It's been a long time since I've been in Windows land. Can't you manage the software on a bunch of desktops with just Active Directory and a bit of scripting without having to buy extra tools?
In 1998, Apple released QuickTime 3.0. They added a new feature since 2.0, building on RealNetworks' innovations in this area: pop up nag messages informing the software industry that Apple wasn't concerned about the consumer experience of QuickTime anymore. In 2002, Macromedia incorporated video support into Flash, and became web video leader by default.
To put the first two points into concrete terms: Even scrupulous non-pirates will sometimes try a game, by renting it or borrowing it from a friend, and then decide not to buy it. And before even trying a game they'll usually first read some in depth reviews to decide which games are worth it. With portable systems' games' small sizes, and big cheap flash memories, will the pirates pick and choose too, or will they just download every game?
"Insightful"? Here's some insight: For instance, Google Finance lets me easily find three companies with names starting with Iridium, and since the article doesn't give the full name of the company, Iridium Communications Inc., the ticker symbol easily tells me which one they're talking about.
Aside: When the original Iridium went bankrupt, Iridium Satellite LLC bought them out for $25 million, and it's that latter company that's now called Iridium Communications Inc. Getting all that?
The success of the razor-and-blades-type model isn't based on "lock-in" as such; they're changing up the printer product lines more often than you change your shorts, and they're still practically paying you to take one. If you don't want to waste money, estimate what you're going to use in the future, weigh all the options, and do the math.
> I wonder if using hijacked subdomains of legitimate websites is a new trend in malware distribution or just a temporarily solution that won’t be widely adopted by cybercriminals in the long run (like dynamic DNS domains last September).
Well, if my co-workers' research with URL-shortener links is any indication, you can certainly train people in a Pavlovian manner to avoid following links to unknown content.
Sure, asking "Do I have any recourse, legal or otherwise, to stop them from requiring me to install software on my personal machines?" is silly, and "their network - their rules" is something the asker should know (or at least familarize themselves with if they want to continue to use computers in the US).
With that said: - enforcing client security requirements by telling employees "take these measures to protect us, and if you don't, we'll call you up and be very cross", and - requiring full disk encryption on machines that are in the office 0 days a year are signs of an incoherent approach to security.
If they were really concerned about compromised remote machines logging into their webmail system, they wouldn't have one.
The mix of hopeless squares and trolls in the comments there is priceless. I'm not entirely sure if the blog runner understands that their blog is ironic humour, but it doesn't really matter in the end.
I'm not sure what the AC had in mind, but here's some components I picked out haphazardly, from my friendly neighborhood internet retailer's site, for comparison purposes (and not really vetted for compatibility):
CA$57 Apex MI-100 Mini-ITX Case w/ 250W PSU (1x 3.5, 1x 5.25) CA$88 Intel DG41MJ Mini-ITX Motherboard, LGA775 with 1333 FSB support, G41 express chipset, 2x DDR-2, 1 PCI, SATA2, GigE, Audio (Realtek ALC888VC), Video (Intel GMA X4500, VGA and DVI-D ports) CA$185 Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Dual Core Processor LGA775 3.0GHZ Wolfdale 1333FSB 6MB Retail CA$112 OCZ Gold XTC PC2-6400 4GB 2X2GB DDR2-800 CL5-5-5-18 DDR2 240PIN Dual Channel Memory Kit (I'm sure I'd find a much better deal than this if I actually looked) CA$59 Western Digital SE16 500GB SATA2 7200RPM 16MB Cache 8.9MS 3.5IN NCQ Hard Drive OEM 3YR MFR Warranty CA$12 Ground shipping to my door. YMMV, obviously. ----------- CA$515 (~ US$498 ~ 350 Euro)
(target was: 359 Euro ~ US$510 ~ CA$528)
I suspect that the quoted price for the openpc has some kind of VAT included, which would mean that this isn't a fair comparison. (If the CA$528 target was deemed to include the 12% sales taxes that I'd have to pay, then I'd have to squeeze another $44 out of the parts list above. Not trivial: I might have to get rid of the higher end proc or the extra gig of RAM, or the bigger HD, but not all three.)
If the manager is staying late to set an example or even for taskmaster duties, that's one thing (it's not a great situation, but it is what it is).
But when the manager isn't familiar with the technology the devs are using, if the manager is standing around giving bad technical advice, that's a problem no matter what time of day they do it. Either the manager needs some training, needs to spend some time getting up to speed with the help of knowledgable devs, or just needs to settle into a role where giving technical advice isn't needed. If the manager is second guessing their employees technical decisions excessively, even when they realize that they don't know what they're talking about, simply because they feel their butt's on the line so they've got to ask all the questions they can, they should consider the implications for their butt in the scenario where some of their employees get fed up and talk to their boss' boss about getting them some retraining and/or a job change.
Since alienating your userbase isn't enough, after the memos leak and the inflammatory discussions start, make sure to send some 11th hour DMCA requests to widely read net personalities. You wouldn't want your real customers, by which I mean advertisers, to think that the people steering the ship actually understand the dynamics of the Internet.
Good point. I forgot that ultimately what it comes down to is only what the court would require: A fine/settlement? An order to release the source for this tool? I don't think those are a big deal. But what if the court forced some other GPL terms?
Er, that tool doesn't by any chance access anything on a FAT filesystem using the techniques covered by the patent that MS has sued people over, does it?
Obvious reasons: Cargo cult behaviour? A shortage of rational thinking skills ("if we cover our eyes then they won't be able to see us")? Not knowing the difference between copyrights and patents ("tainted", above)? The closest thing to a rational argument I've heard goes to this last point; even though whether you've infringed a patent has nothing to do with whether you know about the patent or not, in certain places courts can award triple damages when a company "willfully" infringes a patent, and so the theory goes, having a copy of the patent sitting in some dude's browser cache when the subpoena comes along might give people the wrong impression (i.e that someone in your company knew that the patent applied to whatever you were doing that the patent holder didn't like and they chose to do it anyway) and that impression could make the case for willful infringement, even without any evidence that someone in the company thought the patent was infringed. And, even though the company can't estimate the number of patents they accidentally infringed, it can't be affected by not reading any patents, or certainly not to the tune of 300%. I don't know what number you have to multiply 0 by to get any given number, but I'm sure it's way less than 3.
While we're on the subject, can anyone think of some reasons why MSFT, the world's (second?) largest software patent holder, would have us believe that a "no looking at patents" policy as a standard industry practice is a sound plan and not a red herring at all?
Slashdot Mirror
"an enterprise-level software management tool"
It's been a long time since I've been in Windows land. Can't you manage the software on a bunch of desktops with just Active Directory and a bit of scripting without having to buy extra tools?
In 1998, Apple released QuickTime 3.0. They added a new feature since 2.0, building on RealNetworks' innovations in this area: pop up nag messages informing the software industry that Apple wasn't concerned about the consumer experience of QuickTime anymore. In 2002, Macromedia incorporated video support into Flash, and became web video leader by default.
I don't understand... Why would the profiles supported by hardware decoders be different on macs than on any other computer using the same GPU?
To put the first two points into concrete terms: Even scrupulous non-pirates will sometimes try a game, by renting it or borrowing it from a friend, and then decide not to buy it. And before even trying a game they'll usually first read some in depth reviews to decide which games are worth it. With portable systems' games' small sizes, and big cheap flash memories, will the pirates pick and choose too, or will they just download every game?
Hey, I wonder: What's the smallest unit of a software bundle you could open source and still get a front page story on Slashdot?
"Insightful"? Here's some insight: For instance, Google Finance lets me easily find three companies with names starting with Iridium, and since the article doesn't give the full name of the company, Iridium Communications Inc., the ticker symbol easily tells me which one they're talking about.
Aside: When the original Iridium went bankrupt, Iridium Satellite LLC bought them out for $25 million, and it's that latter company that's now called Iridium Communications Inc. Getting all that?
The success of the razor-and-blades-type model isn't based on "lock-in" as such; they're changing up the printer product lines more often than you change your shorts, and they're still practically paying you to take one. If you don't want to waste money, estimate what you're going to use in the future, weigh all the options, and do the math.
Is that someone you, AC?
> I wonder if using hijacked subdomains of legitimate websites is a new trend in malware distribution or just a temporarily solution that won’t be widely adopted by cybercriminals in the long run (like dynamic DNS domains last September).
Well, if my co-workers' research with URL-shortener links is any indication, you can certainly train people in a Pavlovian manner to avoid following links to unknown content.
er... Link?
can copyright infringement ever be prosecuted as a crime?
Yes, at least in the United States. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NET_Act
Sure, asking "Do I have any recourse, legal or otherwise, to stop them from requiring me to install software on my personal machines?" is silly, and "their network - their rules" is something the asker should know (or at least familarize themselves with if they want to continue to use computers in the US).
With that said:
- enforcing client security requirements by telling employees "take these measures to protect us, and if you don't, we'll call you up and be very cross", and
- requiring full disk encryption on machines that are in the office 0 days a year
are signs of an incoherent approach to security.
If they were really concerned about compromised remote machines logging into their webmail system, they wouldn't have one.
The mix of hopeless squares and trolls in the comments there is priceless. I'm not entirely sure if the blog runner understands that their blog is ironic humour, but it doesn't really matter in the end.
"smug"? Too self satisfied? Too self satisfied for what? Should it be living up to some kind of greater "web comic purpose"?
You know that 40% of the devices running iPhone OS aren't phones, right?
Here's hoping that the sodomy is only in the metaphorical economic sense =)
I'm not sure what the AC had in mind, but here's some components I picked out haphazardly, from my friendly neighborhood internet retailer's site, for comparison purposes (and not really vetted for compatibility):
CA$57 Apex MI-100 Mini-ITX Case w/ 250W PSU (1x 3.5, 1x 5.25)
CA$88 Intel DG41MJ Mini-ITX Motherboard, LGA775 with 1333 FSB support, G41 express chipset, 2x DDR-2, 1 PCI, SATA2, GigE, Audio (Realtek ALC888VC), Video (Intel GMA X4500, VGA and DVI-D ports)
CA$185 Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Dual Core Processor LGA775 3.0GHZ Wolfdale 1333FSB 6MB Retail
CA$112 OCZ Gold XTC PC2-6400 4GB 2X2GB DDR2-800 CL5-5-5-18 DDR2 240PIN Dual Channel Memory Kit (I'm sure I'd find a much better deal than this if I actually looked)
CA$59 Western Digital SE16 500GB SATA2 7200RPM 16MB Cache 8.9MS 3.5IN NCQ Hard Drive OEM 3YR MFR Warranty
CA$12 Ground shipping to my door. YMMV, obviously.
-----------
CA$515 (~ US$498 ~ 350 Euro)
(target was: 359 Euro ~ US$510 ~ CA$528)
I suspect that the quoted price for the openpc has some kind of VAT included, which would mean that this isn't a fair comparison. (If the CA$528 target was deemed to include the 12% sales taxes that I'd have to pay, then I'd have to squeeze another $44 out of the parts list above. Not trivial: I might have to get rid of the higher end proc or the extra gig of RAM, or the bigger HD, but not all three.)
In BC, the Residential Tenancy Act has a blanket exemption for educational institutions' student/staff housing. That kind of thing isn't doesn't exist everywhere... I vaguely remember some cases about unlawful evictions against Ontario universities back when I lived there decades ago, and I see they have a narrower educational exemption...
Does it really surprise people that universities would need the same kinds of grounds for an eviction as any other landlord?
If the manager is staying late to set an example or even for taskmaster duties, that's one thing (it's not a great situation, but it is what it is).
But when the manager isn't familiar with the technology the devs are using, if the manager is standing around giving bad technical advice, that's a problem no matter what time of day they do it. Either the manager needs some training, needs to spend some time getting up to speed with the help of knowledgable devs, or just needs to settle into a role where giving technical advice isn't needed. If the manager is second guessing their employees technical decisions excessively, even when they realize that they don't know what they're talking about, simply because they feel their butt's on the line so they've got to ask all the questions they can, they should consider the implications for their butt in the scenario where some of their employees get fed up and talk to their boss' boss about getting them some retraining and/or a job change.
Because, customers, when you don't treat 'em right, they're apt to just get up and leave...
You realize we're talking about C here, right?
Since alienating your userbase isn't enough, after the memos leak and the inflammatory discussions start, make sure to send some 11th hour DMCA requests to widely read net personalities. You wouldn't want your real customers, by which I mean advertisers, to think that the people steering the ship actually understand the dynamics of the Internet.
Good point. I forgot that ultimately what it comes down to is only what the court would require: A fine/settlement? An order to release the source for this tool? I don't think those are a big deal. But what if the court forced some other GPL terms?
Er, that tool doesn't by any chance access anything on a FAT filesystem using the techniques covered by the patent that MS has sued people over, does it?
Obvious reasons: Cargo cult behaviour? A shortage of rational thinking skills ("if we cover our eyes then they won't be able to see us")? Not knowing the difference between copyrights and patents ("tainted", above)? The closest thing to a rational argument I've heard goes to this last point; even though whether you've infringed a patent has nothing to do with whether you know about the patent or not, in certain places courts can award triple damages when a company "willfully" infringes a patent, and so the theory goes, having a copy of the patent sitting in some dude's browser cache when the subpoena comes along might give people the wrong impression (i.e that someone in your company knew that the patent applied to whatever you were doing that the patent holder didn't like and they chose to do it anyway) and that impression could make the case for willful infringement, even without any evidence that someone in the company thought the patent was infringed. And, even though the company can't estimate the number of patents they accidentally infringed, it can't be affected by not reading any patents, or certainly not to the tune of 300%. I don't know what number you have to multiply 0 by to get any given number, but I'm sure it's way less than 3.
While we're on the subject, can anyone think of some reasons why MSFT, the world's (second?) largest software patent holder, would have us believe that a "no looking at patents" policy as a standard industry practice is a sound plan and not a red herring at all?
Hehe "spam" spam. =)