Despite the dour response that will happen on/., I believe that it is necessary that such things as this happen. Forget your toolbar crap, get an entire browser based on the things that you want to do on the web. This is just the other side of the coin when you look at web based software business... a web browser that completes your business needs.. look for more of the same, and some of them actually being exciting!
and they all relate to regulations. The FCC has, so far, taken a hands off approach to regulation of data services, both wireless and wired. This approach is having an effect of establishing new networks, or seems to be. The problem is that all these new networks are being built by companies that plan to make money from distributing digital content... and we ALL know how sticky that problem is. For instance, music and video distribution is tightly being strangled by the *AA, and MS is trying to get in on the game too, with DRM'd content. All of these efforts are good, and believe me, WiMax is a *GOOD* thing.
The problems are content and distribution. Right now, plans are being made for IPTV and radio, and many many things that are digital in nature, all of which make life better or easier to cope with. Still, copyright and patent law will fsck it up if changes are not made now... Later is no good, the changes need to be made now....
Yes, I suppose so, and they could relicense MS Office under GPL too, but it doesn't seem likely unless 100's more government and business organizations do as Mass. did....
It will be good to see the bull with a ring in its nose for a change, so to speak, but the more relevant down line consequences don't seem to be jumping out at me. If MS goes with ODF, then we are all back in the same mess, more or less, aren't we?
I have faith in people, open-minded people, to see a product, and when the value of the product is comparable to any other product of similar purpose, then choose the cheapest one, or the one with the most compatibility with present relevant investments.
The trouble is, so far as I have seen or understood (I could be wrong), when the products are equal or close, MS uses those 'politicians' they paid for to ensure that only MS products get sold to all but the very edgy techno-geeks. That would leave us right where we started (more or less) in respect of MS's domination of the OS and software world.... that means very little competitive product in circulation by comparison.
So, what would make this more of a move to open and competitive markets?
I love conspiracy math: Lets see, conservative estimate of 400 million printers in North America alone, and no method of tracking serial number to location or owner past the original purchase, assuming cash was not used. So, hmmmm a data base with 400 million records, tied to dubious information... yeah, that's useful, but on second thought, it would allow police to figure out if the printer that counterfit documents were created with was in North America or Europe... that would be helpful, but not really worth putting on the tin foil hats.
Anyway, so the government requires each printer manufacturer to maintain a database of all printers sold, so that if needed, they can subpeona the records? No wonder printer ink costs so much:)
I'm thinking that this would only go so far, and not be much more useful than a database of gun rifling marks?
The issue here is not why there are so few people going into scientific and technological fields in comparison to other countries, many can point at the causes, but what are US businesses and industry and government doing to improve the future of science and technology in the US?
It seems to me that the X-Prize and DARPA Grand Challenge and other such contests inspire children to innovate and learn, to participate in science and technology, to enter those fields of study and commerce. We need more of the same, on smaller, local levels.
Why don't we encourage industry associations to offer prizes for innovation? For an example: the waste management industry bands together to offer three prizes each year for innovations that affect waste management: one for under 16 year olds, one for over 16 but in school, and one for independants (not associated with any school) such that the prize would bring money to the individual school as well as the contest winner, and in the case of independents, the prize would be awarded to the individual and a school of their choosing (even in the form of tuition and costs for that student if the winner desires it)
This would put money in the hands of those capable of innovation and technology advancements. It would reward those that learn, and that is what it should be about. Industry then needs to move on to reward those that choose that career... The first step is to change patent law, and put more stress on innovation and competativeness than on protecting current business models.
When the government and business machines are willing to promote and support innovation, then innovation will happen. Lucky Lindy didn't fly across the ocean to secure a patent on ticketing software, he did it to win acclaim and secure his place in industry. When others can be rewarded in like manner, they will do so... it is up to us to ensure that government and industry reward people like Lindburgh and the Wright brothers (among others). Simply trying to set in motion a machine that turns out engineers is just not going to work.
Well, of course, I might be wrong... its just 2 cents spent
Only the government can do this. That is to say that the government is never wrong. When it seems that the government has done something wrong, that is when a person is blamed. Witness one Iran Contra scandal. The government is never wrong. Now when it comes to private business, your implied rights that are assumed when you buy something are formed between you (the purchaser) and the 'company' you bought it from. Nothing in the law allows for holding a person liable for the quality of the goods that the company sells.
The first thing that would happen is that coder joe writes some code for company xyz, it goes into production, 2 weeks later coder joe moves to another city and a different company. Company xyz is still selling the product with coder joe's code in it. 6 months later it is found to be defective code. Now who does the consumer sue?
If we hold the code writers responsible, then when they leave the company, their code has to go with them, or they will never be able to get liability insurance like doctors get malpractice insurance.
Second issue is this: Coder joe writes some code, but it belongs to company xyz because of clauses in the employment contract. If coder joe has to have liability insurance, he will never write anymore code for company xyz because he is not seeing direct profits: Responsibility without compensation is a strange and twisted sort of slavery.
Third issue: How many managers does it take to totally screw up a software product? One... when a manager is able to tell coder joe how to write the code, how can anyone legally hold coder joe responsible for the effects of using software that 1) does not belong to coder joe, 2) was designed and compromised by someone other than coder joe, and 3) was sold by a company that coder joe no longer works for
This would mean that for the life of the software product, coder joe would have to list his details on some sort of registry so people could find him to sue him? THAT is not going to work.
what is scary is the liklihood that drug companies will find a pill to cure you of the addiction to the Internet. All they have to do is find a compound that not only makes you not want to surf the Internet, but also has viagra side effects. Yes, scary, but then the *AA will be supporting it too because you won't want to download illegal copies of stuff. With a market the size of China, what drug company can resist the lure of selling 2 pills per day to half a billion people?
Yes, I think the fears of certain science fiction writers were well founded.
Say it isn't so... surely suicide bombers and general unrest, military police, guns, bombs, and other daily lifestyle activities in the holy city are not prone to create anxiety disorders!
Geez, in a Jeruselem hospital, you only have to take blood from anyone that happens to be there in the waiting room and I bet you find an anxiety disorder... bet that was hard to test out?
I am not a cosmologist, but wasn't it just a few minutes ago that they discovered that there are black holes at the center of each galaxy? I'm pretty sure that such a discovery would necessarily cause cosmologists to reconsider where the unaccounted-for gravity was coming from. (not that anything comes out of a black hole per se')
Black holes are, well, dark... so all the 'dark' matter is concentrated in localized places, namely the center of the galaxies.
I'm certain that this is not the entire explanation, and that there will be more theories as we discover more about the universe, our galaxy, and the existance of 'stuff' in general.
Hell, we can't even decide if there are 8, 9, or 10 planets in our own solar system, I'm sure it will take some time to figure out what the universe is actually made of.
Sadly, as soon as this happens, we'll probably figure out how to ignite it in a huge ball of flames, or would that be disk of flames?
If NTP is successful at this IP game with RIM, they will have money to go after Smart Technology, and others that are using basic common sense, but which the USPTO managed to let them patent. That is the real problem. Anything that is a natural, anybody-can-see-it extension of a technology should not be granted a patent. Yes, that is a broad statement, and probably won't work everywhere, but seriously, asking for a patent on sending email to wireless PDA (or other) devices is just common sense, as in what else would you do?
The FCC has seen fit to take a mostly hands-off approach to IP networks, but there seems to be no sense of the common good at the USPTO. Perhaps that is what we need. This is not unlike the patent issue about navigating a menu on mobile devices problem that Apple ran into.... OMG, its just stupid, and the devil in the details of trying to remain legal about things is killing us. The USPTO needs to simply say, oh, ooops, mea culpa, sorry. and then the courts can send all the life sucking lawyers home again.
but what exactly happens to this bill of rights crap when all the carriers go to IP based communications where the FCC has yet to implement ANY legislation on data networks. Your next phone is likely to be a voice over WiFi or over WiMax, or some other form of VoIP.
I seriously doubt that regulating voice communications will ever do anything correctly. What is needed is to lay out standards of business for those companies offering services, such cable, broadband, telephone, gas, electricity, anything that involves a "contract". (even if its not really a contract)
What they are trying to fight here is the knock-on effects of commoditization of services. The reason that cellphones are cheap is because they make their money on the backend. The only way to be fair to all parties is to make you pay for your phone up front, regulate roaming issues, and 'encourage' carriers to cooperate on network peering agreements. In other words, forcibly make carriers be nothing more than airtime providers, split away from the carrier any content providing services, etc.
Do we need legislation to set up ratings schemes? Once its rated, selling to minors is illegal already.
No matter how much law is enacted, they still won't be able to enforce the law with anything that approaches what people envision. Grandmothers and family members will still buy games and movies for kids when they shouldn't....
When did Google announce anything before they had a beta you could play with?
So, until Google & Sun work out what they want to do, and Google has played with it, there won't be an announcement... Announcing vaporware as the next savior of the universe is an MS kind of thing to do.
I have faith in the team of Sun and Google to work out how to make the most of 'being against MS' and then execute the plan...
Just by chance, I happened across a sweet deal on the Danger Hiptop II, known as the Sidekick II on T-Mobile in the USA. The camera sucks a bit, but then I didn't want it for that really. It is almost everything that I want in a personal communications device currently.
Yeah, the browser needs some help, and a little more lattitude in usage would be nice, but all things considered, the service and functionality of the Danger device is very cool. You might want to look at that because its got a good service plan too. Don't know what coverage in your area is like, but its suitable here for me, I'm quite happy...
Remember of course, that IANAL, but it seems to me that copyright law, especially that which upholds legal recourse for such small matters as fair-use is just not what the founders intended, nor is it in the best interest of the population.
I believe that copyright owners have a right to legal protection from those that would blatently copy their works and distribute for a profit. Anything that is no more damaging than a public library is fair game. That means it is not illegal for you to load a DVD to your friend before returning it to the rental place, nor is it illegal to 'loan' your copy to a friend.
Now making tons of copies and selling them at a local market... that's wrong, should be illegal.
Fair-use is not an illegal activity aimed at defauding the copyright owner, and any, *ANY* device or mechanism designed to prohibit your fair use of something you have paid to use is NOT the intent of copyright law.
What we have here is a need to re-educate and moderate the law.
Is it really that simple, just wise plotting on the part of IBM? Something tells me that this isn't really over yet... If winning the lawsuit isn't the point, perhaps tenderizing SCO to the point of being ready to sell out is?
I think if IBM owned any remaining IP from SCO it would make an interesting situation.
Given IBM's recent 'play nice with Linux' attitude, that would be very interesting indeed. I don't think that the wounds that IBM got from fighting with Microsoft have ever really healed. With the world of computing changing so much so fast, how would it look if Google/Sun and IBM/Linux were to end up dominating the next 15 years?
It seems to me that its like a teen rattling a gate at the ball park to see if it is locked. While you might do so out of curiosity, or in an attempt to gain unauthorized access, it is still just checking to see if it is locked. If you have a valid ticket in your pocket, accessing through that gate would still be wrong, but checking that it is locked is not.
It does not matter if you have safe cracking tools in the garage at home, if you are simply standing outside the jewelry shop, and check to see if the door is locked or anyone is inside, this doesn't mean that you are attempting to steal diamonds. Sure, he may have had tools on his machine, but that is no different than saying a cop has a gun, and looked like he was trying to break into the store when the door was locked. Things are not always as they appear, and convicting on the basis of intention, especially when it is not overly easy to see the intention, is just wrong.
We have no need of, or room for, thought police in civilized society.
Of course, I may have missed a salient point here, but it just seems wrong to convict without evidence of harm.
In the case of where this seems to happen, like dangerous driving (intoxicated or not) it has been shown that this behavior does lead to accidents, and removing the driver from public roads is a safety measure that does not harm anyone. This is the reason for various lane markings, speed limits, etc.
In this case, there was no speed limits or lane markings, only a locked gate type of guidance. Convicting this man of attempting to steal when there is no blatant evidence is just wrong, and sets a bad precedent in my opinion. Banks don't keep their cash funds out on the sidewalk for a reason. If they did, and it went missing, what exactly would the courts say?
Additionally, it doesn't seem to ring true that a 'security expert' would leave such a trail as to be caught if he was truly trying to break into the system?
So you mean to tell me that people actually pay for HBO? I think HBO is just trying to stop anyone that is intelligent from really finding out what crap they put out on their channels... If the news gets out, they will lose a lot of customers that simply haven't noticed yet.
Hopefully, this news will alert the subscribers that have been too lazy to quit paying for HBO to stop paying for it right now.
Sure, they have a couple of good shows, but you have to pay for 6 channels 24/7 instead of just the 1.5 hours per week that you really want to watch... fsck that billing method.
See, they have lost more revenue, after all this torrent news, I might pay for downloads so I could watch only the programming that interests me, but I'll not pay for anything from HBO from now on, not even a download... WOW, their tactics are working already
I know there are a lot of countries that use the Internet, and as such, rely on the root DNS servers. Those being in the US, paid for by the US, and in fact designed/invented by the US. If the EU/UN want to fracture the internets by using their own root servers, fine, go ahead, but I don't think they are seeing things very clearly. The Internet is not just about pR0n or downloading music files.
There are governments, and a huge number of businesses that rely on the Internet and its smooth running. If the EU/UN fractures this situation, it will disrupt not only the US businesses, but those businesses in the EU/UN. Damn, the British and EU can't even agree on what to name different cheeses and other such nonsensical things. How in the hell are they going to manage 'The Internet' without screwing the pooch very badly?
The last cooperative efforts from the UN were... umm lets see... ignoring genocide in Rwanda and Food for Oil... yeah, those are the guys I want to be in charge of the Internet. They put Libya in charge of human rights? Next thing you know, the UN will let China in and put them in charge of censorship on the Internet! About the EU? hmmm Germany and France didn't want to help with the war in Iraq until they could go in and make money from it... Guess that fairly well explains their interest in global matters.
The only reason for the UN/EU needing to have control of the root servers is to ensure that they can implement their own version of 'fair' management.... somehow I doubt that it would be anything close to fair. I can see the yearly bill for Internet services now...
I hate to bring down the buzz, but POS teriminals are not the kind of system that you want someone running solitare on. These are single function terminals that are high profile, and like your DVD player or microwave oven, they just have to work, every time, every day, or things get messy.
These types of applications are more suited for embedded closed RTOS software than for any desktop OS. ARM and some of the variants of it support encryption and secure operations, and can easily support the functions required for POS terminals. This would make much more sense than Linux, even if the Linux was stripped down and tuned for security and RT operations. (well, thinking of it, Embedded RTLinux setup might be a good thing too, but desktop Linux distros just are not the thing for this) The article does a good job of explaining why they chose not to use XP embedded.
Think about it, most POS systems just don't have room for a hard drive, so really need to be small and use embedded software, loaded from ROM or FLASH. And Yes, these types of terminals need, and typically do have, remote access functionality. Not often used, but its there, even in those credit card swipe machines. The thing is that its an embedded OS and software, so just is not threatened by hackers and such. That is how it should be. Keeping the OS/applications closed and secure is just one of those "job 1" things for the POS industry.
Seeing a terminal in the local pub running Windows of any kind just makes me cringe! A Treo is capable enough to do the job, just doesn't come with the big fancy touch screen.
Good to see Linux making headway, but worries me none the less that such systems are now becoming off the self, and open to hackers... yikes, well it seems that way with this article.
I need better/. skills? The reason I say its not that expensive is that if you want a security robot (not cute and only on wheels) then be prepared to fork out > $30000.00 USD.
Slashdot Mirror
Despite the dour response that will happen on /., I believe that it is necessary that such things as this happen. Forget your toolbar crap, get an entire browser based on the things that you want to do on the web. This is just the other side of the coin when you look at web based software business... a web browser that completes your business needs.. look for more of the same, and some of them actually being exciting!
and they all relate to regulations. The FCC has, so far, taken a hands off approach to regulation of data services, both wireless and wired. This approach is having an effect of establishing new networks, or seems to be. The problem is that all these new networks are being built by companies that plan to make money from distributing digital content... and we ALL know how sticky that problem is. For instance, music and video distribution is tightly being strangled by the *AA, and MS is trying to get in on the game too, with DRM'd content. All of these efforts are good, and believe me, WiMax is a *GOOD* thing.
The problems are content and distribution. Right now, plans are being made for IPTV and radio, and many many things that are digital in nature, all of which make life better or easier to cope with. Still, copyright and patent law will fsck it up if changes are not made now... Later is no good, the changes need to be made now....
two cents used
Yes, I suppose so, and they could relicense MS Office under GPL too, but it doesn't seem likely unless 100's more government and business organizations do as Mass. did....
It will be good to see the bull with a ring in its nose for a change, so to speak, but the more relevant down line consequences don't seem to be jumping out at me. If MS goes with ODF, then we are all back in the same mess, more or less, aren't we?
I have faith in people, open-minded people, to see a product, and when the value of the product is comparable to any other product of similar purpose, then choose the cheapest one, or the one with the most compatibility with present relevant investments.
The trouble is, so far as I have seen or understood (I could be wrong), when the products are equal or close, MS uses those 'politicians' they paid for to ensure that only MS products get sold to all but the very edgy techno-geeks. That would leave us right where we started (more or less) in respect of MS's domination of the OS and software world.... that means very little competitive product in circulation by comparison.
So, what would make this more of a move to open and competitive markets?
I don't see the bright future in this.
I love conspiracy math: Lets see, conservative estimate of 400 million printers in North America alone, and no method of tracking serial number to location or owner past the original purchase, assuming cash was not used. So, hmmmm a data base with 400 million records, tied to dubious information... yeah, that's useful, but on second thought, it would allow police to figure out if the printer that counterfit documents were created with was in North America or Europe... that would be helpful, but not really worth putting on the tin foil hats.
:)
Anyway, so the government requires each printer manufacturer to maintain a database of all printers sold, so that if needed, they can subpeona the records? No wonder printer ink costs so much
I'm thinking that this would only go so far, and not be much more useful than a database of gun rifling marks?
is the second of two full moons occuring in a single month... so they do happen
The issue here is not why there are so few people going into scientific and technological fields in comparison to other countries, many can point at the causes, but what are US businesses and industry and government doing to improve the future of science and technology in the US?
It seems to me that the X-Prize and DARPA Grand Challenge and other such contests inspire children to innovate and learn, to participate in science and technology, to enter those fields of study and commerce. We need more of the same, on smaller, local levels.
Why don't we encourage industry associations to offer prizes for innovation? For an example: the waste management industry bands together to offer three prizes each year for innovations that affect waste management: one for under 16 year olds, one for over 16 but in school, and one for independants (not associated with any school) such that the prize would bring money to the individual school as well as the contest winner, and in the case of independents, the prize would be awarded to the individual and a school of their choosing (even in the form of tuition and costs for that student if the winner desires it)
This would put money in the hands of those capable of innovation and technology advancements. It would reward those that learn, and that is what it should be about. Industry then needs to move on to reward those that choose that career... The first step is to change patent law, and put more stress on innovation and competativeness than on protecting current business models.
When the government and business machines are willing to promote and support innovation, then innovation will happen. Lucky Lindy didn't fly across the ocean to secure a patent on ticketing software, he did it to win acclaim and secure his place in industry. When others can be rewarded in like manner, they will do so... it is up to us to ensure that government and industry reward people like Lindburgh and the Wright brothers (among others). Simply trying to set in motion a machine that turns out engineers is just not going to work.
Well, of course, I might be wrong... its just 2 cents spent
Only the government can do this. That is to say that the government is never wrong. When it seems that the government has done something wrong, that is when a person is blamed. Witness one Iran Contra scandal. The government is never wrong. Now when it comes to private business, your implied rights that are assumed when you buy something are formed between you (the purchaser) and the 'company' you bought it from. Nothing in the law allows for holding a person liable for the quality of the goods that the company sells.
The first thing that would happen is that coder joe writes some code for company xyz, it goes into production, 2 weeks later coder joe moves to another city and a different company. Company xyz is still selling the product with coder joe's code in it. 6 months later it is found to be defective code. Now who does the consumer sue?
If we hold the code writers responsible, then when they leave the company, their code has to go with them, or they will never be able to get liability insurance like doctors get malpractice insurance.
Second issue is this: Coder joe writes some code, but it belongs to company xyz because of clauses in the employment contract. If coder joe has to have liability insurance, he will never write anymore code for company xyz because he is not seeing direct profits: Responsibility without compensation is a strange and twisted sort of slavery.
Third issue: How many managers does it take to totally screw up a software product? One... when a manager is able to tell coder joe how to write the code, how can anyone legally hold coder joe responsible for the effects of using software that 1) does not belong to coder joe, 2) was designed and compromised by someone other than coder joe, and 3) was sold by a company that coder joe no longer works for
This would mean that for the life of the software product, coder joe would have to list his details on some sort of registry so people could find him to sue him? THAT is not going to work.
what is scary is the liklihood that drug companies will find a pill to cure you of the addiction to the Internet. All they have to do is find a compound that not only makes you not want to surf the Internet, but also has viagra side effects. Yes, scary, but then the *AA will be supporting it too because you won't want to download illegal copies of stuff. With a market the size of China, what drug company can resist the lure of selling 2 pills per day to half a billion people?
Yes, I think the fears of certain science fiction writers were well founded.
Say it isn't so... surely suicide bombers and general unrest, military police, guns, bombs, and other daily lifestyle activities in the holy city are not prone to create anxiety disorders!
Geez, in a Jeruselem hospital, you only have to take blood from anyone that happens to be there in the waiting room and I bet you find an anxiety disorder... bet that was hard to test out?
Just my thoughts...
I am not a cosmologist, but wasn't it just a few minutes ago that they discovered that there are black holes at the center of each galaxy? I'm pretty sure that such a discovery would necessarily cause cosmologists to reconsider where the unaccounted-for gravity was coming from. (not that anything comes out of a black hole per se')
Black holes are, well, dark... so all the 'dark' matter is concentrated in localized places, namely the center of the galaxies.
I'm certain that this is not the entire explanation, and that there will be more theories as we discover more about the universe, our galaxy, and the existance of 'stuff' in general.
Hell, we can't even decide if there are 8, 9, or 10 planets in our own solar system, I'm sure it will take some time to figure out what the universe is actually made of.
Sadly, as soon as this happens, we'll probably figure out how to ignite it in a huge ball of flames, or would that be disk of flames?
If NTP is successful at this IP game with RIM, they will have money to go after Smart Technology, and others that are using basic common sense, but which the USPTO managed to let them patent. That is the real problem. Anything that is a natural, anybody-can-see-it extension of a technology should not be granted a patent. Yes, that is a broad statement, and probably won't work everywhere, but seriously, asking for a patent on sending email to wireless PDA (or other) devices is just common sense, as in what else would you do?
The FCC has seen fit to take a mostly hands-off approach to IP networks, but there seems to be no sense of the common good at the USPTO. Perhaps that is what we need. This is not unlike the patent issue about navigating a menu on mobile devices problem that Apple ran into.... OMG, its just stupid, and the devil in the details of trying to remain legal about things is killing us. The USPTO needs to simply say, oh, ooops, mea culpa, sorry. and then the courts can send all the life sucking lawyers home again.
but what exactly happens to this bill of rights crap when all the carriers go to IP based communications where the FCC has yet to implement ANY legislation on data networks. Your next phone is likely to be a voice over WiFi or over WiMax, or some other form of VoIP.
I seriously doubt that regulating voice communications will ever do anything correctly. What is needed is to lay out standards of business for those companies offering services, such cable, broadband, telephone, gas, electricity, anything that involves a "contract". (even if its not really a contract)
What they are trying to fight here is the knock-on effects of commoditization of services. The reason that cellphones are cheap is because they make their money on the backend. The only way to be fair to all parties is to make you pay for your phone up front, regulate roaming issues, and 'encourage' carriers to cooperate on network peering agreements. In other words, forcibly make carriers be nothing more than airtime providers, split away from the carrier any content providing services, etc.
Its just going to backfire on the state...
Do we need legislation to set up ratings schemes? Once its rated, selling to minors is illegal already.
No matter how much law is enacted, they still won't be able to enforce the law with anything that approaches what people envision. Grandmothers and family members will still buy games and movies for kids when they shouldn't....
What a gigantic waste of time and money... pfft!
When did Google announce anything before they had a beta you could play with?
So, until Google & Sun work out what they want to do, and Google has played with it, there won't be an announcement... Announcing vaporware as the next savior of the universe is an MS kind of thing to do.
I have faith in the team of Sun and Google to work out how to make the most of 'being against MS' and then execute the plan...
Just by chance, I happened across a sweet deal on the Danger Hiptop II, known as the Sidekick II on T-Mobile in the USA. The camera sucks a bit, but then I didn't want it for that really. It is almost everything that I want in a personal communications device currently.
Yeah, the browser needs some help, and a little more lattitude in usage would be nice, but all things considered, the service and functionality of the Danger device is very cool. You might want to look at that because its got a good service plan too. Don't know what coverage in your area is like, but its suitable here for me, I'm quite happy...
that Nokia is out of ideas? Can't they go down the street to Ikea and get some more?
If this didn't have IEEE all over it, I'd have thought that was a joke? Cyberdyne Inc, HAL?
Let the jokes begin
Remember of course, that IANAL, but it seems to me that copyright law, especially that which upholds legal recourse for such small matters as fair-use is just not what the founders intended, nor is it in the best interest of the population.
I believe that copyright owners have a right to legal protection from those that would blatently copy their works and distribute for a profit. Anything that is no more damaging than a public library is fair game. That means it is not illegal for you to load a DVD to your friend before returning it to the rental place, nor is it illegal to 'loan' your copy to a friend.
Now making tons of copies and selling them at a local market... that's wrong, should be illegal.
Fair-use is not an illegal activity aimed at defauding the copyright owner, and any, *ANY* device or mechanism designed to prohibit your fair use of something you have paid to use is NOT the intent of copyright law.
What we have here is a need to re-educate and moderate the law.
Well, IMHO anyway
Is it really that simple, just wise plotting on the part of IBM? Something tells me that this isn't really over yet... If winning the lawsuit isn't the point, perhaps tenderizing SCO to the point of being ready to sell out is?
I think if IBM owned any remaining IP from SCO it would make an interesting situation.
Given IBM's recent 'play nice with Linux' attitude, that would be very interesting indeed. I don't think that the wounds that IBM got from fighting with Microsoft have ever really healed. With the world of computing changing so much so fast, how would it look if Google/Sun and IBM/Linux were to end up dominating the next 15 years?
Just a thought, or three
It seems to me that its like a teen rattling a gate at the ball park to see if it is locked. While you might do so out of curiosity, or in an attempt to gain unauthorized access, it is still just checking to see if it is locked. If you have a valid ticket in your pocket, accessing through that gate would still be wrong, but checking that it is locked is not.
It does not matter if you have safe cracking tools in the garage at home, if you are simply standing outside the jewelry shop, and check to see if the door is locked or anyone is inside, this doesn't mean that you are attempting to steal diamonds. Sure, he may have had tools on his machine, but that is no different than saying a cop has a gun, and looked like he was trying to break into the store when the door was locked. Things are not always as they appear, and convicting on the basis of intention, especially when it is not overly easy to see the intention, is just wrong.
We have no need of, or room for, thought police in civilized society.
Of course, I may have missed a salient point here, but it just seems wrong to convict without evidence of harm.
In the case of where this seems to happen, like dangerous driving (intoxicated or not) it has been shown that this behavior does lead to accidents, and removing the driver from public roads is a safety measure that does not harm anyone. This is the reason for various lane markings, speed limits, etc.
In this case, there was no speed limits or lane markings, only a locked gate type of guidance. Convicting this man of attempting to steal when there is no blatant evidence is just wrong, and sets a bad precedent in my opinion. Banks don't keep their cash funds out on the sidewalk for a reason. If they did, and it went missing, what exactly would the courts say?
Additionally, it doesn't seem to ring true that a 'security expert' would leave such a trail as to be caught if he was truly trying to break into the system?
So you mean to tell me that people actually pay for HBO? I think HBO is just trying to stop anyone that is intelligent from really finding out what crap they put out on their channels... If the news gets out, they will lose a lot of customers that simply haven't noticed yet.
Hopefully, this news will alert the subscribers that have been too lazy to quit paying for HBO to stop paying for it right now.
Sure, they have a couple of good shows, but you have to pay for 6 channels 24/7 instead of just the 1.5 hours per week that you really want to watch... fsck that billing method.
See, they have lost more revenue, after all this torrent news, I might pay for downloads so I could watch only the programming that interests me, but I'll not pay for anything from HBO from now on, not even a download... WOW, their tactics are working already
I know there are a lot of countries that use the Internet, and as such, rely on the root DNS servers. Those being in the US, paid for by the US, and in fact designed/invented by the US. If the EU/UN want to fracture the internets by using their own root servers, fine, go ahead, but I don't think they are seeing things very clearly. The Internet is not just about pR0n or downloading music files.
... umm lets see... ignoring genocide in Rwanda and Food for Oil... yeah, those are the guys I want to be in charge of the Internet. They put Libya in charge of human rights? Next thing you know, the UN will let China in and put them in charge of censorship on the Internet! About the EU? hmmm Germany and France didn't want to help with the war in Iraq until they could go in and make money from it... Guess that fairly well explains their interest in global matters.
There are governments, and a huge number of businesses that rely on the Internet and its smooth running. If the EU/UN fractures this situation, it will disrupt not only the US businesses, but those businesses in the EU/UN. Damn, the British and EU can't even agree on what to name different cheeses and other such nonsensical things. How in the hell are they going to manage 'The Internet' without screwing the pooch very badly?
The last cooperative efforts from the UN were
The only reason for the UN/EU needing to have control of the root servers is to ensure that they can implement their own version of 'fair' management.... somehow I doubt that it would be anything close to fair. I can see the yearly bill for Internet services now...
From TFA "over time the database will become integrated into the operating system."
When MS integrates Access into Windows, they will have NO customers left... IMHO
I hate to bring down the buzz, but POS teriminals are not the kind of system that you want someone running solitare on. These are single function terminals that are high profile, and like your DVD player or microwave oven, they just have to work, every time, every day, or things get messy.
These types of applications are more suited for embedded closed RTOS software than for any desktop OS. ARM and some of the variants of it support encryption and secure operations, and can easily support the functions required for POS terminals. This would make much more sense than Linux, even if the Linux was stripped down and tuned for security and RT operations. (well, thinking of it, Embedded RTLinux setup might be a good thing too, but desktop Linux distros just are not the thing for this) The article does a good job of explaining why they chose not to use XP embedded.
Think about it, most POS systems just don't have room for a hard drive, so really need to be small and use embedded software, loaded from ROM or FLASH. And Yes, these types of terminals need, and typically do have, remote access functionality. Not often used, but its there, even in those credit card swipe machines. The thing is that its an embedded OS and software, so just is not threatened by hackers and such. That is how it should be. Keeping the OS/applications closed and secure is just one of those "job 1" things for the POS industry.
Seeing a terminal in the local pub running Windows of any kind just makes me cringe! A Treo is capable enough to do the job, just doesn't come with the big fancy touch screen.
Good to see Linux making headway, but worries me none the less that such systems are now becoming off the self, and open to hackers... yikes, well it seems that way with this article.
I need better /. skills? The reason I say its not that expensive is that if you want a security robot (not cute and only on wheels) then be prepared to fork out > $30000.00 USD.