Why isn't this considered "hacking"? In a word, money, or better yet, capitalism. Like so many of the other crimes that occur in our society, exploitation (and this is exploitation) for money is in many cases acceptable. Indeed, making money is exactly equal to exploitation, wouldn't you agree?
Take our schools and universities, for example. While some of the more academic colleges and universities around the country have the foresight to educate their students on Linux, Unix, and Mac, most pay outlandish license fees for Microsoft Windows and it's Office Suite because they feel that students will need these skills most when entering the working community. This amounts to a tax being paid by the students to Microsoft. Hence MS is publicly subsidized, and is a monopoly. It's competitors do not enjoy this.
I found this article on WebMd particularly insightful into the "imminent" pandemic. I'm sure that you will agree that all of the publicity surrounding bird flu is an attempt to create a climate of fear in the United States.
Please read what the doctors say in "Bird Flu: 10 Questions, 10 Answers":
http://www.webmd.com/content/article/113/110741.ht m
That's why I switched. It looks much cooler than Windows.
And then of course after I had used Linux for a few months I realized that it's a very powerful operating system as well. And that no one should have to pay to, say, burn a CD. Or pay to, say, store things on a hard disk that I already own.
Internet voting, that is casual voting, convenience voting, and the attitude associated with them are a danger to democracy. Internet voting discourages get in the street voting, unofficial voting with action, voting with solidarity rather than through offical means.
Yes internet voting is a great sign of our capabilities, but the desire for it is a sad sign of ambivalence.
This story ignores any of the adverse affects of global warming on society and focuses purely on the potential profit benefits. It ignores both reality and science. What is it doing here?!?
After all, Sun is a corporation acting in it's own financial interests.
Pardon me for saying so, but that is kind of a stupid question. Why does one have to suspend their belief that DRM is corporate fascist control of art in order to believe Sun is acting correctly in making an open source DRM system?
That's a first at Slashdot that I've noticed, but then I'm pretty new.
Maybe if we want a different future, some other future where people don't seek to use backpack nukes against us, then we ought to not allow our government to act, completely contrary to the public interest, against sovereign nations on behalf of our many beligerent corporations.
Yeah we've got a future to choose, but let's look at it with a little context, and not just imply that the backward jihadists want to kill us "because".
I agree with Perens statement that to the way to counter this attack on open source is through a political approach, rather than agreeing to come up with some pool of open source software.
Even with the ideal pool of open source software, there are already patents that, if enforced, would be crippling.
Lobbying politicians, however, is a joke. Does Perens really think that open source developers can out-lobby even just Microsoft? Bear in mind that lobbying is something that's ongoing, next year your favorite Democrat legislator might be beaten and then the lobbying process starts over again.
I think what we need are some open source developers in government. Seriously!
and not only during the imperialist plundering of other countries such as Iraq.
Our government seeks a permanent position of power with weapons like these, that is there only purpose.
To imply that this sort of weapon is good "for when crowds get rowdy" is to ignore the fact that sometimes it's very good for a crowd to get rowdy, such as when the members of the crowd have been long oppressed.
I really look forward to our future, where nonlethal weaponry keeps us "under control".
A lot of people can live within the radius covered by a municipal wireless service.
For example, if say 30 people use this service, then yeah maybe they should go with a private ISP.
But if say 30,000 people use the service, then perhaps it's worth it.
I'm not going to bother looking at the article, and just made these numbers up to make my point.
Something is fishy here...
That is the important question, and no doubt a the reasoning involved here. The internet is too free according to some.
Media is supposed to be one-sided like the TV. What a new internet could accomplish is another TV generation of nihilists.
From the CNN article:
"The telephone survey of 1,003 likely voters was funded by the Washington-based Cyber Security Industry Alliance...".
Let's put two and two together to get four: these people stand to make a lot of money from such a proposal.
Also note that those surveyed were "likely" voters, a somewhat subjective distinction to say the least.
Also, if these people are likely voters, then they are also likely to be Democrats or Republicans, unable to distinguish between a conflict-of-interest and a propoganda campaign.
My guess goes with Ubuntu!
Check out http://www.distrowatch.com/ on the right side of the page is a list of the top 100 linux distros (by download) right now. At the top of the menu, you can adjust the rankings according so that listings are ranked based on information only from the last week, or month, or 6 months.
I've been watching this list for six months, and Ubuntu is really doing well.
in that list of interested parties. But hey, at least this technology will serve the public interest in that it will provide convenient internet access! What a trade! Our privacy for high speed internet access!
No wait, even better, trade our privacy for high speed internet access we not only pay for already with our taxes, but pay for again by subscribing to companies like Verizon. And pay for again because these filthy corporations aren't taxed as they should be. Only in America.
Linux is improving so fast beyond Windows that we're bickering about loyalties to a product that's free to use, and just one of many.
Windows is toast all, and thanks for Debian for helping that along. But now, what will take Windows out once and for all is the fact that there are 5 new (versions of) linux distros out a week.
MS can't keep up, and that's why we still have no Longhorn, because it's behind us, and will be an embarrassment to the company that only knows how to innovate suing, and lobbying weak governments against the free growth of technology.
From a linux "user":
All I know is that when I tried to install Debian last summer, hearing about how it was the best, installation turned into a nightmare when I was asked from a command-line type interface where the mouse was...Ubuntu is a snap to use. Put it in the drive, easy install, looks great and runs great (except mp3 support).
In the meantime however, I have used MEPIS quite a bit, which is also built on Debian as I understand. It has nearly everything I need already built in.
Regarding the compatibility issue, I don't think it's as important as the usability issue, as in, if I can't install it I can't use it.
Just my take on things.
It's the community that makes linux strong(er), not stubborn alliances to this or that project. It is the public nature of its evolution.
Let Gnome stand on its own, let its merits and demerits be considered, argued even, and you'll find that it is not ridiculous that KDE was chosen over Gnome.
I wouldn't expect MS to open much. Their products are so insecure it would probably be a disaster.
This is a dying company. The only product they innovate now is litigation against creativity.
see "Hellstrom's Hive", by Frank Herbert
on
Exultant
·
· Score: 0
Slashdot Mirror
Why isn't this considered "hacking"? In a word, money, or better yet, capitalism. Like so many of the other crimes that occur in our society, exploitation (and this is exploitation) for money is in many cases acceptable. Indeed, making money is exactly equal to exploitation, wouldn't you agree?
Take our schools and universities, for example. While some of the more academic colleges and universities around the country have the foresight to educate their students on Linux, Unix, and Mac, most pay outlandish license fees for Microsoft Windows and it's Office Suite because they feel that students will need these skills most when entering the working community. This amounts to a tax being paid by the students to Microsoft. Hence MS is publicly subsidized, and is a monopoly. It's competitors do not enjoy this.
I found this article on WebMd particularly insightful into the "imminent" pandemic. I'm sure that you will agree that all of the publicity surrounding bird flu is an attempt to create a climate of fear in the United States. Please read what the doctors say in "Bird Flu: 10 Questions, 10 Answers": http://www.webmd.com/content/article/113/110741.ht m
Strange to see some an obvious piece of propaganda here at Slashdot. I thought that for the most part, Slashdot readers are an intellectual bunch.
That's why I switched. It looks much cooler than Windows. And then of course after I had used Linux for a few months I realized that it's a very powerful operating system as well. And that no one should have to pay to, say, burn a CD. Or pay to, say, store things on a hard disk that I already own.
Internet voting, that is casual voting, convenience voting, and the attitude associated with them are a danger to democracy. Internet voting discourages get in the street voting, unofficial voting with action, voting with solidarity rather than through offical means. Yes internet voting is a great sign of our capabilities, but the desire for it is a sad sign of ambivalence.
This story ignores any of the adverse affects of global warming on society and focuses purely on the potential profit benefits. It ignores both reality and science. What is it doing here?!?
After all, Sun is a corporation acting in it's own financial interests. Pardon me for saying so, but that is kind of a stupid question. Why does one have to suspend their belief that DRM is corporate fascist control of art in order to believe Sun is acting correctly in making an open source DRM system?
That's a first at Slashdot that I've noticed, but then I'm pretty new. Maybe if we want a different future, some other future where people don't seek to use backpack nukes against us, then we ought to not allow our government to act, completely contrary to the public interest, against sovereign nations on behalf of our many beligerent corporations. Yeah we've got a future to choose, but let's look at it with a little context, and not just imply that the backward jihadists want to kill us "because".
I agree with Perens statement that to the way to counter this attack on open source is through a political approach, rather than agreeing to come up with some pool of open source software.
Even with the ideal pool of open source software, there are already patents that, if enforced, would be crippling.
Lobbying politicians, however, is a joke. Does Perens really think that open source developers can out-lobby even just Microsoft? Bear in mind that lobbying is something that's ongoing, next year your favorite Democrat legislator might be beaten and then the lobbying process starts over again.
I think what we need are some open source developers in government. Seriously!
and not only during the imperialist plundering of other countries such as Iraq. Our government seeks a permanent position of power with weapons like these, that is there only purpose. To imply that this sort of weapon is good "for when crowds get rowdy" is to ignore the fact that sometimes it's very good for a crowd to get rowdy, such as when the members of the crowd have been long oppressed. I really look forward to our future, where nonlethal weaponry keeps us "under control".
A lot of people can live within the radius covered by a municipal wireless service. For example, if say 30 people use this service, then yeah maybe they should go with a private ISP. But if say 30,000 people use the service, then perhaps it's worth it. I'm not going to bother looking at the article, and just made these numbers up to make my point. Something is fishy here...
That is the important question, and no doubt a the reasoning involved here. The internet is too free according to some. Media is supposed to be one-sided like the TV. What a new internet could accomplish is another TV generation of nihilists.
From the CNN article: "The telephone survey of 1,003 likely voters was funded by the Washington-based Cyber Security Industry Alliance...". Let's put two and two together to get four: these people stand to make a lot of money from such a proposal. Also note that those surveyed were "likely" voters, a somewhat subjective distinction to say the least. Also, if these people are likely voters, then they are also likely to be Democrats or Republicans, unable to distinguish between a conflict-of-interest and a propoganda campaign.
My guess goes with Ubuntu! Check out http://www.distrowatch.com/ on the right side of the page is a list of the top 100 linux distros (by download) right now. At the top of the menu, you can adjust the rankings according so that listings are ranked based on information only from the last week, or month, or 6 months. I've been watching this list for six months, and Ubuntu is really doing well.
I think that should be higher on the list of innovative technological research regarding automobiles than speech recognition systems.
Police state.
in that list of interested parties. But hey, at least this technology will serve the public interest in that it will provide convenient internet access! What a trade! Our privacy for high speed internet access! No wait, even better, trade our privacy for high speed internet access we not only pay for already with our taxes, but pay for again by subscribing to companies like Verizon. And pay for again because these filthy corporations aren't taxed as they should be. Only in America.
Linux is improving so fast beyond Windows that we're bickering about loyalties to a product that's free to use, and just one of many. Windows is toast all, and thanks for Debian for helping that along. But now, what will take Windows out once and for all is the fact that there are 5 new (versions of) linux distros out a week. MS can't keep up, and that's why we still have no Longhorn, because it's behind us, and will be an embarrassment to the company that only knows how to innovate suing, and lobbying weak governments against the free growth of technology.
From a linux "user": All I know is that when I tried to install Debian last summer, hearing about how it was the best, installation turned into a nightmare when I was asked from a command-line type interface where the mouse was...Ubuntu is a snap to use. Put it in the drive, easy install, looks great and runs great (except mp3 support). In the meantime however, I have used MEPIS quite a bit, which is also built on Debian as I understand. It has nearly everything I need already built in. Regarding the compatibility issue, I don't think it's as important as the usability issue, as in, if I can't install it I can't use it. Just my take on things.
It's the community that makes linux strong(er), not stubborn alliances to this or that project. It is the public nature of its evolution. Let Gnome stand on its own, let its merits and demerits be considered, argued even, and you'll find that it is not ridiculous that KDE was chosen over Gnome.
the best game ever
I wouldn't expect MS to open much. Their products are so insecure it would probably be a disaster. This is a dying company. The only product they innovate now is litigation against creativity.
from a reformed sci fi fan.
In the rush to profit, MS probably didn't comment much of their code, which is why they can't fix it, which is why there are so many viruses.