How exactly might Microsoft go about shutting-down a copy of XP if it *doesn't* have WGA installed, and if it *doesn't* connect with microsoft servers (presumably to allow the "kill code" to be sent remotely)? Are we thinking that the original code for XP contained this "kill date" all this time? Or did some other, earlier, update (e.g. SP2) include instructions to self-disable the installation this fall, barring further instructions from the mothership?
Forgive any naïveté, but I don't understand how *not* having a piece of software installed can cause XP to shut itself down, unless it was designed to do so from the start, which seems (to put it lightly) unlikely.
It seems to me the history of NASA is littered with mistakes like this, some of higher magnitude, some of lesser. Maybe I've seen Apollo 13 one too many times, but IMO the startling thing about NASA is NOT the number of mistakes they make, but the amazingly high percentage of those mistakes which are worked-around, or at least contained. Sure, redunancy is a simple enough concept to follow, and can account for some of the obstacles they've overcome. But how many Man-All-Nighters have been used by NASA over the years to fix problems both life-threatening and otherwise?
How they react to mistakes is as important as the mistakes they make. NASA, as an organization, has consistantly proven that if a solution can be found, they will find it--so attacking them on their responses to crises is difficult. Do they make too many mistakes? Maybe. But what organizations can you compare it with? How can we be sure that these kinds of mistakes aren't just indicative of the scope and complexity of their projects?
NASA is chock full of really smart people. That's kind of the point. There are bureaucrats, and sycophants, and, yes, idiots, too; but these guys are the absolute best at what they do. If NASA is stupid, what does that say about the rest of us?
Slashdot Mirror
How exactly might Microsoft go about shutting-down a copy of XP if it *doesn't* have WGA installed, and if it *doesn't* connect with microsoft servers (presumably to allow the "kill code" to be sent remotely)? Are we thinking that the original code for XP contained this "kill date" all this time? Or did some other, earlier, update (e.g. SP2) include instructions to self-disable the installation this fall, barring further instructions from the mothership? Forgive any naïveté, but I don't understand how *not* having a piece of software installed can cause XP to shut itself down, unless it was designed to do so from the start, which seems (to put it lightly) unlikely.
It seems to me the history of NASA is littered with mistakes like this, some of higher magnitude, some of lesser. Maybe I've seen Apollo 13 one too many times, but IMO the startling thing about NASA is NOT the number of mistakes they make, but the amazingly high percentage of those mistakes which are worked-around, or at least contained. Sure, redunancy is a simple enough concept to follow, and can account for some of the obstacles they've overcome. But how many Man-All-Nighters have been used by NASA over the years to fix problems both life-threatening and otherwise?
How they react to mistakes is as important as the mistakes they make. NASA, as an organization, has consistantly proven that if a solution can be found, they will find it--so attacking them on their responses to crises is difficult. Do they make too many mistakes? Maybe. But what organizations can you compare it with? How can we be sure that these kinds of mistakes aren't just indicative of the scope and complexity of their projects?
NASA is chock full of really smart people. That's kind of the point. There are bureaucrats, and sycophants, and, yes, idiots, too; but these guys are the absolute best at what they do. If NASA is stupid, what does that say about the rest of us?