It's interesting actually. To prove a point, I looked up a random girl I had just met, and within 20 minutes between the school's website and facebook, had her name (off of a face, year, and knowing the first two letters), phone number, dorm (although not room), birthday, email, and about a dozen more pictures of her. Fortunately for her, I'm not interested in stalking her. But a person needs to think through whether they want to have that information available. It can't be hard to get on facebook as a non-college person, all you need is the email address for like 30 minutes.
They couldn't really prove the students had been drinking unless they said something -- which several of them did, on the group message boards. That's hardly proof. "Oh, I was kidding." or "I didn't post it, someone figured out my password" The second is actually possible, since facebook doesn't keep a comment log, AFAIK (and I'm on it)
Ownership comes from the barrel of a gun. If I founded a company and in twenty years we could carry people to and from the moon, and NASA/EU/China couldn't, then we own the moon. Unless the military nukes the moon "Mr. President, do you really want to nuke the moon?" "Would you miss it"? (Austin Powers II)
yeah, but a lot of the time, some email servers default append the previous message at the bottom with > at the beginning of each line. If that happens, they get your original message as well, right?
How long before identity theft is not the real problem, but being accused of anti-american activities is the problem because of clever botnets that have seeded the government databases with information about you and your activities?
The FBI just caught a guy who sold access to botnets he made. How long before there is a thriving "ruin your enemy's life" market?
As I understand the ZPMs on Atlantis, they are super-condensed, "a universe in a bottle", battery-esque things, so they represent Zero Point Energy collected from another dimension or something. the relevant episode is probably "trinity". there may be a wikipedia article on it, they have a large stargate section.
OK folks, here's what we do when this thing passes.
1) Someone buy a recorder with DRM, then record something pricelessly funny. Maybe some sort of amateur movie or stand-up or something. 2) Attempt to distribute it for free. 3)When DRM stops you, sue someone for interfering with your business model. 4)???? 5)Profit!!!
Seriously, though, if you do that, then they are sticking DRM on your stuff when you don't want it. They have to at least figure out a way to remove it if you demand it.
Very true. They would most likely vary price by movie. For instance, some of the crap that was in theaters this summer they couldn't pay me to watch, and when someone considered bringing it to our theater on second release, we basically laughed them out of the meeting. However, there are a fair few good movies available. I would pay to see Serenity at home. I would pay to have a copy of Batman Begins. But I'd only download it if was cheaper than DVD. And when you figure on tying up 1.25 GB of bandwidth, and considering that's gonna be at only like 3 MB a minute where I am, and probably about 7 hours of my downloading (so basically an overnight job), it's almost easier to find the DVD for cheap somewhere.
I'm saying rootkits = good, I'm saying there is gonna be some majorly piss-off people who get banned because, unbeknownst to them, their computers are zombies. And I meant actual zombies, not just Sony rootkitted. I wouldn't want a rootkit on my network, but I wouldn't want to be Blizzard booting a thousand innocent people.
Only on Intel Macs. This is because (stated reason from Apple) Apple likes to design the whole package, hardware, OS, some big apps, etc. This sometimes works well. Witness iPod-iTunes-iTunes Music Store. They also don't want to have to compete with cheaper clones with OS X
Yeah, but then all they could do without actually changing any settings is determine that you do have a rootkit. And they couldn't ban you for it, because you might be hacked, and it isn't your fault. If they tried to disable it to see what it is hiding, then they are hacking. Although, perversely, they are helping you, it's actually hacking.
That wouldn't do it. If they had the same connecting interfaces, we could have infinitely fast processors/drives that would be limited by how fast we could the information to them. Which is a step up, but we're not going to see meaningful improvement if the processor or hard drive has to wait on the connection. A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.
As I understand it, and I don't work in IT or anything, the reason Firefox is safer is that it isn't given preferential treatment by the operating system as IE is. At worse, someone could, what, crash Firefox? Oh no, darn. Move my mouse all the way down to the dock, click it again, go to the Go Menu, and pick the 2nd most recent thing, and I'm back in business.
Also, the fact that Firefox doesn't automatically trust downloads helps. Of course, viruses that are downloaded can still get through if the user is stupid/tricked.
It would be, except that not everyone with a Mac uses Safari. For instance, I have Safari, but I mostly use firefox. There are people with Macs who use Internet Explorer (the older ones that had mac support), and there are even people who still use OS 9. So I think we can assume that anyone using Safari uses a Mac, but that doesn't give us an upper bound of who uses macs, just a lower one.
If the editors had written it like "his previous employers, who are at this link: _______", then we'd get to see if they got around to updating that server. My money is on 'yes'.
But it does add up to Sony's rootkit not being legal. Sony supplying an illegal product to people to "damage" Blizzard's credibility is implicit assistance.
Sadly, that won't fly. Recall "shrink-wrap EULAs". You agree when you open them. In some cases, you agree when you open the box. So, unless someone's got X-ray vision and goes around reading the EULAs to you, there is no way at all to read them without first agreeing.
My point was/is this: 1) It's bad to hide stuff on other people's computers (trespassing in some areas) 2) Unless you have Dissociative Identity Disorder, there is no need to hide things from yourself 3) While this is good at hiding things from other users of your computer, it is not the only method, and not the primary method.
All of this adds up to something that doesn't pass Betamax or Grokster muster. It has no major legitimate purpose, and it is designed for malicious intent. It would be legal if it was designed for a legal purpose and had significant legal uses. At least, that's how I understand the law, but IANAL.
Why bother? If we force ATI and the other card creators to simply give themselves over to the MPAA companies, we're guaranteed that they'll never make something that can break the rules. For that matter, why don't we just let the MPAA run anything related to video, and the RIAA run anything related to audio? It'd be the perfect solution. We wouldn't have to worry about this kind of stuff, because we know they have our best interests at heart, and aren't remotely corrupt or greedy...
A lot of your points seem aimed at Linux working better for you. great! I'm honestly glad you've found it then. I'm talking about a widespread adoption, and I think Mac OS has a better shot than Linux.
On porting, I was talking about non-emulation, b/c Macs have emulators too, and I often hear Linux guys on here complaining about them. And some ported stuff (like games) isn't opensource, the developing company makes a Mac version, or liscenses a mac version to MacSoft or someone.
let's face the future together challenging each other but not fighting against each other! Amen.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if they do it serially, couldn't they just split it up? I mean, hey, computer 1, you take 1-100, computer 2, you get 101-200, etc.?
It's interesting actually. To prove a point, I looked up a random girl I had just met, and within 20 minutes between the school's website and facebook, had her name (off of a face, year, and knowing the first two letters), phone number, dorm (although not room), birthday, email, and about a dozen more pictures of her. Fortunately for her, I'm not interested in stalking her. But a person needs to think through whether they want to have that information available. It can't be hard to get on facebook as a non-college person, all you need is the email address for like 30 minutes.
They couldn't really prove the students had been drinking unless they said something -- which several of them did, on the group message boards.
That's hardly proof. "Oh, I was kidding." or "I didn't post it, someone figured out my password" The second is actually possible, since facebook doesn't keep a comment log, AFAIK (and I'm on it)
Unless I misundersand the article and comments, it seems that
Safety of Linux user who screws up >> MS user who does everything right
Ownership comes from the barrel of a gun. If I founded a company and in twenty years we could carry people to and from the moon, and NASA/EU/China couldn't, then we own the moon. Unless the military nukes the moon "Mr. President, do you really want to nuke the moon?" "Would you miss it"? (Austin Powers II)
you can take them to the small claims court.
Yes, because people are actually going to sue someone over a single CD? I doubt any more than 1% of Sony's customers would do it.
yeah, but a lot of the time, some email servers default append the previous message at the bottom with > at the beginning of each line. If that happens, they get your original message as well, right?
How long before identity theft is not the real problem, but being accused of anti-american activities is the problem because of clever botnets that have seeded the government databases with information about you and your activities?
. botmaster.reut/index.html
The FBI just caught a guy who sold access to botnets he made. How long before there is a thriving "ruin your enemy's life" market?
Relevant article on botmaster: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/11/04/crime
As I understand the ZPMs on Atlantis, they are super-condensed, "a universe in a bottle", battery-esque things, so they represent Zero Point Energy collected from another dimension or something. the relevant episode is probably "trinity". there may be a wikipedia article on it, they have a large stargate section.
OK folks, here's what we do when this thing passes.
1) Someone buy a recorder with DRM, then record something pricelessly funny. Maybe some sort of amateur movie or stand-up or something.
2) Attempt to distribute it for free.
3)When DRM stops you, sue someone for interfering with your business model.
4)????
5)Profit!!!
Seriously, though, if you do that, then they are sticking DRM on your stuff when you don't want it. They have to at least figure out a way to remove it if you demand it.
Very true. They would most likely vary price by movie. For instance, some of the crap that was in theaters this summer they couldn't pay me to watch, and when someone considered bringing it to our theater on second release, we basically laughed them out of the meeting. However, there are a fair few good movies available. I would pay to see Serenity at home. I would pay to have a copy of Batman Begins. But I'd only download it if was cheaper than DVD. And when you figure on tying up 1.25 GB of bandwidth, and considering that's gonna be at only like 3 MB a minute where I am, and probably about 7 hours of my downloading (so basically an overnight job), it's almost easier to find the DVD for cheap somewhere.
I'm saying rootkits = good, I'm saying there is gonna be some majorly piss-off people who get banned because, unbeknownst to them, their computers are zombies. And I meant actual zombies, not just Sony rootkitted. I wouldn't want a rootkit on my network, but I wouldn't want to be Blizzard booting a thousand innocent people.
Only on Intel Macs. This is because (stated reason from Apple) Apple likes to design the whole package, hardware, OS, some big apps, etc. This sometimes works well. Witness iPod-iTunes-iTunes Music Store. They also don't want to have to compete with cheaper clones with OS X
So does anyone else find it funny that we get an Apple-Intel update on within 6 hours of a "Intel processors get their asses kicked" story?
Yeah, but then all they could do without actually changing any settings is determine that you do have a rootkit. And they couldn't ban you for it, because you might be hacked, and it isn't your fault. If they tried to disable it to see what it is hiding, then they are hacking. Although, perversely, they are helping you, it's actually hacking.
AAAHHHH!! Danger! Danger! Daily Irony Limits Exceeded!!
That wouldn't do it. If they had the same connecting interfaces, we could have infinitely fast processors/drives that would be limited by how fast we could the information to them. Which is a step up, but we're not going to see meaningful improvement if the processor or hard drive has to wait on the connection. A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.
As I understand it, and I don't work in IT or anything, the reason Firefox is safer is that it isn't given preferential treatment by the operating system as IE is. At worse, someone could, what, crash Firefox? Oh no, darn. Move my mouse all the way down to the dock, click it again, go to the Go Menu, and pick the 2nd most recent thing, and I'm back in business.
Also, the fact that Firefox doesn't automatically trust downloads helps. Of course, viruses that are downloaded can still get through if the user is stupid/tricked.
It would be, except that not everyone with a Mac uses Safari. For instance, I have Safari, but I mostly use firefox. There are people with Macs who use Internet Explorer (the older ones that had mac support), and there are even people who still use OS 9. So I think we can assume that anyone using Safari uses a Mac, but that doesn't give us an upper bound of who uses macs, just a lower one.
Then we add a star or a underscore or something to the beginning of Airfox, therefore coming ahead of them again.
If the editors had written it like "his previous employers, who are at this link: _______", then we'd get to see if they got around to updating that server. My money is on 'yes'.
But it does add up to Sony's rootkit not being legal. Sony supplying an illegal product to people to "damage" Blizzard's credibility is implicit assistance.
Sadly, that won't fly. Recall "shrink-wrap EULAs". You agree when you open them. In some cases, you agree when you open the box. So, unless someone's got X-ray vision and goes around reading the EULAs to you, there is no way at all to read them without first agreeing.
My point was/is this:
1) It's bad to hide stuff on other people's computers (trespassing in some areas)
2) Unless you have Dissociative Identity Disorder, there is no need to hide things from yourself
3) While this is good at hiding things from other users of your computer, it is not the only method, and not the primary method.
All of this adds up to something that doesn't pass Betamax or Grokster muster. It has no major legitimate purpose, and it is designed for malicious intent. It would be legal if it was designed for a legal purpose and had significant legal uses. At least, that's how I understand the law, but IANAL.
Why bother? If we force ATI and the other card creators to simply give themselves over to the MPAA companies, we're guaranteed that they'll never make something that can break the rules. For that matter, why don't we just let the MPAA run anything related to video, and the RIAA run anything related to audio? It'd be the perfect solution. We wouldn't have to worry about this kind of stuff, because we know they have our best interests at heart, and aren't remotely corrupt or greedy...
A lot of your points seem aimed at Linux working better for you. great! I'm honestly glad you've found it then. I'm talking about a widespread adoption, and I think Mac OS has a better shot than Linux.
On porting, I was talking about non-emulation, b/c Macs have emulators too, and I often hear Linux guys on here complaining about them. And some ported stuff (like games) isn't opensource, the developing company makes a Mac version, or liscenses a mac version to MacSoft or someone.
let's face the future together challenging each other but not fighting against each other!
Amen.