"...why would the fear of contraband be more intense at the border..."
Because this is one of the only places where they have easy access to your person and you're in a position which makes it difficult to resist. Easy targets.
Anyone with a brain doesn't seriously listen to fairy tale figures anyway. If he [and other religious wackos] wants to remain swathed in some ancient story let him - the rest of us are trying out this thing called 'progress'.
Who is giving SCO the funding to launch all these bullshit lawsuits? Granted it doesn't take a fortune to merely file suit against someone in this tort-filled country (the USA), but after watching some of the folks SCO has been going against (not to mention the "evidence" they've stated so far) it definitely bears the reek of a certain Washington-based manipulator.
As has been said before, why blab on about something noone cares about in a public forum just to mark it private? If anyone really cares, they would have asked you.
Some people have blogs while most have a cry for attention.
Sounds like a good way to deal with the problem. Just set up encryption for all networked transactions, everywhere. Checking email, downloading whatever you wish to, even viewing webpages. Alright, the last one will be more difficult to implement, but scare tactics such as these from the so-called BSA should only push any intelligent (ahhh, there's the rub) users to assert their privacy.
Fuck 'em. Bring a roll of opaque tape of your favorite type and cover up the silly-ass logos on the bags the corporate megalodons dole out to all of the good little consumers. At the very least don't give them free advertising.
Web bugs, per-se, do not have to be 1X1 transparent GIF images. They could very well be some other company's logo, they could be a button, anything. Blocking image grabbing from remote sites would be a good start, though many pages are written to fetch images from afar. I honestly see no useful reason to do so other than to pass some form of information to another site/domain. Browsers or blockers need to have a way to say "No images/pages to be loaded outside of the domain I'm currently viewing."
Rob Pegoraro, senior technology editor for The Washington Post, responds that, "It's not that Linux is special; many software companies see sending out evaluation programs as an extension of marketing. Writers and software makers who buy into this, though, are stupid, because it quickly becomes obvious who's in the tank for a specific company."
Um... "Hey pot! This is Kettle calling... Guess what?!"
I've never read any Washington Post reviews (do they even review software?), so this may or may not apply to them, but considering that ZD has been seriously in bed with M$ for a number of years, their story on this can be safely dismissed. The Tucows article bears slightly more significance. With Linux being as cheap as it is for those who know where to look, one should look to more expensive software packages for the more skewed review. Also considering the easy excitability of the feverent gaming crowd, this seems to be a breeding ground for corrupted reviews.
What say we shift this from a music CD to something just as tangible... a book? Does it fly in the face of copyright and 'fair use' to loan that book to a friend to read? What's the difference?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the test of the M$ box have 1600 requested connections, while the Linux box received 4200? I hate M$ as much as the next, but wouldn't this make a difference?
I won't get into the software side of things, for that would be a one-way road to futility... However, as far as M$'s "hardware" goes, I must ask myself "Why the hell bother re-designing the mouse when one could simply change the code so that holding down the middle button and moving the mouse up or down activates scrolling?" (see Zircon for one example) Would be nice if all applications were written in such a manner. And as for the "natural" [wrist-breaker] keyboards: No. A long time ago in typing class one of the first things taught to us was the basic ergonomics of sittng in front of a keyboard and using it. If folks remembered, or ever bothered to learn that stuff, the problem would solve itself.
Maybe, just maybe, if enough people flat-out dare Unisys to attempt enforcement of their claims it would cause such a flood of investigation and potential lawsuits as to be completely unfeasible on their part to warrant pursuit. Might even shed light on some of the absurdity surrounding the whole controversy.
I'm not suggesting a web-wide movement be started... or am I?
Slashdot Mirror
"...why would the fear of contraband be more intense at the border..."
Because this is one of the only places where they have easy access to your person and you're in a position which makes it difficult to resist. Easy targets.
Anyone with a brain doesn't seriously listen to fairy tale figures anyway. If he [and other religious wackos] wants to remain swathed in some ancient story let him - the rest of us are trying out this thing called 'progress'.
Xenu?
This one comes to mind, brought fresh today: Sometimes what's right isn't as important as what's profitable.
Who is giving SCO the funding to launch all these bullshit lawsuits? Granted it doesn't take a fortune to merely file suit against someone in this tort-filled country (the USA), but after watching some of the folks SCO has been going against (not to mention the "evidence" they've stated so far) it definitely bears the reek of a certain Washington-based manipulator.
"No sir, I don't like it!"
What the HELL that pattern of dots in Underworld was all about...
Apparently due to some bug in Windows the "0" was left off after the "5" in the percentage report.
It's 50%, duh.
As has been said before, why blab on about something noone cares about in a public forum just to mark it private?
If anyone really cares, they would have asked you.
Some people have blogs while most have a cry for attention.
Sounds like a good way to deal with the problem. Just set up encryption for all networked transactions, everywhere. Checking email, downloading whatever you wish to, even viewing webpages. Alright, the last one will be more difficult to implement, but scare tactics such as these from the so-called BSA should only push any intelligent (ahhh, there's the rub) users to assert their privacy.
Take it or leave it.
Fuck 'em. Bring a roll of opaque tape of your favorite type and cover up the silly-ass logos on the bags the corporate megalodons dole out to all of the good little consumers. At the very least don't give them free advertising.
Web bugs, per-se, do not have to be 1X1 transparent GIF images. They could very well be some other company's logo, they could be a button, anything. Blocking image grabbing from remote sites would be a good start, though many pages are written to fetch images from afar. I honestly see no useful reason to do so other than to pass some form of information to another site/domain. Browsers or blockers need to have a way to say "No images/pages to be loaded outside of the domain I'm currently viewing."
Yah yah.
Rob Pegoraro, senior technology editor for The Washington Post,
responds that, "It's not that Linux is special; many software
companies see sending out evaluation programs as an extension of
marketing. Writers and software makers who buy into this, though, are
stupid, because it quickly becomes obvious who's in the tank for a
specific company."
Um... "Hey pot! This is Kettle calling... Guess what?!"
I've never read any Washington Post reviews (do they even review software?), so this may or may not apply to them, but considering that ZD has been seriously in bed with M$ for a number of years, their story on this can be safely dismissed. The Tucows article bears slightly more significance. With Linux being as cheap as it is for those who know where to look, one should look to more expensive software packages for the more skewed review. Also considering the easy excitability of the feverent gaming crowd, this seems to be a breeding ground for corrupted reviews.
What say we shift this from a music CD to something just as tangible... a book? Does it fly in the face of copyright and 'fair use' to loan that book to a friend to read? What's the difference?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the test of the M$ box have 1600 requested connections, while the Linux box received 4200?
I hate M$ as much as the next, but wouldn't this make a difference?
I won't get into the software side of things, for that would be a one-way road to futility...
However, as far as M$'s "hardware" goes, I must ask myself "Why the hell bother re-designing the mouse when one could simply change the code so that holding down the middle button and moving the mouse up or down activates scrolling?" (see Zircon for one example) Would be nice if all applications were written in such a manner. And as for the "natural" [wrist-breaker] keyboards: No. A long time ago in typing class one of the first things taught to us was the basic ergonomics of sittng in front of a keyboard and using it. If folks remembered, or ever bothered to learn that stuff, the problem would solve itself.
Enough of this off-topic banter though!
Maybe, just maybe, if enough people flat-out dare Unisys to attempt enforcement of their claims it would cause such a flood of investigation and potential lawsuits as to be completely unfeasible on their part to warrant pursuit. Might even shed light on some of the absurdity surrounding the whole controversy.
I'm not suggesting a web-wide movement be started... or am I?
Something to think about.
- Wolf