Whoa, careful now. Being associated with the RIAA is a very serious matter. You're better off being associated with Al Qaida than them. Try just asking - bin.laid.in.afghanistan@alqaida.com - he apparently has lots of money.
Funny that Bin Ladin put it that way too in one of his videos.
To their credit, the Americans originally elected the hard-partying owner of a sports team, assuming he'd coast through the great economy, maybe cut the size of government like their party keeps promising, and generally cheer up the country a little while praying on Sundays. Bitch was, they didn't realize he had family grudge with Saddam to settle, and a slightly different take on the constitution than everyone else in the country. No George, it isn't toilet paper, put it back.
Being Canadian, I'm glad to see our courts erring on the side of citizens rights. That particular case was about the government arbitrarily changing the rules for getting a passport, not so much about him being a security risk.
The passport thing in England is insane though. The pity there is that the outgoing government will gather a butt load of data before it booted out, and the next government scraps the plan. At really, the data will be on the citizens that it doesn't need to look at, simply because the ones that will sign on early are the respectable, conservative types that are generally clean or have enough clout to hide their nefarious dealings. The criminals and terrorists will simply wait for the current government to be voted out, the new government will scrap it, they won't have to sign on to get the passports. The incoming party will, of course, keep the data and use it.
No, they get slammed for making everyone need it in the first place by making their OS's so insecure.
MS puts one in and gets slammed for trying to 'squeeze' out the big AV players.
No, they get slammed for trying to lock out competitors (again)
If MS makes their AV great than they get sued by Norton and McAfee.
If it ever happens that they make something "great", we'll see what happens. We haven't had enough experience of that happening yet to say.
If MS makes their AV 'average' or poor they get slammed for being stupid and incompetant.
Can't argue about that. Seems to be the thing to do though, when they play it up as being all you'll ever need and it doesn't cut it. And when it comes to security and AV, there is no praise for average or poor, especially when you get infected and lose everything because you trusted them.
There's no evidence that MS stole any code from Linux or any reasonable explanation as to why they'd want to.
Evidence, no. but this is M$ we're talking about, and they haven't exactly shown that they're the epitome of morals and ethics. I have no doubt they've at least perused (and continue to do so) the code base of the majority of successful open source projects and picked some cherries, both in code and in concepts.
Sensationalist yes, but no more than for the other sites that have done the same thing. It shows that the company that has harped on how good their new security is has a long way to go. And, on a more basic level, also shows that they just don't "get it" yet.
No, they forgot to hit the "Yes" button when it asked them if they really wanted to run the backup.
Re:Can Linux Virtualization Get Any More Fragmente
on
Virtualbox Goes OSS
·
· Score: 1
I believe the word you are looking for is "competition". It works in the open source world as well as the private business to encourage advancement. As well, there are many possible approaches to something like this, so we get to see how they each work.
Would you prefer that there was only a single vendor/group working on this instead?
I agree absolutely, it was almost certainly a mistake, incompetence, or freak accident. That terrorism was mentioned or considered is what riled me up. AK-47's are good weapons, but their range is a bit short.
China was testing a laser powerful enough to disable satellites not too long ago though...
If anyone actually did something to kill the satellite, there is a list of countries that I would suspect long before looking at terrorists. Countries like China, Russia, etc., have greater reason, not to mention resources, to damage an orbiting satellite.
Why is always terrorists that are the culprits when something goes wrong? The nations that used espionage before the "War On Terror" are still there, and still have vested interest in denying the US the ability to spy on them.
It got to the point where it was no longer worth my time. $150 for Windows MCE, and $40 for the NVIDIA mpeg encoder and I was up and running with everything working within a few hours
Problem with MCE being that you have a 50-50 chance of your recording actually working properly. It simply isn't very stable over the short term term, never mind the long term. Once I get my Myth installs set and stable, I don't worry about at all, and never miss a recording. As well, I get to see the pretty movie posters for all my videos.
That's what I wonder as well. You'd think it should mean 4 years at 25% greater cost while they upgrade the infrastructure. After the upgrades are done, does it take a lot more electricity to run it, or cost that much more for the the extra writeable dvd's for backups?
I hope you mean £1.98 per 2 MB should be per 2 GB. Otherwise, you're looking at a rediculous amount of money to do an additional 50 gigs,which is easily do-able by 4 people. (over £50,000) Even at almost £2.00 per gig thats an additional £100.00 extra a month by itself.
There's a difference between theorizing and classification though. You find one cat, and it has a tail, so you classify "cats" as having "tails". When you find one that doesn't, you classifiy it further.
Theory is guessing the answer to a mystery based on what you know. You can theorize all cats have tails, based on previous classifications.
String therory is at least that, a working theory. When the detractors come up with a better theory, I'll listen to them. I don't necessartily buy the theory, but it sure looks cool, such as, this message is only real while you're looking at it.
LOL you're just pissed that you had to do an install for your folks that you didn't expect, and it burnt up a couple hours. The software did it's job in your case, and they got their money.
I have no problem with a program that checks my install and goes away, since my copies are legit. If I give my folks a machine with an illegal copy, and they get freaked out when the machine up and tells them that is the case, then I deserve it and just do the install.
One that repeatedly phones home constantly without permission is wrong, tho.
"That's not the same thing as going to a site solely to attack the operator, with no interest in any content beyond maybe using it in the attack."
If the site operator sends out a million invitations to come to his website, and gets a million hits because of that, is it an attack? No. The invitation has 3 options, browse, buy something, or opt out. Automating that process is not an attack. If the operator sends out a million invitations he had best have the bandwidth to accomodate the million potential hits. If he doesn't then too bad. The spammers are like the ISP's that have oversold bandwidth. Now that someone wants to take them up on their offer to come and visit, planning on a 1% or 2% response to the spam adds won't cut it. And for that I have ZERO sympathy.
And finally, Bluegrog's stated intentions was not to break it or slow it down. In fact they went to very reasonable lengths to avoid exactly that. Call it an attack if you want, but looking at the methods and actions involved, I just don't see how that term applies. They were a lot more reasonable than I would have been.
"If one defines "DOS" as "attack or interupt[sic] the normal business of a server or network", BlueFrog certainly did."
Umm, no. Blue Frog only automated the process of going to the website and opting out. And, that was only once for each spam email that was recieved by the members. That is not a DOS attack any more than a sight being hit with the slashdot effect. It does not slow down or make a sight unavailable, but it ups their bandwidth consumption meaning higher bandwidth costs to them, and administration time to deal with the opt out request. Even if they are ignoring them they probably have to be cleaned out.
They solicit a million people to visit their website, and that is what's happening. The difference being is that it's for opt-out requests instead of purchases.
But, as someone above noted, they've had time to deal with the impending onslaught. They have known it was coming for years, and have had those years to both make money on what they had oversold, and to build up for what they knew was coming. It's common sense that people's usage would increase as new services were thought up, especially since they're the ones trying to come up with those new services they could sell us and create new revenue streams.
The bigger companies certainly have unused fiber waiting to light up. The smaller companies should have grown/consolidated by now. If not they will be unable to compete when their users start straining the networks they should have built up, and find they have to start actually paying for the bandwidth they oversold their subscribers. If the business owners were too short-sighted to see what was coming, then like any other business they will fail.
"Translation: Certainly culture and sovereign interests need to be respected, except when [Person(s)] decide that they shouldn't be."
I will concede that point, with a "but". The problem of course is what is considered a basic human right or not? My point of view is obviously west-biased, where I enjoy a great deal of freedoms and rights, many of which are not available in other countries. This is one of the few topics where I am willing to take a stand and present an opinion that a forward thinking nation should allow unfettered access to information. The reason that they don't is not cultural, it is purely a population control and power retaining method.
Bear in mind that really, I am only advocating that the people have access to information, not that they must do anything or change to suit me in any way.
The example I gave about the psychotic general is an extreme of course to illustrate that a blanket statement of don't interfere, ever, is not always the correct action. Certain actions are repugnent to everyone regardless of culture, like genocide, and need to be addressed.
And if Mexico is going to legalize drugs, I may have to take a trip to, umm, evaluate the situation firsthand before not interfering.
I agree. They should be ignored more than anything else.
"Those primative people were doing wrong according to Europeans."
I am talking only about free uncensored access of information in China's case, by their own people. That's a far cry from stealing their gold and women, and killing the priests. Although there is a bunch of gold there, and the women are hot...
"So who's up to invading America?"
The mexicans.
I'm not American, btw. I'm Canadian, and we happen to have a long tradition and record of apathy about everything, and non-interference since we generally don't care what's happening. Just don't take away our beer or the crap will hit the fan.
"Like when the white man came to America. Or when Europeans encountered aboriginals. Some South American tribes wouldn't agree. Yeah, information is all just good clean fun."
Again, there is a difference between letting those natives use the internet to communicate freely and find out the white man is screwing them, or stomping on them if they dare to question what is being done to them.
So by your logic we should not attempt to intervene next time some psychotic general in an African nation decides to purge it's society of those pesky million or so people of whatever minority they don't like.
Certainly culture and sovereign interests need to be respected, but it comes down to a question of is what they are doing right or wrong? Denying your people the truth and the ability to make actual informed decisions for themselves is wrong, at least by my standards. And, it certainly doesn't erode the culture of a people to have more information.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoa, careful now. Being associated with the RIAA is a very serious matter. You're better off being associated with Al Qaida than them. Try just asking - bin.laid.in.afghanistan@alqaida.com - he apparently has lots of money.
Funny that Bin Ladin put it that way too in one of his videos.
To their credit, the Americans originally elected the hard-partying owner of a sports team, assuming he'd coast through the great economy, maybe cut the size of government like their party keeps promising, and generally cheer up the country a little while praying on Sundays. Bitch was, they didn't realize he had family grudge with Saddam to settle, and a slightly different take on the constitution than everyone else in the country. No George, it isn't toilet paper, put it back.
Being Canadian, I'm glad to see our courts erring on the side of citizens rights. That particular case was about the government arbitrarily changing the rules for getting a passport, not so much about him being a security risk.
The passport thing in England is insane though. The pity there is that the outgoing government will gather a butt load of data before it booted out, and the next government scraps the plan. At really, the data will be on the citizens that it doesn't need to look at, simply because the ones that will sign on early are the respectable, conservative types that are generally clean or have enough clout to hide their nefarious dealings. The criminals and terrorists will simply wait for the current government to be voted out, the new government will scrap it, they won't have to sign on to get the passports. The incoming party will, of course, keep the data and use it.
MS gets slammed for not having AV in the OS.
No, they get slammed for making everyone need it in the first place by making their OS's so insecure.
MS puts one in and gets slammed for trying to 'squeeze' out the big AV players.
No, they get slammed for trying to lock out competitors (again)
If MS makes their AV great than they get sued by Norton and McAfee.
If it ever happens that they make something "great", we'll see what happens. We haven't had enough experience of that happening yet to say.
If MS makes their AV 'average' or poor they get slammed for being stupid and incompetant.
Can't argue about that. Seems to be the thing to do though, when they play it up as being all you'll ever need and it doesn't cut it. And when it comes to security and AV, there is no praise for average or poor, especially when you get infected and lose everything because you trusted them.
There's no evidence that MS stole any code from Linux or any reasonable explanation as to why they'd want to.
Evidence, no. but this is M$ we're talking about, and they haven't exactly shown that they're the epitome of morals and ethics. I have no doubt they've at least perused (and continue to do so) the code base of the majority of successful open source projects and picked some cherries, both in code and in concepts.
To think otherwise would be naive.
Sensationalist yes, but no more than for the other sites that have done the same thing. It shows that the company that has harped on how good their new security is has a long way to go. And, on a more basic level, also shows that they just don't "get it" yet.
No, they forgot to hit the "Yes" button when it asked them if they really wanted to run the backup.
I believe the word you are looking for is "competition". It works in the open source world as well as the private business to encourage advancement. As well, there are many possible approaches to something like this, so we get to see how they each work.
Would you prefer that there was only a single vendor/group working on this instead?
Yup, that is one butt-ugly vehicle.
Concept vehicle or not, they could have made it look a lot more reasonable, maybe even *gasp* like it might be the actual production vehicle.
I agree absolutely, it was almost certainly a mistake, incompetence, or freak accident. That terrorism was mentioned or considered is what riled me up. AK-47's are good weapons, but their range is a bit short.
China was testing a laser powerful enough to disable satellites not too long ago though...
If anyone actually did something to kill the satellite, there is a list of countries that I would suspect long before looking at terrorists. Countries like China, Russia, etc., have greater reason, not to mention resources, to damage an orbiting satellite.
Why is always terrorists that are the culprits when something goes wrong? The nations that used espionage before the "War On Terror" are still there, and still have vested interest in denying the US the ability to spy on them.
It got to the point where it was no longer worth my time. $150 for Windows MCE, and $40 for the NVIDIA mpeg encoder and I was up and running with everything working within a few hours
Problem with MCE being that you have a 50-50 chance of your recording actually working properly. It simply isn't very stable over the short term term, never mind the long term. Once I get my Myth installs set and stable, I don't worry about at all, and never miss a recording. As well, I get to see the pretty movie posters for all my videos.
allowed to say that.
That's what I wonder as well. You'd think it should mean 4 years at 25% greater cost while they upgrade the infrastructure. After the upgrades are done, does it take a lot more electricity to run it, or cost that much more for the the extra writeable dvd's for backups?
Ya, CSIS would never do anything like that...
Except now you'll hear arguing between the FBI and the CIA over who should hang up and let the other record your call...
I hope you mean £1.98 per 2 MB should be per 2 GB. Otherwise, you're looking at a rediculous amount of money to do an additional 50 gigs,which is easily do-able by 4 people. (over £50,000) Even at almost £2.00 per gig thats an additional £100.00 extra a month by itself.
There's a difference between theorizing and classification though. You find one cat, and it has a tail, so you classify "cats" as having "tails". When you find one that doesn't, you classifiy it further.
Theory is guessing the answer to a mystery based on what you know. You can theorize all cats have tails, based on previous classifications.
String therory is at least that, a working theory. When the detractors come up with a better theory, I'll listen to them. I don't necessartily buy the theory, but it sure looks cool, such as, this message is only real while you're looking at it.
LOL you're just pissed that you had to do an install for your folks that you didn't expect, and it burnt up a couple hours. The software did it's job in your case, and they got their money.
I have no problem with a program that checks my install and goes away, since my copies are legit. If I give my folks a machine with an illegal copy, and they get freaked out when the machine up and tells them that is the case, then I deserve it and just do the install.
One that repeatedly phones home constantly without permission is wrong, tho.
"That's not the same thing as going to a site solely to attack the operator, with no interest in any content beyond maybe using it in the attack."
If the site operator sends out a million invitations to come to his website, and gets a million hits because of that, is it an attack? No. The invitation has 3 options, browse, buy something, or opt out. Automating that process is not an attack. If the operator sends out a million invitations he had best have the bandwidth to accomodate the million potential hits. If he doesn't then too bad. The spammers are like the ISP's that have oversold bandwidth. Now that someone wants to take them up on their offer to come and visit, planning on a 1% or 2% response to the spam adds won't cut it. And for that I have ZERO sympathy.
And finally, Bluegrog's stated intentions was not to break it or slow it down. In fact they went to very reasonable lengths to avoid exactly that. Call it an attack if you want, but looking at the methods and actions involved, I just don't see how that term applies. They were a lot more reasonable than I would have been.
"If one defines "DOS" as "attack or interupt[sic] the normal business of a server or network", BlueFrog certainly did."
Umm, no. Blue Frog only automated the process of going to the website and opting out. And, that was only once for each spam email that was recieved by the members. That is not a DOS attack any more than a sight being hit with the slashdot effect. It does not slow down or make a sight unavailable, but it ups their bandwidth consumption meaning higher bandwidth costs to them, and administration time to deal with the opt out request. Even if they are ignoring them they probably have to be cleaned out.
They solicit a million people to visit their website, and that is what's happening. The difference being is that it's for opt-out requests instead of purchases.
But, as someone above noted, they've had time to deal with the impending onslaught. They have known it was coming for years, and have had those years to both make money on what they had oversold, and to build up for what they knew was coming. It's common sense that people's usage would increase as new services were thought up, especially since they're the ones trying to come up with those new services they could sell us and create new revenue streams.
The bigger companies certainly have unused fiber waiting to light up. The smaller companies should have grown/consolidated by now. If not they will be unable to compete when their users start straining the networks they should have built up, and find they have to start actually paying for the bandwidth they oversold their subscribers. If the business owners were too short-sighted to see what was coming, then like any other business they will fail.
"Translation: Certainly culture and sovereign interests need to be respected, except when [Person(s)] decide that they shouldn't be."
I will concede that point, with a "but". The problem of course is what is considered a basic human right or not? My point of view is obviously west-biased, where I enjoy a great deal of freedoms and rights, many of which are not available in other countries. This is one of the few topics where I am willing to take a stand and present an opinion that a forward thinking nation should allow unfettered access to information. The reason that they don't is not cultural, it is purely a population control and power retaining method.
Bear in mind that really, I am only advocating that the people have access to information, not that they must do anything or change to suit me in any way.
The example I gave about the psychotic general is an extreme of course to illustrate that a blanket statement of don't interfere, ever, is not always the correct action. Certain actions are repugnent to everyone regardless of culture, like genocide, and need to be addressed.
And if Mexico is going to legalize drugs, I may have to take a trip to, umm, evaluate the situation firsthand before not interfering.
"North Korea isn't that bad."
I agree. They should be ignored more than anything else.
"Those primative people were doing wrong according to Europeans."
I am talking only about free uncensored access of information in China's case, by their own people. That's a far cry from stealing their gold and women, and killing the priests. Although there is a bunch of gold there, and the women are hot...
"So who's up to invading America?"
The mexicans.
I'm not American, btw. I'm Canadian, and we happen to have a long tradition and record of apathy about everything, and non-interference since we generally don't care what's happening. Just don't take away our beer or the crap will hit the fan.
"Like when the white man came to America. Or when Europeans encountered aboriginals. Some South American tribes wouldn't agree. Yeah, information is all just good clean fun."
Again, there is a difference between letting those natives use the internet to communicate freely and find out the white man is screwing them, or stomping on them if they dare to question what is being done to them.
So by your logic we should not attempt to intervene next time some psychotic general in an African nation decides to purge it's society of those pesky million or so people of whatever minority they don't like.
Certainly culture and sovereign interests need to be respected, but it comes down to a question of is what they are doing right or wrong? Denying your people the truth and the ability to make actual informed decisions for themselves is wrong, at least by my standards. And, it certainly doesn't erode the culture of a people to have more information.