ever-changing license strategies are going to be Virtual Customers
"Having the president appoint supreme court judges is wrong anyway.
Here is an interesting comment.. no basis, no substantiation, nothing... what do you do with this?
"There should be a better process of selecting them"
Another stellar comment. In other words, "I don't like what is going on for no particular reason, and it needs to change. I don't know how. Hmmmm, I wonder what other people are doing, lets ask Russia, or China, or how about North Korea?
I don't want to start a flame war here, but this is exactly the kind of opposition that is toxic to any environment, I agree with standing up for something, but it is useless to stand up, complain for no reason and then offer no solutions..
How about we leave it alone for now, of course the people who do not want to see this appointment are going to argue the processes, and if it were in their favor, it would not be an issue.
At this point, when we elect a politician to office (Like the President) we do so with such things in mind as... who would they appoint to vacancies in government offices? What is their stance on all of the important issues? They make Informed decisions. Learning both sides of the story, and heaven forbid, ignoring the "Parties".
The real problem is the division among our politicians, it is not the "United" States, it is Divided, two parties, squabbling over every stupid little thing like kids in a schoolyard that never grew up or never heard the word "NO".
As for the comments above, it is clear that this type of "decision" making process, the "I don't like it just because." and "We cant' be doing it right, lets see what others are doing" is just the kind of stuff that elects bad politicians.
The way I see it is this, we have marginal politicians and we have uninformed voters, both are a problem. If you are not informed, please, DONT VOTE.
"Because" is not and answer, "I don't know" is not a solution and "Oh yeah!" is not a response.
Government imposition is becoming increasingly more prevelant in our society. "We must protect the children..." is cited in most or all of the cases. Well, I realize that this has been said 99,000 times alerady, but I repeat: WHERE ARE THE PARENTS?
Children need to be governed and protected by their parents, not the Government! In most cases you will find that the root of the problem are the parent(s), sure, there are genetic dispositions that might make someone more succeptable to commiting violent acts, but for the most part, the way they deal and react in every situation is learned at a very early age and age where most kids are not playing video games. Unfortunately, the kids are thrown into daycare and the parents are too busy working late so then can pay off their $40,000 SUV. So, realy parenting is out of the question..
Where are the parents when these kids are playing the games? The kids are in front of their baby sitter, a video game or the television!
Enter the Governement..."We'll take it from here"
Parents! Pay attention to your kids! spend some time with them instead of shuffling them off to soccer, ballet, etc... and spend some time with them. What a simple concept!
It's not my fault!
What a common theme on our society, I got a question, if it's not your fault, than whose is it?
"It's your fault, or his fault, or her fault, or their fault!"
Enter some government official with an agenda ready to make hasty decisions and judgements about a situation without completely understanding it. "I dont' care whose fault it is, your both wrong"
The problem and the blame and the responsibility needs to be the parents and it is not the Governements job to raise our children.
Poor Video Game Developers...yeah, right!
Here is where I will more than likely get slammed, citing; "You can't be on both sides of the fence", well, yes I can.
There are some real crap video games out there! Grand Theft Auto is Useless. I've played it, I am a gamer, it is completely unecessary killing and violence and everything else rolled into a first person experience. Children should never be allowed near this kind of crap, however,it it not the Governments' job to decide this, it is the PARENTS.
Senator Dinosaur
Lastly, I will make this short and to the point' People over the age of 40 should not be able to make or propose ANY legislation that involves technology! More often than not, they do not understand it, they don't understand the implications, and they are incapable of making an educated decision, so they apply their old school, antiquated ideals and sometimes, bring innovation to a screeching halt.
"...Exactly what a phone should have"
....mass exodus. hehe
should is the operative word here, this is far different from what people want. I do agree that no one needs a camera on their phone, noone needs to watch the latest music video on their phone, but they want it.
"...she can't use that phone
more than likely not and while it is a tad bit frustrating, I can accept this, I have all kinds of computer equipment that is useless too.
"...but it only costs her a penny with the two-year contract she has to accept anyway if she wants service
really? no. I would bet that you can go out, purchase a new phone and pay a monthly fee without being in a contract. This is a choice, not an obligation.
"you'll see a mass exodus from AT&T and Cingular and Verizon and the like..."
Huh? This kind of comment makes me laugh.. mass exodus. This is not going to happen anytime soon. There are solutions right now, no contract, pay as you go... I don't see any mass exodus. "Just give me the basics", right, no one wants just the "basics" they all want the model with everything, and if they don't want it, your right, the companies will create the need.
mass exodus... guess what? Open source software is free and better too! You can get back to me and I will say you are right when Micro$oft files bancruptcy....mass exodus.
"I agree that they believe that, but I do not
Companies do what is successful and makes them the most money, if the most money was in simply providing you a solid flat black hunk of plastic with a button pad and speaker that would cost them $.01, beleive me, they would in a second.
"Yes, the phone comes cheap as part of signing a 2-year contract (usually), but after that?..."
After that, you throw away the phone because you dont want it anyway due to the fact that the phone is ridiculously outdated.
The point may be missed on this slightly, however, first of all, nothing is free and there is a price for everything. I agree, of you choose to agree to the contract, then by all means, sign it otherwise, just buy a phone that is not unlocked.
You see, the only way that the companies, at this point, can stay competetive is to lock people in on contracts and the only way people will agree to this is by getting something for "free" or at a special price....
Additionally, cell phone manufacturers are unloading units by the millions, earnings are secure based on contracted revenue allowing for them to secure additional funding for R&D on new cell phones to ensure that you will want the latest and greatest technology when your contract expires.
"When every object we posess contains some amount of copyrighted material, will companies successfully argue that we don't actually "own" anything"
well, thats an interesting point... I think that the only thing you really own is what you came into this world with and what you leave with...Unless of course you are cloned.
"...HOW the things work, and they have no idea. They are really riding on the backs of the 'old folks' like us that built the goodies they enjoy"
I find this comment interesting, while it is somewhat accurate, there just may be more to it.
The 'Old folks' spent their time building a framework, a base, if you will. The young techies need not expend energy understanding how the framework was put together, rather they expend their energy building on the results.
Lets just go back a little ways... I find it somewhat interesting that some institutions of higher learning still require HTML programing... There are so many front ends for HTML development, that I would guess that it would be counter-productive to write straight HTML in a text editor...
"Well, thats riduculous, this breeds lazy coders who don't understand what they are doing, and can't troubleshoot the problems because they don't know what they are looking at"
I would somewhat agree with this philosephy, however, at some point it does become counter-productive to do things "the old fashioned way".
I beleive that in order to move into the future, you must build on the past, use the tools developed in the past and move to the next level.
In addition to all of this with regards to "riding the backs of old folks like us..", I got news for the "old folks", they rode over your backs a long time ago, the people that you are seeing in those lines are riding the backs of the people who rode over your backs 5 years ago....
Technology is moving just that fast...
These continual discussions posted under "your rights online" need to be moved to a new topic of their own. I mean, what does this have to do with rights? since when does infringing upon someone elses product become a right? Since when has freely ditributing someone elses product without their permission or become a right?
... In addition, I agree that all those fatcat movie producers are more-than-likely scum and make too much money, along with those over-paid actors/actresses. I guess if money is your problem, then either boycott the movies, or become and actor/actress or producer.
I suspect that this term right is being used/misused very loosly, see Websters' definition:
" something to which one has a just claim: as a : the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled b (1) : the interest that one has in a piece of "
I don't see how walking into a movie theatre, paying the money to view the movie, recording the movie, and distributing it to all who want to participate in thievery to download it constitute any type of right. Right?
"something to which one has a just claim"
Please explain how anyone other than the people directly involved in the production of a movie apply to the above? Is it because they paid the $8-$10 to see the movie?
I tell you what, if I spent $50M to make a movie and some schmuck with a $500 CamCorder and a broadband Internet connection was caught up in a frenzy of unauthorized movie distribution with a group of his cyber-buddies, I would exercise every power I could to take that group down. Let's face it, computing power is increasing by leaps and bounds, bandwidth is on the upswing as well, eventually, if this was left around and ignored, it could become a problem.
" the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled "
there are way too many people with the sick beleif of entitilement, again, if you paid the price to produce the film in some way, shape or form and you have an agreement with the production company, I would say that their may be some sort of entitlement, and if you are not getting your share, then I suggest you open up the yellow pages because their are piles of lawyers out there that will get the payment you are entitled to.
"the interest that one has in a piece of"
You more than likely did not contribute anything in the line of creativty or monies, you have no intrest therefore you are again, not entitled
"ok, ok, but this should be a matter if civil leagality, not for the government to step in..."
I would suspect then that we would not be talking about rights rather than some breach of contract, or negligence.
just pay the money, if you don't like the movie, then shrug it off, no one owes you anything
Please though, don't hand me the line that any of this is some type of right.
"Why don't they care about their product to protect distribution proactively? Like... don't put it in a form where everyone can copy it?"
I think that a best effort should be made to protect something, however, you and I both know that what-ever protection methods you devise, nothing is safe, there is always someone smarter and more capable who is going to get a kick out of breaking your protection and ditributng the intellectual property.
Sure, there are some methods, but this ultimately may change the functionality of the software, or limit the market...
"No, because you've now deprived someone else of a car which cost about $3000 in materials and labor to build"
I think there is a general misunderstanding here, there is a value to intellectual property, otherwise people would not pay for it, just like the $3000 in materials, there may be 1,000,000 dollars in R&D, coding, or whatever...
So, it is still theft, I think GM is making their best effor to protect their cars by using keys and alarms, however, if you could transfer a car across the Internet, trust me, they would be flying across the net faster that porn.
"Because our law enforcement is acting on the behalf of private companies (who should be filing civil suits against these people) instead of going after the rapists/murders/terrorists of the World."
Here we go! what kind of attitiude is this? This is the attitude that condones breaking the law. This is the attitude that says "hey, it's just stealing, it's not like I am hurting anyone"...
Please remember, software is their product, it is the sole means of how they make money, and when you pirate sofware, you are walking into their place of business and taking the product off the shelf and walking out without paying for it.
"Yea, but those big bad software companies are making ridiculous amounts of money, they are ripping US off with their unfair licensing or (insert any gripe here)"
Yes, I agree, some of the companies out there are unscrupulous, hell, I don't like GM,I think that they make crappy cars, would it be ok if I walked onto a car lot and drove off with a car?
This is such a ridiculous argument, ultimately, if you have a problem with the publisher, you have a choice, if you still choose to use the software, the argument is moot and you are just stealing.
This person clearly broke the law, there is no doubt about it. It is not like he ripped off and distributed 1 lousy game, we are talking about an excess of 13,000 titles, this is huge.
As far as: "going after the rapists/murders/terrorists of the World" what you are saying is that stealing on a large scale is not that bad, in fact, it may not event be a crime, right? wrong. What the hell is it with this Robin Hood Attitude about software? Open up your wallet and start paying for the goods.
I agree, I also belive that one of the primary motivating factors for regulation is to somehow squeeze money out of the MILLIONS of people using the Internet.
"oh no, they can't do that the Internet is a global entity"
If you beleive this, you are dreaming
The Internet is not tied to the US, however, that wouldn't stop the government entities from imposing taxes on it. How bad do you think politicians are salavating at the chance to get a piece of that action?
The Internet has grown due to the fact that it has NOT been restrained by government, Governing the Internet will surly hinder the growth.
This fight is worse than the damn US Presidential Election. "My OS is better than your OS". BLAH, BLAH.
Do you know what matters? Cash, sales and total installations and lastly PERCEPTION.
The truth of the matter is that it doesn't matter which is better, it only matters which LOOKS BETTER, or is PERCEIVED AS BETTER or MORE SECURE for that matter.
Microsoft has pumped BILLIONS into making people BELEIVE that there products are the best,the most secure and the easiest to use and maintain. How much money has gone into the marketing of Linux vs. the amount that has goen into the marketing of Windows?
When was the last time you went to a "kick off" of a new version of the Linux Kernel?
Some people just never learn, you can spit the facts out until you are blue in the face, but the winner will have a bigger marketing budget!
People are warming up to Linux and are realizing the benfits of Linux, in addition, they are taking hard looks as to how secure their current OS is. It will tke time for the Linux based ditributions to take a foothold in the enterprise.
The problem is that Linux is so widely dispersed, there is no way that you can compete with the Marketing power of Microsoft.
I am pgnas and I support this message
You know, that is very interesting, arent' they encroaching on a registered name?
This is really being taken too far though, I find myself saying the same things over-and-over, How do you expect the feds to gather information?
Maybe that should have been the question, it is plain and clear that the "bad guys" have and use technology to their advantage, why can't we use this to our advantage in our own country?
I think the problem is more that in the past the information was not so readily available and shareable, technology has given us the ability to have information available at the push of a button. Soon a search on a person will travel across and hit databases all around the country, throughout large and small municipalities, but we need this, we need the ability to stay 1 step ahead of the "bad guys"
I just hate the argument from "duh, this is happening, get used to it." Just because it's already going on doesn't make it fair or right.
Again, technology is bringing together information that was always there, just not as accessible, in addition, the Internet has taken off so fast that we need to have our laws reflect the current state of technology.
Fair? please, spare with the that word, it is too vague, everyone has their own opinion of what fair is...
True, Very true.
I think of that everytime I look at presidential candidate Kerry spewing out his socialist values, promising that the Gevernment will take care of us all...
How do you expect the law enforcement agencies to collect information? With the Internet literally closing the communication gaps and making real-time communication across the world possible, technology used by terrorist who want to kill us how can we protect ourselves if we currently have laws on the books that prevent us from protecting ourselves?
The thing about it is that you and I both know that the terrorists have the money to bring their organizations together across the world using technology, and if we can't fight them using at least the same technology, you are asking for our agents to work with their hands tied behind their backs.
"In the US, there are supposed to be certain 4th and 14th ammendment rights which guarantee that the states and the federal government can't randomly start collecting information on someone for politically motivated persecution and prosecution.
I don't see anything in this that allows any agent to go willy-nilly and collect information, it appears to me that a conduit is being suggested to make it easier to wiretap, however:
"The FCC says the government must still go through all of the necessary legal steps to obtain the authority to wiretap"
You know, like a written piece of paper from a judge who deems the search necessary for further investigation into a criminal act?
Again, if I were conducting unlawful busniess subject to penalty by the government, I would be concerned, otherwise your email is safe, oh yeah and you can still get that abortion, I didn't see anything in the new wiretap laws discussing that...
"I do understand, however, that delusion is much easier for most people to live in. You derive a large amount of smug self-satisfaction by labeling others as "paranoid" and thus justifying to yourself that you are better than they are."
ok. maybe it is a bit ridiculous to label people as Paranoid, I'll buy into that. I think, however, that it is a sad state of affairs to suggest that we cannot trust anyone. I get a kick out of "watchdog" orgnizations that are waving their hands in the air like the Feds just trampled all over our (US) constitutional rights, the truth of the matter is that there were always laws in place for the Feds to wiretap, now, with the Internet and all of the other methods of communications, the policies in place need to adjusted with the times, see: MATRIX Database Schema Altered Due to Privacy Concerns
The funny thing is that we (the public) are asking for this, the public will be the first to condemn the government for allowing some incident to happen under our noses, when in fact we knew nothing about it because we can't exercise authority to gather intelligence. See: Good for law enforcement, bad for criminals...
The only point that I am trying to make is that if there are safety measures in place to prevent unecessary gathering of information, then there should be little to worry about. There are actually Far more things to worry about than the gevernment reading your email, or intercepting IM traffic, or sniffing network segments, so on...
How about the person right now working tirelessly on some means of stealing you identity?
What about Terrorist opertatives in our country right now using the Internet to comunicate the next act of terror on our country?
What is the bigg issue here? are we afraid that the FBI is going to intercept and read our SPAM? Please do, and while you are at it, delete it for me. Seriously, am I just that naive.? who cares? If anyone thinks that this wasn't happening before, I think their the naive ones.
I said this before, and I will say this again and again, there is nothing private, you are not anonymous, there is simply no-such-thing.
I would suspect that those concerned about wiretap laws and so-called invasion of privacy are truly paranoid, or just plain trying to hide something.
I am not suggesting that the government get carte blanche access to everything, there does need to be some oversight. I know, I know, the oversight commitee will be corrupt, right? (I think that they make pills to ease paranoia).
so, Someone, please draw me a picture, how is this so bad, what the hell is so private, they are not putting cameras in our houses...wait, are they?
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH....
I spent some time yesterday watching some shows that I archived about 9/11, I recommend that anyone who doubts why we are in Iraq, watch or read again about this tragedy!
I know this is completely off topic, but c'mon, are you going to actually be like the rest of the media-fed cattle in the US? Why do you think that we don't see or hear much about 9/11 anymore? Do people want to forget? No, John Kerry and his ass-clowns would like to have you forget about it because our President's reaction to this event speaks volumes as to how he is completely intolerant to terrorism, unlike John Kerry who has no idea as to what to do about it.
"If Bush wanted to invade Iraq based solely on humanitarian grounds, he should have made that argument and let the people decide whether it was worth it"
It is clearly obvious that Iraq is harboring terrorists, we (the US) have said time and again, that we will not tolerate harboring of terrorists. At the time that Bush announced this, all the Libs were nodding along. Bush also said that this will take a long time what in the hell was expected? The middle-eastern wack-job terrorists have been conducting this business for decades, it is going to take TIME to root them out and restore order.
It's so pathetic how all of you self-righteous arm-chair quarterbacks can sit back with hindsight and spout off "what should have been done", but is so hilarious how the libs were so "bi partison" shortly after the attack and encouraged the war on terrorism, of course anything else at that time would have been damaging to their political careers.
Bring on the media
once the liberal media shifted the focus to more "important" things, once they were sucessful in making people forget about this travesty, they began their own war of turning our country into a socialist state.
You know, I could name-call and rant all day long about this, it would be too easy. I will put it this way, if someone you know or love is burned to death in a fiery crash caused by a missle driven by some wack-job middle-eastern terrorist with a "cause". I would suspect that you would have a different opinion of what our President is doing.
By the way, according to google, John Kerry leads the assclown awards by about 20%.
"I have nothing but contempt for someone that would violate the copyright on this"
geesh, does anyone get it? anyone?
"Small and independent"
ok, their small, I applaud their zeal to break some new ground, I truly wish them well! What does that have to do with anything? Do you steal or encourage/condone stealing from Walmart ( after all, they are BIG)?
"Compensating writers fairly"
complete rubbish! Do you feel you are compensated fairly? if not, is it ok then to steal from your employer? What is fair? eveyone has a different opinion of fair, fair is over-rated, nothing is fair.
Are you suggesting that "artists" like Brittney Spears are not being "fairly" compensated? I tell you who isn't be compensated fairly, the engineers who work miracles with her "talent".
"Charging a very Reasonable Price"
You know, you almost got me on that one, however riddle me this: what is reasonable? this is another ridiculous word that everyone has their own opinion of. This is a CAPITALISTIC society, prices are determined by what people are willing to pay, if people stop buying, trust me, they will be forced to lower their prices(whoever they are.
"Choosing not to use DRM"
what is the problem with DRM? if it can be delivered to you in a "reasonable" manner by which you can enjoy the book, music, video, what-ever, than what is the problem in someone trying to prevent you from rifling out copies to all of your friends, neighbors and the entire Kazaa network? If it's worth it, and you want it, you will pay for it.
There is simply no justification for stealing.