If they will again this time, that would be great, but content-free proclamations are meaningless. I trust these guys as far as I could throw a hundreds-of-billions-of-dollar-cap company.
In this case I think MS is telling the truth. They don't want to be the sole responsibility for all authentication (think of the liability they'd have). They're going to allow anyone to set up their own authentication centers. Why? Because they're going to hold ALL THE PATENT RIGHTS AROUND IT. That way they get paid whether Joe ASP buys their back end solution directly from them or from a competitor.
The BSD license is clearly more free, as it allows one the most options when using/modifying/incorporating a piece of code.
Right... more "free" for a publisher / business.
Of course, if I can't see the code because its been take private then (as a GPL advocate would say) I've had my freedom restricted.
You define freedom one way, they define it another way. I've always seen it as one tilts more to code visibilty, one more to code acceptance. Both, IMO, are equally "Free" (or unfree as the case may be). Compared to Public Domain code both are pretty restrictive).
{sigh} Another retarded arguement about which license is "more free."
How about "Neither." Each license caters to different situations better that the other. One is only "more free" than the other depeding on what you want to do / how you want to use the software.
Of course, that won't stop the parent post's bubblehead advocate (nor, I fear most of the responses to it) from yet again turning this topic into another license pissing match.
Some elected officials can boast on the campaign trail how they enacted laws that allow us to sleep safely at night. Complete bunk, but they don't care. Its the easy solution.
N.
Re:What can be done about terrorism?
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
The interesting (frightning) thing about this is
a) how low tech it was
and
b) when you think about it how it succeeded much better than you would have suspected.
Two to three people (what they're claiming right now) with box cutters / knives and boxes they claimed contained bombs. Frankly I would have thought the success of
a) getting weapons onto planes
b) overpowering pilots/crew
c) keeping folks at bay while you fly the plane
would be a lot less than 75%. The hijackers IMHO were in some respects very, very lucky.
Aside from the obvious horrible human toll this has exacted I wonder how this effects our society in the long run? Off the top of my head the things that could have prevented this (or at least minimized the damage to strictly aircraft) are not 'political' solutions, by which I mean a roll back of civil liberties / increase in the police state, but things such as secure cockpit doors and policies that (no matter the urge to help when you know there's trouble) keep pilots from exiting the cockpit in a time of emergency (FYI, some early reports in the Washington Post claim the hijackers lured pilots out of the cabins by killing stewards).
I hope that in the coming weeks we don't start down the path of passing laws that, frankly, would not have prevented this from happinging in the first place.
Nah, Caveman Ogg could make a cave painting depicting Pearl Harbor, thus pissing off Caveman Eisner. To be totally sure, lets just kill all humans... and maybe the monkey's as well. I'm sure Shakespear starts to get nervous when a large group of them stumble upon some old IBM Selectrics.
Yeah it sucks, but there's some delicious irony about the whole thing. One of the arguments used for workplace monitoring is because if a company doesn't block certain sites it can open it up to litigation -- i.e. sexual harrasment, etc. When the courts say that a company can be held accountable (i.e. cough up mondo $$$) for the actions of one of its employees during company hours, and the civil definition of what constitutes harrasment is murky at best, companies take a "ban it all/monitor it all" mentality.
I don't care if you never implement a Linux/*BSD box, or if you think Linux is the biggest piece of crap to ever be installed on a computer. The simple fact that its an alternative to NT (and one that, as this article shows, can be done piecemeal) is good for the industry. It keeps MS honest. As an IT director you have one hell of a bargining chip at your disposal. You still may go with MS tech, but at least you can do it with some leverage on the licensing terms.
I've been saying this ever since the "Big 5" laid out thier plans. Who's going to pay money to "rent" a finite amount of music (lossy compressed at that) for a flat fee each month? Someone did a study (that I can't find right now) showing that the average music fan would pay more to "rent" the music then they would to just buy it on CD. Plus, with a CD I'm free to rip it, make a compilation CD out of it, put it on tape, etc.
The only way digital music will take off is if a) the record companies make it the only avenue of delivery (they're dumb, but they're not that dumb) or b) add value or make it cheaper. Since they're taking away value (compressed, timebombed and player restricted) they better damn well make it cheap.
For the near future I think (legitimate) digital music will only succeed as a promotional item. I.e. free streaming of upcoming albums for a day, free b-sides, etc.
... they forgot to mention that thier "full screen" is a 16x16 2 bit screen. Smells like a bunch o' bull if you ask me.
If they could compress data enough to shove that much information down a 28.8 modem with little or no loss of quality, then you should be able to get surrond sound quality voice over the phone line. Pardon me if I sound skeptical, but if the folks at Ma Bell couldn't improve the basic quality over POTS that much, what makes me believe some ponces from down under could.
My question is how much of an advantage does software not specifically compiled for 64bit gain?
None. In fact, they get slower. Check out this article (link pilfered from poster above).
MS's (correct) mantra about it being all about the apps is gonna bite 'em in the ass on this one. Until SQL server, IIS, and the rest of the back office stuff is also native 64 bit (along with all thier dev tools) it ain't gonna be anything but an expensive, slow box.
No, no it can't be. A voice of reason? Say it isn't so!
It never fails to amaze me how people equate "they don't do what I do" with "well, that must mean their stupid and/or *forced* to do something else."
The internet will become less democratic when others *force* me to stop publishing on the net. No one has yet to tell me I can't post on my shittly little website.. Just because no one reads it doesn't mean my rights are being trampled, it just means I really don't have anything compelling to say.
Apparently they were pulled to keep the information they supplied to the FCC private. I guess "pending" applications are kept private. Ones that have been approved are made public. I guess Palm and Handspring are trying to keep some things as close to their chest as long as possible.
The scary thing is (at least here in the US) almost all news is turning to crap. I can't stand any of the major network evening news. The news magazines are shit on a stick (60 minutes is only dirt on a stick; better, but not great). The worst, though, has to be the local evening news.
Everything news wise here is a "cult of personality." Look at CNN. They had a huge purge because they thought they needed more "household names" to read the news. You know its bad when a news company thinks who's reading the news is more important than the news itself. And if I have to see one more shot of the interviewer "thoughtfully" shaking thier head and scratching thier chin while doing an interview I'm gonna go postal. Its getting to the point now where the the interviewer gets more airtime than the interviewee.
I feel the same way. Loath it as I may, I actually agree with the MS flack who says you should use the software that's best suited for the job, even if it costs more.
Now, having said that I think that Linux/*BSD/ et al will probably have the inside track on most non specialized software (file servers, web servers, maybe even desktop), and I think that in all procurement cases you should try to avoid locking yourself into one provider like those crazy Canuuk librarians.
... a plea bargin. D. will cop a plea that will allow punish him with time served, and maybe an agreement not to work on the e-book software again (or at least not work on it and show his face in America again). That way the Pro DMCA folks can claim victory ("see, the system works... our copyrighted works are as safe as ever") and get rid of any sort of martyr they had for the Anti-DMCA crowd. D. will accept simply because he can finally go home. (and I don't blame him... sure I'd like to see him--or anyone else for that matter--stick to his guns and take this bad boy the distance, but to quote NWH's Tone Def: "Lock up's a bitch.")
Actually I'd take out the "solutions to a given problem" and just define hacker as "anything clever." Aren't the stunts at MIT and CalTech called "hacks?" They certainly weren't solutions to any problems. And the more clever it was, the greater the hack. Just my $0.02.
Yes, I'm one of the dingbats that sent Mindcraft one of the posted mail messages (A Centofanti if you're wondering).
Was it a stupid, mindless mail message: sure! Would I do it again: Probably.
I realize that it wasn't the most constructive bit of mail they got on the subject, but it summed up what I was feeling at the time. In response to to an earlier post: Yes, this is something I would say to the CEO of Mindcraft. The choice of words may be a little on the blue side, but I still feel that either they were honestly trying to tune Linux to perform at its best and they were incompentant at it, or they were shilling for MS by tilting the results (which is what I suspect). Mindcraft posting only these e-mails doesn't do much to sway my opinion on this matter.
Just my 2 cents worth (and prob. 2 cents too many)
Slashdot Mirror
* 2001-09-18 15:09:47 More Microsofts Licensing Hijinks (articles,news) (rejected)
Dammit. I'm off to have a good lunch time mope...
Taco, ya bastard!
:)
N.
If they will again this time, that would be great, but content-free proclamations are meaningless. I trust these guys as far as I could throw a hundreds-of-billions-of-dollar-cap company.
In this case I think MS is telling the truth. They don't want to be the sole responsibility for all authentication (think of the liability they'd have). They're going to allow anyone to set up their own authentication centers. Why? Because they're going to hold ALL THE PATENT RIGHTS AROUND IT. That way they get paid whether Joe ASP buys their back end solution directly from them or from a competitor.
{bzzzz} wrong.
It depends on how you define freedom.
The BSD license is clearly more free, as it allows one the most options when using/modifying/incorporating a piece of code.
Right... more "free" for a publisher / business.
Of course, if I can't see the code because its been take private then (as a GPL advocate would say) I've had my freedom restricted.
You define freedom one way, they define it another way. I've always seen it as one tilts more to code visibilty, one more to code acceptance. Both, IMO, are equally "Free" (or unfree as the case may be). Compared to Public Domain code both are pretty restrictive).
Jesus Fucking Christ get a goddamn clue.
Whoops.. just fed a Tool... never mind.
{sigh} Another retarded arguement about which license is "more free."
How about "Neither." Each license caters to different situations better that the other. One is only "more free" than the other depeding on what you want to do / how you want to use the software.
Of course, that won't stop the parent post's bubblehead advocate (nor, I fear most of the responses to it) from yet again turning this topic into another license pissing match.
Mmmmm.... purple Vodka.
Absolut Barney!
{god damn lameness filter}
What would this accomplish?
Some elected officials can boast on the campaign trail how they enacted laws that allow us to sleep safely at night. Complete bunk, but they don't care. Its the easy solution.
N.
The interesting (frightning) thing about this is
a) how low tech it was
and
b) when you think about it how it succeeded much better than you would have suspected.
Two to three people (what they're claiming right now) with box cutters / knives and boxes they claimed contained bombs. Frankly I would have thought the success of
a) getting weapons onto planes
b) overpowering pilots/crew
c) keeping folks at bay while you fly the plane
would be a lot less than 75%. The hijackers IMHO were in some respects very, very lucky.
Aside from the obvious horrible human toll this has exacted I wonder how this effects our society in the long run? Off the top of my head the things that could have prevented this (or at least minimized the damage to strictly aircraft) are not 'political' solutions, by which I mean a roll back of civil liberties / increase in the police state, but things such as secure cockpit doors and policies that (no matter the urge to help when you know there's trouble) keep pilots from exiting the cockpit in a time of emergency (FYI, some early reports in the Washington Post claim the hijackers lured pilots out of the cabins by killing stewards).
I hope that in the coming weeks we don't start down the path of passing laws that, frankly, would not have prevented this from happinging in the first place.
Nah, Caveman Ogg could make a cave painting depicting Pearl Harbor, thus pissing off Caveman Eisner. To be totally sure, lets just kill all humans... and maybe the monkey's as well. I'm sure Shakespear starts to get nervous when a large group of them stumble upon some old IBM Selectrics.
Ahhh.. my second favorite beverage (although not the Earl Grey.. not bad, but I go for a good breakfast one any day of the week).
N. (who has a 52oz depthcharge sized 7-11 thermos full of piping hot tea in front of him as we speak)
...but until it can "replicate" a pint of Guinness I'm afraid I have no use for it.
Yeah it sucks, but there's some delicious irony about the whole thing. One of the arguments used for workplace monitoring is because if a company doesn't block certain sites it can open it up to litigation -- i.e. sexual harrasment, etc. When the courts say that a company can be held accountable (i.e. cough up mondo $$$) for the actions of one of its employees during company hours, and the civil definition of what constitutes harrasment is murky at best, companies take a "ban it all/monitor it all" mentality.
I don't care if you never implement a Linux/*BSD box, or if you think Linux is the biggest piece of crap to ever be installed on a computer. The simple fact that its an alternative to NT (and one that, as this article shows, can be done piecemeal) is good for the industry. It keeps MS honest. As an IT director you have one hell of a bargining chip at your disposal. You still may go with MS tech, but at least you can do it with some leverage on the licensing terms.
I've been saying this ever since the "Big 5" laid out thier plans. Who's going to pay money to "rent" a finite amount of music (lossy compressed at that) for a flat fee each month? Someone did a study (that I can't find right now) showing that the average music fan would pay more to "rent" the music then they would to just buy it on CD. Plus, with a CD I'm free to rip it, make a compilation CD out of it, put it on tape, etc.
The only way digital music will take off is if a) the record companies make it the only avenue of delivery (they're dumb, but they're not that dumb) or b) add value or make it cheaper. Since they're taking away value (compressed, timebombed and player restricted) they better damn well make it cheap.
For the near future I think (legitimate) digital music will only succeed as a promotional item. I.e. free streaming of upcoming albums for a day, free b-sides, etc.
... they forgot to mention that thier "full screen" is a 16x16 2 bit screen. Smells like a bunch o' bull if you ask me.
If they could compress data enough to shove that much information down a 28.8 modem with little or no loss of quality, then you should be able to get surrond sound quality voice over the phone line. Pardon me if I sound skeptical, but if the folks at Ma Bell couldn't improve the basic quality over POTS that much, what makes me believe some ponces from down under could.
My question is how much of an advantage does software not specifically compiled for 64bit gain?
None. In fact, they get slower. Check out this article (link pilfered from poster above).
MS's (correct) mantra about it being all about the apps is gonna bite 'em in the ass on this one. Until SQL server, IIS, and the rest of the back office stuff is also native 64 bit (along with all thier dev tools) it ain't gonna be anything but an expensive, slow box.
No, no it can't be. A voice of reason? Say it isn't so!
It never fails to amaze me how people equate "they don't do what I do" with "well, that must mean their stupid and/or *forced* to do something else."
The internet will become less democratic when others *force* me to stop publishing on the net. No one has yet to tell me I can't post on my shittly little website.. Just because no one reads it doesn't mean my rights are being trampled, it just means I really don't have anything compelling to say.
Apparently they were pulled to keep the information they supplied to the FCC private. I guess "pending" applications are kept private. Ones that have been approved are made public. I guess Palm and Handspring are trying to keep some things as close to their chest as long as possible.
{rant mode one}
The scary thing is (at least here in the US) almost all news is turning to crap. I can't stand any of the major network evening news. The news magazines are shit on a stick (60 minutes is only dirt on a stick; better, but not great). The worst, though, has to be the local evening news.
Everything news wise here is a "cult of personality." Look at CNN. They had a huge purge because they thought they needed more "household names" to read the news. You know its bad when a news company thinks who's reading the news is more important than the news itself. And if I have to see one more shot of the interviewer "thoughtfully" shaking thier head and scratching thier chin while doing an interview I'm gonna go postal. Its getting to the point now where the the interviewer gets more airtime than the interviewee.
That's why I stick to print and the BBC.
{rant mode zero}
Gas octane rating is (I'm pretty sure) gov't regulated
Actually, set by the API (IIRC), which sets standards for the industry. Sorta the same though.
N.
I feel the same way. Loath it as I may, I actually agree with the MS flack who says you should use the software that's best suited for the job, even if it costs more.
Now, having said that I think that Linux/*BSD/ et al will probably have the inside track on most non specialized software (file servers, web servers, maybe even desktop), and I think that in all procurement cases you should try to avoid locking yourself into one provider like those crazy Canuuk librarians.
... which reminds me of a good joke:
"What's the difference between a bowl of milk and Australia?"
"Leave a bowl of milk out long enough and it will eventually grow a culture."
Let the libel suits begin!
... a plea bargin. D. will cop a plea that will allow punish him with time served, and maybe an agreement not to work on the e-book software again (or at least not work on it and show his face in America again). That way the Pro DMCA folks can claim victory ("see, the system works... our copyrighted works are as safe as ever") and get rid of any sort of martyr they had for the Anti-DMCA crowd. D. will accept simply because he can finally go home. (and I don't blame him... sure I'd like to see him--or anyone else for that matter--stick to his guns and take this bad boy the distance, but to quote NWH's Tone Def: "Lock up's a bitch.")
Actually I'd take out the "solutions to a given problem" and just define hacker as "anything clever." Aren't the stunts at MIT and CalTech called "hacks?" They certainly weren't solutions to any problems. And the more clever it was, the greater the hack. Just my $0.02.
FRB
Yes, I'm one of the dingbats that sent Mindcraft one of the posted mail messages (A Centofanti if you're wondering).
Was it a stupid, mindless mail message: sure! Would I do it again: Probably.
I realize that it wasn't the most constructive bit of mail they got on the subject, but it summed up what I was feeling at the time. In response to to an earlier post: Yes, this is something I would say to the CEO of Mindcraft. The choice of words may be a little on the blue side, but I still feel that either they were honestly trying to tune Linux to perform at its best and they were incompentant at it, or they were shilling for MS by tilting the results (which is what I suspect). Mindcraft posting only these e-mails doesn't do much to sway my opinion on this matter.
Just my 2 cents worth (and prob. 2 cents too many)
A Centofanti