Because there was an uproar about those specific things. Read the new policy before you say 'they can still terminate you for bashing', instead of just listening to the PR Rep and trying to pick apart the words.
No, the 'threat' that was 'quite real' was to AT&T's profits. They realized that people would not shut up about this and it would impact their bottom line. They felt the need to put it to rest because it was a non-issue and there was no reason to keep the wording as it was.
All I have to say to that is: Yay internet!
Before the internet, disseminating knowledge about a company's possible practices (as opposed to their real ones) was very tough. Now, in a matter of hours, millions of people can be informed of a looming issue and speak out about it. This sounds like 'down the with corporations!' speech, but it's not. It's good for them as well, as they can now judge their customers attitude in hours as well, instead of implementing a disastrous policy and finding out a year later that it has ruined their business.
I'm gonna get modded down to hell, but I'm going to say this anyhow:
Ubuntu Server is for novice system admins that just have to have all the newest bells and whistles. I'm in the group as far as my personal projects go. I would not consider installing it at work, though, even an LTS. (We -are- thinking about Gentoo, but that's headed by someone who uses it a lot already. We currently have RedHat.)
I can't count the number of times at work I've said 'Man, if we had Ubuntu server, upgrading that would be SO easy.' But then I stop and think 'Yeah, and what would the frequent updates break?' We've had -planned- updates to critical components go horribly wrong before, and are even using a very old version of 1 library because we had issues with a newer version, and the sysadmin (at the time) was afraid to mess with it any more. When we upgrade next, it'll be tons of fun finding out what works and what doesn't, I'm sure.
Re:I couldn't agree with TFA more....
on
Gaming Usability 101
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Absolutely. 'Consequence for actions' works great in real life, and keeps people from running out into a stream of bullets. It does -not- stop little Johnny from doing the same while playing a game. As for me, it only pisses me off and makes me curse the designer of the game, not the careless action I just pulled. Dying and having to try over and over and over is bad enough, I don't need them to add artificial pain as well.
If they wanted 'consequences for actions' they should have perma-death and NO saves. There have been games like that and they generally just piss me off, but there are those that like them.
gives us "AT&T has exclusive U.S. distribution rights for five years " and quite a few other links that say the same. As far as I know, it's fact.
The lockdown of third-party apps was originally blamed on AT&T, but there's been a lot of evidence lately that it may not be the case after all, as AT&T allows third-party apps on all other phones on their network. It could go either way on that... My thought is that AT&T and Apple fear that third-party apps could be used to unlock the phone (gasp) and they were banned for that reason. This is the first carrier-locked phone with a 'real' OS (or at least, it appears that way... it's less 'mobile' than Windows Mobile is, when compared to its desktop counterpart) and there may have been a lot of fear.
Don't tell the IP police, but when I see a good comic, I post it on the tech room door for others to enjoy. The really geeky ones (like this one) most people don't get, but I also watch Savage Chickens and Brevity and grab one from there, too. Even Sinfest occasionally has a funny one that's not NSFW.
It's nice to have people walk by and get to visibly watch their spirits lift.
So then explain why the US courts have the right to set the defintion of 'steal' for the entire world? There are plenty of people on this site (let alone the internet) that don't live in the US.
And I don't think of it as stealing because the RIAA says so. The dictionary definition is good enough for me, and I felt that way before I looked it up the first time to make sure I wasn't talking out of my ass. I think of it as stealing simply because it is taking something you have no right to and not compensating the owner.
Even if you don't call it stealing, it's still -wrong-. Anyone who thinks it's okay to 'infringe' has never created IP and had it infringed. It opens your eyes quite quickly.
"Apple's contract with AT&T does not give them the right to destroy unlocked phones"
Very true. Too bad they didn't 'destroy' the phones or you might have a point here. The phones were not 'destroyed', they were simply locked again and with a patch that fixed a vulnerability. The phones aren't 'bricked', they are simply locked again.
Apple sold that phone with 1 sole purpose in mind. That purpose did not include using third-party or any network except AT&T's. They didn't even try to hide this.
Wrong. If there's no bugfixes or patches in the update, the 'hackers' aren't a week behind, they are merely hours behind. And if there's no update anyhow, why bother upgrading? Anyone with a hacked device doesn't update unless there's a new feature they want in the new firmware, so constant updates don't -do- anything to the hacked devices and hackers, except fill a bit of their free time and give them a chance to further hack the system.
The PSP is a good example of that. They had to rely on bugs like the TIFF exploit for a long time, until someone figured out how to hack the updates. Lately, they've even figured out how to hack the BATTERY to update the firmware to whatever they want with no trouble. I think this attack even works on the new PSPs as well now, so Sony has real issues on their hands trying to stop hackers.
The more updates and changes you make, the more knowledge you give the hackers. Every new encryption key for the firmware is another piece of data to help them crack that key and generate their own.
More updates is actually -bad- for the manufacturer, not good.
I don't know what their contract says with AT&T, but that might very well be on there. Something to the tune of 'only tested and approved applications'.
But even assuming it's not a contractual obligation, Apple announced they weren't going to allow third-party apps weeks before the first iPhone was sold. It wasn't a surprise and anyone who bought it with the intent of hacking it and putting their own apps on it did so at their own risk.
I've bought devices, used 'hacks' on them, and did other things with them. But I did so with each of them with the complete understanding of how much money I could lose if anything happened that I couldn't control. In fact, while I was soldering one, my father was in the other room saying comforting things like 'That's a $300 mistake.' Turns out, he was almost right on that one... I barely managed to fix it.
Anyone complaining about Apple updating their firmware has rocks in their head. It's what they do, it's what they said they'll do, and nobody ought to be surprised that they'll do it.
If you want an open phone, there are several on the market or very close to market that will work MUCH better and the companies will support you in creating the apps. There's no need to hack the iPhone and Apple has cheated no one.
It's an add-on for a program that you'll never use that fixes a bug you'll never encounter. How do I know this? Because if this applied to you at all, you'd already know all the 'Web-Gobbledygook' that was used in the summary.
What 'hint'? They are under legal obligation to maintain their firmware so that the phones can't be used on other networks for another 5 years. They are also under obligation to their customers to provide firmware for their phone that is as bug-free as possible. If the user can hack it, a malicious attacker can, too.
So are you saying that they shouldn't patch the vulnerabilities, that they shouldn't release new firmware at all, or that they should break their contract with AT&T which could make every iPhone out there useless overnight unless it is hacked?
Maybe you didn't notice, but almost nobody here is a lawyer, and none of us are in court at the moment. You can pretend that it matters what the court says, but when speaking to people, you'll have to use the same language.
When you go to court, feel free to use the 'legal definition' of 'steal'. Here, we use English.
Thank you! I was wondering if I'd ever see a post say this and be modded up.
I'm absolutely sick of all the people who say 'they still have the item' and claim that means they didn't steal it. They simply use it as an excuse to make themselves feel better about taking something that they have no right to.
Before the trolls ask, yes, I have stolen and been stolen from, both with physical property and IP. I don't like any of it. You don't end the day with a good feeling under any of the situations.
Most people do -not- want to break the law, and they do -not- want to take things they aren't entitled to. But it's also true that most people have desires, and if you put up too many roadblocks for their desire, they'll go around them instead of paying the tolls. If a person wants a CD and knows there's DRM on it and they won't be able to rip it to their iPod, they'll simply save the time, money, and hassle and download the songs instead. They could buy the CD and then download the songs, and I'm sure some do, but why give good money for something that doesn't fit your need?
I used to be a PC gamer. Then DRM started to get out of control with rootkits and nasty drivers that crash the system and games that had DRM that didn't work right and I had to download a crack to play the game I rightfully bought. NWN is a good example of the last. I bought it first day, and bring it home. I installed it and started to play, and it crashes a few minutes later. I start it over and over, and it always crashes a few minutes later. It was unable to verify the DRM on my top of the line system, and instead of telling me, simply crashed the game so I'd lose all progress. I ended up getting a cracked version and everything worked fine.
One last thought: Scare tactics. I have seen a TON of misinformation about cracks. Everywhere I go, I see people saying that cracks often have viruses. I have applied cracks for dozens of games (because having to have the CD in the drive is idiotic) and not a single one has ever had a virus. The problem isn't the crack, but where you get it from. Don't download EXEs from P2P. It's stupid.
I installed it when I learned of Krita because I wanted to try it out. I had some issues with opening a file (forget what kind now) and tried KOffice and was very surprised to learn it not only opened it, but did it fast.
And I 'think that it's going to drop in price' because all games do, eventually. If not a straight price drop, then they get packaged in with other stuff until the value is good enough to keep selling copies of it.
Eventually it -does- go away, of course, but most decent titles see some time in the ole bargain bin. And if it isn't decent, why do you want it anyhow?
'Fight' has not been used incorrectly here, but maybe in a way Gandhi would not have meant.
Dictionary.com, fight "8. to contend in any manner; strive vigorously for or against something: He fought bravely against despair."
Doing anything that that the enemy does not want is 'fighting' them. "Peacefully walking into to gunfire and dieing" is fighting, just without violence.
The WalMart reference is apt, since you have the same basic reason to shop there: It's cheaper and/or they have things nobody else does. (The latter reason applies to all stores, though.)
I only buy on EBay when I can get the item at a significant discount, or I can't find the item at any reputable dealer. At that point, it's worth the potential hassle of having to complain to get your product or money back. And if I get my money back, I -still- have to go find a seller for the product.
It has to be significantly cheaper because of the time I have ot invest for every item I buy on EBay. After having an issue with a seller (who eventually DID send the phone, but with a picture of himself flicking me a bird and scratches) I now have to do more than just glance at the seller's rep. I -always- read through their negative feedback and see if A) it was deserved B) if they responded and C) if the response was friendly and correct.
On top of that, I have to be careful to read the auction several times to make sure it isn't a cardboard cutout of item X or a display model or damaged, and that the item is exactly the same as I have been researching elsewhere. Model numbers, part numbers, clones... Most auctions provide all the info, but you have to be very careful not to assume anything. Yes, I got burned on that once, too. I admitted my mistake and whatever the item turned out to be (I've forgotten since it was only a few dollars) is in a box somewhere.
Returns! They cost money on EBay. The seller isn't going to pay to have it shipped back, that's your money that's going to disappear. In some cases, that might cost as much as the product did. Driving to WalMart costs gas, but not nearly so much as shipping something back to China.
I still use EBay, but since the prices are generally not significantly less than retail any more, I mainly use it for items that aren't sold at any store that I recognize as reputable. Things like European phones (because they don't need to be unlocked), odd video game accessories (Why doesn't Nintendo sell a charging cradle for the ds lite?) and other such things.
I don't think 'thou shalt not kill' ever refered to anything except humans. Otherwise, all the Christians that are eating meat will have some serious explaining to do.
I think this is a good idea for the church... Get the kids used to being at the church, and interacting with their friends there, possibly even friends that they never get to see otherwise. It establishes it as a friendly place that they want to be, the kids have some supervision while they play, and everyone involved is happy.
Slashdot Mirror
Because there was an uproar about those specific things. Read the new policy before you say 'they can still terminate you for bashing', instead of just listening to the PR Rep and trying to pick apart the words.
No, the 'threat' that was 'quite real' was to AT&T's profits. They realized that people would not shut up about this and it would impact their bottom line. They felt the need to put it to rest because it was a non-issue and there was no reason to keep the wording as it was.
All I have to say to that is: Yay internet!
Before the internet, disseminating knowledge about a company's possible practices (as opposed to their real ones) was very tough. Now, in a matter of hours, millions of people can be informed of a looming issue and speak out about it. This sounds like 'down the with corporations!' speech, but it's not. It's good for them as well, as they can now judge their customers attitude in hours as well, instead of implementing a disastrous policy and finding out a year later that it has ruined their business.
"Aside from their archive of "least used verbs throughout history" where else do you find these words?"
Wow, I think this is the first example of 'self-negating prophecy' I've ever seen.
1) Announce to the world that 'shrive' and 'smite' are least used verbs.
2) World starts to use said verbs.
3) ???
4) Prophet! Err, Non-prophet!
I'm gonna get modded down to hell, but I'm going to say this anyhow:
Ubuntu Server is for novice system admins that just have to have all the newest bells and whistles. I'm in the group as far as my personal projects go. I would not consider installing it at work, though, even an LTS. (We -are- thinking about Gentoo, but that's headed by someone who uses it a lot already. We currently have RedHat.)
I can't count the number of times at work I've said 'Man, if we had Ubuntu server, upgrading that would be SO easy.' But then I stop and think 'Yeah, and what would the frequent updates break?' We've had -planned- updates to critical components go horribly wrong before, and are even using a very old version of 1 library because we had issues with a newer version, and the sysadmin (at the time) was afraid to mess with it any more. When we upgrade next, it'll be tons of fun finding out what works and what doesn't, I'm sure.
Absolutely. 'Consequence for actions' works great in real life, and keeps people from running out into a stream of bullets. It does -not- stop little Johnny from doing the same while playing a game. As for me, it only pisses me off and makes me curse the designer of the game, not the careless action I just pulled. Dying and having to try over and over and over is bad enough, I don't need them to add artificial pain as well.
If they wanted 'consequences for actions' they should have perma-death and NO saves. There have been games like that and they generally just piss me off, but there are those that like them.
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=att+apple+exlusive+5+year+contract&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
gives us "AT&T has exclusive U.S. distribution rights for five years " and quite a few other links that say the same. As far as I know, it's fact.
The lockdown of third-party apps was originally blamed on AT&T, but there's been a lot of evidence lately that it may not be the case after all, as AT&T allows third-party apps on all other phones on their network. It could go either way on that... My thought is that AT&T and Apple fear that third-party apps could be used to unlock the phone (gasp) and they were banned for that reason. This is the first carrier-locked phone with a 'real' OS (or at least, it appears that way... it's less 'mobile' than Windows Mobile is, when compared to its desktop counterpart) and there may have been a lot of fear.
Shit. That's my fault. I let a friend talk me into donating. Damned peer pressure. I promise it won't happen again.
Don't tell the IP police, but when I see a good comic, I post it on the tech room door for others to enjoy. The really geeky ones (like this one) most people don't get, but I also watch Savage Chickens and Brevity and grab one from there, too. Even Sinfest occasionally has a funny one that's not NSFW.
It's nice to have people walk by and get to visibly watch their spirits lift.
So then explain why the US courts have the right to set the defintion of 'steal' for the entire world? There are plenty of people on this site (let alone the internet) that don't live in the US.
And I don't think of it as stealing because the RIAA says so. The dictionary definition is good enough for me, and I felt that way before I looked it up the first time to make sure I wasn't talking out of my ass. I think of it as stealing simply because it is taking something you have no right to and not compensating the owner.
Even if you don't call it stealing, it's still -wrong-. Anyone who thinks it's okay to 'infringe' has never created IP and had it infringed. It opens your eyes quite quickly.
"Apple's contract with AT&T does not give them the right to destroy unlocked phones"
Very true. Too bad they didn't 'destroy' the phones or you might have a point here. The phones were not 'destroyed', they were simply locked again and with a patch that fixed a vulnerability. The phones aren't 'bricked', they are simply locked again.
Apple sold that phone with 1 sole purpose in mind. That purpose did not include using third-party or any network except AT&T's. They didn't even try to hide this.
Wrong. If there's no bugfixes or patches in the update, the 'hackers' aren't a week behind, they are merely hours behind. And if there's no update anyhow, why bother upgrading? Anyone with a hacked device doesn't update unless there's a new feature they want in the new firmware, so constant updates don't -do- anything to the hacked devices and hackers, except fill a bit of their free time and give them a chance to further hack the system.
The PSP is a good example of that. They had to rely on bugs like the TIFF exploit for a long time, until someone figured out how to hack the updates. Lately, they've even figured out how to hack the BATTERY to update the firmware to whatever they want with no trouble. I think this attack even works on the new PSPs as well now, so Sony has real issues on their hands trying to stop hackers.
The more updates and changes you make, the more knowledge you give the hackers. Every new encryption key for the firmware is another piece of data to help them crack that key and generate their own.
More updates is actually -bad- for the manufacturer, not good.
I don't know what their contract says with AT&T, but that might very well be on there. Something to the tune of 'only tested and approved applications'.
But even assuming it's not a contractual obligation, Apple announced they weren't going to allow third-party apps weeks before the first iPhone was sold. It wasn't a surprise and anyone who bought it with the intent of hacking it and putting their own apps on it did so at their own risk.
I've bought devices, used 'hacks' on them, and did other things with them. But I did so with each of them with the complete understanding of how much money I could lose if anything happened that I couldn't control. In fact, while I was soldering one, my father was in the other room saying comforting things like 'That's a $300 mistake.' Turns out, he was almost right on that one... I barely managed to fix it.
Anyone complaining about Apple updating their firmware has rocks in their head. It's what they do, it's what they said they'll do, and nobody ought to be surprised that they'll do it.
If you want an open phone, there are several on the market or very close to market that will work MUCH better and the companies will support you in creating the apps. There's no need to hack the iPhone and Apple has cheated no one.
You knew the terms before you bought the phone. If you didn't like the terms, you should not have bought the phone. It's not all that hard.
It's an add-on for a program that you'll never use that fixes a bug you'll never encounter. How do I know this? Because if this applied to you at all, you'd already know all the 'Web-Gobbledygook' that was used in the summary.
What 'hint'? They are under legal obligation to maintain their firmware so that the phones can't be used on other networks for another 5 years. They are also under obligation to their customers to provide firmware for their phone that is as bug-free as possible. If the user can hack it, a malicious attacker can, too.
So are you saying that they shouldn't patch the vulnerabilities, that they shouldn't release new firmware at all, or that they should break their contract with AT&T which could make every iPhone out there useless overnight unless it is hacked?
Maybe you didn't notice, but almost nobody here is a lawyer, and none of us are in court at the moment. You can pretend that it matters what the court says, but when speaking to people, you'll have to use the same language.
When you go to court, feel free to use the 'legal definition' of 'steal'. Here, we use English.
Or maybe you don't.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/steal
"2. to appropriate (ideas, credit, words, etc.) without right or acknowledgment."
"It is stealing."
Thank you! I was wondering if I'd ever see a post say this and be modded up.
I'm absolutely sick of all the people who say 'they still have the item' and claim that means they didn't steal it. They simply use it as an excuse to make themselves feel better about taking something that they have no right to.
Before the trolls ask, yes, I have stolen and been stolen from, both with physical property and IP. I don't like any of it. You don't end the day with a good feeling under any of the situations.
Most people do -not- want to break the law, and they do -not- want to take things they aren't entitled to. But it's also true that most people have desires, and if you put up too many roadblocks for their desire, they'll go around them instead of paying the tolls. If a person wants a CD and knows there's DRM on it and they won't be able to rip it to their iPod, they'll simply save the time, money, and hassle and download the songs instead. They could buy the CD and then download the songs, and I'm sure some do, but why give good money for something that doesn't fit your need?
I used to be a PC gamer. Then DRM started to get out of control with rootkits and nasty drivers that crash the system and games that had DRM that didn't work right and I had to download a crack to play the game I rightfully bought. NWN is a good example of the last. I bought it first day, and bring it home. I installed it and started to play, and it crashes a few minutes later. I start it over and over, and it always crashes a few minutes later. It was unable to verify the DRM on my top of the line system, and instead of telling me, simply crashed the game so I'd lose all progress. I ended up getting a cracked version and everything worked fine.
One last thought: Scare tactics. I have seen a TON of misinformation about cracks. Everywhere I go, I see people saying that cracks often have viruses. I have applied cracks for dozens of games (because having to have the CD in the drive is idiotic) and not a single one has ever had a virus. The problem isn't the crack, but where you get it from. Don't download EXEs from P2P. It's stupid.
I installed it when I learned of Krita because I wanted to try it out. I had some issues with opening a file (forget what kind now) and tried KOffice and was very surprised to learn it not only opened it, but did it fast.
It has been my office app of choice since then.
Nope, it's down to $10 now. http://steampowered.com/v/index.php?area=game&AppId=380
And I 'think that it's going to drop in price' because all games do, eventually. If not a straight price drop, then they get packaged in with other stuff until the value is good enough to keep selling copies of it.
Eventually it -does- go away, of course, but most decent titles see some time in the ole bargain bin. And if it isn't decent, why do you want it anyhow?
'Fight' has not been used incorrectly here, but maybe in a way Gandhi would not have meant.
Dictionary.com, fight
"8. to contend in any manner; strive vigorously for or against something: He fought bravely against despair."
Doing anything that that the enemy does not want is 'fighting' them. "Peacefully walking into to gunfire and dieing" is fighting, just without violence.
The WalMart reference is apt, since you have the same basic reason to shop there: It's cheaper and/or they have things nobody else does. (The latter reason applies to all stores, though.)
I only buy on EBay when I can get the item at a significant discount, or I can't find the item at any reputable dealer. At that point, it's worth the potential hassle of having to complain to get your product or money back. And if I get my money back, I -still- have to go find a seller for the product.
It has to be significantly cheaper because of the time I have ot invest for every item I buy on EBay. After having an issue with a seller (who eventually DID send the phone, but with a picture of himself flicking me a bird and scratches) I now have to do more than just glance at the seller's rep. I -always- read through their negative feedback and see if A) it was deserved B) if they responded and C) if the response was friendly and correct.
On top of that, I have to be careful to read the auction several times to make sure it isn't a cardboard cutout of item X or a display model or damaged, and that the item is exactly the same as I have been researching elsewhere. Model numbers, part numbers, clones... Most auctions provide all the info, but you have to be very careful not to assume anything. Yes, I got burned on that once, too. I admitted my mistake and whatever the item turned out to be (I've forgotten since it was only a few dollars) is in a box somewhere.
Returns! They cost money on EBay. The seller isn't going to pay to have it shipped back, that's your money that's going to disappear. In some cases, that might cost as much as the product did. Driving to WalMart costs gas, but not nearly so much as shipping something back to China.
I still use EBay, but since the prices are generally not significantly less than retail any more, I mainly use it for items that aren't sold at any store that I recognize as reputable. Things like European phones (because they don't need to be unlocked), odd video game accessories (Why doesn't Nintendo sell a charging cradle for the ds lite?) and other such things.
I don't think 'thou shalt not kill' ever refered to anything except humans. Otherwise, all the Christians that are eating meat will have some serious explaining to do.
I think this is a good idea for the church... Get the kids used to being at the church, and interacting with their friends there, possibly even friends that they never get to see otherwise. It establishes it as a friendly place that they want to be, the kids have some supervision while they play, and everyone involved is happy.
Really? Google says otherwise.
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=kromulant&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=opera&rls=en&hs=5sF&pwst=1&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=cromulent&spell=1
Nice try, though.
No, it's market-speak. Since this is marketing, I find the use of the word perfectly cromulent.