it's definitely scumware. Think about it. It's tough to remove, it's installed either sneakily or as a component of something else, and now they want it to serve ads.
If they're so convinced they're not spyware, they can make their product easily removable. Provide an uninstaller, or leave instructions for manual removal if they're too damn lazy.
Not correct. The NTLM hash was designed to overcome the shortcomings of the original LM (LanMan) hash, which was as you describe. Modern cracking generally cracks the LM hash first if it exists (which is far easier), THEN uses the full set of possible passwords that the cracked LM password could be in its original case to see if it matches the LM hash.
Those are great ideas, but they don't really fit into their business model.
- They can't use an OSS engine because if it's GPL'd (like most OSS stuff is), then they have to release the source code. And once they release their source code, they can't make as much profit. This isn't like with Red Hat or Novell where customers are really paying for is support; if the game becomes rree, people will NOT pay for it.
- Making games moddable is nice, and will probably work out fine, but the problem is that most people (tm) won't know much about mods. Not all people who game will have the knowledge to seek out and... mod. Granted, this is less of a concern, as the audience is more technical, and more likely to figure it out.
Illegal? Yeah, probably.
But, then, there are a ton of things that are done these days that piss on the Constitution and this country's laws, so that won't concern them.
Seriously, folks, Microsoft is not running a charity here. What he suggests doing is dirty, scummy, and cheap because it will make them more money. I often agree with Dvorak, and this is definitely the case.
Now, if Microsoft does this, it will inevitably hurt their profits in the long run, but for the short term, it'll boost them. The same thing happens with outsourcing. The same thing happens when customer service is moved to a call center in India where the workers don't speak passable English. The customers of these businesses decide that they want to work with the business that deal with issues themselves.
A very valid point. I personally wouldn't bother (because, most of the time, I'm just buying another one of those recovery CD's that I already have so many of), but someone really low on cash might try it.
Of course, when I wanted to try out the betas for Avalon and Indigo, I just used a "recovery" CD and a spare hard drive and it all worked just fine.
On a side note, why bother paying for Linux? The CD is worth about $.50, and you can go to a variety of sites to find free downloads (assuming you're on broadband).
The most likely course of action will be for them to disable WINE access as quietly as possible. Even though it's for updates to Windows (not Linux), there is still the risk that someone might think like you.
Of course, if they actually thought about how they might prevent piracy, it might occur to them that they should just lower their prices. $100 for a five-ish year old OS? Sorry, I'll just use this recovery CD from my laptop (which works fine most of the time).
Re:Since when did time off cost anyone anything?
on
Star Wars Sickout
·
· Score: 1
The places like that are likely not the ones who figure biggest into that number: the losses for work that didn't really need to get done and therefore wasn't done are probably not going to be foremost in the anticipated "sick-out".
BTW, why bother posting 12 days after the article was released? This topic was dead and gone...
Since when did time off cost anyone anything?
on
Star Wars Sickout
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The fact is, you don't just magically get time off when a new movie comes out. Someone has to cover for you where you work, or your work doesn't get done. If your work doesn't get done, you get fired. How does this add up to billions in lost funds?
HP, of course, associated with these people (read: they pay them to blog). The blog is meant to get them attention, and free advertising. Posting thoughtful comments is really not what they have in mind: they want "HP Goooooooood" comments on the site. Naturally, someone being critical of the company that is hosting such a site will be silenced.
Yes, I know the distinction is mostly a lost cause, but once upon a time people didn't gasp when one said "I'm a hacker".
Anyway, what I was referring to was how hackers who don't actually cause damage get prosecuted; the "white-hat" crowd. I still think that "Black-hat" people should be prosecuted if and when they are caught. Spyware is buried in a EULA, and I am beginning to believe that EULAs are so long because they're intended to hide something in the middle. Seriously - how about a table of contents so we can skip to the relevant stuff?!
Spyware is designed to make peoples' lives more difficult specifically for the greed of those who own these companies. In contrast, white-hat hackers are doing a service to others, and if they cause a small (keyword, small) amount of damage in the process they should not be penalized.
Contrarily, when a corporation with no morals or respect for users releases a spyware program for
research/marketing with illegal methods,
Advertisement,
Data mining, etc.,
no one tends to lift a finger. I salute Spitzer, and hope that this sets some sort of precedent to protect consumers and businesses from these sorts of programs that waste productivity and generally piss people off.
That's more or less what I said (or was it meant?): Linux is for those who want to put time in for their freedom of choice.
You do have a point about recompiling software, but most people don't know anything about compiles (and not all distros have people waiting to redistribute for free).
In truth, no one ever said Linux was for the faint of brain. It's about choice, and those who have no capacity or desire to learn and therefore to choose do not need to run Linux. It's those people that demand that their system work for THEM and not Microsoft or some other company that Linux is for.
Simple. Because it is written in the interest of getting software written, and not in the interest of promoting a public agenda (at least, most of the time - there are exceptions).
Corporate America has more money to spare for advertising, and because they want you to see things their way: rather than letting you configure things with your goals in mind, you have to configure them with DRM, activation, and proprietary formats in mind.
Now, open source comes at things from a different angle - they design things saying, "We'll let you configure it yourself - you get full control." The only problem here is that configuration is often all manual, via cryptic configuration files.
So why does open source work? Simply because it gives the user what the user wants, even though the user has to work more for it. Why does the GPL work? Because it allows software to be free as in speech, but does not force it to be free as in price.
Slashdot Mirror
it's definitely scumware. Think about it. It's tough to remove, it's installed either sneakily or as a component of something else, and now they want it to serve ads. If they're so convinced they're not spyware, they can make their product easily removable. Provide an uninstaller, or leave instructions for manual removal if they're too damn lazy.
Not correct. The NTLM hash was designed to overcome the shortcomings of the original LM (LanMan) hash, which was as you describe. Modern cracking generally cracks the LM hash first if it exists (which is far easier), THEN uses the full set of possible passwords that the cracked LM password could be in its original case to see if it matches the LM hash.
Other than that, you're pretty much dead on.
You mixed that up, man. There's an accent on 'a' and not on 'la'. It's "à la". Yes, I'm a Foreign Language nazi.
And what if I told you my dad was a banker...?
Don't forget 2600.com, the only domain I can think of that has zero letters in it...
No worries... it saves on heating costs.
Those are great ideas, but they don't really fit into their business model. - They can't use an OSS engine because if it's GPL'd (like most OSS stuff is), then they have to release the source code. And once they release their source code, they can't make as much profit. This isn't like with Red Hat or Novell where customers are really paying for is support; if the game becomes rree, people will NOT pay for it. - Making games moddable is nice, and will probably work out fine, but the problem is that most people (tm) won't know much about mods. Not all people who game will have the knowledge to seek out and... mod. Granted, this is less of a concern, as the audience is more technical, and more likely to figure it out.
Illegal? Yeah, probably. But, then, there are a ton of things that are done these days that piss on the Constitution and this country's laws, so that won't concern them.
Seriously, folks, Microsoft is not running a charity here. What he suggests doing is dirty, scummy, and cheap because it will make them more money. I often agree with Dvorak, and this is definitely the case. Now, if Microsoft does this, it will inevitably hurt their profits in the long run, but for the short term, it'll boost them. The same thing happens with outsourcing. The same thing happens when customer service is moved to a call center in India where the workers don't speak passable English. The customers of these businesses decide that they want to work with the business that deal with issues themselves.
GASP! We know that has never worked before, right?
I think that solution stacks are good, especially if you wish to envisioneer web-enabled content through branding front-end e-services.
Well, where I live, DSL is cheaper and better than dial-up. It's true in other areas as well.
A very valid point. I personally wouldn't bother (because, most of the time, I'm just buying another one of those recovery CD's that I already have so many of), but someone really low on cash might try it.
Of course, when I wanted to try out the betas for Avalon and Indigo, I just used a "recovery" CD and a spare hard drive and it all worked just fine.
On a side note, why bother paying for Linux? The CD is worth about $.50, and you can go to a variety of sites to find free downloads (assuming you're on broadband).
The most likely course of action will be for them to disable WINE access as quietly as possible. Even though it's for updates to Windows (not Linux), there is still the risk that someone might think like you.
Of course, if they actually thought about how they might prevent piracy, it might occur to them that they should just lower their prices. $100 for a five-ish year old OS? Sorry, I'll just use this recovery CD from my laptop (which works fine most of the time).
The places like that are likely not the ones who figure biggest into that number: the losses for work that didn't really need to get done and therefore wasn't done are probably not going to be foremost in the anticipated "sick-out".
BTW, why bother posting 12 days after the article was released? This topic was dead and gone...
The fact is, you don't just magically get time off when a new movie comes out. Someone has to cover for you where you work, or your work doesn't get done. If your work doesn't get done, you get fired. How does this add up to billions in lost funds?
HP, of course, associated with these people (read: they pay them to blog). The blog is meant to get them attention, and free advertising. Posting thoughtful comments is really not what they have in mind: they want "HP Goooooooood" comments on the site. Naturally, someone being critical of the company that is hosting such a site will be silenced.
Yes, I know the distinction is mostly a lost cause, but once upon a time people didn't gasp when one said "I'm a hacker". Anyway, what I was referring to was how hackers who don't actually cause damage get prosecuted; the "white-hat" crowd. I still think that "Black-hat" people should be prosecuted if and when they are caught. Spyware is buried in a EULA, and I am beginning to believe that EULAs are so long because they're intended to hide something in the middle. Seriously - how about a table of contents so we can skip to the relevant stuff?! Spyware is designed to make peoples' lives more difficult specifically for the greed of those who own these companies. In contrast, white-hat hackers are doing a service to others, and if they cause a small (keyword, small) amount of damage in the process they should not be penalized.
Whenever a hacker (or cracker, distinction here http://searchwindowssecurity.techtarget.com/tip/1, 289483,sid45_gci998037,00.html.) breaks into corporate networks, he's a CRIMINAL, and his purpose is evil. Even if he does not do anything that damages productivity, purported "loss of funds" can get him imprisoned.
Contrarily, when a corporation with no morals or respect for users releases a spyware program for research/marketing with illegal methods, Advertisement, Data mining, etc., no one tends to lift a finger. I salute Spitzer, and hope that this sets some sort of precedent to protect consumers and businesses from these sorts of programs that waste productivity and generally piss people off.
That's more or less what I said (or was it meant?): Linux is for those who want to put time in for their freedom of choice.
You do have a point about recompiling software, but most people don't know anything about compiles (and not all distros have people waiting to redistribute for free).
In truth, no one ever said Linux was for the faint of brain. It's about choice, and those who have no capacity or desire to learn and therefore to choose do not need to run Linux. It's those people that demand that their system work for THEM and not Microsoft or some other company that Linux is for.
Simple. Because it is written in the interest of getting software written, and not in the interest of promoting a public agenda (at least, most of the time - there are exceptions). Corporate America has more money to spare for advertising, and because they want you to see things their way: rather than letting you configure things with your goals in mind, you have to configure them with DRM, activation, and proprietary formats in mind. Now, open source comes at things from a different angle - they design things saying, "We'll let you configure it yourself - you get full control." The only problem here is that configuration is often all manual, via cryptic configuration files. So why does open source work? Simply because it gives the user what the user wants, even though the user has to work more for it. Why does the GPL work? Because it allows software to be free as in speech, but does not force it to be free as in price.
Spyware, N.: Spyware may be Slowing t3h yu0r PC down!!!1 Downl0ad t3h 0u|2 5py-5w33p3r t0d4Y!
Sources say that the scammers set up a wireless hotspot and commenced hosting a web page on an Apache web server.
The federal government is also considering purchasing from "Üb3r-1337 ch1pz", which is run out of a warehouse in Taiwan.