Do these guys have balls or what?
I wish they would just go away. They seem to think that the only reason a person gets online is to download their precious music - illegally. And the demands they want the ISP's to do is ludicrous for example "no servers" does that mean I can't run Linux or Solaris. What defines a server according to the RIAA. It seems that the RIAA lawyers like to through terms around without having much of a clue what it means. And the Impact it will have on the opensource community like limiting bandwidth. I download Linux distros all the time and I checkout CVS content all the time. And listen to Winamp radio. I would be screwed if the RIAA passes what they want and I am sure that I am not alone. The RIAA is still thinking about cash flow without regards to our Internet rights.
This guys are evil and when will the federal government step in and tell these assholes to step off and work with the Internet and stop trying to make it disappear.
You know someone here mentioned the GNOME Mailing Lists http://mail.gnome.org/archives/ an I searched for Eugenia and it seems that she was trying to change Gnome but, the developers were actually writing back to her giving her explanations as to why they could not do things she wanted. Eugenia seems to just bug the krap out of these poor guys and is just pissed off becuase the developers told her to "pack sand" and gave rather goood explanations. All her article is is a freaking rant.
The only good thing that it brought out was the fact that yes we should never forget the end-user when developing. BUT the end user has to realize that they are not going to get every single little thing that is asked for. Gnome is doing an great job for what is being asked of them.
After reading some of her request on Gnome mailing list she seems like a spoiled rotton end user that has never been told no. And after being told NO she is using her position as Editor-in-Chief at http://www.OSNews.com to rant.
First off what a title to this story that seems to elude to Linus giving up on Linux. This is a title I expect on the National inquirer or the Sun.
First off Macintosh hardware is exceptional. Right down to the openboot prom. Linux runs very well on Macs. I wish I could afford one I would put linux on one. And if like Linus I got one for free. I would use it.
OSX did do some good changes like a some Unix, a command line, and the ability to go into console mode, The best change they did was get rid of OS9. Which Apple later admitted sucked. But it did not seem like enough change. I feel the reason they did not do more was because they are trying to maintain tight control of their product. And with that corporate control comes less consumer control.
"I generally despise Apple users. It's like they are asking if you want to be Saved by Jesus when they find out you are a sinful PC user." -B
It's like some kind of techno cult.
It is business as usual. Companies who make lots of money like Linux competitors (Windows, etc...). They will stand at nothing to destroy anything that takes market $hare away from them. Companies are ruthless and will stand at the edge of doing illegal things to destroy others. Linux Distributions out there will have to be just as ruthless (Jugular) if they want to compete with the likes of Microsoft. The Distros out there have to treat the compitetion like an Enemy that will take great pleasure in destroying them.
I think the competition that is out there for Linux stands on shaky ground and hides behind lawyers, money, and marketing hype.
Linux is simply a good OS for anybody who has a need for it.
Linux has more than proven itself in the server market, but to get a bigger audience it needs to establish itself in the desktop market. Application developers need to dumb down apps for Joe average who needs three clicks or less to comprehend what he is doing. But leave the power there for the "Admin types". I have noticed that since the 2.6 kernel and knewer versions of KDE and GNOME the apps seem to be getting better.
Bounce back, Yeah whatever. Where I live at I can work for Dions Pizza at 8 dollars an hour or go to school get a associates degree and work for 8.50 an hour.
This bounce back is limited to certain type of computer jobs in certain areas. The media needs to report some form of BS.
And if there is a bounce back. Every employee should rape the companies for all they are worth.
Work, Save, Bail.
Don't forget the.com.broke days.
Some Opensource some Warez - SoundForge 4.5.
This falls apart becuase the authors credability falls apart. The error was a 7-Zip error not a Firefox error which he rants on about.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/13/wmp_sound_ warez_claim/
It seems to me that the biggest argument this person has is the lack of a digital signature. But you go off and say this: "just because a piece of software is signed (or you have the MD5 hashes for it) doesn't mean it isn't nasty;" There has to be some level of trust that you put in Firefox homepage. For being so paranoid about installing it you spent no time at the Firefox home page learning about the product.
The extension was a problem for you to but you get your extensions from firefox you can read that in the big FAQ link at the extension page titled "How do I get my extension or theme listed?" refer to step 5. -RTFM
As far as the advertisement in the New York Times. The only people that should be mad about this is Microsoft and Microsoft ** employees.
The 7-Zip error is rather amusing because the error is not related to firefox. Yet the author makes it seem like it was Firefox to blame. And the icing on the cake is that 7-Zip is licensed under GNU LGPL. When you downloaded that were you this paranoid. http://www.7-zip.org/
This quote was priceless - The truth comes out from th e msdn.com URL: This is what the "Secure Deployment" part of Microsoft's SD3+C campaign is all about; we design and develop secure software, but we make sure that customers can deploy it securely as well. What I hear: We know we screwed up in the past but were trying to fix it now. We help nonqualified people be administrators.
Another useless sentence: So, at this point in time, installing (and using) Firefox encourages exactly the sort of behaviour we are trying to steer people away from, Who the F*&^ is WE? What are WE trying to stay clear from: Open source software solutions that are free.
Open source code that any one can modify and fix to suite their needs. Don't go there - I know what your thinking. Try to get a trojaned version of Firefox to link from the Firefox site.
Disable the "Flash" specific plugin has to be an option for the next firefox version. Because you can disable most of the plugins from "Tools" - "Options" - "Downloads" - 'Plug ins" Thanks for the feedback - See this is how Open software works.
This article should have been titled. Can Mike and Robert be trusted to do follow up work.
Remember this tasty nugget of joy: Just because you don't see any unpatched security bugs in Bugzilla doesn't mean they don't exist, either. --Really
Slashdot Mirror
Do these guys have balls or what? I wish they would just go away. They seem to think that the only reason a person gets online is to download their precious music - illegally. And the demands they want the ISP's to do is ludicrous for example "no servers" does that mean I can't run Linux or Solaris. What defines a server according to the RIAA. It seems that the RIAA lawyers like to through terms around without having much of a clue what it means. And the Impact it will have on the opensource community like limiting bandwidth. I download Linux distros all the time and I checkout CVS content all the time. And listen to Winamp radio. I would be screwed if the RIAA passes what they want and I am sure that I am not alone. The RIAA is still thinking about cash flow without regards to our Internet rights. This guys are evil and when will the federal government step in and tell these assholes to step off and work with the Internet and stop trying to make it disappear.
You know someone here mentioned the GNOME Mailing Lists http://mail.gnome.org/archives/ an I searched for Eugenia and it seems that she was trying to change Gnome but, the developers were actually writing back to her giving her explanations as to why they could not do things she wanted. Eugenia seems to just bug the krap out of these poor guys and is just pissed off becuase the developers told her to "pack sand" and gave rather goood explanations. All her article is is a freaking rant. The only good thing that it brought out was the fact that yes we should never forget the end-user when developing. BUT the end user has to realize that they are not going to get every single little thing that is asked for. Gnome is doing an great job for what is being asked of them. After reading some of her request on Gnome mailing list she seems like a spoiled rotton end user that has never been told no. And after being told NO she is using her position as Editor-in-Chief at http://www.OSNews.com to rant.
First off what a title to this story that seems to elude to Linus giving up on Linux. This is a title I expect on the National inquirer or the Sun. First off Macintosh hardware is exceptional. Right down to the openboot prom. Linux runs very well on Macs. I wish I could afford one I would put linux on one. And if like Linus I got one for free. I would use it. OSX did do some good changes like a some Unix, a command line, and the ability to go into console mode, The best change they did was get rid of OS9. Which Apple later admitted sucked. But it did not seem like enough change. I feel the reason they did not do more was because they are trying to maintain tight control of their product. And with that corporate control comes less consumer control. "I generally despise Apple users. It's like they are asking if you want to be Saved by Jesus when they find out you are a sinful PC user." -B It's like some kind of techno cult.
Why is Pixar an apple company not using it's own wonderfull machines. Maybe it is cost.
It is business as usual. Companies who make lots of money like Linux competitors (Windows, etc ...). They will stand at nothing to destroy anything that takes market $hare away from them. Companies are ruthless and will stand at the edge of doing illegal things to destroy others. Linux Distributions out there will have to be just as ruthless (Jugular) if they want to compete with the likes of Microsoft. The Distros out there have to treat the compitetion like an Enemy that will take great pleasure in destroying them.
I think the competition that is out there for Linux stands on shaky ground and hides behind lawyers, money, and marketing hype.
Linux is simply a good OS for anybody who has a need for it.
Linux has more than proven itself in the server market, but to get a bigger audience it needs to establish itself in the desktop market. Application developers need to dumb down apps for Joe average who needs three clicks or less to comprehend what he is doing. But leave the power there for the "Admin types". I have noticed that since the 2.6 kernel and knewer versions of KDE and GNOME the apps seem to be getting better.
Bounce back, Yeah whatever. Where I live at I can work for Dions Pizza at 8 dollars an hour or go to school get a associates degree and work for 8.50 an hour. This bounce back is limited to certain type of computer jobs in certain areas. The media needs to report some form of BS. And if there is a bounce back. Every employee should rape the companies for all they are worth. Work, Save, Bail. Don't forget the .com .broke days.
Some Opensource some Warez - SoundForge 4.5. This falls apart becuase the authors credability falls apart. The error was a 7-Zip error not a Firefox error which he rants on about. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/13/wmp_sound_ warez_claim/
It seems to me that the biggest argument this person has is the lack of a digital signature. But you go off and say this:
: .
"just because a piece of software is signed (or you have the MD5 hashes for it) doesn't mean it isn't nasty;"
There has to be some level of trust that you put in Firefox homepage.
For being so paranoid about installing it you spent no time at the Firefox home page learning about the product.
The extension was a problem for you to but you get your extensions from firefox you can read that in the big FAQ link at the extension page titled "How do I get my extension or theme listed?" refer to step 5. -RTFM
As far as the advertisement in the New York Times. The only people that should be mad about this is Microsoft and Microsoft ** employees.
The 7-Zip error is rather amusing because the error is not related to firefox. Yet the author makes it seem like it was Firefox to blame. And the icing on the cake is that 7-Zip is licensed under GNU LGPL.
When you downloaded that were you this paranoid. http://www.7-zip.org/
This quote was priceless - The truth comes out from th e msdn.com URL:
This is what the "Secure Deployment" part of Microsoft's SD3+C campaign is all about; we design and develop secure software, but we make sure that customers can deploy it securely as well.
What I hear
We know we screwed up in the past but were trying to fix it now. We help nonqualified people be administrators
Another useless sentence:
So, at this point in time, installing (and using) Firefox encourages exactly the sort of behaviour we are trying to steer people away from,
Who the F*&^ is WE?
What are WE trying to stay clear from:
Open source software solutions that are free.
Open source code that any one can modify and fix to suite their needs.
Don't go there - I know what your thinking. Try to get a trojaned version of Firefox to link from the Firefox site.
Disable the "Flash" specific plugin has to be an option for the next firefox version. Because you can disable most of the plugins from "Tools" - "Options" - "Downloads" - 'Plug ins"
Thanks for the feedback - See this is how Open software works.
This article should have been titled.
Can Mike and Robert be trusted to do follow up work.
Remember this tasty nugget of joy:
Just because you don't see any unpatched security bugs in Bugzilla doesn't mean they don't exist, either.
--Really