MPlayer is good because there's none of that nonsense: it just works, for every video that I've tried.
MPlayer works well, except for streaming videos, especially Microsoft's ASF (surprise, surprise). For instance, there is no support for skipping through streams, which pretty much makes them unusable in my opinion. This is the only gripe that I still have against Linux. All other issues and limitations that I've encountered so far I've been able to use.
Mind you, I still use Linux in spite of this minor con. If I really want to watch a specific video stream I just sit through all of it, or watch it at work, where Windows is the norm, more's the pity. It's just that it would be really nice to resolve this lingering annoyance one way or the other.
The organization of the World-Wide Web. I love the Web, but finding something specific on it is a nightmare. And because the Web is growing by leaps and bounds, I just don't see things getting easier anytime soon.
It's not the same thing. The article is about Microsoft using personal data (admittedly, data that is entered by the users themselves) along with search and browsing habits to create ads. This is a whole different ballpark from delivering ads that are relevant to content you are viewing at some particular moment, i.e. an email you're reading mentions cats, you get ads about cats, to take an example I noticed on Gmail just today. Personally, I'm fine with that. But creating a huge database that combines personal information and browsing habits, possibly over a long period, is just creepy, no matter how secure it's supposed to be.
Are they just concentrating on a Windows-only solution that will lock out OS X and Linux??
From the requirements:
SUPPORTED OPERATING SYSTEM, HARDWARE, FIRMWARE (NOTE: Vendors must support one or more of the following operating systems and it is important if you support multiple)
Microsoft Windows 2000 Microsoft Windows 2003 Microsoft Windows XP Microsoft Windows Vista Sun Open Solaris Mac OS X Windows Mobile 5.0 Windows CE RIM/Blackberry Palm Symbian Linux to include Red Hat, SuSE
Truth be told, this doesn't really say that much... 'It is important if you support multiple' - what does that mean?
Q) Is digital rights management (DRM) sustainable over the next 10 years?
A) DRM is not where it should be. In the end of the day incentive systems (for artists) make a difference. But we don't have the right thing here in terms of simplicity or interoperability.
I agree with the interpretation that Gates is saying that there's nothing wrong with DRM per se, but that it's just that it could be implemented better and made simpler for consumers.
"Data used by Microsoft Word to construct a destination address for a memory copy routine is embedded within a Word document itself. If an attacker constructs a Word document with a specially crafted value used to build this destination address, then that attacker may be able to overwrite arbitrary memory," the US-CERT warned.
So yet again it's a case of embedded code within a data file wreaking havoc. And as already been reported in comments here, this vulnerability also exists in OO.org.
Seeing this kind of thing always blows my mind. I would be greatly interested in hearing the rationale behind the decision to incorporate this feature. What the hell did they need that for?
It's actually code language. It means: "I have the documents you requested. Meet me tomorrow night at 20:00 by the statue of Lincoln. Bring some hot chocolate."
Regarding MSN; I guess somebody forgot to tell Mr. Norman about Microsoft's blatant ripoff of Google. If Google is doing things so wrong, why is Microsoft copying their look and feel to the letter?
The other section of McCain's legislation targets convicted sex offenders. It would create a federal registry of "any e-mail address, instant-message address, or other similar Internet identifier" they use, and punish sex offenders with up to 10 years in prison if they don't supply it.
Then, any social-networking site must take "effective measures" to remove any Web page that's "associated" with a sex offender.
Eh? Say what you will about sex offenders, but isn't this a little too much?
BC: We're rolling out with some content DRM'd, using Windows DRM, at the insistence of our content partners. We're very concerned about the usability problems DRM introduces, and are educating our content partners about the lost commercial opportunity.
For your ears, the answer would be something along the lines of:
WN: So, as it stands right now, the downloaded video content will only work on Windows software?
BC: At the initial launch, yes, the content from the studios and networks will be protected with Windows DRM.
This logic assumes that the bad guys are smarter than the good guys and are much better at finding vulnerabilities in code... or that they can do this faster than the good guys can fix them. It's so damn stupid and easy to refute, and it has been refuted numerous times.
The only thing that closed source does is to create a false sense of security... 'they can't see the code, so they can't find vulnerabilities'. This completely ignores other methods such as reverse engineering and just plain stubborn testing around until you find something exploitable. Closed source also means that you have a small team of people who can see the code and review it for flaws, vs. an aformentioned horde of bad guys who are finding flaws via other means.
It's a shame that some people are confused by such obvious scare tactics and deliberate befuddlement. It's also a shame that this completely clouds the issue of what constitutes real security in software.
Slashdot Mirror
Then can't it at least be used to gauge the price of luxury goods, the legislation and taxes regarding them, etc.?
Exactly!
And who better to enforce standards on people than Microsoft, eh? ;-)
Here's a snapshot of a prototype of what these artifacts will look like.
MPlayer works well, except for streaming videos, especially Microsoft's ASF (surprise, surprise). For instance, there is no support for skipping through streams, which pretty much makes them unusable in my opinion. This is the only gripe that I still have against Linux. All other issues and limitations that I've encountered so far I've been able to use.
Mind you, I still use Linux in spite of this minor con. If I really want to watch a specific video stream I just sit through all of it, or watch it at work, where Windows is the norm, more's the pity. It's just that it would be really nice to resolve this lingering annoyance one way or the other.
Yeah ... guess they'll have to write a bug-fix tool for the bug-fix tool now.
So, did they finally find the Sirens?
Under the list Worst in Net Entertainment:
How little they knew ...
Hi, I'm Bill Gates, and I'm going to give you ONE MILLION DOLLARS if you send your credit card info to me.
See the problem?
It's not the same thing. The article is about Microsoft using personal data (admittedly, data that is entered by the users themselves) along with search and browsing habits to create ads. This is a whole different ballpark from delivering ads that are relevant to content you are viewing at some particular moment, i.e. an email you're reading mentions cats, you get ads about cats, to take an example I noticed on Gmail just today. Personally, I'm fine with that. But creating a huge database that combines personal information and browsing habits, possibly over a long period, is just creepy, no matter how secure it's supposed to be.
From the requirements:
Truth be told, this doesn't really say that much ... 'It is important if you support multiple' - what does that mean?
Yeah, it's true. They were offering jobs on the Moon as early as April 1, 2004!
Parent speaks the truth.
From Micro Persuasion:
Q) Is digital rights management (DRM) sustainable over the next 10 years?
A) DRM is not where it should be. In the end of the day incentive systems (for artists) make a difference. But we don't have the right thing here in terms of simplicity or interoperability.
I agree with the interpretation that Gates is saying that there's nothing wrong with DRM per se, but that it's just that it could be implemented better and made simpler for consumers.
No, that's Emacs. MS Word is a pushdown automaton at best.
From TFA:
So yet again it's a case of embedded code within a data file wreaking havoc. And as already been reported in comments here, this vulnerability also exists in OO.org.
Seeing this kind of thing always blows my mind. I would be greatly interested in hearing the rationale behind the decision to incorporate this feature. What the hell did they need that for?
Oh yeah? Bring it on!
It's actually code language. It means: "I have the documents you requested. Meet me tomorrow night at 20:00 by the statue of Lincoln. Bring some hot chocolate."
Yes. Yes it did.
But I guess Gary didn't buy the rights to Fallout after all. Maybe he went for the jar of spit instead.
Amen to that.
Regarding MSN; I guess somebody forgot to tell Mr. Norman about Microsoft's blatant ripoff of Google. If Google is doing things so wrong, why is Microsoft copying their look and feel to the letter?
From TFA:
Eh? Say what you will about sex offenders, but isn't this a little too much?
Are you crazy?
Double rot-13 is vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack. Triple rot-13 is the way to go.
<tinfoilhat>
November 22 is the day they killed Kennedy! Coincidence? You be the judge ...
</tinfoilhat>
I believe you're referring to this:
For your ears, the answer would be something along the lines of:
Remember the short-lived slashdot meme '... in Japan'?
There seems to exist a disturbing real-life parallel: '... by Muslim terrorists'.
Any threat automagically gains newsworthy status if this phrase is tacked onto it.
This logic assumes that the bad guys are smarter than the good guys and are much better at finding vulnerabilities in code ... or that they can do this faster than the good guys can fix them. It's so damn stupid and easy to refute, and it has been refuted numerous times.
The only thing that closed source does is to create a false sense of security ... 'they can't see the code, so they can't find vulnerabilities'. This completely ignores other methods such as reverse engineering and just plain stubborn testing around until you find something exploitable. Closed source also means that you have a small team of people who can see the code and review it for flaws, vs. an aformentioned horde of bad guys who are finding flaws via other means.
It's a shame that some people are confused by such obvious scare tactics and deliberate befuddlement. It's also a shame that this completely clouds the issue of what constitutes real security in software.
Pathetic crap.
Yes indeedy. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
There are better ways to prove that an attack worked than just leaving a password somewhere, that's for sure.