What if, rather than just people detained, it were all people either at birth or when they get a license or something? Would that make it better? Then we aren't discriminating against innocent people who just happened to have some bad luck and rather just creating a database that can identify all Americans.
Would this be a little better? Quell all your complaints? Be worse? No difference? I'm curious.
Microsoft has always said that it has no problem with the BSD license (which is what this code is under). They've even suggested it for people looking to develop open-source projects. It's not like the code got in there without their knowledge and now they're going to have to open source windows.
To an extent, the RIAA makes a point (well, except in the case of BitTorrent). All of the others are used for piracy as their primary purpose. Go to Limewire's site and you see how it will automaticly add songs to iTunes for you.
BitTorrent is different. Of course, BitTorrent is a lot less easy to use for piracy. It can't just find files. There has to be a torrent. Yeah, there are torrent search engines, but it isn't the same level of ease.
That's the difference. The level of ease. CD burners allow people to share music, but it is a lot harder than Limewire et al. Xerox machines can copy books, but it takes time, effort and resources. LimeWire et al make it trivial to infringe on copyright and have slim legitimate uses. That's what the Supreme Court saw.
Now, Limewire could be used for legit uses - like sharing songs that artists allow to be shared. But there are better mechanisms for that - like FTP and BitTorrent. Why hide on Limewire when you can put a torrent link on your website? Only if you're doing something illegal and don't want to be found.
The RIAA is being terrible lately, but the opposite is just as bad. Why can't we defend technologies like BitTorrent which are less easy to use for illegal use and easier to use for legitimate uses and have the oppertunity to revolutionize distribution?
Can anyone respond with a real-world legitimate use for Limewire et al that wouldn't be better served by BitTorrent? Or is this just fear that if the RIAA gets its way with services we all acknowledge aren't used legitimately, they'll go after the Xerox machines, CD-burners and BitTorrents of the world (and succeed)?
Am I the only one who things this article is incredibly biased? I mean, Mambo isn't changing it's name. There will still be a Mambo. Joomla! is a project created based off of Mambo by a lot of the Mambo developers, but it isn't the new name of Mambo.
Wait. ..this just in Red Hat Linux changes its name to SUSE (insofar as SUSE was based off RH and so clearly it is just a name change and whatever that Red Hat company continues to do isn't real).
Now, there is a VERY strong argument that Joomla! is where all the big Mambo developers are moving and that it will be more Mambo than Mambo, but the post is libelous because Mambo isn't changing it's name. Mambo is staying around with the Mambo name.
Yes, it is illegal. Apple's agreement on the pre-releases barred people from talking about it and I'm sure they have a provision in there about putting it on non-Apple boxes. In fact, Apple's current license states that you can only install it on an Apple box even though there really aren't other PPC boxes out there.
I know that defending IP on Slashdot is like preaching vegitarianism at McDonalds, but if people agree not to speak and then violate that agreement, they are taking illegal actions. This isn't a moral judgement or anything. I frankly don't care, but someone is violating their agreement and the law.
While I think the state of our patent system is deplorable, companies can't play by rules that don't exist. We need to sit on our congressmen to get them to pass legislation that will allow businesses to be moral while staying afloat. While Google's "Don't Be Evil" has worked well for them, the same thinking has sent many companies to their graves and it's time for a change in our laws.
Capitalism is amoral which is why our laws can't be.
I really doubt that the passwords were ever vulnerable since SpreadFirefox runs on Drupal and I'm fairly certain that Drupal hashes them (MD5) before storing them in the database. Worst case then would be that people got the hashes and could hack them, but it's quite a chore for a fairly unimportant login (it's not like it's my banking data).
Anyone else get creeped out when big commercial sites don't hash passwords (and can therefore recover them)?
Blu Ray discs hold more data. Anyone hearing a run down comparison is going to go with blu ray. Personally, I'm still a bit scared about potentially loosing data because the layer of protection is so small. Of course, I'm sure the comparison didn't say "the protection layer is almost non-existant in blu ray discs".
It might be an unfounded fear, but I won't know that for at least a year after I get blu ray stuff.
While I agree that Apple will do everything in its power to stop people from getting Mac OS X on any non-Apple box, Apple has said that it is fine with people putting Windows on Apple boxes. Even better, applications like VirtualPC will allow users of Apple boxes to run Windows XP with little slowdown since the processor instructions don't need to be translated.
I think by transparent they mean that it runs in OS X windows and looks and feels like an OS X application rather than the speed. Like, with Classic, all of the Apps ran after the Classic environment booted and they used the old Mac OS 9 widgets and windows and were just very seperate from OS X.
Clearly the speed boost comes from the amazing graphics capabilities of the Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900. I mean, the 900 stands for 450 times better than their last integrated system which was numberd 2, right?
The post says how people accept the iTunes DRM and lockin, but there is no way for Netflix to similarly lock people in because you won't own any of the films. I could easily switch to Netflix copycat A and start renting downloads from them since I wouldn't have a library of Netflix stuff since one doesn't keep rentals. DRM lockin only works when you own something.
There are other reasons for choosing Intel too: -Intel delivers new processors on a more regular basis than IBM/Moto's fits and starts. It's not because IBM/Moto are incompetant. It's because Intel makes its money off the fast moving consumer market while IBM and Moto make designs for more of the long haul. Think of SPARC chips. They don't progress at the steady rate that Intel chips do. They progress in larger leaps at longer intervals and Apple has had that same problem with IBM/Moto (and it's really only a problem when selling to consumers). -IBM's ability to deliver. This might be Apple's fault as the article suggests, but even if it is Apple's fault, Apple doesn't want to commit to huge purchases they might not use. Intel offers them the chance to say "we want 100,000 chips" and then a week later say "we need 250,000 more" and get the extra 250k a week after they receive the 100k simply because Intel sells these chips to more than just Apple and so they continue to make them unlike IBM. -Public Perception. I think this is one of the biggest. Using Intel chips lets the avoid the crap that people say against the processors that Apple has used. I'm sure there are a lot of people that go into a store, see a 1.25GHz Mac mini for $500 and then see a 2.8GHz Dell Dimension 3000 with monitor, kb and mouse for $450 (http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/featured_desktop1?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs) and think that Apple's are crap for performance and cost too much. If Apple can sell the same configuration as Dell for $100 more, people can justify the premium while not wondering about performance. I'm one of the most pro-Apple and pro-MHz-myth people out there, but I have a hard time believing that a 1.25GHz G4 is going to compete with an Intel processor over 2.5GHz. -Motherboards. Right now, Apple has to custom build most of their stuff. With Intel, Intel would be more than happy to sell Apple a fully tested, reliable system to install their OS on. No more in house chipsets, motherboards, whatnot. -It's easy/foolproof!!! This is the best reason. Going with Intel makes you like every other manufacturer out there. When they have problems, you do and so your sales don't slump against their's. You don't have to worry about making sure people know your chips are competitive, you don't have to worry about IBM/Moto keeping interest in a market that doesn't make them money, etc. Apple doesn't have all these worries with Intel. The OS is a big enough draw, especially now at a time when Mac OS X is just beautiful and Windows is getting nastier and nastier to run.
Hardly. The fact is that the broweer they are developing doesn't just run on Linux. In fact, Apple's fork of it is obviously for Mac OS X. Not only that, but it could easily be run on any BSD system and I'm sure NetBSD would take well to a handheld - it took well to my toaster;).
Nokia is actually more committing to GTK than anything else since that's what they've decided to use as the widgets with Apple's WebCore.
This is a perfect example of what no one talks about. That it costs more if you aren't going to identify yourself. People have bashed hotel places because they want your info, but if they don't have it, they would need to raise their insurance to cover you skipping on the bill or damaging the place and leaving. The fact is that most people would prefer to fork over their info rather than pay more money.
Maybe we should just be making our society more accessible to people with different preferences. Of course, once you allow people to do these things without sharing their info, they're going to protest the price.
If I steal a $5 object from a store and I get caught, it doesn't cost me $5. There is a penalty above what it would have cost me to purchase it because there is a chance that I won't get caught. In fact, logically the penalty should be the cost of the item times the inverse of the chance of being caught. So, if there is a one in one-thousand chance of getting caught and the cost is $5, the penalty should be $5,000.
Now, I don't think the penalties should be that harsh, but if someone downloads songs illegally, they have to pay more in penalty than someone that purchases songs legally ahead of time just as the criminal who steals an object from the store pays more in restitution than the person who legally purchases it.
Wouldn't it be great if there were two crimes here? The first being the students breaking into the system. The second being that the system was insecure. With so many systems containing our personal information today, doesn't the holder of said personal information have an obligation to keep it secure? I mean, my bank has to make sure that my money is secure and they insure it for $100,000. If someone breaks into the bank, the bank/insurance looses as well as the person robbing the bank (provided they are caught). Here, shouldn't the school have some responsibility? Maybe the school could pay for an identity protection service to monitor the identities of the students there who had their SSNs stolen. That way, the school is paying for their neglagence in protecting personal information by paying a third party to protect students from identity theft.
I want some responsibility from companies. I'm sick of hearing that "people need to be responsible for their actions, well, unless they're wealthy corportations."
Because I'm sure the GPL'd drivers and hardware support won't find its way into the regular Ubuntu distribution and from there into others. I mean, all that good stuff will probably be tied into proprietary HP graphics included in this system. Without the HP logo, the code will just cease to function.
On a nicer note, kudos to HP for at least putting a little effort into Linux - maybe to counteract the $100 million investment from Michael Dell into Red Hat?
Slashdot Mirror
What if, rather than just people detained, it were all people either at birth or when they get a license or something? Would that make it better? Then we aren't discriminating against innocent people who just happened to have some bad luck and rather just creating a database that can identify all Americans.
Would this be a little better? Quell all your complaints? Be worse? No difference? I'm curious.
It would be nice if Ubuntu committed to it seeing as though they've become the 10,000 pound gorilla of Linux distributions.
Note: this isn't anti-Ubuntu. I run Ubuntu.
Microsoft has always said that it has no problem with the BSD license (which is what this code is under). They've even suggested it for people looking to develop open-source projects. It's not like the code got in there without their knowledge and now they're going to have to open source windows.
.formulates a plot.
Hmm. .
I guess I just read the Slashdot blurb and went off that.
To an extent, the RIAA makes a point (well, except in the case of BitTorrent). All of the others are used for piracy as their primary purpose. Go to Limewire's site and you see how it will automaticly add songs to iTunes for you.
BitTorrent is different. Of course, BitTorrent is a lot less easy to use for piracy. It can't just find files. There has to be a torrent. Yeah, there are torrent search engines, but it isn't the same level of ease.
That's the difference. The level of ease. CD burners allow people to share music, but it is a lot harder than Limewire et al. Xerox machines can copy books, but it takes time, effort and resources. LimeWire et al make it trivial to infringe on copyright and have slim legitimate uses. That's what the Supreme Court saw.
Now, Limewire could be used for legit uses - like sharing songs that artists allow to be shared. But there are better mechanisms for that - like FTP and BitTorrent. Why hide on Limewire when you can put a torrent link on your website? Only if you're doing something illegal and don't want to be found.
The RIAA is being terrible lately, but the opposite is just as bad. Why can't we defend technologies like BitTorrent which are less easy to use for illegal use and easier to use for legitimate uses and have the oppertunity to revolutionize distribution?
Can anyone respond with a real-world legitimate use for Limewire et al that wouldn't be better served by BitTorrent? Or is this just fear that if the RIAA gets its way with services we all acknowledge aren't used legitimately, they'll go after the Xerox machines, CD-burners and BitTorrents of the world (and succeed)?
I wonder how this will effect Linus and his sizable patent portfolio.
Am I the only one who things this article is incredibly biased? I mean, Mambo isn't changing it's name. There will still be a Mambo. Joomla! is a project created based off of Mambo by a lot of the Mambo developers, but it isn't the new name of Mambo.
.this just in Red Hat Linux changes its name to SUSE (insofar as SUSE was based off RH and so clearly it is just a name change and whatever that Red Hat company continues to do isn't real).
Wait. .
Now, there is a VERY strong argument that Joomla! is where all the big Mambo developers are moving and that it will be more Mambo than Mambo, but the post is libelous because Mambo isn't changing it's name. Mambo is staying around with the Mambo name.
Yes, it is illegal. Apple's agreement on the pre-releases barred people from talking about it and I'm sure they have a provision in there about putting it on non-Apple boxes. In fact, Apple's current license states that you can only install it on an Apple box even though there really aren't other PPC boxes out there.
I know that defending IP on Slashdot is like preaching vegitarianism at McDonalds, but if people agree not to speak and then violate that agreement, they are taking illegal actions. This isn't a moral judgement or anything. I frankly don't care, but someone is violating their agreement and the law.
While I think the state of our patent system is deplorable, companies can't play by rules that don't exist. We need to sit on our congressmen to get them to pass legislation that will allow businesses to be moral while staying afloat. While Google's "Don't Be Evil" has worked well for them, the same thinking has sent many companies to their graves and it's time for a change in our laws.
Capitalism is amoral which is why our laws can't be.
I really doubt that the passwords were ever vulnerable since SpreadFirefox runs on Drupal and I'm fairly certain that Drupal hashes them (MD5) before storing them in the database. Worst case then would be that people got the hashes and could hack them, but it's quite a chore for a fairly unimportant login (it's not like it's my banking data).
Anyone else get creeped out when big commercial sites don't hash passwords (and can therefore recover them)?
Blu Ray discs hold more data. Anyone hearing a run down comparison is going to go with blu ray. Personally, I'm still a bit scared about potentially loosing data because the layer of protection is so small. Of course, I'm sure the comparison didn't say "the protection layer is almost non-existant in blu ray discs".
It might be an unfounded fear, but I won't know that for at least a year after I get blu ray stuff.
Yeah, it was meant to be funny. Guess I missed the mark.
While I agree that Apple will do everything in its power to stop people from getting Mac OS X on any non-Apple box, Apple has said that it is fine with people putting Windows on Apple boxes. Even better, applications like VirtualPC will allow users of Apple boxes to run Windows XP with little slowdown since the processor instructions don't need to be translated.
I think by transparent they mean that it runs in OS X windows and looks and feels like an OS X application rather than the speed. Like, with Classic, all of the Apps ran after the Classic environment booted and they used the old Mac OS 9 widgets and windows and were just very seperate from OS X.
Clearly the speed boost comes from the amazing graphics capabilities of the Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900. I mean, the 900 stands for 450 times better than their last integrated system which was numberd 2, right?
Wouldn't it create huge binaries if it were creating code for Intel and AMD in one executable that were actually differently optimized code?
The post says how people accept the iTunes DRM and lockin, but there is no way for Netflix to similarly lock people in because you won't own any of the films. I could easily switch to Netflix copycat A and start renting downloads from them since I wouldn't have a library of Netflix stuff since one doesn't keep rentals. DRM lockin only works when you own something.
There are other reasons for choosing Intel too:s .aspx/featured_desktop1?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs) and think that Apple's are crap for performance and cost too much. If Apple can sell the same configuration as Dell for $100 more, people can justify the premium while not wondering about performance. I'm one of the most pro-Apple and pro-MHz-myth people out there, but I have a hard time believing that a 1.25GHz G4 is going to compete with an Intel processor over 2.5GHz.
-Intel delivers new processors on a more regular basis than IBM/Moto's fits and starts. It's not because IBM/Moto are incompetant. It's because Intel makes its money off the fast moving consumer market while IBM and Moto make designs for more of the long haul. Think of SPARC chips. They don't progress at the steady rate that Intel chips do. They progress in larger leaps at longer intervals and Apple has had that same problem with IBM/Moto (and it's really only a problem when selling to consumers).
-IBM's ability to deliver. This might be Apple's fault as the article suggests, but even if it is Apple's fault, Apple doesn't want to commit to huge purchases they might not use. Intel offers them the chance to say "we want 100,000 chips" and then a week later say "we need 250,000 more" and get the extra 250k a week after they receive the 100k simply because Intel sells these chips to more than just Apple and so they continue to make them unlike IBM.
-Public Perception. I think this is one of the biggest. Using Intel chips lets the avoid the crap that people say against the processors that Apple has used. I'm sure there are a lot of people that go into a store, see a 1.25GHz Mac mini for $500 and then see a 2.8GHz Dell Dimension 3000 with monitor, kb and mouse for $450 (http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/feature
-Motherboards. Right now, Apple has to custom build most of their stuff. With Intel, Intel would be more than happy to sell Apple a fully tested, reliable system to install their OS on. No more in house chipsets, motherboards, whatnot.
-It's easy/foolproof!!! This is the best reason. Going with Intel makes you like every other manufacturer out there. When they have problems, you do and so your sales don't slump against their's. You don't have to worry about making sure people know your chips are competitive, you don't have to worry about IBM/Moto keeping interest in a market that doesn't make them money, etc. Apple doesn't have all these worries with Intel. The OS is a big enough draw, especially now at a time when Mac OS X is just beautiful and Windows is getting nastier and nastier to run.
Hardly. The fact is that the broweer they are developing doesn't just run on Linux. In fact, Apple's fork of it is obviously for Mac OS X. Not only that, but it could easily be run on any BSD system and I'm sure NetBSD would take well to a handheld - it took well to my toaster ;).
Nokia is actually more committing to GTK than anything else since that's what they've decided to use as the widgets with Apple's WebCore.
Yeah, and what's with those idiots who want me to learn a foreign language? Damn French people! They're probably behind this too!
This is a perfect example of what no one talks about. That it costs more if you aren't going to identify yourself. People have bashed hotel places because they want your info, but if they don't have it, they would need to raise their insurance to cover you skipping on the bill or damaging the place and leaving. The fact is that most people would prefer to fork over their info rather than pay more money.
Maybe we should just be making our society more accessible to people with different preferences. Of course, once you allow people to do these things without sharing their info, they're going to protest the price.
What course would teach me about minutes squared? Maybe something in the physics department?
If I steal a $5 object from a store and I get caught, it doesn't cost me $5. There is a penalty above what it would have cost me to purchase it because there is a chance that I won't get caught. In fact, logically the penalty should be the cost of the item times the inverse of the chance of being caught. So, if there is a one in one-thousand chance of getting caught and the cost is $5, the penalty should be $5,000.
Now, I don't think the penalties should be that harsh, but if someone downloads songs illegally, they have to pay more in penalty than someone that purchases songs legally ahead of time just as the criminal who steals an object from the store pays more in restitution than the person who legally purchases it.
Wouldn't it be great if there were two crimes here? The first being the students breaking into the system. The second being that the system was insecure. With so many systems containing our personal information today, doesn't the holder of said personal information have an obligation to keep it secure? I mean, my bank has to make sure that my money is secure and they insure it for $100,000. If someone breaks into the bank, the bank/insurance looses as well as the person robbing the bank (provided they are caught). Here, shouldn't the school have some responsibility? Maybe the school could pay for an identity protection service to monitor the identities of the students there who had their SSNs stolen. That way, the school is paying for their neglagence in protecting personal information by paying a third party to protect students from identity theft.
I want some responsibility from companies. I'm sick of hearing that "people need to be responsible for their actions, well, unless they're wealthy corportations."
Because I'm sure the GPL'd drivers and hardware support won't find its way into the regular Ubuntu distribution and from there into others. I mean, all that good stuff will probably be tied into proprietary HP graphics included in this system. Without the HP logo, the code will just cease to function.
On a nicer note, kudos to HP for at least putting a little effort into Linux - maybe to counteract the $100 million investment from Michael Dell into Red Hat?