Increasing the percentage of people who didn't pay Radiohead is serving the RIAA interest, I think. Encouraging people to buy it, is more likely to get more artists to bypass the current music publishing industry. Vote with your dollars.
All I'm saying is that windows is not inherently evil and unix is not the definition of perfection.
Do you consider that a restatement of what you wrote? I'm not attacking Windows. I felt your criticisms weren't legitimate, and I told you why. Your only real point is that Linux doesn't have drivers for all hardware. The same is true to a lesser extent for XP, and moreso for Vista. Besides, since most people buy computers with the OS preinstalled, it is reasonable to assume that your one point would be a non-issue for someone who buys a Linux computer from Dell or HP.
If your point is simply that Linux isn't for you, then yes, I think that's likely.
Familiarty? You said you use Linux all the time, so you're equally familiar with both. right? Something sounds untrue there.
Support? Do you really mean MS phone support? Really?
Ease of use? That's tied closely to familiarity. Maybe you mean the ease of use of most Windows programs, which generally are easier.
Maybe there was a driver you needed that wasn't available, which is where your source code argument came from, but it's a bit dishonest to suggest that a willingness to alter source code is a requirement of a good Linux experience. Strange hardware either works or it doesn't.
I've had Linux on my laptop for over a year. Everything just works, there's nothing to babysit, and I have the same level of support that I ever got with Windows - none.
AT&T will not terminate, disconnect or suspend service because of the views you or we express on public policy matters, political issues or political campaigns.
They didn't mention criticism of AT&T corporation, or its employees, products, and services. I'm sure that was just an oversight, like the first draft was. They knew it wasn't political speech that people were expecting to be censored.
I also find the contrast of their new statement amusing. We respect our customers, buuuuuut we will immediately terminate or suspend your account for violation of any of the following broad categories...
I spoke with my cellular customer service recently - who are apparently aware that they are even more untouchable than wired telephone providers - and their friendly and sympathetic statements did very little to distract me from the fact that they were being intransigent bastards who would admit no errors and provide no remedy. At least with my AT&T service, I can go to the Public Utilities Commision. If my cellphone carrier steals hundreds of dollars in new, unannounced fees, I'm SOL. Anyway, my point is that AT&Ts meaningless text about their attitude towards their customers won't do you any good after they disconnect you, but we're sorry we couldn't help you, and I hope you have a nice day. *click*
I'll write the FCC letter anyway, and write it off (mentally - it's not actually a write off).
The point is that Microsoft doesn't supply you with that software, so don't expect something different from Linux. I agree that vendors should provide Linux versions of their drivers and software, but I wouldn't characterize this as "linux" falling short. I'm aware of the issue, and this was a big reason I had such high hopes for the Linux offerings from the major retailers, especially Dell, because nobody can get their demands met from OEM suppliers like they can, but so far they are the ones that have fallen short. I don't just want any preinstall, I want a complete and quality installation.
But since common tasks like watching a movie or syncing an iPod require hunting for and installing extra software, Linux is best for technically savvy users or for people whose needs are so basic that they will never need anything other than the bundled software.
Yeah, cause it's not like users of Windows XP needs extra software to view DVDs and sync their iPods... oh, wait, they do! WTF is this guy on about?
If the manufacturer is nice enough to include the extra software, then good for him. They can easily do the same for their Linux offerings too. So, you see it's not a Linux problem at all. Maybe you should contact Dell and ask them why they didn't feel the need to customize their Ubuntu offering, or even QA it, in the same way they do for their Windows products.
It's sad that the defense lawyer couldn't have invented a couple of half-way plausible scenarios where the person sharing the files was not her. $60,000 doesn't buy much legal representation it seems.
Take note, those who would use the wireless defense:
Evidence against Thomas included her internet protocol address matching the address where the files were shared, as well as her Charter Communications' cable modem MAC address. A wireless intrusion was also ruled out, because the private internet protocol address of that router would have been present in the Kazaa traffic.
So, you'd need to be on the same subnet as your wireless router and have a random MAC address - no, not random, but a pseudo random address that could be a legitimate issued address that a wireless stumbler might use. Psuedo random username too. Oh, and if the script that does this is found, then that could indicate intent. Also you'd need dual level encryption to be able to represent that some other contents - which you will be forced to reveal - are the actual current contents of your hard drive, and update the fake contents on a regular basis, just for show.
Not nearly as easy to blame it on an ordinary wireless user as I thought it was. The malicious hacker who hijacks your computer only to share your music is less believable.
This is a legitimate moral dilemma. Since the money came from the same source, does one unrelated activity outweigh the other? That's not illogical at all.
Small correction: She had to post bond, because she was already charged.
I don't buy your analogy. The guy driving at 2:00am is probably doing something illegal. A girl with wires on her shirt asking about an arriving flight is probably not.
Just because something is not 100% secure doesn't mean that you don't at least TRY to secure it.
Assuming every officer is too jumpy to simply stop her and ask her to explain it (no, a rude counter employee doesn't count), then maybe they do stop her at gunpoint. OK, better safe than sorry, leave that in your car, have a nice day. How does charging her with a hoax device, when it was your own goddamn mistake, make anybody more safe and secure?
I think your problem is that you think you're safe in an airport lobby. You're not. Anyone can be dropped off at the curb and wheel a suit case of explosives up to the huge line at the ticket counter and blow up dozens of people. Please recognize and accept this fact. After the security checkpoint, you have some security, but if you think you need to panic and use deadly force in the lobby, you're wrong. It wouldn't help if you did anyway. So lighten up.
OK, the airline employee panicked, so I guess the police have to follow up, but it's a false alarm. There's no bomb, nor anything that looks like a bomb on closer inspection. This is where the police want to justify their actions. Looks like they've been trained that the only successful conclusion to a police action is to take someone into custody.
Dell resells PowerDVD, making a profit. Linux though has nothing to resell, so it would either have to eat the cost, or raise the price (and then hear complaints from Linux zealots that because Linux is free, it should be cheaper than Windows).
MP3 decoder $0.75 DVD decoder $1.00
Even your irrelevant and inflammatory "zealot" characterization falls flat. I think Dell can safely charge $1.75 per unit without inciting that unstable horde of zealots.
Why are we waiting until it's a crisis to deal with it?
Because until it's a crisis, you can't get the money to upgrade. If current addressing is going to work for another week, then it costs nothing to stick with it. Call me when the crisis is imminent.
I've read a few warranties, and I have yet to find one that really says this. Their one year standard warranty covers hardware and the only exclusion I see that could apply is damage caused by non-HP software, but since this was a part that isn't affected by software at all, that still doesn't apply. The software warranty can be voided by "improper installation", but that line doesn't apply to hardware.
So I would present my warranty agreement, and ask to see exactly where it says that I'm not covered. Sometimes a support policy is based on a misinterpretation of when an exclusion applies, or once a policy is in place it can start to be applied inappropriately as an excuse for not fixing things.
The greater engineering challenge is the first one. Once you know how it can be done, and apply the lessons learned from the first flight, adding one more element of difficulty is much easier. I think an average pilot with a plane built by Scaled Composites and supervised by the last person to do this same flight would have had the same chance to make the second flight solo.
The official page is not a page for (unpaid) support or discussion. They refer users to ubuntuforums and IRC. Newcomers (i.e. outsiders) do indeed go to community support forums, where they will only see codenames used in the discussions. The practice is so widespread that it's not even worth debating. Whether you think it matters or not is up to you.
Try visiting ubuntuforums.org -- Many newcomers are rightly directed to this comprehensive and friendly support forum. The codenames are used exclusively in the discussions. I find this to be representative of community discussions everywhere.
I said "blind spot" earlier, but I think that failed to include the denial that is commonly heard when this is pointed out. Thanks for providing a sterling example. Remember, I was only speaking of the impression given to outsiders, and only for those distros that give a damn about marketing themselves to the general public. Amongst Ubuntu insiders it doesn't matter. If it's still fun after so many repetitions then great for you.
Good luck getting anyone unfamiliar with Linux to install Gutsy Gibbon after you call it that. I'm being serious. This is still a blind spot for Linux distros that aspire to being on the desktop, Ubuntu in particular. If support people (i.e. people like us) are going to call it by the codename instead of "Ubuntu 7.10", then the codename shouldn't sound like a bad joke.
I can't understand paying for someone to pirate stuff for you.
How about: 1) Being shielded from a potential RIAA lawsuit. 2) Still screwing over said RIAA. 3) The convenience of not having to troll P2P networks. 4) Higher quality and selection among what is easy for you to find on P2P.
Number 4 is the most likely reason I would consider paying a small fee, but I'm just guessing on that one, since I don't know first hand if the provide quality and selection. I'd bet the iTunes crowd makes a lot of their purchases based on number 3, not necessarily on a desire to feel clean. I suppose that's why the have to price it at a level that seems like spare change.
Slashdot Mirror
Increasing the percentage of people who didn't pay Radiohead is serving the RIAA interest, I think. Encouraging people to buy it, is more likely to get more artists to bypass the current music publishing industry. Vote with your dollars.
All I'm saying is that windows is not inherently evil and unix is not the definition of perfection.
Do you consider that a restatement of what you wrote? I'm not attacking Windows. I felt your criticisms weren't legitimate, and I told you why. Your only real point is that Linux doesn't have drivers for all hardware. The same is true to a lesser extent for XP, and moreso for Vista. Besides, since most people buy computers with the OS preinstalled, it is reasonable to assume that your one point would be a non-issue for someone who buys a Linux computer from Dell or HP.
If your point is simply that Linux isn't for you, then yes, I think that's likely.
Pardon me for trolling. I should have just directly answered the points brought up by the previous poster... wait a second, troll??... wtf?!
Familiarty? You said you use Linux all the time, so you're equally familiar with both. right? Something sounds untrue there.
Support? Do you really mean MS phone support? Really?
Ease of use? That's tied closely to familiarity. Maybe you mean the ease of use of most Windows programs, which generally are easier.
Maybe there was a driver you needed that wasn't available, which is where your source code argument came from, but it's a bit dishonest to suggest that a willingness to alter source code is a requirement of a good Linux experience. Strange hardware either works or it doesn't.
I've had Linux on my laptop for over a year. Everything just works, there's nothing to babysit, and I have the same level of support that I ever got with Windows - none.
If you have to hack someone's thumb off then the security has done it's job. At some point, violence will always be enough to steal somebody's access.
AT&T will not terminate, disconnect or suspend service because of the views you or we express on public policy matters, political issues or political campaigns.
They didn't mention criticism of AT&T corporation, or its employees, products, and services. I'm sure that was just an oversight, like the first draft was. They knew it wasn't political speech that people were expecting to be censored.
I also find the contrast of their new statement amusing. We respect our customers, buuuuuut we will immediately terminate or suspend your account for violation of any of the following broad categories...
I spoke with my cellular customer service recently - who are apparently aware that they are even more untouchable than wired telephone providers - and their friendly and sympathetic statements did very little to distract me from the fact that they were being intransigent bastards who would admit no errors and provide no remedy. At least with my AT&T service, I can go to the Public Utilities Commision. If my cellphone carrier steals hundreds of dollars in new, unannounced fees, I'm SOL. Anyway, my point is that AT&Ts meaningless text about their attitude towards their customers won't do you any good after they disconnect you, but we're sorry we couldn't help you, and I hope you have a nice day. *click*
I'll write the FCC letter anyway, and write it off (mentally - it's not actually a write off).
The point is that Microsoft doesn't supply you with that software, so don't expect something different from Linux. I agree that vendors should provide Linux versions of their drivers and software, but I wouldn't characterize this as "linux" falling short. I'm aware of the issue, and this was a big reason I had such high hopes for the Linux offerings from the major retailers, especially Dell, because nobody can get their demands met from OEM suppliers like they can, but so far they are the ones that have fallen short. I don't just want any preinstall, I want a complete and quality installation.
But since common tasks like watching a movie or syncing an iPod require hunting for and installing extra software, Linux is best for technically savvy users or for people whose needs are so basic that they will never need anything other than the bundled software.
Yeah, cause it's not like users of Windows XP needs extra software to view DVDs and sync their iPods... oh, wait, they do! WTF is this guy on about?
If the manufacturer is nice enough to include the extra software, then good for him. They can easily do the same for their Linux offerings too. So, you see it's not a Linux problem at all. Maybe you should contact Dell and ask them why they didn't feel the need to customize their Ubuntu offering, or even QA it, in the same way they do for their Windows products.
Take note, those who would use the wireless defense:
So, you'd need to be on the same subnet as your wireless router and have a random MAC address - no, not random, but a pseudo random address that could be a legitimate issued address that a wireless stumbler might use. Psuedo random username too. Oh, and if the script that does this is found, then that could indicate intent. Also you'd need dual level encryption to be able to represent that some other contents - which you will be forced to reveal - are the actual current contents of your hard drive, and update the fake contents on a regular basis, just for show.
Not nearly as easy to blame it on an ordinary wireless user as I thought it was. The malicious hacker who hijacks your computer only to share your music is less believable.
Actually no it appears she owns most of the music she was sharing.
Most of it?? You don't really understand how the law works, do you?
You haven't posted in three years and that's all you have for us?
This is a legitimate moral dilemma. Since the money came from the same source, does one unrelated activity outweigh the other? That's not illogical at all.
Small correction: She had to post bond, because she was already charged.
I don't buy your analogy. The guy driving at 2:00am is probably doing something illegal. A girl with wires on her shirt asking about an arriving flight is probably not.
Just because something is not 100% secure doesn't mean that you don't at least TRY to secure it.
Assuming every officer is too jumpy to simply stop her and ask her to explain it (no, a rude counter employee doesn't count), then maybe they do stop her at gunpoint. OK, better safe than sorry, leave that in your car, have a nice day. How does charging her with a hoax device, when it was your own goddamn mistake, make anybody more safe and secure?
The prosecuter during her arraignment said that she answered the employee that it was art. Everybody panic!
I think your problem is that you think you're safe in an airport lobby. You're not. Anyone can be dropped off at the curb and wheel a suit case of explosives up to the huge line at the ticket counter and blow up dozens of people. Please recognize and accept this fact. After the security checkpoint, you have some security, but if you think you need to panic and use deadly force in the lobby, you're wrong. It wouldn't help if you did anyway. So lighten up.
OK, the airline employee panicked, so I guess the police have to follow up, but it's a false alarm. There's no bomb, nor anything that looks like a bomb on closer inspection. This is where the police want to justify their actions. Looks like they've been trained that the only successful conclusion to a police action is to take someone into custody.
Dell resells PowerDVD, making a profit. Linux though has nothing to resell, so it would either have to eat the cost, or raise the price (and then hear complaints from Linux zealots that because Linux is free, it should be cheaper than Windows).
MP3 decoder $0.75
DVD decoder $1.00
Even your irrelevant and inflammatory "zealot" characterization falls flat. I think Dell can safely charge $1.75 per unit without inciting that unstable horde of zealots.
Why are we waiting until it's a crisis to deal with it?
Because until it's a crisis, you can't get the money to upgrade. If current addressing is going to work for another week, then it costs nothing to stick with it. Call me when the crisis is imminent.
I've read a few warranties, and I have yet to find one that really says this. Their one year standard warranty covers hardware and the only exclusion I see that could apply is damage caused by non-HP software, but since this was a part that isn't affected by software at all, that still doesn't apply. The software warranty can be voided by "improper installation", but that line doesn't apply to hardware.
So I would present my warranty agreement, and ask to see exactly where it says that I'm not covered. Sometimes a support policy is based on a misinterpretation of when an exclusion applies, or once a policy is in place it can start to be applied inappropriately as an excuse for not fixing things.
This is why it's always vitally important to get a true blood test, and to preserve a sample for your attorney.
On the contrary, insist on the breathalyzer and contest the results if you fail. If you fail the blood test, you're screwed.
Ok, I've thought about it hard.
The greater engineering challenge is the first one. Once you know how it can be done, and apply the lessons learned from the first flight, adding one more element of difficulty is much easier. I think an average pilot with a plane built by Scaled Composites and supervised by the last person to do this same flight would have had the same chance to make the second flight solo.
Is that the right answer? Do tell.
So let me see if I can get this straight
You didn't, but that was probably intentional.
The official page is not a page for (unpaid) support or discussion. They refer users to ubuntuforums and IRC.
Newcomers (i.e. outsiders) do indeed go to community support forums, where they will only see codenames used in the discussions. The practice is so widespread that it's not even worth debating. Whether you think it matters or not is up to you.
Try visiting ubuntuforums.org -- Many newcomers are rightly directed to this comprehensive and friendly support forum. The codenames are used exclusively in the discussions. I find this to be representative of community discussions everywhere.
I said "blind spot" earlier, but I think that failed to include the denial that is commonly heard when this is pointed out. Thanks for providing a sterling example. Remember, I was only speaking of the impression given to outsiders, and only for those distros that give a damn about marketing themselves to the general public. Amongst Ubuntu insiders it doesn't matter. If it's still fun after so many repetitions then great for you.
Good luck getting anyone unfamiliar with Linux to install Gutsy Gibbon after you call it that. I'm being serious. This is still a blind spot for Linux distros that aspire to being on the desktop, Ubuntu in particular. If support people (i.e. people like us) are going to call it by the codename instead of "Ubuntu 7.10", then the codename shouldn't sound like a bad joke.
I can't understand paying for someone to pirate stuff for you.
How about:
1) Being shielded from a potential RIAA lawsuit.
2) Still screwing over said RIAA.
3) The convenience of not having to troll P2P networks.
4) Higher quality and selection among what is easy for you to find on P2P.
Number 4 is the most likely reason I would consider paying a small fee, but I'm just guessing on that one, since I don't know first hand if the provide quality and selection. I'd bet the iTunes crowd makes a lot of their purchases based on number 3, not necessarily on a desire to feel clean. I suppose that's why the have to price it at a level that seems like spare change.
It doesn't beg the question, although it does raise the question.