i agree with an earlier post, wikipedia needs some kind of karma system like slashdot, any one with 0 or less karma, their edits are in a queue, 0 - 5, they get queue priority, 5+ auto accepted. something like that would keep a vast majority of the people who are only their to "purify" their own, or someone elses image away from the real fact, out.
There have been alot of articles in wikipedia that have been defaced or changed to falsify information, right now the problems are only fixed after they have happened and the articles locked. are there any plans to increase the security around articles to stop these attacks in the first place?
winamp is still lite, you dont HAVE to install the extra features. you dont HAVE to install the library, you dont HAVE to install the modern skin support,
remove those 2 and your practicaly using winamp 2.9 with alot of bug fixes and speedups... so i dont see what all the complaining and whining is about
GPL and DRM are both the same thing, but at oposite ends of the spectrum, they both force you to do or not do something. GPL forces "openness" to everything it comes near, ie. link to any GPL source or binary from GPL source, you are FORCED to open source your own code that you worked on, thats a removal of your rights. DRM forces access restrictions to whatever it is on, ie. you pay for a cd and you are forced to not be able to play it on your pc, or not be able to put it on your mp3 player, removing your right to be able to listen to it, since you paid for your copy.
I know that all too well, when you come to code something the second time around, it always ends up better, because you have the knowledge from the first time
MS have to test the patch properly to make sure it doesnt break anything else, and they have to make sure it will still work on an infinate amount of combinations of hardware. they cant just do what others do and just stick a temperary plug over the hole, it has to be done and tried and tested properly.
this is bullshit, i cant belive they have been bullied into having to release their source, they own it, they have the right to do whatever they want with it. who is the EU to tell them what they HAVE to do because they dont agree with it being closed.
"untracable" is a myth, anyone who has the money and the know how and the technology to waste on looking up someone down a long line of nodes can do it
win2003 directly uses quite a large percent of windows xp.. and the same with vista. not alot of the old nt 3.1 code is still around, since it was all converted from asm to C for nt4 and then continualy removed/replaced. and then the new driver model in 5.0... nt5.1 directly inherits from nt5 as does nt6
'Also, to have them be seen going out of their way to hurt a competing operating system is not really helpful from an anti-trust perspective.'
Microsoft owns office, if they dont want to continue development for OSX, they dont HAVE to do, its their own choice.. what if azureus stopped supporting osx and linux os's... would that allow azureus to be sued under anti-trust laws?
Slashdot Mirror
i agree with an earlier post, wikipedia needs some kind of karma system like slashdot, any one with 0 or less karma, their edits are in a queue, 0 - 5, they get queue priority, 5+ auto accepted. something like that would keep a vast majority of the people who are only their to "purify" their own, or someone elses image away from the real fact, out.
it only takes 1 step to start a thousand mile walk... is this the first step in stoping companies like this?
if sun give up OOo to a free foundation, does that mean they can FINALY get rid of the last of the java in OOo?
if it is true, what will be bigger? this, or the cure to cancer when it comes around?
There have been alot of articles in wikipedia that have been defaced or changed to falsify information, right now the problems are only fixed after they have happened and the articles locked. are there any plans to increase the security around articles to stop these attacks in the first place?
winamp is still lite, you dont HAVE to install the extra features.
you dont HAVE to install the library,
you dont HAVE to install the modern skin support,
remove those 2 and your practicaly using winamp 2.9 with alot of bug fixes and speedups... so i dont see what all the complaining and whining is about
GPL and DRM are both the same thing, but at oposite ends of the spectrum, they both force you to do or not do something.
GPL forces "openness" to everything it comes near, ie. link to any GPL source or binary from GPL source, you are FORCED to open source your own code that you worked on, thats a removal of your rights.
DRM forces access restrictions to whatever it is on, ie. you pay for a cd and you are forced to not be able to play it on your pc, or not be able to put it on your mp3 player, removing your right to be able to listen to it, since you paid for your copy.
I know that all too well, when you come to code something the second time around, it always ends up better, because you have the knowledge from the first time
I think that was taken out of context too, unless it means dog years
there is NO microsoft code in reactos... read the article on their site first
MS have to test the patch properly to make sure it doesnt break anything else, and they have to make sure it will still work on an infinate amount of combinations of hardware. they cant just do what others do and just stick a temperary plug over the hole, it has to be done and tried and tested properly.
this is bullshit, i cant belive they have been bullied into having to release their source, they own it, they have the right to do whatever they want with it. who is the EU to tell them what they HAVE to do because they dont agree with it being closed.
i wonder if they are still using the 100 million dollar pen that writes in zero grav.. instead of a pencil...
microsoft anounced that SP3 for xp would not be released untill after the release of Vista. so i dont see why we are supprised
This is totaly new information...
if this dark energy is still a theory that hasnt got any solid proof that it exists, how can you know its different now to how it used to be?
"untracable" is a myth, anyone who has the money and the know how and the technology to waste on looking up someone down a long line of nodes can do it
win2003 directly uses quite a large percent of windows xp.. and the same with vista. not alot of the old nt 3.1 code is still around, since it was all converted from asm to C for nt4 and then continualy removed/replaced. and then the new driver model in 5.0... nt5.1 directly inherits from nt5 as does nt6
which is the same core as XP. as windows 2003 is windows xp server edition
hmmn, vista uses the same core as xp, and is expected to NOT have the bugs that no one knew about... some people have all the brains
'Also, to have them be seen going out of their way to hurt a competing operating system is not really helpful from an anti-trust perspective.'
Microsoft owns office, if they dont want to continue development for OSX, they dont HAVE to do, its their own choice.. what if azureus stopped supporting osx and linux os's... would that allow azureus to be sued under anti-trust laws?
Windows Quantum Edition? wonder what minimum requirement for that will be...
by that definition, any one of us could be sued for connecting to any site on the internet...
i would have thought it was Internet Security, since more and more companies are wanting this right now
welcome to last weeks news