How much of this open-source code DB is reusable? Are most of the lines things that have limited applications, or are most of them more general? I mean, if you have 275 million lines, but 175 million lines are code designed to solve one specific problem and can't be easily cross-applied, then it isn't as useful as the statement implies.
That said, congrats on the milestone, and looking forward to hearing of more!
I can see this idea working as a "try it before you buy it" type of thing. I mean, it'd allow me to hear a song on the radio, then legally hear the whole CD before deciding to buy it. I use iTunes mostly anyways, but it beats the mere 30-seconds iTunes plays the songs for free.
But paying money for browser-only music? Forget that. I don't feel like carrying my laptop around with me, and holding it open to listen to songs. If I pay for a song, I'm going to pay to be able to play it wherever, whenever. I don't think people listen to the majority of their music when they are online.
The whole reason for the lawsuit wasn't because 180 was pissed with misleading statements, it was because a potential business partner of 180solutions had concerns about associating their company which Zone Labs had tagged as a high security risk.
Well, if legitimate companies are afraid to associate with spyware companies, then I'd call that a good side-effect of the Sony malware mess.
Unfortunately, there are probably plenty of people who have BellSouth who can't switch away from it because they have no local alternatives. I don't have a landline (well, I do...but I don't know the number to it), but most non-college students need one. And VoIP isn't an option if you don't have highspeed access, even if you can call "normal" phones with it. And you do have highspeed, and its from Bell South, you can't really switch away from them unless you also have cable. A lot of you guys seem to be lucky enough to have broadband internet and multiple phone providers in your area. In some parts of the country, particularly "backwater" parts of the South, you don't have those kind of options.
(I lived 10 of my almost 19 years in such a place, so "backwater" isn't an insult).
First, does this movie feature
* Attractive girls, elsewhere than on computer screens?
* Humour, understandable by people who aren't living in their parents' basement?
* Action, more thrilling than tracing a memory leak in C program?
* Adventure, filing post-outsourcing job applications to mcdonalds not included?
* Love, relationships to chat bots not counted?
* Message, other than that life sucks and your imaginary girlfriend doesn't?
Slashdot doesn't have any of these, and yet people come here in droves. On a more serious note, there have been many movies that have done well without that, like "March of the Penguins". Obviously this isn't your typical blockbuster, but keep in mind that making a profit requires a lot fewer sales.
Computer-Based Media Centers will be common when they have 3 things:
1) Ease of Purchase. If I can order one online or in a store with everything I need, instead of in 20-30 different parts to install or solder or whatever, Joe Public will jump. 2) Ease of Use. Can't be much harder to use a TiVo. 3) Cost. It has to be cheap enough that the average person in a Western country could get it without having to agonize over the decision. So I'd say $800 is the upper limit.
That means that it'll have to be relatively limited in what it can do. Maybe it can go light on software or something.
Restart Manager will work with Microsoft Update, Windows Update, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Microsoft Software Installer, and Microsoft Systems Management Server
Think there are enough updaters out there? I mean, OS X does this with one updater, and you just pick the relevant updates. It seems like that would be better. That way there is no need to access like 5 updaters, you can just use one.
This isn't a straight "OS X ROXXORS!!" comment, I'm just wonder why you need 5 updaters.
You and I are agreeing then. This isn't a fix-the-problem solution, this is a slight help sort of solution. But lots of people are going to think that this fixes it.
But say someone puts a cage with a bunch of dead animals inside, locked it and chained it to your house. Would it be illegal to pick the lock to remove the items from your property?
Heavens YES!! Obviously this violates the laws against lock-picking. However, it is a public health risk to have dead animals in your yard. So basically you're expected to torch the animals (and part or all of your house) and then rebuild.
I have long felt that this whole Sony thing could have easily gone the other way. If Sony had landed on sysinternals for removing the rootkit and DRM in the first place, exactly what the danger to consumers was may not have fully leaked out. We'd still see the problem, but it could have been that Sony could have stopped the general public from getting the CDs. In fact, I know a lot of people now who have no idea about this.
Well, be careful not to overstate the problem. While the language of the DMCA makes it clear that it is illegal to even do this type of investigation with your own computer, it's not reasonable to assume that they would prosecute you unless you published the information you obtained (indeed, how would they know?)
First of all, I don't like actions that are necessary for my safety to make me a "criminal", even in the theoretical (non-prosecutorial) sense.
Secondly, it reflects badly on a gov't to have a law that is unenforceable.
1) Lots of duplication of sites. 2) A single instance could screw something over. Anytime CNN.com discusses sex, does it get booted off *kids? How about Wikipedia? Just try to block the "bad" articles? 3) The idea of a.kids TLD seems like the Windows root/basic user quandry. Windows users are forced to run as admin or root or whoever because most legitimate programs require it. If a young teenager regularly needs to access sites outside of.kids, he gets "adult access" for a short time. 4) Betting against horny teenagers is a bad idea, since they are generally more tech-savvy than the parents, and would spread the word to less tech-savvy friends about how to beat it (and I'm sure it can be beaten).
Search and seizure BY THE GOVERNMENT without a warrant is illegal and a violation of the constition. Search and seizure by the RIAA and the ISP is perfectly fine, and they certainly don't need a warrant.
I can't find my GameBoy. I think you might have it. I'll be over around 3 tommorrow to toss your house and see if a Gameboy turns up, at which point, I'll take it home with me, then sue you for something. Have a nice day, and please be a nice host and have refreshments for me when I show up.
I agree with you, but I'd like to point out that this is just the first to come to trial, which means that there may be more resisters than just this one.
I think IP addresses are so common as a watershed because you are paying for the IP address, presumably through an ISP. At that point, you as an individual person are responsible for what you do with it. If you aren't doing the illegal stuff, then you are facilitating someone else's doing the illegal stuff by negligence or consent. Unless you are honestly trying to secure your connection and getting like professionally hacked, you are at least semi-responsible for what happens on your network. Or so the theory seems to go.
I'm not legal savvy, but it'll set a big unoffical precedent. If this woman loses, it's all the more reason for someone to settle with the RIAA if/when they come knocking. If she or anyone else gets off, then there will be more people willing to fight the RIAA suits. As I see it, the RIAA will lose if it has to cover thousands of trials and the associated legal fees. They have lots of lawyers and money, but hopefully we can get pro bono lawyers for the defendants. And even if they win most of the trials, the people are too poor to pay the judgements, and the trials will be a financial loss for the RIAA, since whatever they get off the average person will be less than their total legal fees.
That assumes that Linux people buy the same number per person. If some big company buys 5,000 models per month for some reason, then your logic is toast. Similarly, if I understand this right, it only deals with people with wireless, which again, a proportion that may differ in the Windows and Linux communities.
True. They might even demand that they get their money back.
Just because it's free doesn't mean Google doesn't profit. Google makes money off the ads we presumably click. If we (or more important, Joe Average, who is more likely to click the ads) quit, they lose revenue.
If the virus can't be removed from the file, you won't be able to download it. ...... If a virus is found in an attachment you're trying to send, you won't be able to send the message until you remove the attachment.
Now I know Google is pretty good and reliable, but that's sort of a harsh way to do business. There should be some sort of work-around if Google gets it wrong on what is and isn't a virus (which I assume they are going to do sooner or later). I mean, a false positive would get you cut off from what could be vital information. If that happens to someone, they'll be mad, even though it was done for a good reason. I hope they at least warn the people that there was an attachment.
Why? Webmail is slow at times and your Internet connection could be unavailable or only available at intervals.
And...what about people with multiple email addresses? It isn't that hard to set up Thunderbird/Mozilla Suite, and it saves you having to open like 3 browser windows (or ideally tabs) to check your webmail.
They've got Xbox Live, now OneCare Live, and there was something else too. Is that becoming their new thing? Sticking Live on something to brand it? Is it sort of like the Apple 'i' or the Google 'g'?
Slashdot Mirror
How much of this open-source code DB is reusable? Are most of the lines things that have limited applications, or are most of them more general? I mean, if you have 275 million lines, but 175 million lines are code designed to solve one specific problem and can't be easily cross-applied, then it isn't as useful as the statement implies.
That said, congrats on the milestone, and looking forward to hearing of more!
I can see this idea working as a "try it before you buy it" type of thing. I mean, it'd allow me to hear a song on the radio, then legally hear the whole CD before deciding to buy it. I use iTunes mostly anyways, but it beats the mere 30-seconds iTunes plays the songs for free.
But paying money for browser-only music? Forget that. I don't feel like carrying my laptop around with me, and holding it open to listen to songs. If I pay for a song, I'm going to pay to be able to play it wherever, whenever. I don't think people listen to the majority of their music when they are online.
The whole reason for the lawsuit wasn't because 180 was pissed with misleading statements, it was because a potential business partner of 180solutions had concerns about associating their company which Zone Labs had tagged as a high security risk.
Well, if legitimate companies are afraid to associate with spyware companies, then I'd call that a good side-effect of the Sony malware mess.
Wow, did I just see the guy saying "Mod the troll down" get nailed faster than the actual troll? That's always worth a laugh.
"Yes, I know the "MOD THE TROLL DOWN!" thing is a crapflood, but still.
Unfortunately, there are probably plenty of people who have BellSouth who can't switch away from it because they have no local alternatives. I don't have a landline (well, I do...but I don't know the number to it), but most non-college students need one. And VoIP isn't an option if you don't have highspeed access, even if you can call "normal" phones with it. And you do have highspeed, and its from Bell South, you can't really switch away from them unless you also have cable. A lot of you guys seem to be lucky enough to have broadband internet and multiple phone providers in your area. In some parts of the country, particularly "backwater" parts of the South, you don't have those kind of options.
(I lived 10 of my almost 19 years in such a place, so "backwater" isn't an insult).
First, does this movie feature
* Attractive girls, elsewhere than on computer screens?
* Humour, understandable by people who aren't living in their parents' basement?
* Action, more thrilling than tracing a memory leak in C program?
* Adventure, filing post-outsourcing job applications to mcdonalds not included?
* Love, relationships to chat bots not counted?
* Message, other than that life sucks and your imaginary girlfriend doesn't?
Slashdot doesn't have any of these, and yet people come here in droves. On a more serious note, there have been many movies that have done well without that, like "March of the Penguins". Obviously this isn't your typical blockbuster, but keep in mind that making a profit requires a lot fewer sales.
1) Read story about world's tallest building.
2) Move to Earthquake prone area
3) Put fragile stuff up high
4) File lawsuit
5) ?????
6) Profit!!!!!
Computer-Based Media Centers will be common when they have 3 things:
1) Ease of Purchase. If I can order one online or in a store with everything I need, instead of in 20-30 different parts to install or solder or whatever, Joe Public will jump.
2) Ease of Use. Can't be much harder to use a TiVo.
3) Cost. It has to be cheap enough that the average person in a Western country could get it without having to agonize over the decision. So I'd say $800 is the upper limit.
That means that it'll have to be relatively limited in what it can do. Maybe it can go light on software or something.
Restart Manager will work with Microsoft Update, Windows Update, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Microsoft Software Installer, and Microsoft Systems Management Server
Think there are enough updaters out there? I mean, OS X does this with one updater, and you just pick the relevant updates. It seems like that would be better. That way there is no need to access like 5 updaters, you can just use one.
This isn't a straight "OS X ROXXORS!!" comment, I'm just wonder why you need 5 updaters.
You and I are agreeing then. This isn't a fix-the-problem solution, this is a slight help sort of solution. But lots of people are going to think that this fixes it.
But say someone puts a cage with a bunch of dead animals inside, locked it and chained it to your house. Would it be illegal to pick the lock to remove the items from your property?
Heavens YES!! Obviously this violates the laws against lock-picking. However, it is a public health risk to have dead animals in your yard. So basically you're expected to torch the animals (and part or all of your house) and then rebuild.
I have long felt that this whole Sony thing could have easily gone the other way. If Sony had landed on sysinternals for removing the rootkit and DRM in the first place, exactly what the danger to consumers was may not have fully leaked out. We'd still see the problem, but it could have been that Sony could have stopped the general public from getting the CDs. In fact, I know a lot of people now who have no idea about this.
Well, be careful not to overstate the problem. While the language of the DMCA makes it clear that it is illegal to even do this type of investigation with your own computer, it's not reasonable to assume that they would prosecute you unless you published the information you obtained (indeed, how would they know?)
First of all, I don't like actions that are necessary for my safety to make me a "criminal", even in the theoretical (non-prosecutorial) sense.
Secondly, it reflects badly on a gov't to have a law that is unenforceable.
I like the idea, but there are flaws.
.kids TLD seems like the Windows root/basic user quandry. Windows users are forced to run as admin or root or whoever because most legitimate programs require it. If a young teenager regularly needs to access sites outside of .kids, he gets "adult access" for a short time.
1) Lots of duplication of sites.
2) A single instance could screw something over. Anytime CNN.com discusses sex, does it get booted off *kids? How about Wikipedia? Just try to block the "bad" articles?
3) The idea of a
4) Betting against horny teenagers is a bad idea, since they are generally more tech-savvy than the parents, and would spread the word to less tech-savvy friends about how to beat it (and I'm sure it can be beaten).
Search and seizure BY THE GOVERNMENT without a warrant is illegal and a violation of the constition. Search and seizure by the RIAA and the ISP is perfectly fine, and they certainly don't need a warrant.
I can't find my GameBoy. I think you might have it. I'll be over around 3 tommorrow to toss your house and see if a Gameboy turns up, at which point, I'll take it home with me, then sue you for something. Have a nice day, and please be a nice host and have refreshments for me when I show up.
I agree with you, but I'd like to point out that this is just the first to come to trial, which means that there may be more resisters than just this one.
I think IP addresses are so common as a watershed because you are paying for the IP address, presumably through an ISP. At that point, you as an individual person are responsible for what you do with it. If you aren't doing the illegal stuff, then you are facilitating someone else's doing the illegal stuff by negligence or consent. Unless you are honestly trying to secure your connection and getting like professionally hacked, you are at least semi-responsible for what happens on your network. Or so the theory seems to go.
I'm not legal savvy, but it'll set a big unoffical precedent. If this woman loses, it's all the more reason for someone to settle with the RIAA if/when they come knocking. If she or anyone else gets off, then there will be more people willing to fight the RIAA suits. As I see it, the RIAA will lose if it has to cover thousands of trials and the associated legal fees. They have lots of lawyers and money, but hopefully we can get pro bono lawyers for the defendants. And even if they win most of the trials, the people are too poor to pay the judgements, and the trials will be a financial loss for the RIAA, since whatever they get off the average person will be less than their total legal fees.
That assumes that Linux people buy the same number per person. If some big company buys 5,000 models per month for some reason, then your logic is toast. Similarly, if I understand this right, it only deals with people with wireless, which again, a proportion that may differ in the Windows and Linux communities.
True. They might even demand that they get their money back.
Just because it's free doesn't mean Google doesn't profit. Google makes money off the ads we presumably click. If we (or more important, Joe Average, who is more likely to click the ads) quit, they lose revenue.
Steve Ballmer? You read slashdot? Are you by chance a masochist? That would explain everything...
If the virus can't be removed from the file, you won't be able to download it.
......
If a virus is found in an attachment you're trying to send, you won't be able to send the message until you remove the attachment.
Now I know Google is pretty good and reliable, but that's sort of a harsh way to do business. There should be some sort of work-around if Google gets it wrong on what is and isn't a virus (which I assume they are going to do sooner or later). I mean, a false positive would get you cut off from what could be vital information. If that happens to someone, they'll be mad, even though it was done for a good reason. I hope they at least warn the people that there was an attachment.
Why? Webmail is slow at times and your Internet connection could be unavailable or only available at intervals.
And...what about people with multiple email addresses? It isn't that hard to set up Thunderbird/Mozilla Suite, and it saves you having to open like 3 browser windows (or ideally tabs) to check your webmail.
I don't think it's annoying really, I just want to see if some smart guy gets rich off selling the name "Office Live" to MS.
They've got Xbox Live, now OneCare Live, and there was something else too. Is that becoming their new thing? Sticking Live on something to brand it? Is it sort of like the Apple 'i' or the Google 'g'?