Precisely. Pretty much everyone I know uses Gaim or Trillian, and my typical family calls for tech support and spyware removal usually involve uninstalling AIM in favor of one of the two.
So people fill out their age as 18 instead of 14. So what? It says in the article snippet right there that someone was going after a 13-year-old, and that's below the current minimum age. What are they going to do, force people to use credit cards to verify their age? MySpace could put the age at 80, and people would say that they're 80. Welcome to the real world.
Not to bob my head, but I'm especially seeing this with Knights of the Old Republic II. It's been out for, what, a good year? And yet gameplay is still plagued with cinematic bugs and a good chunk of the last third of the game was cut completely. The site itself says that there's an ongoing bug where, if you stay in any one area without hitting a cutscene for more than 40 minutes, your game is prone to crashing. Maybe it's just me, but this strikes me as a very "Should've-been-fixed-before-the-release" type of bug.
What makes this more irritating is the fact that once the game's released, developers keep saying "We'll fix it next patch, we'll fix it next patch"...and then the company decides to take the developers off that project and onto another one, since fixing games that're 6 months old won't make them as much money anymore. So these bugs and dropped features never get fixed.
True, but it does say that they tried to do this earlier. The suit was dropped because of a typo or something that made the whole thing moot. So, that having been said, there's a chance they actually have a decent case here. And I always enjoy seeing companies like MS getting shook up a bit. (Not, of course, that I have any expectation of this not settling for a large sum of money out-of-court, but I can dream, can't I?)
In response, Bush finally agrees that the threat against global warming is real. He declares a "War against Heat" and immediately draws up plans to bomb the Bahamas.
...prevent digital attacks on the US and its allies...
Uh, wasn't this what this thing was supposed to do? They failed at defense, so now they're going to offense? Is this going to work any better? Is the US capable of doing anything without making a war out of it?
I'd say that they'll probably have a physical backup, unless the people who make it are really stupid. I wouldn't mind being able to unscrew all the screws on something with a command from a PDA, but I'm not going to use 'em if I can't still take them out with a screwdriver.
Yeah, sure. I'll listen to them as soon as I can send them a memo asking them to start "being fair" with their pricing schemes and monopolistic practices, and they actually listen to it. Until then, forget it.
It may be unlikely, but this is what these companies are arguing for -- "We don't want you messing with our DRM systems, because it might be holding control over your computer/network, and screwing with it might break your computer."
You: "Wait, why would you have control over my computer? I don't want a screw-up with your DRM to mess up my computer!"
Company: "That's why you shouldn't play with it! Our DRM would NEVER break unless you fool around with it. It's completely bug-free and hacker-proof."
You: "Uh..."
And as for it being unlikely, I direct your attention to a certain Sony-distributed rootkit that broke your computer if you tried to remove it on your own...
Re:The best way to secure the root account...
on
Sudo vs. Root
·
· Score: 1
He can't, he left it in his/root folder and forgot the password.
On a more serious note, I'd say Slashdot would be a pretty good indicator of what sites should and shouldn't be linked to. I mean, for the most part, they're news stories or blogs, and most NSFW links are marked as such. You don't see links from Slashdot leading to the back (spyware-rife) end of the internet, because the content on said page isn't interesting enough to warrant a link.
The complaint accuses Google, as the dominant provider of Web searches, of violating KinderStart's constitutional right to free speech by blocking search engine results showing Web site content and other communications.
They have the right to free speech. But here's the thing: Google is not a public forum. Google, as a seperate company, has every right to decide what they do and do not display on their webpage. Kinderstart has every right to go elsewhere and advertise their site. But last time I checked, regulating what privately-owned web pages display don't fall under the first amendment. Otherwise, you'd see a lawsuit every time a post gets deleted on (insert random popular web forum here) for breaking whatever that site's ToS is.
But, of course, it makes for better FUD when you slap a "You broke the first amendment!" sticker on companies.
Could you imagine the implications if they had to turn this data over? Every minor study in the country would be trolling Google for user information. It would all be to "protect the children", of course. Nice to see a judge with a brain stem for the first time in awhile. Of course, no doubt soccer moms and politicians angling for reelection'll be complaining about this for awhile. "Google hates kids and supports child pornography!"
They're taking a good idea and trying to regulate it, as usual.
The idea of making a.xxx extension counts as a good idea.
The forcing of people to abide by it is a bad one. I mean, look at the state of TLDs today. "com" is supposed to be for commercial sites only, but that's not followed in the slightest. Is that what's next? Forcing people without commercial sites to switch to a.net or.org or dot-whatever-else TLD? I call stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Precisely. Pretty much everyone I know uses Gaim or Trillian, and my typical family calls for tech support and spyware removal usually involve uninstalling AIM in favor of one of the two.
So people fill out their age as 18 instead of 14. So what? It says in the article snippet right there that someone was going after a 13-year-old, and that's below the current minimum age. What are they going to do, force people to use credit cards to verify their age? MySpace could put the age at 80, and people would say that they're 80. Welcome to the real world.
Yes, well, if I had mod points I'd give you +1 Overreacting. I guess we can't all get what we want.
I'm putting my money on WinZip. I'm currently running close to even with a couple hundred per with days unregistered and archives opened.
Not to bob my head, but I'm especially seeing this with Knights of the Old Republic II. It's been out for, what, a good year? And yet gameplay is still plagued with cinematic bugs and a good chunk of the last third of the game was cut completely. The site itself says that there's an ongoing bug where, if you stay in any one area without hitting a cutscene for more than 40 minutes, your game is prone to crashing. Maybe it's just me, but this strikes me as a very "Should've-been-fixed-before-the-release" type of bug.
What makes this more irritating is the fact that once the game's released, developers keep saying "We'll fix it next patch, we'll fix it next patch"...and then the company decides to take the developers off that project and onto another one, since fixing games that're 6 months old won't make them as much money anymore. So these bugs and dropped features never get fixed.
True, but it does say that they tried to do this earlier. The suit was dropped because of a typo or something that made the whole thing moot. So, that having been said, there's a chance they actually have a decent case here. And I always enjoy seeing companies like MS getting shook up a bit. (Not, of course, that I have any expectation of this not settling for a large sum of money out-of-court, but I can dream, can't I?)
I'd like to know what the heck kind of laws we have that make this type of operation illegal to do in the US...
But my MP3 collection is horribly important!
Er, threat of global warning. My bad.
In response, Bush finally agrees that the threat against global warming is real. He declares a "War against Heat" and immediately draws up plans to bomb the Bahamas.
...prevent digital attacks on the US and its allies...
Uh, wasn't this what this thing was supposed to do? They failed at defense, so now they're going to offense? Is this going to work any better? Is the US capable of doing anything without making a war out of it?
I'd say that they'll probably have a physical backup, unless the people who make it are really stupid. I wouldn't mind being able to unscrew all the screws on something with a command from a PDA, but I'm not going to use 'em if I can't still take them out with a screwdriver.
Yeah, sure. I'll listen to them as soon as I can send them a memo asking them to start "being fair" with their pricing schemes and monopolistic practices, and they actually listen to it. Until then, forget it.
Actually, I'd be worried if dupes were tagged as such when they're put up; if the editor realizes it's a dupe, why's it up in the first place?
But now it comes in 6 new flavors!
That's an unforseen consequence. The companies will promptly release statements blaming each other for the problem.
Alright, you sign up for a new account with that system, and see how long it takes for someone to get back to you. If ever.
It may be unlikely, but this is what these companies are arguing for -- "We don't want you messing with our DRM systems, because it might be holding control over your computer/network, and screwing with it might break your computer."
You: "Wait, why would you have control over my computer? I don't want a screw-up with your DRM to mess up my computer!"
Company: "That's why you shouldn't play with it! Our DRM would NEVER break unless you fool around with it. It's completely bug-free and hacker-proof."
You: "Uh..."
And as for it being unlikely, I direct your attention to a certain Sony-distributed rootkit that broke your computer if you tried to remove it on your own...
He can't, he left it in his /root folder and forgot the password.
I'm sure we're going to get a bunch of shopping lists, a letter to a neighbor decrying imperialist nations, and a tawdry tale or two.
3 million geeks can't be wrong!
On a more serious note, I'd say Slashdot would be a pretty good indicator of what sites should and shouldn't be linked to. I mean, for the most part, they're news stories or blogs, and most NSFW links are marked as such. You don't see links from Slashdot leading to the back (spyware-rife) end of the internet, because the content on said page isn't interesting enough to warrant a link.
The complaint accuses Google, as the dominant provider of Web searches, of violating KinderStart's constitutional right to free speech by blocking search engine results showing Web site content and other communications.
They have the right to free speech. But here's the thing: Google is not a public forum. Google, as a seperate company, has every right to decide what they do and do not display on their webpage. Kinderstart has every right to go elsewhere and advertise their site. But last time I checked, regulating what privately-owned web pages display don't fall under the first amendment. Otherwise, you'd see a lawsuit every time a post gets deleted on (insert random popular web forum here) for breaking whatever that site's ToS is.
But, of course, it makes for better FUD when you slap a "You broke the first amendment!" sticker on companies.
On the plus side, at least Google's lawyers are getting a workout. Between the whole DoJ thing, the FTC's demand for emails, and that stupid Usenet lawsuit, they're definately earning their pay.
Could you imagine the implications if they had to turn this data over? Every minor study in the country would be trolling Google for user information. It would all be to "protect the children", of course. Nice to see a judge with a brain stem for the first time in awhile. Of course, no doubt soccer moms and politicians angling for reelection'll be complaining about this for awhile. "Google hates kids and supports child pornography!"
I can't wait. Talk about your no-win scenarios.
They're taking a good idea and trying to regulate it, as usual. .xxx extension counts as a good idea. .net or .org or dot-whatever-else TLD? I call stupid.
The idea of making a
The forcing of people to abide by it is a bad one. I mean, look at the state of TLDs today. "com" is supposed to be for commercial sites only, but that's not followed in the slightest. Is that what's next? Forcing people without commercial sites to switch to a
Actually, I wouldn't mind a "dismissing total fucktards" precedent being set by this. Not much chance, but I can dream.