That's where I remember the quote from, and I'm not so sure that many other people know it anyway.
Interesting that Wonka chocolates were loved by everyone in the world, and were far and away the most popular chocolate, but no one knew anything about the inner workings of the factory.
In the end though, even those secrets became known.
IMO, Microsoft has made the correct decision in announcing this change in IE. The main audience is the so-called "mom & pop" audience which haven't the faintest idea of how to do things, and just want things to work. They also tend to get hit with more problems which the typical/. crowd probably ends up having to fix.
Microsoft may be a bit slow to get there, but they'll get there in the end.
I would rather that he steal from the numerous numbers of people in the "First World", then redistribute it to help those in the Third World.
In a way, it's forcing the great many of us who don't care, or have no idea how, to help those that are in much greater need than we are.
Discounting his efforts to help people from a personal level (he is NOT doing it as a representative of Microsoft) is still admirable. How many times have you donated to help people in need?
The methods which Microsoft to get the amount of wealth and apparent control is illegal, but to blame Bill Gates completely and utterly for these things is short-sighted and dangerous.
Calling the VGs "murder simulators" is at best somewhat true, and at worst downright inaccurate.
In the vast majority of cases of murder or maiming or other violent acts, the victim is usually known to be screaming out in pain, or anguish, or some other sort of emotion which is not portrayed in these types of games.
This stark contrast to reality is being ignored, and in the process we will see plenty of extra curbs to the choices that we make for ourselves.
In other jurisdictions, video games all fall under the corresponding censorship legislation, and as such is treated in just the same way as books, movies, magazines, etc. We have different classifications of movies, and we don't see the movie studios getting sued because of parents purchasing/hiring adult movies for their children. The same similar practise should be in place for video games.
I agree that there is some level of responsibility placed on the retailers to ensure compliance, but beyond that anyone can create/sell anything so long as it is legal. The burden of responsibility of consumption of the product still largely lies with the people making purchases.
Wool and Shaked have managed to force pairing by pretending to be one of the two devices and sending a message to the other claiming to have forgotten the link key.
So, it's an automatic and remote attack which doesn't rely upon any cooperation from either of the two original Bluetooth devices.
Just because you and much of the rest of the democratic world has ready and free access to the "entire" internet, it doesn't mean that it's all good either.
With such freedoms, we also have to be constantly aware of the problems that it breeds, and the responsibility we place on ourselves to keep such problems under control.
Without limits, we run the risk of being desensitized to all and sundry. Sometimes having a little bit of "parenting" can be a good thing.
Don't get me wrong, there's plenty that China could improve with their parenting skills!
On the whole, I agree with the parents views to allowing the trading of online items to happen.
The only proviso I have to this is that anyone providing an officially sanctioned site for trading of the items makes it crystal clear that the cut they are taking from each and every trade is in the same manner as the service provided by companies like Ebay.
The important difference with SOE providing the service is that they are also the ones providing the product (the vendor) in the first place and may implicitly be saying that they're giving more support for the items if they don't live up to the expectations of the buyer, as consumers are usually accustomed to the attitude of "I spent good money on this, so I have a right to complain to a Fair Trade authority/law since this isn't the thing I expected it to be" with anything they normally buy in any other real-world transaction.
I don't see it as being redundant at all.
For Python developers on almost anything except Windows, you'll most probably have some native Python interpreter installed. You can do all your development, making a great application which targets the.NET CLR, and then deploy it to the world (which by that time will have probably upgraded to the version 2.NET Framework/CLR).
All these Windows users won't have to worry about downloading and installing a native interpreter to run your application, since they'll already have the.NET CLR installed, and if you've compiled to Mono+IronPython, you would reasonably expect that anyone on Windows will be able to use your amazing new application without any hassles.
This is the whole point of cross-platform bytecode VMs like the Java VM, or the.NET CLR.
It frees you from having to rely on the customer adding more and more stuff to their machines to make your program work.
You increase your target market immensely, while using the environment you choose and are most comfortable in.
The same food over many days starts tasting the same, the same colour gets boring, and the same sounds eventually get ignored.
If you had a choice between a room of 50 Sun workstations which didn't make a perceptible sound compared to the one you're currently in, which would it be? (I'm assuming that you even know what a silent or quiet room is like;)
The future certainly seems to be heading that way.
However, the main problem I have with the authors point of view is that of a Modern World perspective. As evidence that this future is still many a generation away from becoming reality, we need only look at the Third World countries and witness the total lack of infrastructure in supporting such a society of high bandwidth and low local maintenance computing.
The local computer is a fast, simple, and easy way of getting the required (or needed/desired) computing power to the people in poorer nations without worrying about the HUGE commitment in upgrading or installing the infrastructure that we modern nations are beginning to take for granted.
So while we sit here behind our NATs, and use our computers while eating pizza and sipping on a latte, and think that the future is all silicon, we run the very real risk of not seeing the digital divide grow ever more quickly.
At some point in the future, our societies will have grown so far apart that computers will cease to be the "big" problems that we ultimately face.
The P2P networks are primarily a distribution medium. The source which Microsft (and presumably any other software company chasing down software pirates) is after would be those warez groups which do the cracking and/or packaging of the software in a form that people can then download and burn to CD/DVD.
Another related source would be chasing those that receive the software ahead of time because they work for a major retail distributor.
There is also the smaller problem of employees releasing the software somehow, but Microsoft seems to have far fewer problems in this area than some game companies.
Slashdot Mirror
Those that are genetically "perfect" are given extra benefits, and those that are not are destined to live lives of unimportance, working menial jobs.
Not enough people think beyond themselves these days, and think of the wider implications of what advances can have on society as a whole.
This should give you something useful to learn from: http://www.sun.com/cddl/CDDL_why_details.html
We should try to learn from the mistakes of the past, and not be cursed to repeat them time and time again.
Interesting that Wonka chocolates were loved by everyone in the world, and were far and away the most popular chocolate, but no one knew anything about the inner workings of the factory.
In the end though, even those secrets became known.
Microsoft may be a bit slow to get there, but they'll get there in the end.
In a way, it's forcing the great many of us who don't care, or have no idea how, to help those that are in much greater need than we are.
Discounting his efforts to help people from a personal level (he is NOT doing it as a representative of Microsoft) is still admirable. How many times have you donated to help people in need?
The methods which Microsoft to get the amount of wealth and apparent control is illegal, but to blame Bill Gates completely and utterly for these things is short-sighted and dangerous.
In the vast majority of cases of murder or maiming or other violent acts, the victim is usually known to be screaming out in pain, or anguish, or some other sort of emotion which is not portrayed in these types of games.
This stark contrast to reality is being ignored, and in the process we will see plenty of extra curbs to the choices that we make for ourselves.
In other jurisdictions, video games all fall under the corresponding censorship legislation, and as such is treated in just the same way as books, movies, magazines, etc. We have different classifications of movies, and we don't see the movie studios getting sued because of parents purchasing/hiring adult movies for their children. The same similar practise should be in place for video games.
I agree that there is some level of responsibility placed on the retailers to ensure compliance, but beyond that anyone can create/sell anything so long as it is legal. The burden of responsibility of consumption of the product still largely lies with the people making purchases.
So, it's an automatic and remote attack which doesn't rely upon any cooperation from either of the two original Bluetooth devices.
They always seem to be saying that they're the first for all sorts of things.
With such freedoms, we also have to be constantly aware of the problems that it breeds, and the responsibility we place on ourselves to keep such problems under control.
Without limits, we run the risk of being desensitized to all and sundry. Sometimes having a little bit of "parenting" can be a good thing.
Don't get me wrong, there's plenty that China could improve with their parenting skills!
Furthermore, the applicants don't seem to think the applications are vague at all.
The only proviso I have to this is that anyone providing an officially sanctioned site for trading of the items makes it crystal clear that the cut they are taking from each and every trade is in the same manner as the service provided by companies like Ebay.
The important difference with SOE providing the service is that they are also the ones providing the product (the vendor) in the first place and may implicitly be saying that they're giving more support for the items if they don't live up to the expectations of the buyer, as consumers are usually accustomed to the attitude of "I spent good money on this, so I have a right to complain to a Fair Trade authority/law since this isn't the thing I expected it to be" with anything they normally buy in any other real-world transaction.
Which, to me, means that if you've been having any problems with legitimate sites and their popups, you can still get them to work if you wish.
I don't see it as being redundant at all. For Python developers on almost anything except Windows, you'll most probably have some native Python interpreter installed. You can do all your development, making a great application which targets the .NET CLR, and then deploy it to the world (which by that time will have probably upgraded to the version 2 .NET Framework/CLR).
All these Windows users won't have to worry about downloading and installing a native interpreter to run your application, since they'll already have the .NET CLR installed, and if you've compiled to Mono+IronPython, you would reasonably expect that anyone on Windows will be able to use your amazing new application without any hassles.
This is the whole point of cross-platform bytecode VMs like the Java VM, or the .NET CLR.
It frees you from having to rely on the customer adding more and more stuff to their machines to make your program work.
You increase your target market immensely, while using the environment you choose and are most comfortable in.
The same food over many days starts tasting the same, the same colour gets boring, and the same sounds eventually get ignored. If you had a choice between a room of 50 Sun workstations which didn't make a perceptible sound compared to the one you're currently in, which would it be? (I'm assuming that you even know what a silent or quiet room is like ;)
The future certainly seems to be heading that way.
However, the main problem I have with the authors point of view is that of a Modern World perspective. As evidence that this future is still many a generation away from becoming reality, we need only look at the Third World countries and witness the total lack of infrastructure in supporting such a society of high bandwidth and low local maintenance computing.
The local computer is a fast, simple, and easy way of getting the required (or needed/desired) computing power to the people in poorer nations without worrying about the HUGE commitment in upgrading or installing the infrastructure that we modern nations are beginning to take for granted.
So while we sit here behind our NATs, and use our computers while eating pizza and sipping on a latte, and think that the future is all silicon, we run the very real risk of not seeing the digital divide grow ever more quickly.
At some point in the future, our societies will have grown so far apart that computers will cease to be the "big" problems that we ultimately face.
The P2P networks are primarily a distribution medium. The source which Microsft (and presumably any other software company chasing down software pirates) is after would be those warez groups which do the cracking and/or packaging of the software in a form that people can then download and burn to CD/DVD.
Another related source would be chasing those that receive the software ahead of time because they work for a major retail distributor.
There is also the smaller problem of employees releasing the software somehow, but Microsoft seems to have far fewer problems in this area than some game companies.
... if their DRM can be broken or not.
The point is that it is "good enough" to stop the average person from lifting the material.
If you're determined enough, nothing is going to stop you from getting what you want.