We don't really need to have decisions that benefit Linux specificially, as you said. I think the decision should include at least the following.
- All agreements and contracts between MS and computer manufacturers should be declared null and void. The court should force Microsoft to enter into a fair agreement with PC vendors that does not force them to make users pay a "Windows tax" if they do not want Windows preinstalled on their new CD.
- The court should enforce that users of MS operating systems should be allowed to EASILY change or remove any default software component not needed for regular OS operation. This includes Internet Explorer, Virtual Machines (ie Java), Windows Media Player, firewalling software, etc.
- Microsoft software should be changed so that it does not "trick" users into signing up for features and services that they don't actually need, such as Passport.
- By default, all "net reporting" by Microsoft Software to MS should be turned OFF. Windows XP
activation codes should be disabled.
- Microsoft should be forced to open all of their protocols that are essential for connectivity between Windows and non-Windows machines.
This will prevent the "TCP/MS" situation that was rumored a few months ago.
I'm not an expert on the DVD format, but it seems to me that most DVDs are both a piece of software, and a film.
Of course, from the legal notification on the beginning of the DVD (FBI Warning), it seems that the movie companies are claiming that they are films. No end user lisence agreement, just the same FBI warning one would see on a VHS.
My 2 cents:
I think since they are _primarily_ used for viewing movies, they should legally be treated as films, with the exception of DVD-based "games" (such as the DVD version of Dragon's Lair).
And as far as other programs on the disc that require a PC to play (such as the infamous stuff on the Powerpuff Girls disc), there should be a separate lisence for those individually, as not to confuse those with the actual film content.
Of course, I'm sure that movie companies want it "both ways," so that when they bust some poor 14 year old for using DeCSS to watch an out of region DVD, they can charge him with video piracy laws AND software piracy laws, and make sure he gets twice as much time in ass-pounding federal prison.
I'm sure that Slackware will always have a place. I know plenty of hardcore Slackware users, and I don't think they have any intention on giving it up.
We don't hear much about Slackware very often, that is true. In the last couple of years we've seen Linux IPOs, the domination of Red Hat, and many other flashy distros with neat logos and nice web sites (Corel, Mandrake, and so forth). Slackware has kinda stayed in the background of the Linux world, so to speak.
It seems to me that media and advertising companies want to take some of the risk out of their business by forcing us to watch ads.
People have been skipping ads, not only via VCRs, Tivos, and other timeshifting devices, but by flipping channels and leaving, for years.
I thought it was an accepted fact that advertisers are gambling that you will see an ad, and that the ad will have an effect on your buying patterns.
What next, will media corporations sue us if we don't buy advertiser's products?
That ends up costing a lot, and that money, IMO, is better spent in more memory or better hardware.
Of course, to each his own... a glowing box is kinda cool in its own way.
I tried BeOS on the side for a little while some time ago, and I found that I liked it quite a bit as a single user desktop operating system. Unfortunately, I couldn't seem to find much software I really liked for it.
BeOS could become the platform of choice for kick ass Open Source media software if it were to suddenly be seen as a great desktop OS that is easy to use for the common user, that is ALSO open source.
Code snippits are beneficial, so long as companies like Microsoft promptly provide security updates. I think that examples of attacks provide sysadmins and coders insight into how these holes in security come about, and give software authors an opportunity to think about what holes they might inadvertantly be putting in their software.
Of course, MS just wants to skirt responsibility for negligance on their part.
I've said it once, and I'll say it again...
on
RIAA Wants Right To Hack
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Tell everyone you know to vote out incumbants in Congress. The fact that the RIAA even thinks that they can get crap like passed into law shows that they are well on their way to totally owning Congress.
Seriously, all these 3D games are great and all, but nothing beats pulling out the Super Nintendo and playing the 16-Bit Final Fantasy games, or pulling out the Genesis and playing some Sonic.
People forget what made these games great when they start focusing on making the next 3D Engine.
It ultimately wasn't the graphics.
...They feel that there is a serious possibility they won't be re-elected for another term. Considering that generally, incumbants will win more often than not, there is no reason for them to listen to a thing you say.
Maybe if more people wrote, they would start to care. Or if people clued in and started voting these longtime power drunken idiots out of office, they would realize they are supposed to work for the general public, not screw them over.
Installed it under Mozilla 0.9.4. The toolbar shows up, but the gestures don't seem to be working no matter what I do. Hmn. Am I doing the gestures wrong? Anyone else having the problem?
They are such a great idea that I'm sure that this will be lobbied against by big corps like AOL/Time Warner and eventually be likened to terrorism SOMEHOW if they ever catch on.
Sorry if I'm pessemistic, but at the rate things are going, I have no reason to believe these won't be made illegal in the near future.
Remember you gotta teach him how to use his non-state sponsored toaster, as well. Using unlisenced toast (patent #1234354325432437432) in a sponsored toaster will be considered a terrorist offense, punishable by beheading.
And it will probably be illegal to even have a bible.
DefTonez Protection Inc. announced its new copy protection scheme for compact discs, which they claim is uncrackable and vastly superior to the protection schemes of SunnComm and other competitors.
DefTonez scheme is simple. They turn all of the tracks on a CD into static garbage. This makes it impossible for hackers to aquire listenable songs on their computers and distribute them online. In fact, this even prevents people from recording onto tapes or other media directly, as the sound waves themselves are modified.
DefTonez CEO, Maximillion Profitz, describes his technology as being designed for 99% of all music consumers. "Most people probably only listen to one song on the CD anyway, and are too hard of hearing from listening to all that heavy metal crap to tell the difference between static and the crappy Backdoor Boys stuff they are used to listening to."
When inquired about those who complain about the music being "defective," Profitz replied, "These people are not in the majority of 99% of all listeners. These people who complain about 'not being able to listen to the music' are nothing more than social ingrates who want a free ride. Our lawyers are already using the DMCA to make sure these people get 5 to 20 in ass pounding federal prison. Any responsible American knows that artists would never take the risk of allowing people to actually let people have a copy of their music that would allow them to play it in public, where many people who have not paid lisencing fees might hear it."
When asked if consumers would seriously spend $20 on a CD they couldn't listen to, Profitz answered, "People have been shelling out $20 on Michael Jackson, Prince, and other crappy CDs. Why should this be any different to them?"
DefTonez copy protection scheme will be featured in Britney Spears new album to be released later this month entitled, "You're CRAZY if you think my rack is real."
Lets see... add banners on top or bottom of a page are tolerable. Popups are annoying, but these new "force you to view to see the next page" ones are not tolerable.
If a company doesn't value me as anything but a mindless consumer, I'm not going to buy anything from them. If I wanted to be forced to watch ads, I'd watch live television.
The first thing I do when I buy a new CD is to rip it onto my PC and then put the CD into my CD case in my car trunk. I usually listen to my CDs in the car, and MP3 rips of CDs I own in at home when working at my PC. I also use CDs (either originals, or CDs full of MP3s) when listening to music on my laptop, since I don't have the drive space to store all those MP3s on that machine. That is my personal listening practice. I believe I have the protection of "fair use" when I do such a thing.
I only used Napster (and other such MP3 services and so forth) to aquire music that was impossible to find in stores, thus buy, or to download music from artists that had said they supported their fans sharing music in that manner.
Last year I spent >$200 on CDs. The RIAA certainly made money off of me. However, now the RIAA wants to curtail my ability of fair use? Naturally, I'll be less inclined to buy CDs I can't use in all of my players. Not to mention that I consider these CDs that are "protected" to be defective. Of course, I might be inclined to buy again if I can have a tool to bypass their schemes (which will more than likely be illegal under the DMCA).
Case in point. I don't want to buy CDs that are defective (either intentionally or not). RIAA is losing my business by curtailing my ability to listen to my CD in the format I choose.
The only big thing lacking on it was a lighted screen, from my POV, and this guy solved the problem. I'm very interested in this hardware hack for my own GBA.
Slashdot Mirror
- All agreements and contracts between MS and computer manufacturers should be declared null and void. The court should force Microsoft to enter into a fair agreement with PC vendors that does not force them to make users pay a "Windows tax" if they do not want Windows preinstalled on their new CD.
- The court should enforce that users of MS operating systems should be allowed to EASILY change or remove any default software component not needed for regular OS operation. This includes Internet Explorer, Virtual Machines (ie Java), Windows Media Player, firewalling software, etc.
- Microsoft software should be changed so that it does not "trick" users into signing up for features and services that they don't actually need, such as Passport.
- By default, all "net reporting" by Microsoft Software to MS should be turned OFF. Windows XP
activation codes should be disabled.
- Microsoft should be forced to open all of their protocols that are essential for connectivity between Windows and non-Windows machines.
This will prevent the "TCP/MS" situation that was rumored a few months ago.
Of course, from the legal notification on the beginning of the DVD (FBI Warning), it seems that the movie companies are claiming that they are films. No end user lisence agreement, just the same FBI warning one would see on a VHS.
My 2 cents:
I think since they are _primarily_ used for viewing movies, they should legally be treated as films, with the exception of DVD-based "games" (such as the DVD version of Dragon's Lair).
And as far as other programs on the disc that require a PC to play (such as the infamous stuff on the Powerpuff Girls disc), there should be a separate lisence for those individually, as not to confuse those with the actual film content.
Of course, I'm sure that movie companies want it "both ways," so that when they bust some poor 14 year old for using DeCSS to watch an out of region DVD, they can charge him with video piracy laws AND software piracy laws, and make sure he gets twice as much time in ass-pounding federal prison.
We don't hear much about Slackware very often, that is true. In the last couple of years we've seen Linux IPOs, the domination of Red Hat, and many other flashy distros with neat logos and nice web sites (Corel, Mandrake, and so forth). Slackware has kinda stayed in the background of the Linux world, so to speak.
People have been skipping ads, not only via VCRs, Tivos, and other timeshifting devices, but by flipping channels and leaving, for years.
I thought it was an accepted fact that advertisers are gambling that you will see an ad, and that the ad will have an effect on your buying patterns.
What next, will media corporations sue us if we don't buy advertiser's products?
That ends up costing a lot, and that money, IMO, is better spent in more memory or better hardware.
Of course, to each his own... a glowing box is kinda cool in its own way.
Google works so well for me that I'd have no problem paying a few extra bucks to use it, even if they kept the ads in their current form intact.
BeOS could become the platform of choice for kick ass Open Source media software if it were to suddenly be seen as a great desktop OS that is easy to use for the common user, that is ALSO open source.
Of course, MS just wants to skirt responsibility for negligance on their part.
Tell everyone you know to vote out incumbants in Congress. The fact that the RIAA even thinks that they can get crap like passed into law shows that they are well on their way to totally owning Congress.
People forget what made these games great when they start focusing on making the next 3D Engine.
It ultimately wasn't the graphics.
Don't come wining to me when you get 20 to Life in ass-pounding federal prison for forgetting your National ID Card on your coffee table.
Vote these jokers out while we still can vote.
Maybe if more people wrote, they would start to care. Or if people clued in and started voting these longtime power drunken idiots out of office, they would realize they are supposed to work for the general public, not screw them over.
Installed it under Mozilla 0.9.4. The toolbar shows up, but the gestures don't seem to be working no matter what I do. Hmn. Am I doing the gestures wrong? Anyone else having the problem?
'Nuff said.
Just look at this article...
They are such a great idea that I'm sure that this will be lobbied against by big corps like AOL/Time Warner and eventually be likened to terrorism SOMEHOW if they ever catch on.
Sorry if I'm pessemistic, but at the rate things are going, I have no reason to believe these won't be made illegal in the near future.
And it will probably be illegal to even have a bible.
DefTonez scheme is simple. They turn all of the tracks on a CD into static garbage. This makes it impossible for hackers to aquire listenable songs on their computers and distribute them online. In fact, this even prevents people from recording onto tapes or other media directly, as the sound waves themselves are modified.
DefTonez CEO, Maximillion Profitz, describes his technology as being designed for 99% of all music consumers. "Most people probably only listen to one song on the CD anyway, and are too hard of hearing from listening to all that heavy metal crap to tell the difference between static and the crappy Backdoor Boys stuff they are used to listening to."
When inquired about those who complain about the music being "defective," Profitz replied, "These people are not in the majority of 99% of all listeners. These people who complain about 'not being able to listen to the music' are nothing more than social ingrates who want a free ride. Our lawyers are already using the DMCA to make sure these people get 5 to 20 in ass pounding federal prison. Any responsible American knows that artists would never take the risk of allowing people to actually let people have a copy of their music that would allow them to play it in public, where many people who have not paid lisencing fees might hear it."
When asked if consumers would seriously spend $20 on a CD they couldn't listen to, Profitz answered, "People have been shelling out $20 on Michael Jackson, Prince, and other crappy CDs. Why should this be any different to them?"
DefTonez copy protection scheme will be featured in Britney Spears new album to be released later this month entitled, "You're CRAZY if you think my rack is real."
If a company doesn't value me as anything but a mindless consumer, I'm not going to buy anything from them. If I wanted to be forced to watch ads, I'd watch live television.
Not even in the days of Kirk was the psuedo-pr0n as bad as it was in Voyager. Bet they'll follow suit with the Vulcan chick.
I only used Napster (and other such MP3 services and so forth) to aquire music that was impossible to find in stores, thus buy, or to download music from artists that had said they supported their fans sharing music in that manner.
Last year I spent >$200 on CDs. The RIAA certainly made money off of me. However, now the RIAA wants to curtail my ability of fair use? Naturally, I'll be less inclined to buy CDs I can't use in all of my players. Not to mention that I consider these CDs that are "protected" to be defective. Of course, I might be inclined to buy again if I can have a tool to bypass their schemes (which will more than likely be illegal under the DMCA).
Case in point. I don't want to buy CDs that are defective (either intentionally or not). RIAA is losing my business by curtailing my ability to listen to my CD in the format I choose.
The only big thing lacking on it was a lighted screen, from my POV, and this guy solved the problem. I'm very interested in this hardware hack for my own GBA.
Why exactly are military sites necessary to the national security of the United States accessible over the internet in the first place?
While rapists and perpetrators of other violent crimes that do physical damage to others get off easy. God Bless America!