I hate MicroSoft and Billy Gates more than most, but the article summary and title is simply unfair.
Napster has to write software that works with Micrsoft DRM software, which has to interoperate with software from any number of hardware vendors.
This is the classic problem that Linux people are familiar with: uniform hardware support is nearly impossible, due to hardware quirks. You've got N motherboard manufacturers that your software tries to work with. Sometimes it is impossible to write one piece of software that can work with any of N boards: perhaps the boards misidentify themselves, such that what works with one board crashes on another, and so on.
That's the problem that Napster has.
Microsoft's typical approach is to try to support as much hardware and user software as possible, even as they upgrade the OS, even if it makes their engineers lives hell. They don't want to get blamed for application or driver failures -- even though we know that the problems lie with the driver/app software writers. I remember seeing a blog from a M$ engineer, who described making app-specific patches to the OS so that fucked-up apps could still run, even as they changed the implementation of the window system.
Apple has it much easier, in comparison: they do it all in-house.
That's a little extreme: if your thing is really good, you might be better off buying appliances (they cost only $150 on up), loading your software onto the thing, and going into business for yourself.
Furthermore, just entering your thing means you are giving it up. You probably won't win, but you'll be giving up.
This isn't like the Dept. of Motor Vehicles pouring a billion down the tubes and getting nothing in return.
The NSA is made up of very smart and capable folks. Give them a budget and incentives, and they can probably do a pretty good job of sticking their noses into the public's affairs.
Sadly for our privacy, the US has no real concept of data privacy. If you've bought something and told someone, they can tell the NSA.
So if the data is available, the NSA can just go out and but it. That's perfectly fine, but it means the NSA can easily acquire mind-bogglingly large amounts of data. Also, the phone company (AT&T) has no qualms cooperating with the govt. It isn't like Google, willing to fight it out in court. Just about nobody is -- so the NSA has an easy time, if it wants to get the goods on you.
If you use Scheme, you don't need a framework -- it is powerful enough.
If you use CAML/ML, there are also typically libraries of combinators (e.g. CML) that allow you to get done what you need to get done.
People make frameworks for less powerful languages, because that's the only way you can get stuff done when your language requires so much effort to get things done.
I only mention Pebble Beds because the Chinese are getting into them in a big way. If that's the case, a huge number of the world's nukes will be pebble beds.
When I read about pebble beds, they sounded like a real improvement. Fast breeders sound neat too. My only point was to bring up the good news in a field plagued with P.R. problems.
Pebble Bed reactors are the future: they are supposed to be safe, cheap and modular. They'll be mass-produced, and allow cities or factories to power themselves.
You are right, that is not much for them. In fact, it isn't much for a super-rich person: Larry Ellison burns $100 million a year on his personal expenses.
Wouldn't they do better to buy a diversified portfolio of productive assets?
E.g. invest in China, Japan, Korea, Europe and the USA? I would think that would out-perform their spaceport.
The only country (well, city-state) I can think of that successfully pulled off the banking->tourism switch is Venice, and even then, it is a lot worse off than it used to be, when it was a hub of commerce.
"Because of Ras Al-Khaimah's unique airport and spaceport support facilities, His Highness' commitment to space tourism, and the close proximity to Dubai, one of the world's leading luxury tourist destinations, makes it a choice location for spaceflight operations," said Mr. Anderson. "As a global leader of tourism, the United Arab Emirates is an ideal location for a spaceport. Suborbital flights will offer millions of people the opportunity to experience the greatest adventure available, space travel. We are honored to partner with His Highness Sheikh Saud."
I know that being nearer the equator is better for launch than elsewhere, so perhaps that helps to cut costs.
But in the future, when the Gulf has less income, due to less oil, won't their economies die? I have a hard time seeing them sustaining anything once the lifeblood of their economy is exhausted.
Although that doesn't talk about all the people that suburbans avoid, it does talk about black people - which represent a big chunk of that group.
The article points out that that blacks commit a lot more crime than other groups. That is simply a fact, regardless of the reason why. E.g. even if whites (or sunspots) are to blame, blacks do commit more crime.
One reason blacks with money try to live apart from other blacks (and one assumes whites with money think the same) is that blacks commit a lot of crime. If it was "racism", I guess you'd have to call the blacks racist too.
It isn't racist to point out that blacks commit a huge amount of crime (10x the white rate), nor is it racist to point out that Chinese and Japanese commit a lot less crime than white people.
Unless you are saying that the facts are racist, or something similarly irrational.
When that happens, in America you'll have productive, law-abiding folks wanting to live in areas where criminal poor people live. What will happen to the poor folks? Where will they get shoved?
One of the neat things about America is that suburban sprawl has been possible because of autos. So the productive, law-abiding folks found it possible to get away from the criminal class after the court mandated unsegregated workplaces and schools. The cost of satisfying those mandates was made cheaper due to cheap oil.
Isn't the market for oil global, in the sense that a shortage in supply affects prices everywhere?
It is a bit like wheat: a bad harvest in Europe means prices are higher here. Yet most wheat produced in Europe is consumed in Europe. A shortage in Europe means that Europeans will import wheat, and pay enough that they don't starve. So the price in America goes up.
When the US had its Katrina-caused price disruption, the price went up everywhere, instantaneously, as producers and consumers adjusted to the new information (and the fact that if it it was cheaper to import oil, the US would, and supplies would tighten elsewhere).
Criminals manage to put programs like keyloggers and Back Orofice on the victims' computers.
If a criminal puts stuff like that on his victim's computer, won't he have enough information and control to deactivate the whitelist mechanism? Or perhaps enough control to keep the whitelist mechanism intact, and just add the criminal's addresses to the whitelist?
The basic principle is that if the malware compromises the user's computer, it can take actions on behalf of the malware-creator, as if it were the user. So if the user, sitting at the computer, can do it, the malware payload can do it.
So, for instance, the first thing some malware does is turn off any security programs, so that it can download further payloads.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you think they could stay in business and not use Microsoft's DRM?
That's why I used the word "has" -- in the sense that, if they want to stay in business, they must choose M$ DRM.
Google "ntavo".
I hate MicroSoft and Billy Gates more than most, but the article summary and title is simply unfair.
Napster has to write software that works with Micrsoft DRM software, which has to interoperate with software from any number of hardware vendors.
This is the classic problem that Linux people are familiar with: uniform hardware support is nearly impossible, due to hardware quirks. You've got N motherboard manufacturers that your software tries to work with. Sometimes it is impossible to write one piece of software that can work with any of N boards: perhaps the boards misidentify themselves, such that what works with one board crashes on another, and so on.
That's the problem that Napster has.
Microsoft's typical approach is to try to support as much hardware and user software as possible, even as they upgrade the OS, even if it makes their engineers lives hell. They don't want to get blamed for application or driver failures -- even though we know that the problems lie with the driver/app software writers. I remember seeing a blog from a M$ engineer, who described making app-specific patches to the OS so that fucked-up apps could still run, even as they changed the implementation of the window system.
Apple has it much easier, in comparison: they do it all in-house.
When you enter, you give up your stuff.
That's a little extreme: if your thing is really good, you might be better off buying appliances (they cost only $150 on up), loading your software onto the thing, and going into business for yourself.
Furthermore, just entering your thing means you are giving it up. You probably won't win, but you'll be giving up.
You should make sure to check out the picture of the author. He looks like a he could be a Unix hacker!
The book is excellent too of course, which is why this is so cool.
Also, the book is truly excellent. He's got very, very useful stuff in there.
My only more favorite author on the same topic is Lucas, who has a few books out from "No Starch Press".
So does Steve Jobs throw a chair now, and yell, "Anybody but Samsung!!"
I bet not.
He probably meditates on it, then eats a miso sandwich.
You got the NSC (and Iran/contra) mixed up with the NSA.
This isn't like the Dept. of Motor Vehicles pouring a billion down the tubes and getting nothing in return.
The NSA is made up of very smart and capable folks. Give them a budget and incentives, and they can probably do a pretty good job of sticking their noses into the public's affairs.
Sadly for our privacy, the US has no real concept of data privacy. If you've bought something and told someone, they can tell the NSA.
So if the data is available, the NSA can just go out and but it. That's perfectly fine, but it means the NSA can easily acquire mind-bogglingly large amounts of data. Also, the phone company (AT&T) has no qualms cooperating with the govt. It isn't like Google, willing to fight it out in court. Just about nobody is -- so the NSA has an easy time, if it wants to get the goods on you.
If you use Scheme, you don't need a framework -- it is powerful enough.
If you use CAML/ML, there are also typically libraries of combinators (e.g. CML) that allow you to get done what you need to get done.
People make frameworks for less powerful languages, because that's the only way you can get stuff done when your language requires so much effort to get things done.
Perhaps fast breeders are better!
I only mention Pebble Beds because the Chinese are getting into them in a big way. If that's the case, a huge number of the world's nukes will be pebble beds.
When I read about pebble beds, they sounded like a real improvement. Fast breeders sound neat too. My only point was to bring up the good news in a field plagued with P.R. problems.
This doens't have to end badly for the planet.
Pebble Bed reactors are the future: they are supposed to be safe, cheap and modular. They'll be mass-produced, and allow cities or factories to power themselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
I have the feeling that Google might respond to these folks, givne their moral suasion.
If they really wanted to get attention though, they'd hit Google in the pocketbook. That would wake them up faster.
I'm glad you like it. My favorite section, in general, is "The Law".
OK, it is only $265 million.
You are right, that is not much for them. In fact, it isn't much for a super-rich person: Larry Ellison burns $100 million a year on his personal expenses.
Wouldn't they do better to buy a diversified portfolio of productive assets?
E.g. invest in China, Japan, Korea, Europe and the USA? I would think that would out-perform their spaceport.
The only country (well, city-state) I can think of that successfully pulled off the banking->tourism switch is Venice, and even then, it is a lot worse off than it used to be, when it was a hub of commerce.
"Because of Ras Al-Khaimah's unique airport and spaceport support facilities, His Highness' commitment to space tourism, and the close proximity to Dubai, one of the world's leading luxury tourist destinations, makes it a choice location for spaceflight operations," said Mr. Anderson. "As a global leader of tourism, the United Arab Emirates is an ideal location for a spaceport. Suborbital flights will offer millions of people the opportunity to experience the greatest adventure available, space travel. We are honored to partner with His Highness Sheikh Saud."
I know that being nearer the equator is better for launch than elsewhere, so perhaps that helps to cut costs.
But in the future, when the Gulf has less income, due to less oil, won't their economies die? I have a hard time seeing them sustaining anything once the lifeblood of their economy is exhausted.
Sounds like the one company paying him a lot is in a different country (Canada).
The USA ones may be under the reporting requirement.
Ever notice that MLK street is always lousy in America? In any city.
You are right on about this. Billy Gates's company has sold an insecure product to hundreds of millions.
If all Billy did was repackage a BSD (something like what Apple does), this "Botmaster" would have a much harder time making money.
My thoughts exactly.
I was busy wondering what company that might be, until I figured that it was just a spelling mistake.
http://www.wweek.com/story.php?story=3485&page=1
That's a fact: http://www.amren.com/946issue/946issue.html#cover
Although that doesn't talk about all the people that suburbans avoid, it does talk about black people - which represent a big chunk of that group.
The article points out that that blacks commit a lot more crime than other groups. That is simply a fact, regardless of the reason why. E.g. even if whites (or sunspots) are to blame, blacks do commit more crime.
One reason blacks with money try to live apart from other blacks (and one assumes whites with money think the same) is that blacks commit a lot of crime. If it was "racism", I guess you'd have to call the blacks racist too.
It isn't racist to point out that blacks commit a huge amount of crime (10x the white rate), nor is it racist to point out that Chinese and Japanese commit a lot less crime than white people.
Unless you are saying that the facts are racist, or something similarly irrational.
When that happens, in America you'll have productive, law-abiding folks wanting to live in areas where criminal poor people live. What will happen to the poor folks? Where will they get shoved?
One of the neat things about America is that suburban sprawl has been possible because of autos. So the productive, law-abiding folks found it possible to get away from the criminal class after the court mandated unsegregated workplaces and schools. The cost of satisfying those mandates was made cheaper due to cheap oil.
Isn't the market for oil global, in the sense that a shortage in supply affects prices everywhere?
It is a bit like wheat: a bad harvest in Europe means prices are higher here. Yet most wheat produced in Europe is consumed in Europe. A shortage in Europe means that Europeans will import wheat, and pay enough that they don't starve. So the price in America goes up.
When the US had its Katrina-caused price disruption, the price went up everywhere, instantaneously, as producers and consumers adjusted to the new information (and the fact that if it it was cheaper to import oil, the US would, and supplies would tighten elsewhere).
Criminals manage to put programs like keyloggers and Back Orofice on the victims' computers.
If a criminal puts stuff like that on his victim's computer, won't he have enough information and control to deactivate the whitelist mechanism? Or perhaps enough control to keep the whitelist mechanism intact, and just add the criminal's addresses to the whitelist?
The basic principle is that if the malware compromises the user's computer, it can take actions on behalf of the malware-creator, as if it were the user. So if the user, sitting at the computer, can do it, the malware payload can do it.
So, for instance, the first thing some malware does is turn off any security programs, so that it can download further payloads.