The GPL does essentially mean free, IMO: 1) One person buys software from vendor 2) Said customer puts program on website/BitTorrent/P2P for distribution (completely legal..) for free.
Isn't the PPV or video on demand a clawback of CURRENT features?
Oh well.. anyone worthy of calling themselves a tech nerd should be able to either hack the TiVo or build their own PVR using a TV capture card and PVR software (MythTV comes to mind..)
I'm waiting until the final release of version 1.0. Using 0.9.1 right now, and don't feel like going through the trouble of sorting through incompatible extensions, etc.
That was especially annoying (in Windows or Linux) when the FF browser crashed. It wouldn't release whatever locking mechanism it had on the file, and future instances thought FF was still running, forcing you to choose a different profile..
Do such containers exist? If so, then why haven't they been used to solve the nuclear waste disposal dilemma (ie: where the hell do we put this stuff?)
If you don't like it, don't play it. About the only thing I see wrong with this situation is the developer didn't say that participants may be subjected to conduct they find offensive (oh, wait.. they did, didn't they?)
It's not the GUI that's the problem: it's running application programs as administrator. If you run a web browser as root, you put yourself at the same risk.
How is this any different? Unless certain *nix's forbid you from running the gui/apps as root, I see none..
OK: 1) Windows is not monolithic. If you or the authors of this report knew anything about OS design, you'd know this to be true.
2) They completely forget (or choose to ignore) that Windows was multiuser starting with NT. 2000 was multiuser as well. To say that XP is the first real multiuser Windows is completely false. And they use fast user switching to imply that Windows still isn't a true multi-user OS, which is complete nonsense.
3) From a design perspective, it makes more sense to use the same functionality to communicate with a remote or local machine (ie. it doesn't matter where the other program is). And Windows is not "constrained" by an RPC model (as they seem to imply by saying that Linux is not).. application programmers can CHOOSE to use RPC, or they can use other methods.
4) This point makes no sense whatsoever: "By advocating this type of usage, Microsoft invites administrators to work with Windows Server 2003 at the server itself, logged in with Administrator privileges. This makes the Windows administrator most vulnerable to security flaws, because using vulnerable programs such as Internet Explorer expose the server to security risks."
Just as the authors of this report claim "it takes only a little scrutiny to debunk the myths and logical errors behind the oft-repeated axioms (that suggest Windows is more secure)" their myth busting arguments also do not stand up to scrutiny.
For one, they speak at length about the uptime of web servers. While some downtime is related to security flaws, there is not a direct corrospondance between security flaws and uptime. I find this metric completely unreliable as a method of assessing web server security.
This is essentially their only argument for the first two myths.
For the third, they mention that flaws Microsoft will NEVER fix. They don't bother to mention that these flaws only occur in older, "obsolete" operating systems. Does Red Hat issue patches for version 1.0 anymore? The rest of their argument makes much more sense, however.
(Haven't read the rest yet.. but this thus far makes me skeptical that this is an unbiased report.. )
I know how BitTorrent works. But Rockstar can get the IP addresses of all of the pirates who are on the torrent.. which is a start to tracking down and prosecuting all of the pirates.
Slashdot Mirror
The GPL does essentially mean free, IMO:
1) One person buys software from vendor
2) Said customer puts program on website/BitTorrent/P2P for distribution (completely legal..) for free.
Unless I'm missing something..
but now, I'm not buying the argument. Microsoft isn't going away anytime soon.
Holy $!@#)( this is bad news. Let's hope the Google people resolve this very, very quickly.. or I'm switching e-mail providers (yet again).
I should be able to download it for free from somewhere, right?
Isn't the PPV or video on demand a clawback of CURRENT features?
Oh well.. anyone worthy of calling themselves a tech nerd should be able to either hack the TiVo or build their own PVR using a TV capture card and PVR software (MythTV comes to mind..)
(ie: parody of MSN's "More useful everyday" slogan, for the mods :-> )
I'm waiting until the final release of version 1.0. Using 0.9.1 right now, and don't feel like going through the trouble of sorting through incompatible extensions, etc.
That was especially annoying (in Windows or Linux) when the FF browser crashed. It wouldn't release whatever locking mechanism it had on the file, and future instances thought FF was still running, forcing you to choose a different profile..
I realized that after I made the post. Rest assured, the message got to Rockstar Games :->
The REAL George Dubya Bush was blocked from the rest of the world.. we'd be fine!
There's always conspiracy to commit piracy, I guess? :->
Too bad it'll be several months till I'll be able to play it.. damn PS2 only releases!
Thanks for the link!
piracy@rockstar.com you go..
If you could transfer photos from your digital camera to your iPod. No need to take along a laptop to store a few weeks worth of vacation photos!
Dunno if the new iPod will do this (doesn't look like it.. plus it probably requires some support by the camera guys).. I'm just wishing here..
Considering Microsoft opens it's source to numerous governments, Nato, etc. I highly doubt it contains any backdoors.
Do such containers exist? If so, then why haven't they been used to solve the nuclear waste disposal dilemma (ie: where the hell do we put this stuff?)
Maybe I should RTFA.. but wouldn't a Challenger or Columbia type accident have catastrophic consequences with a nuclear rocket?
If you don't like it, don't play it.
About the only thing I see wrong with this situation is the developer didn't say that participants may be subjected to conduct they find offensive (oh, wait.. they did, didn't they?)
It's not the GUI that's the problem: it's running application programs as administrator. If you run a web browser as root, you put yourself at the same risk.
How is this any different? Unless certain *nix's forbid you from running the gui/apps as root, I see none..
OK:
1) Windows is not monolithic. If you or the authors of this report knew anything about OS design, you'd know this to be true.
2) They completely forget (or choose to ignore) that Windows was multiuser starting with NT. 2000 was multiuser as well. To say that XP is the first real multiuser Windows is completely false. And they use fast user switching to imply that Windows still isn't a true multi-user OS, which is complete nonsense.
3) From a design perspective, it makes more sense to use the same functionality to communicate with a remote or local machine (ie. it doesn't matter where the other program is).
And Windows is not "constrained" by an RPC model (as they seem to imply by saying that Linux is not).. application programmers can CHOOSE to use RPC, or they can use other methods.
4) This point makes no sense whatsoever:
"By advocating this type of usage, Microsoft invites administrators to work with Windows Server 2003 at
the server itself, logged in with Administrator privileges. This makes the Windows administrator most vulnerable to
security flaws, because using vulnerable programs such as Internet Explorer expose the server to security risks."
That is a complete load of bull $hit.
Just as the authors of this report claim "it takes only a little scrutiny to debunk the myths and logical errors behind the oft-repeated axioms (that suggest Windows is more secure)" their myth busting arguments also do not stand up to scrutiny.
For one, they speak at length about the uptime of web servers. While some downtime is related to security flaws, there is not a direct corrospondance between security flaws and uptime. I find this metric completely unreliable as a method of assessing web server security.
This is essentially their only argument for the first two myths.
For the third, they mention that flaws Microsoft will NEVER fix. They don't bother to mention that these flaws only occur in older, "obsolete" operating systems. Does Red Hat issue patches for version 1.0 anymore? The rest of their argument makes much more sense, however.
(Haven't read the rest yet.. but this thus far makes me skeptical that this is an unbiased report.. )
.. it runs games like Star Wars:Battlefront.
..
And changing the engine will require you to activate the car with Microsoft again.
Driver steps on brake pedal
Windows: "Please restart your car for the settings to take effect"
I'm sure you can think of many more..
I know how BitTorrent works. But Rockstar can get the IP addresses of all of the pirates who are on the torrent.. which is a start to tracking down and prosecuting all of the pirates.