> You give them the lock, you give them the key, and you hope that > they can never figure out how to use them together.
IANADE (I Am Not A DRM Expert), but... A more accurate analogy would be: (1) You give them something in a box. The box is the DRM mechanism. (2) The box is secured with a lock. (3) You give them a key so that they can use what's inside.
Step (3) is where the problem starts. The DRMer has to do one of the following. a) the lock has to be openable with multiple keys. (Otherwise people would duplicate the key) b) Make different locks for each boxed product. (Production problems?) c) Make the box really difficult to open. Use hard material, make the lid heavy... (But who would use the product then?)
(4) They use the product.
The real flaw in the reasoning is that the DRMer thinks that they can use the product only after using the key.
DRM-cracking is more like using a totally different mechanism for using it. Think of it as viewing what's inside an opaque box with X-rays or something!
Knowing how it works and knowing how to make it do things you want are two different things altogether. There is a problem with the engineer-driver analogy. "You can be an engineer and still not know how to drive!"
One should be considered computer-literate if and only if one can use the computer to do things and, you know, get by!
Aren't these acquisitions just a ploy to gain market- and mind-share? It's just that they are making it look like these would be used for improving search results.
Social networking is a powerful marketing idea but nothing more, in my book. Search relevance improvement is out of the picture.
Oh, for a non-commercial Web again! What I need is information, not your product...
Presently it seems that both Yahoo! and Google are both presently concentrating on lapping up growing and popular websites..
When will the serpents eat their tails? The question is: Who (Yahoo!/Google) is going to acquire the other(Google/Yahoo!)?
I wish they used this time and effort to improve their search technologies - which seems to be stagnating - they're putting their feet into too many boats - forgetting where they came from, their roots, what made them what they are really.......because I still haven't found what I am looking for!
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, really? I'd been thinking OS/2 stood for half open-source! OpenSource/2?
> You give them the lock, you give them the key, and you hope that
> they can never figure out how to use them together.
IANADE (I Am Not A DRM Expert), but...
A more accurate analogy would be:
(1) You give them something in a box. The box is the DRM mechanism.
(2) The box is secured with a lock.
(3) You give them a key so that they can use what's inside.
Step (3) is where the problem starts.
The DRMer has to do one of the following.
a) the lock has to be openable with multiple keys. (Otherwise people would duplicate the key)
b) Make different locks for each boxed product. (Production problems?)
c) Make the box really difficult to open. Use hard material, make the lid heavy... (But who would use the product then?)
(4) They use the product.
The real flaw in the reasoning is that the DRMer thinks that they can use the product only after using the key.
DRM-cracking is more like using a totally different mechanism for using it. Think of it as viewing what's inside an opaque box with X-rays or something!
If necessity is the mother, laziness is the father of invention.
http://oozone.blogspot.com/
Knowing how it works and knowing how to make it do things you want are two different things altogether. There is a problem with the engineer-driver analogy.
"You can be an engineer and still not know how to drive!"
One should be considered computer-literate if and only if one can use the computer to do things and, you know, get by!
>Not sure where you are going with the anti-virus, since Microsoft has never
:-)
>released one.
MS used to bundle an antivirus tool with DOS. They used to call it MSAV.
IIRC, there was one called MWAV too.
http://www.computerhope.com/msavhlp.htm
From the link,
"the Windows 3.x version may think Windows 95 is a Virus."!!!
I am not an AJAX expert or anything but...
ActiveX...cross-platform?
Firefox does not support ActiveX objects by default, right?
yeah, it seems to be an error.
looks like they were doing the calculations with a calculator and somebody presses '*' instead of '/' !!!!
625 * 5 = 3125
a forgivable slip of the finger's tip.
Because when run stand-alone, it is a face-saver for Windows, and hence cannot be a screen-saver.
I liked the way you put it...Yahoogle
And finally it's gonna end up with: Google buys Yahoo! Microsoft buys Google. World Domination and Apocalypse!
(Note: In the above sentence G,M and Y are interchangeable)
Aren't these acquisitions just a ploy to gain market- and mind-share? It's just that they are making it look like these would be used for improving search results.
Social networking is a powerful marketing idea but nothing more, in my book. Search relevance improvement is out of the picture.
Oh, for a non-commercial Web again! What I need is information, not your product...
Presently it seems that both Yahoo! and Google are both presently concentrating on lapping up growing and popular websites.. When will the serpents eat their tails? The question is: Who (Yahoo!/Google) is going to acquire the other(Google/Yahoo!)? I wish they used this time and effort to improve their search technologies - which seems to be stagnating - they're putting their feet into too many boats - forgetting where they came from, their roots, what made them what they are really.... ...because I still haven't found what I am looking for!