Making laws to tell them exactly what to do is stupid. What if there's a better way, and encryption isn't needed? They still have to do the encryption now.
Other posts have been more reasonable: Harsher penalties for failing to protect the data.
It might even be different if this was a 100% fix. It's not. Now the thief just needs 1 more step, instead. The password/key. Even without it, it's not impossible to crack encryption. It's just very hard, if done right. (And next to useless if done wrong.)
I think you hit the nail on the head, here. I hear people say 'It's impossible!' all the time and think of things like this. Even 'perpetual motion machines' (which I understand why they are impossible) should not stop being someone's dream because they may find a way to create something that's close enough as doesn't matter, or serves some other useful function.
They should, however, stop professing to have made one until they can actually prove it and stand the scrutiny... That may have been Tesla's mistake as well: Don't tell people you can do it until you have.
By that logic, some games are only $5, too. I was only talking about new prices, not bargain bin prices.
The DVD TV sets are a good point, too, but you can actually watch most of those shows over the air for 'free'. ('Free' because they are ad-supported, so they aren't truly free... You waste some of your time.)
No, I think it's a step further. It's not only permissible, but -required-. If they don't do everything they can for their client, they've failed them. The client will definitely think that, even if nobody else does, and the client pays the bills.
I disagree about the price of software. Let's look at other forms of entertainment:
DVD Movies: 2 hours (repeatable), $15+ ($60 for bluray new releases!) Theatre Movies: 2 hours, $7+ per person. Games: 20+hours (highly variable and repeatable), $60 (Some games are less than that, but many are more. Call it an 'average'.) Bowling: 1 hour, $10 per person.
DVDs are $7.50 per hour if you only do them once. Theatre Movies are $3.50 per hour. Games are $3/hour if you only play for 20 hours. Bowling is $10 per hour.
I dunno, seems games are a pretty good deal. Add in the fact that the best games have entertained me for 200+ hours, and some get thousands, and they are an even better deal.
Things are worth what you are willing to pay for them. Judging software against hardware isn't a fair comparison, either. Without the software for the hardware, it's worthless to most people. And vice versa.
IF there was any chance that the number of write-ins for Ron Paul would be counted and said publicly, even if not officially counted, I'd agree that it sends a better message.
They won't, though. You'll never heard anything about it, any more than you've ever heard of any other write-in.
So between the 2, Barr makes more sense to me.
(As an aside, I was voting for RP until he dropped. I'll be voting for Barr now. It's not likely he'll win, but I'll feel good about who I voted for.)
These alternatives to YouTube that will thumb their nose at the DMCA... What are they exactly? I'm assuming they're sites outside the US... And that they are in countries that don't have treaties with the US, either.
It's not a matter of company policy. It's a matter of complying with the law. They have no choice.
I've seen the 'shotgun thing' myself... Well, almost.
This guy had been working there forever when I started. He loved this dog he had. One day, he comes in and says in monotone (no emotion) "I shot my dog." We stare. He continues, "I put my gun to the back of its head and pulled the trigger. I quit." And he walks out.
Call center stress is amazing. I felt some of it, but thankfully, never to that degree that it affected me like that. I was only in that job for 6 months, though.
Even if all the 'community' lets them do is blow off steam, I think it'd be worth it. Properly done, however, it could be a good resource for the company.
No 3-dig ID, but the fact that Fallout wasn't Wasteland 2 stopped me from playing it then. I was pretty pissed at the time. Now, I try to go back and see what the fuss is and the interface is horrid. -sigh- I've been spoiled by good interfaces and it really bugs me. I did recently purchased the 3-game set, but that UI hurdle is still stopping me.
I've heard the interface on 2 is better, but I'd really rather play 1 first.
As for the 'ad-based' being different, why? It still takes revenue to stream them, and sponsors in the US aren't going to be willing to sponsor the overseas traffic. So once again, the people who pay the bills (ad-watchers in the US, in this case) are the ones that get to the see the content, just like the BBC.
I think we all have things that we valued enough to pay 'too much' for, and then overprotect it afterwards. I tend to do it with tech things, but everyone has their own.
I would actually love to have a chess set that really feels like mine... I've just never seen one that speaks to me that strongly. I do have a $40 one that I got in the Bahamas (and looks more like $300-500, if purchased here in the US) that is hidden in a box somewhere because I don't want it broken, though.
Or maybe people shouldn't submit their data to every website they visit. If they care about their privacy, they had better well read the privacy policy.
Companies aren't going to dumb-down their policies and open themselves to lawsuits. They are precise and lengthy for a reason.
In the end it doesn't even matter, though. They all include a clause that lets them change the policy any time they like.
Some call a single imperfection on the face, like a mole, a 'beauty mark'. I don't subscribe to that myself, but it does make a face a bit more interesting.
I also prefer the 'after' picture. She not ugly beforehand, but I find the 'after' picture to be prettier.
Sounds to me like not everyone is identical... Wow, imagine that!
I see them having a lot of problems with this technology because of that. Our brainwaves may all be similar, but that doesn't mean they're all the same. Or even alike enough to have a single plastic helmet fit everyone.
I'm hoping this device (and game) does well, and I'll probably be sucked into buying one, but only the fact that Squeenix is involved gives me any confidence in it.
As someone else pointed out: What -is- that common ancestor?
No, it's not a modern day ape, but an ape ancestor... Which was basically just an ape. You shouldn't discount someone that says we evolved from apes automatically. There's a good chance they actually understand the fine distinction and find that it's not a big enough distinction to explain every time they talk about it. They'd rather get into the meat of the discussion than brag about how much they know about the fine details that everyone else already knows.
I just traded up from a Sansa e270 6gb to an iPod Nano 8gb. It is -so- much better.
Granted, I haven't put thirdparty firmware (Rockbox) on my Sansa, but I absolutely hated my Sansa. You -have- to use their proprietary software to put video on it. Guess what happens if you lose your CD? You have to BUY a new one! They won't let you download it. Apple's software (iTunes), while still proprietary, is extremely easy to get another free copy of.
I never DID get playlists to work correctly on my Sansa. Podcasts worked okay when used with iTunes, but not at all otherwise. If you put it in USB stick mode, it reports every time you unplug it.
I've never tried games on my Sansa, but games on iPod Nano 4th gen are great. They are very clear, sound great, and the accelerometer lets me play games like 'Maze' (aka Labyrinth) where you guide the ball around the maze by tilting.
I'm far from a Mac fanboy. I say 'It just works!' in a nasty tone about 3 times a day at work, where we're all on Macs and have as much problems with the Mac Pros and xServe as any Windows machine I ever used. My personal preference there is Linux, too.
But the iPod is done right. It's going to be very hard to improve on it.
TFA asks a lot of questions but provides no answers whatsoever.
Personally, I doubt Hulu is going to let Tivo access their service and then skip the commercials unless Tivo is paying them every time a user does that. It would be suicide for Hulu.
ABC, NBC, etc etc are all in the same boat, except that it's not suicide and merely stupid for them.
I also doubt that user viewing preferences matters at all in an environment that can skip commercials. Unless they are looking for the demographic that won't watch the commercials no matter what... I can't imagine what use that data is.
Actually, that report said 15%. And you've left out some factors:
It was only parents with children that were surveyed, but... 26% haven't bought a TV since the V-chip was mandatory, 39% had bought one since then but didn't think it had a V-chip, and 20 percent simply haven't used it.
In addition, only 27% of the people who have used it were able to program it, and some (no idea how many) were frustrated by it not working like they thought.
It doesn't surprise me, though, as many people are unable to get their VCR's time set correctly.
Any technical way to restrict viewing is going to be complicated, so the 'it's too difficult' argument just doesn't mean anything. If you can't program the V-chip, just do it the old-fashioned way: Watch TV WITH your kids. It was good enough for my parents.
They're paying to have a project that doesn't work well enough (by your own admission) rewritten completely so that it -will- work. Sounds to me like they're trying to save it.
If you want to prove yourselves, take the time to fix the current one before they have had time to completely rewrite it... If you can't, there's your real problem.
Slashdot Mirror
In a word: Yes.
Making laws to tell them exactly what to do is stupid. What if there's a better way, and encryption isn't needed? They still have to do the encryption now.
Other posts have been more reasonable: Harsher penalties for failing to protect the data.
It might even be different if this was a 100% fix. It's not. Now the thief just needs 1 more step, instead. The password/key. Even without it, it's not impossible to crack encryption. It's just very hard, if done right. (And next to useless if done wrong.)
So yes, the 'nannystate' tag is accurate.
I think you hit the nail on the head, here. I hear people say 'It's impossible!' all the time and think of things like this. Even 'perpetual motion machines' (which I understand why they are impossible) should not stop being someone's dream because they may find a way to create something that's close enough as doesn't matter, or serves some other useful function.
They should, however, stop professing to have made one until they can actually prove it and stand the scrutiny... That may have been Tesla's mistake as well: Don't tell people you can do it until you have.
By that logic, some games are only $5, too. I was only talking about new prices, not bargain bin prices.
The DVD TV sets are a good point, too, but you can actually watch most of those shows over the air for 'free'. ('Free' because they are ad-supported, so they aren't truly free... You waste some of your time.)
No, I think it's a step further. It's not only permissible, but -required-. If they don't do everything they can for their client, they've failed them. The client will definitely think that, even if nobody else does, and the client pays the bills.
I disagree about the price of software. Let's look at other forms of entertainment:
DVD Movies: 2 hours (repeatable), $15+ ($60 for bluray new releases!)
Theatre Movies: 2 hours, $7+ per person.
Games: 20+hours (highly variable and repeatable), $60 (Some games are less than that, but many are more. Call it an 'average'.)
Bowling: 1 hour, $10 per person.
DVDs are $7.50 per hour if you only do them once. Theatre Movies are $3.50 per hour. Games are $3/hour if you only play for 20 hours. Bowling is $10 per hour.
I dunno, seems games are a pretty good deal. Add in the fact that the best games have entertained me for 200+ hours, and some get thousands, and they are an even better deal.
Things are worth what you are willing to pay for them. Judging software against hardware isn't a fair comparison, either. Without the software for the hardware, it's worthless to most people. And vice versa.
IF there was any chance that the number of write-ins for Ron Paul would be counted and said publicly, even if not officially counted, I'd agree that it sends a better message.
They won't, though. You'll never heard anything about it, any more than you've ever heard of any other write-in.
So between the 2, Barr makes more sense to me.
(As an aside, I was voting for RP until he dropped. I'll be voting for Barr now. It's not likely he'll win, but I'll feel good about who I voted for.)
Oh wow. I just had an Atlas shrugged flashback. Thank you.
These alternatives to YouTube that will thumb their nose at the DMCA... What are they exactly? I'm assuming they're sites outside the US... And that they are in countries that don't have treaties with the US, either.
It's not a matter of company policy. It's a matter of complying with the law. They have no choice.
I've seen the 'shotgun thing' myself... Well, almost.
This guy had been working there forever when I started. He loved this dog he had. One day, he comes in and says in monotone (no emotion) "I shot my dog." We stare. He continues, "I put my gun to the back of its head and pulled the trigger. I quit." And he walks out.
Call center stress is amazing. I felt some of it, but thankfully, never to that degree that it affected me like that. I was only in that job for 6 months, though.
Even if all the 'community' lets them do is blow off steam, I think it'd be worth it. Properly done, however, it could be a good resource for the company.
No 3-dig ID, but the fact that Fallout wasn't Wasteland 2 stopped me from playing it then. I was pretty pissed at the time. Now, I try to go back and see what the fuss is and the interface is horrid. -sigh- I've been spoiled by good interfaces and it really bugs me. I did recently purchased the 3-game set, but that UI hurdle is still stopping me.
I've heard the interface on 2 is better, but I'd really rather play 1 first.
They're both fruit. Yes, you can compare them.
As for the 'ad-based' being different, why? It still takes revenue to stream them, and sponsors in the US aren't going to be willing to sponsor the overseas traffic. So once again, the people who pay the bills (ad-watchers in the US, in this case) are the ones that get to the see the content, just like the BBC.
I think we all have things that we valued enough to pay 'too much' for, and then overprotect it afterwards. I tend to do it with tech things, but everyone has their own.
I would actually love to have a chess set that really feels like mine... I've just never seen one that speaks to me that strongly. I do have a $40 one that I got in the Bahamas (and looks more like $300-500, if purchased here in the US) that is hidden in a box somewhere because I don't want it broken, though.
http://www.shapeways.com/model/6280/limbtaker_trophy.html
This bookend (21x22x23cm) is $7800. How is that anything close to cheap?
Wireframe objects without much mass are considerably cheaper, but any statues with heft are insanely expensive.
http://www.shapeways.com/model/6277/queen.html
A chess queen... $319. Seriously!
Or maybe people shouldn't submit their data to every website they visit. If they care about their privacy, they had better well read the privacy policy.
Companies aren't going to dumb-down their policies and open themselves to lawsuits. They are precise and lengthy for a reason.
In the end it doesn't even matter, though. They all include a clause that lets them change the policy any time they like.
I did notice that the algorithm tends to make them smile. Especially the girl with the lips that turned down at the corners naturally.
Some call a single imperfection on the face, like a mole, a 'beauty mark'. I don't subscribe to that myself, but it does make a face a bit more interesting.
I also prefer the 'after' picture. She not ugly beforehand, but I find the 'after' picture to be prettier.
Sounds to me like not everyone is identical... Wow, imagine that!
I see them having a lot of problems with this technology because of that. Our brainwaves may all be similar, but that doesn't mean they're all the same. Or even alike enough to have a single plastic helmet fit everyone.
I'm hoping this device (and game) does well, and I'll probably be sucked into buying one, but only the fact that Squeenix is involved gives me any confidence in it.
As someone else pointed out: What -is- that common ancestor?
No, it's not a modern day ape, but an ape ancestor... Which was basically just an ape. You shouldn't discount someone that says we evolved from apes automatically. There's a good chance they actually understand the fine distinction and find that it's not a big enough distinction to explain every time they talk about it. They'd rather get into the meat of the discussion than brag about how much they know about the fine details that everyone else already knows.
I just traded up from a Sansa e270 6gb to an iPod Nano 8gb. It is -so- much better.
Granted, I haven't put thirdparty firmware (Rockbox) on my Sansa, but I absolutely hated my Sansa. You -have- to use their proprietary software to put video on it. Guess what happens if you lose your CD? You have to BUY a new one! They won't let you download it. Apple's software (iTunes), while still proprietary, is extremely easy to get another free copy of.
I never DID get playlists to work correctly on my Sansa. Podcasts worked okay when used with iTunes, but not at all otherwise. If you put it in USB stick mode, it reports every time you unplug it.
I've never tried games on my Sansa, but games on iPod Nano 4th gen are great. They are very clear, sound great, and the accelerometer lets me play games like 'Maze' (aka Labyrinth) where you guide the ball around the maze by tilting.
I'm far from a Mac fanboy. I say 'It just works!' in a nasty tone about 3 times a day at work, where we're all on Macs and have as much problems with the Mac Pros and xServe as any Windows machine I ever used. My personal preference there is Linux, too.
But the iPod is done right. It's going to be very hard to improve on it.
TFA asks a lot of questions but provides no answers whatsoever.
Personally, I doubt Hulu is going to let Tivo access their service and then skip the commercials unless Tivo is paying them every time a user does that. It would be suicide for Hulu.
ABC, NBC, etc etc are all in the same boat, except that it's not suicide and merely stupid for them.
I also doubt that user viewing preferences matters at all in an environment that can skip commercials. Unless they are looking for the demographic that won't watch the commercials no matter what... I can't imagine what use that data is.
You find it scary that someone who can hold a steady job, has many hours of experience, and can pass a driving test... Can drive?
Old drivers are a LOT scarier than young ones.
Actually, that report said 15%. And you've left out some factors:
It was only parents with children that were surveyed, but... 26% haven't bought a TV since the V-chip was mandatory, 39% had bought one since then but didn't think it had a V-chip, and 20 percent simply haven't used it.
In addition, only 27% of the people who have used it were able to program it, and some (no idea how many) were frustrated by it not working like they thought.
It doesn't surprise me, though, as many people are unable to get their VCR's time set correctly.
Any technical way to restrict viewing is going to be complicated, so the 'it's too difficult' argument just doesn't mean anything. If you can't program the V-chip, just do it the old-fashioned way: Watch TV WITH your kids. It was good enough for my parents.
Knowing how many times he agreed means nothing if you don't know how many times he disagreed.
All people agree on some basic things, and disagree on others.
Your second bullet point negates your third one. The very same vote that doesn't matter is the same non-vote that doesn't matter as well.
Besides, here's another way to look at it: If you don't vote, everyone else's votes are worth more.
Or maybe that was the plan? Get people not to vote so that your vote means more?
They're paying to have a project that doesn't work well enough (by your own admission) rewritten completely so that it -will- work. Sounds to me like they're trying to save it.
If you want to prove yourselves, take the time to fix the current one before they have had time to completely rewrite it... If you can't, there's your real problem.