Ok, so how can we make this of no value to anyone? My first thought would be some kind of client that sends fake 'clicks', ignoring the results, just to clog up the clickstream with a massive amount of extraneous data. There's a Firefox extension that does this for Google...I used it for a week about a year ago and my Web History trends are still bizarre.
Better still, if we can find some way to create associations, so the ad-serving software thinks that porn and booze ads are good choices to serve up to visitors of disney.com
I expect that not much will happen till the day that the guys who pay Dell big bucks to have their trial software on Windows boxes start showing an interest in Linux.
This will never happen, and the open model is exactly why. As soon as Dell ships a Latitude XG45l with special Ubuntu Cruftware Edition, a dell-decruftifier.deb will appear in the repos, be pointed out by every blog from here to the moon, and every user will de-cruftify themselves.
I'd have to disagree with you on the RAM bit. A friend of mine recently got 10 systems from Lenovo for the office, and each one had 2x512MB RAM, which I'd consider heavy overkill for the kind of workload they used. Perhaps that's an unusally large amount of RAM for a system to come with.
Besides, even a pretty close system would probably be able to spare the 32MB or so the virtualized SAN-node OS would need. It would probably eat up less than the onboard graphics will on those systems. We're not talking about running two full desktops at once.
Setting aside the debate as to whether or not they should have a dollar value, the bottom line is that exploits do have a dollar value. Someone can use an exploit to take your money, your bosses money, you government's money, etc., which will always give these things a value to people with the requisite lack of ethics needed to use them in that way. Because of this, there's simply no economic incentive for this company to give away their commodity of value for nothing. If this kind of thing is to be stopped, we'll need to find a way to change that balance...either by paying for the exploit (giving an economic incentive to disclose) or by some kind of legislative approach (to create an economic disincentive for not disclosing). The legislative approach has such a history (it worked so well on software piracy) that it probably won't work all that well, here, which leaves us with this. Got a better idea?
Does your average office drone really need the whole power of a modern processor to bang out documents in Word? The most basic computer you can get from Dell or Lenovo or some other OEM has lots of RAM and CPU cycles to spare.
Assuming a recent CPU with hardware virtualization, could you have one partition (say, 20GB) with Windows for the user, and another partition running something else to serve up the remaining hard drive space, with a hypervisor running them both at the same time, invisible to one another?
I thought this was the kind of scenario that virtualization was intended for.
It's mandatory for you and I, sure, but I've had so many people act all shocked when they use my computer, and discover they need to 'turn on' scripting to use whatever stupid site they want to look at. That's one of the many things that makes my computer 'suck' compared to theirs.
This seems to be a pattern: big tech company sees domain spammers own computer.com, so they buy it to link to their website (TigerDirect for most of 2007, TechDepot a while before that, etc.). They run it for a year, but they get nowhere near enough revenue from the link to justify renewing it, and domain spammers get it again, repeating the process.
The keynote was surprisingly sparce on the iPhone front so I guess not much is going to change until next year
You think so? What I took away from the lack of iPhone stuff at the keynote is that they're saving whatever big iPhone news they have for this year for its own event, maybe like the iPod thing last September that introduced the Touch. iPhone is (arguably) the product they have with the biggest 'buzz', even post Macworld...I'd be shocked if they just dropped the SDK this year and then nothing till next year.
I don't think it's illegal to protect your monopoly, only to abuse it (IANAL, though). Your point does raise an interesting kettle of worms about transparency, though. If Apple lets (say, for example) Adobe protect their stuff on the Mac platform from DTrace, eventually DTrace won't be all that useful, due to the holes in the data it collects, from Adobe and everyone else who wants an exception. And if Apple doesn't let their partners into the 'no Mac DTrace' club, then Apple's not winning with them, either, by withholding technical capabilities that they could extend to others but have chosen not to.
Say I'm enclosed in a steel box, with a delicious cake and a healthy appetite. To an outside observer, before she confirms whether or not the cake has been eaten by looking inside the box, would I be simultaneously having my cake and eating it, too?
You shouldn't expect any serious space exploration until we can get to the point where we have more reusable equipment and methods. We had this to some degree with the space shuttle, but look how quickly that became obsolete.
This is an impossible goal. When you're reusing your old stuff, you aren't innovating to create new stuff, and when you are innovating to create new stuff, you aren't reusing the old. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
I think the main purpose st.com serves since ma.org has been around is to settle edit disputes on ma.org (of the Ceti Alpha VI vs. Ceti Alpha 6 variety, generally).
Slashdot Mirror
Pardon my ignorance, but how does this differ from Google Gears, other than being able to bundle it with the already-popular Flash plugin?
Patent trolls attack open source, no problem. Patent trolls attack banks, SHIT!! PASS A LAW!
Ok, so how can we make this of no value to anyone? My first thought would be some kind of client that sends fake 'clicks', ignoring the results, just to clog up the clickstream with a massive amount of extraneous data. There's a Firefox extension that does this for Google...I used it for a week about a year ago and my Web History trends are still bizarre.
Better still, if we can find some way to create associations, so the ad-serving software thinks that porn and booze ads are good choices to serve up to visitors of disney.com
I expect that not much will happen till the day that the guys who pay Dell big bucks to have their trial software on Windows boxes start showing an interest in Linux.
This will never happen, and the open model is exactly why. As soon as Dell ships a Latitude XG45l with special Ubuntu Cruftware Edition, a dell-decruftifier.deb will appear in the repos, be pointed out by every blog from here to the moon, and every user will de-cruftify themselves.
TFA seems to think this is only slightly better than eating children. I guess using words like 'blackmail' increases blog clicks.
I'd have to disagree with you on the RAM bit. A friend of mine recently got 10 systems from Lenovo for the office, and each one had 2x512MB RAM, which I'd consider heavy overkill for the kind of workload they used. Perhaps that's an unusally large amount of RAM for a system to come with.
Besides, even a pretty close system would probably be able to spare the 32MB or so the virtualized SAN-node OS would need. It would probably eat up less than the onboard graphics will on those systems. We're not talking about running two full desktops at once.
Setting aside the debate as to whether or not they should have a dollar value, the bottom line is that exploits do have a dollar value. Someone can use an exploit to take your money, your bosses money, you government's money, etc., which will always give these things a value to people with the requisite lack of ethics needed to use them in that way. Because of this, there's simply no economic incentive for this company to give away their commodity of value for nothing. If this kind of thing is to be stopped, we'll need to find a way to change that balance...either by paying for the exploit (giving an economic incentive to disclose) or by some kind of legislative approach (to create an economic disincentive for not disclosing). The legislative approach has such a history (it worked so well on software piracy) that it probably won't work all that well, here, which leaves us with this. Got a better idea?
Does your average office drone really need the whole power of a modern processor to bang out documents in Word? The most basic computer you can get from Dell or Lenovo or some other OEM has lots of RAM and CPU cycles to spare.
There's probably a decent peer to peer photo sharing app in what you just said.
Assuming a recent CPU with hardware virtualization, could you have one partition (say, 20GB) with Windows for the user, and another partition running something else to serve up the remaining hard drive space, with a hypervisor running them both at the same time, invisible to one another?
I thought this was the kind of scenario that virtualization was intended for.
It's mandatory for you and I, sure, but I've had so many people act all shocked when they use my computer, and discover they need to 'turn on' scripting to use whatever stupid site they want to look at. That's one of the many things that makes my computer 'suck' compared to theirs.
Interesting. Check out http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://computer.com
This seems to be a pattern: big tech company sees domain spammers own computer.com, so they buy it to link to their website (TigerDirect for most of 2007, TechDepot a while before that, etc.). They run it for a year, but they get nowhere near enough revenue from the link to justify renewing it, and domain spammers get it again, repeating the process.
Wikipedia seems to think computer.com is now TigerDirect. You might have heard of them.
The keynote was surprisingly sparce on the iPhone front so I guess not much is going to change until next year
You think so? What I took away from the lack of iPhone stuff at the keynote is that they're saving whatever big iPhone news they have for this year for its own event, maybe like the iPod thing last September that introduced the Touch. iPhone is (arguably) the product they have with the biggest 'buzz', even post Macworld...I'd be shocked if they just dropped the SDK this year and then nothing till next year.
I don't think it's illegal to protect your monopoly, only to abuse it (IANAL, though). Your point does raise an interesting kettle of worms about transparency, though. If Apple lets (say, for example) Adobe protect their stuff on the Mac platform from DTrace, eventually DTrace won't be all that useful, due to the holes in the data it collects, from Adobe and everyone else who wants an exception. And if Apple doesn't let their partners into the 'no Mac DTrace' club, then Apple's not winning with them, either, by withholding technical capabilities that they could extend to others but have chosen not to.
I don't see how they can win.
What about someone whose heart stops, but then in restarted later by a medicine or treatment of some kind (an "update")? Were they dead?
These iPhones were unusable and unable to be put into a usable state, until this "treatment" came around. That's dead, to me.
Imagine a space vehicle powered by thousands of Asian children, riding stationary bicycles for 10 cents a day.
Did you not see the Asus Eee on the list?
You sure? Back when my home network was simpler, I had a high-up firewall rule to allow all traffic from/to 192.168.*
I would have been tripped up (fortunately, my network is much more complex now, and this hole no longer exists for me).
You idiot! The Germans didn't bomb Pearl Harbour. Jeez!
Everybody knows that was Chuck Norris.
Say I'm enclosed in a steel box, with a delicious cake and a healthy appetite. To an outside observer, before she confirms whether or not the cake has been eaten by looking inside the box, would I be simultaneously having my cake and eating it, too?
Just wondering...
You shouldn't expect any serious space exploration until we can get to the point where we have more reusable equipment and methods. We had this to some degree with the space shuttle, but look how quickly that became obsolete.
This is an impossible goal. When you're reusing your old stuff, you aren't innovating to create new stuff, and when you are innovating to create new stuff, you aren't reusing the old. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
I think the main purpose st.com serves since ma.org has been around is to settle edit disputes on ma.org (of the Ceti Alpha VI vs. Ceti Alpha 6 variety, generally).
Chances are, your privacy is being sold right now.
Please add this tidbit to the tagging FAQ, so more people will know it works. :)