Dear editors:
If Donald Knuth, Linus Torvalds, or some other famous developer submits an article about something cool they're making, people might care. But nobody cares about some dumbass' broken firefox plugin. The advertisements here are supposed to be the banner ads, not the articles.
Thank you.
You mean I won't be able to watch a ton of crappy tv shows on my AMD machine running Linux? Damn.
I'll just buy a $400 windows machine with Intel for the occasions I want to watch tv or a movie or listen to a new CD. When I'm done, I'll throw it away, since that's what everyone else is doing anyway.
It's probably wrong, but whenever I hear someone talk about how they get malware, I immediately conclude they're clueless on almost any subject having to do with computers.
I've told my parents and sister how they need to run Ad-Aware once a week, and then I installed a free antivirus (AVG) on their box. This was after I decided I had wasted 4 hours cleaning their PC for the last time. Last time I went over to their house, I checked, and all they had were a few tracking cookies. Previously I could count on 200+ "critical objects".
Total cost? $0, a few minutes of installation, and 5 minutes once a week running Ad-Aware.
When I read the article, and saw that an "Internet industry executive" with a PhD and a professor of computer science could not figure out Ad-Aware and a virus checker, I almost laughed. Surely the school has some policy for dealing with malware? Couldn't the professor copy their solution at home? Failing that, I would expect people in their postions to be smart enough to hunt down possible solutions on their own, if it were bothering them that much.
More people have died, but the shuttle program has lasted much, much longer than any of the previous programs and has flown many more times than all the other manned missions combined.
So (# deaths)/(length of program) is lower, and (# deaths)/(# flights) is lower, thus making it safer on average than any of the previous projects.
It's not what WE can do with these players that worries me, it's what other people can do with them that worries me.
This immediately brought to mind very draconian DRM, viruses, spyware, and adware. It's bad enough advertisers try to find everywhere you go on the internet, do they really need to know all the movies people watch also?
What really scares me is when companies start requiring a network connection to watch the movies you buy. Yeah, it'll be cracked, but it's still a huge pain in the ass.
I see a whole lot of bad uses for this, and I already have a computer for all the "good" uses. So when given the choice between a $300 DVD player with all that crap, and a $100 DVD player without, the choice will be obvious.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear editors:
If Donald Knuth, Linus Torvalds, or some other famous developer submits an article about something cool they're making, people might care. But nobody cares about some dumbass' broken firefox plugin. The advertisements here are supposed to be the banner ads, not the articles.
Thank you.
That's like asking C++ and Java, room for both? Or, Chevy and Ford, room for both?
Of course there's room for both, and if there's not, who cares?
You mean I won't be able to watch a ton of crappy tv shows on my AMD machine running Linux? Damn.
I'll just buy a $400 windows machine with Intel for the occasions I want to watch tv or a movie or listen to a new CD. When I'm done, I'll throw it away, since that's what everyone else is doing anyway.
It's probably wrong, but whenever I hear someone talk about how they get malware, I immediately conclude they're clueless on almost any subject having to do with computers.
I've told my parents and sister how they need to run Ad-Aware once a week, and then I installed a free antivirus (AVG) on their box. This was after I decided I had wasted 4 hours cleaning their PC for the last time. Last time I went over to their house, I checked, and all they had were a few tracking cookies. Previously I could count on 200+ "critical objects".
Total cost? $0, a few minutes of installation, and 5 minutes once a week running Ad-Aware.
When I read the article, and saw that an "Internet industry executive" with a PhD and a professor of computer science could not figure out Ad-Aware and a virus checker, I almost laughed. Surely the school has some policy for dealing with malware? Couldn't the professor copy their solution at home? Failing that, I would expect people in their postions to be smart enough to hunt down possible solutions on their own, if it were bothering them that much.
Maybe they should.
Is it too much to ask that people have a clue about something they likely use for a few hours every single day?
Don't forget you need bit torrent and irc clients too.
sigh. Is it really necessary to point it out?
More people have died, but the shuttle program has lasted much, much longer than any of the previous programs and has flown many more times than all the other manned missions combined.
So (# deaths)/(length of program) is lower, and (# deaths)/(# flights) is lower, thus making it safer on average than any of the previous projects.
It's not what WE can do with these players that worries me, it's what other people can do with them that worries me.
This immediately brought to mind very draconian DRM, viruses, spyware, and adware. It's bad enough advertisers try to find everywhere you go on the internet, do they really need to know all the movies people watch also?
What really scares me is when companies start requiring a network connection to watch the movies you buy. Yeah, it'll be cracked, but it's still a huge pain in the ass.
I see a whole lot of bad uses for this, and I already have a computer for all the "good" uses. So when given the choice between a $300 DVD player with all that crap, and a $100 DVD player without, the choice will be obvious.
You're right.
Our government needs to crack down on that sort of thing. Maybe they could get some advice from Iran or China.