>No company is going to pay to have their software installed on a Linux machine because their software is not written for Linux.
That's not what this is about.
Whether they write their crapware for Linux is irrelevant. Nobody is demanding that they write it for Linux. Nobody is demanding (in this discussion) that manufacturers preinstall Linux. I'm not going to use Windows. I did not agree to the Windows license. Windows is an added cost.
Microsoft tells you to get it back from the OEM The OEM tells you to get it back from Microsoft.
Someone, here, has my money unjustly.
>Therefore pre-installing Windows has a positive impact on the manufacturer's cost of the machine which gets passed on to you.
Prove it. A gedankenxperiment is not proof, neither is assertion.
>argument about it being small
Doesn't matter. If it's 10 bux, I want my ten bux back.
>It should be pointed out that only users of Facebook and 'Adobe Flash` running on Microsoft are suseptable to this vulnerability.
Actually, it's the people in the Windows world who have been taught by the likes of Adobe and such that the normal way to install software is when you encounter a site that requires some special codec, that you install it straight away without question.
Flash itself is not the problem, it's the behavior of users who have been taught wrong in the Windows universe.
In sane environments, you look for trusted sources for software before blindly clicking on a web page. The Free Software world teaches people to look in the trusted repositories first (bsd ports system, debian packages, gentoo portage, etc) before downloading random binary code and running it willy-nilly.
-- BMO
Re:Your right to what?
on
BTJunkie No More?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
>Also, there are lots of things that are out of print, but copyright still covers that.
This is what the real problem is with current copyright law. Stuff that would go to the public domain is simply locked up, never to be seen again.
There is no balance anymore between the right to culture and the right to earn a living. The right to culture has been obliterated. Indeed, the Supreme Court has ruled that yes, Congress *can* pass copyright laws that rip culture out of the public domain.
The powers that be are now stealing from the public, far more so than they are losing to "piracy."
Yes, you missed the part where the article discussed the inconvenience of getting legal content vs. pirating it, which was the entire other half of the article's main point. Indeed, it spent more time on that argument than any other.
Indeed, you completely ignore the point of the "steam for movies" example that you just quoted and go on about price and price only in this discussion.
So you claim you read the article in its entirety. Treating that as truth, I guess reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
Follow-up for resolution limit for a 130M telescope looking at objects on the Moon.
Best resolution = distance to object * wavelength / diameter of mirror
Best resolution = 400,000,000M * 500nm / 130M
1.5M.
You'll get fuzzy images regardless.
For what the Hubble could see, just substitute 2.4 for the mirror diameter. You get roughly 80 meters across. This is why Hoaxers are morons when they say "just point Hubble at the Moon."
No, because no matter how high resolution the pics are, it will never be enough to satisfy the moon hoax morons.
I suggest that we round up the hoaxers, and in an attempt to prove to them that we really did land on the Moon in 1969, send them to Tranquility base, let them out, and remove their helmets, because the visors would distort the view.
And with their dying breaths, you would see them mouth the words "movie set."
Has everyone forgotten that the goal of the Iraq war was to get access to their oil? (And get revenge for the first Gulf War.) It was never about "weapons of mass destruction". The warmongers who came in with Bush (i.e. Cheney and his crew) were calling to overthrow Hussein the entire time Bill Clinton was in office. This is all well documented, even if it was never reported in the main stream press.
So much this.
They are even proud of it, to this day, because the PNAC website is still up.
>It is a well known legal principle that you cannot yell fire in a crowded room because you feel like it.
That's because it compromises other people's safety and might cause a loss of life in a stampede, which had happened back when a theater burning down was a lot more probable than it is today with fire codes and whatnot.
Where is the threat to life and limb for someone looking at porn?
>At the top of the list are gamma-ray cargo and vehicles scanners that can reportedly see through six inches of steel to reveal the contents of large vehicles.
Just wait until they use this on a vehicle that still has a human being still inside it when they turn on their death/maim ray.
They really want to open themselves up to that kind of liability?
In order for people to contribute to an open source project, one must do code review anyway as a matter of course, and most projects are multiple people.
Sure, maybe you can slip your nefarious code past a few end users if you are a sole developer, but try getting it past your fellow developers in a project.
"Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead." - Franklin.
It's not realistic to think that everyone would compile applications if they could, or be able to do a source audit to see they are truly safe.
No, it's not that *I* necessarily need to see the code (while I appreciate the freedom that I could), but I know other people *can* and *do*
That's the advantage.
Nefarious code does not live long in open sauce. Basically because not everyone is Ken Thompson to quote Tom Christiansen.
Tom Christiansen has a pretty good rant about why the source-code world is superior. I have saved this as a text file since I read it the first time here, because it is that good.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not about the OEM selling "naked," to use a Microsoft term, machines.
This is about being able to get a refund for the already installed Windows which is going to go unused.
--
BMO
>No company is going to pay to have their software installed on a Linux machine because their software is not written for Linux.
That's not what this is about.
Whether they write their crapware for Linux is irrelevant. Nobody is demanding that they write it for Linux. Nobody is demanding (in this discussion) that manufacturers preinstall Linux. I'm not going to use Windows. I did not agree to the Windows license. Windows is an added cost.
Microsoft tells you to get it back from the OEM
The OEM tells you to get it back from Microsoft.
Someone, here, has my money unjustly.
>Therefore pre-installing Windows has a positive impact on the manufacturer's cost of the machine which gets passed on to you.
Prove it. A gedankenxperiment is not proof, neither is assertion.
>argument about it being small
Doesn't matter. If it's 10 bux, I want my ten bux back.
Why is this so hard to understand?
--
BMO
>Like it or not, the software bundled with your computer drives its cost down
Maybe the crapware from Norton, McAfee, etc, but not the Windows license.
Microsoft gets its pound of flesh every time. The Windows license is always a cost, unless you can prove otherwise.
--
BMO
>It should be pointed out that only users of Facebook and 'Adobe Flash` running on Microsoft are suseptable to this vulnerability.
Actually, it's the people in the Windows world who have been taught by the likes of Adobe and such that the normal way to install software is when you encounter a site that requires some special codec, that you install it straight away without question.
Flash itself is not the problem, it's the behavior of users who have been taught wrong in the Windows universe.
In sane environments, you look for trusted sources for software before blindly clicking on a web page. The Free Software world teaches people to look in the trusted repositories first (bsd ports system, debian packages, gentoo portage, etc) before downloading random binary code and running it willy-nilly.
--
BMO
>Also, there are lots of things that are out of print, but copyright still covers that.
This is what the real problem is with current copyright law. Stuff that would go to the public domain is simply locked up, never to be seen again.
There is no balance anymore between the right to culture and the right to earn a living. The right to culture has been obliterated. Indeed, the Supreme Court has ruled that yes, Congress *can* pass copyright laws that rip culture out of the public domain.
The powers that be are now stealing from the public, far more so than they are losing to "piracy."
--
BMO
>their statement was pretty blatant about turning the entire world into slaves to Wall Street
That was the statement of principles.
It's still there.
All the papers are still there.
They likely know about archive.org and they didn't bother to scrub that, either.
--
BMO
Somehow I doubt Bush will emerge as an elder statesman or doing good deeds swinging a hammer.
--
BMO
If I missed something there, please correct me.
Yes, you missed the part where the article discussed the inconvenience of getting legal content vs. pirating it, which was the entire other half of the article's main point. Indeed, it spent more time on that argument than any other.
Indeed, you completely ignore the point of the "steam for movies" example that you just quoted and go on about price and price only in this discussion.
So you claim you read the article in its entirety. Treating that as truth, I guess reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
--
BMO
Actually I did read the entire article; "free" was a slight exaggeration
No, no it wasn't. It was trolling and a complete misstatement of the facts. In other words, it was a lie.
(next time change the batteries in your sarcasm detector)
No. Get stuffed.
--
BMO
Follow-up for resolution limit for a 130M telescope looking at objects on the Moon.
Best resolution = distance to object * wavelength / diameter of mirror
Best resolution = 400,000,000M * 500nm / 130M
1.5M.
You'll get fuzzy images regardless.
For what the Hubble could see, just substitute 2.4 for the mirror diameter. You get roughly 80 meters across. This is why Hoaxers are morons when they say "just point Hubble at the Moon."
--
BMO
>His solution seems to be "Give everything away for free, then it won't get stolen".
Do you know how I know you didn't read the article all the way through?
--
BMO
No, because no matter how high resolution the pics are, it will never be enough to satisfy the moon hoax morons.
I suggest that we round up the hoaxers, and in an attempt to prove to them that we really did land on the Moon in 1969, send them to Tranquility base, let them out, and remove their helmets, because the visors would distort the view.
And with their dying breaths, you would see them mouth the words "movie set."
--
BMO
Has everyone forgotten that the goal of the Iraq war was to get access to their oil? (And get revenge for the first Gulf War.) It was never about "weapons of mass destruction". The warmongers who came in with Bush (i.e. Cheney and his crew) were calling to overthrow Hussein the entire time Bill Clinton was in office. This is all well documented, even if it was never reported in the main stream press.
So much this.
They are even proud of it, to this day, because the PNAC website is still up.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
And guess where Romney got his foreign policy advisors?
The Foreign Policy Initiative. http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/
The entire board, with the exception of William Kristol himself (because it would be too obvious to the press), are Romney's foreign policy advisors.
What is the FPI? The direct descendant of PNAC. It is essentially PNAC 2.
And nobody reports on this. These are the assholes that are banging the drum for Obama to invade Iran.
And it should scare the crap out of everyone.
--
BMO
My orthopedic surgeon was a toolmaker and machinist before he decided to become a doc.
--
BMO
>It is a well known legal principle that you cannot yell fire in a crowded room because you feel like it.
That's because it compromises other people's safety and might cause a loss of life in a stampede, which had happened back when a theater burning down was a lot more probable than it is today with fire codes and whatnot.
Where is the threat to life and limb for someone looking at porn?
I'll wait right here.
--
BMO
>At the top of the list are gamma-ray cargo and vehicles scanners that can reportedly see through six inches of steel to reveal the contents of large vehicles.
Just wait until they use this on a vehicle that still has a human being still inside it when they turn on their death/maim ray.
They really want to open themselves up to that kind of liability?
--
BMO
Some games work well, others don't.
WoW works well. So well, in fact, that you get more FPS than on Windows.
--
BMO
Leonard Cohen was arrested at the Peace Bridge border stop in because of his song "First We Take Manhattan"
--
BMO
He's a dickhead in general.
Sucking the teat of corporate welfare:
http://www.pbn.com/EDC-approves-loan-package-for-Schillings-38-Studios-now-he-must-bring-jobs,51422
Yes, he's a dickhead.
--
BMO
>study economics
Curt Schilling was never an economist.
He was pitcher for the Red Sox, however. Bloody ankle and all.
This is called "learning your second career by the seat of your pants."
--
BMO
Then Linux and its utilities and all the desktop stuff must be full of malware, right?
Because nobody ever looks at code, right?
--
BMO
we have Macbot.
Macbot is like Siri, but retarded, drunk, and insane.
--
BMO
In order for people to contribute to an open source project, one must do code review anyway as a matter of course, and most projects are multiple people.
Sure, maybe you can slip your nefarious code past a few end users if you are a sole developer, but try getting it past your fellow developers in a project.
"Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead." - Franklin.
--
BMO
It's not realistic to think that everyone would compile applications if they could, or be able to do a source audit to see they are truly safe.
No, it's not that *I* necessarily need to see the code (while I appreciate the freedom that I could), but I know other people *can* and *do*
That's the advantage.
Nefarious code does not live long in open sauce. Basically because not everyone is Ken Thompson to quote Tom Christiansen.
Tom Christiansen has a pretty good rant about why the source-code world is superior. I have saved this as a text file since I read it the first time here, because it is that good.
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2540&cid=1522840
--
BMO
And the more I read about this, the better off I think I am.
Seriously, this summary sounds like there is really no way around this BS except by using a dumbphone and never connecting anything to the Internet.
>free app clones of pay ones are a problem
No, closed source "free" apps are the problem.
--
BMO