Microsoft would have a hard time getting away with something like this because they've fostered enough ill will in the past that it automatically looks suspicious.
I don't think Microsoft would do something like this in the first place, because whatever their many faults they do get that an OS has to accommodate third party apps and hardware if it possibly can. Apple already had code to interface with Palm - maybe there was a good technical reason for dropping it from this release of their OS but, as you say, it looks suspicious.
I wasn't aware of this research before, and it seems ironic to me that it seems to have coincided with the increased use of self-assessment forms in job applications. As someone with a high degree of knowledge of my area of work (web development) I am almost painfully aware of my areas of inadequacy. I choose to answer these questionnaires honestly, but I wonder now if that means I am getting passed over for people with an over-inflated idea of their competence? Or do people set these tests in order to weed out the ones who give themselves high scores in every area?
I imagine their activities do affect their country - for the better, as they effectively bring money into the economy. Isn't it odd that these activities are largely concentrated in poor countries? We could probably alleviate the problem by raising living standards in Eastern Europe, Africa, China, etc.
You're right. Unfortunately they only listen to the geeks they are paying to create systems like this, who are of course saying "yes, we can make an uncrackable security system" and suppressing their sniggers until they've made it out of the room with their fat cheque.
You state these things as if they were unalterable facts. But as has been noted above it is the profit motive that makes people, and more importantly corporations, behave like this.
But literally millions of people are guilty of this so-called "offence". At some point you have to challenge this insane law, although one could argue whether in front of a judge and jury is the right place to do it.
That is wrong in so many ways it's hard to know where to start. For one, those fines have been in place since long before filesharing was a twinkle in Shawn Fanning's eye, and are meant to act as actual compensation for losses caused by corporate pirates, not punishment to individuals.
No. Some mobile browsers don't have it, lynx users certainly don't have it, not every screenreader will execute it and nor will most search engines (Google being a very recent exception), plus a lot of us have noticed that javascript is the one consistent factor in browser vulnerabilities and choose to keep it switched off except when it's absolutely required (a number I'd be willing to bet is rising).
Judging by the code I've seen (and continue to see regularly), I thought EVERYONE else learned this by doing it on their own, like me!
"They" do teach it, by which I mean the world community of web coders. Even the most enthusiastic teaching professional is no match for the aggregate of everyone who is actually doing that work. Sure, there is some misinformation and bad practise being passed around but in general the google hit rate for quality advice and guidance in web development is very high. If you only looked at w3schools (for boring details) and alistapart (for higher level discussion) you'd already be off to a great start.
This is one job where you definitely don't have to be on your own.
When a software company has a website that replaces every href with an onclick, I know they're fucking idiots
Actually this is reasonably legitimate. I hate links which open in a new window as much as anyone, but if you have to do it, javascript is the way, rather than using the deprecated target attribute.
I have seen it estimated that up to 10% of users have javascript turned off. I usually find that mentioning that NoScript is the #4 Firefox add-on persuades clients that providing scriptless fallbacks is important even before getting them thinking about accessibility concerns.
(I have to turn it off in Opera on my phone, mostly because Slashdot is unreadable with it on. Some phones browsers don't even have the choice)
Xp was good in that you could use drivers from previous windows OS.
This is not strictly true: some drivers worked ok, but many did not. I haven't read anything about this, but can't believe that Win7 is so different from Vista that the situation will be worse; I would hope it will be better. Of course I would not expect many XP drivers to work on Win7, but that was the version of Windows before last.
This whole topic is of interest to me as I would like to upgrade my Vista laptop to Win7 but really don't have the time to do a full install of all my apps.
It would be a far more interesting test case if she came out and admitted she did it. Then they lawyers would have to make the case that (non-profit) file sharing is actually legal, and/or that the damages are unconstitutional. The last trial was just about the technicalities of whether the prosecution could prove she did it, and they did quite a good job of that.
Given that these numbers have just come to light, in the incredible coincidence that they also happen to be this week's winning lottery numbers you'll win less money because you'll have to share your winnings with all the other wrong-headed people who think this increases their likelihood. (I am having strenuously to fight my intuition, which is telling me that they are now *less* likely to come up.)
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft would have a hard time getting away with something like this because they've fostered enough ill will in the past that it automatically looks suspicious.
I don't think Microsoft would do something like this in the first place, because whatever their many faults they do get that an OS has to accommodate third party apps and hardware if it possibly can. Apple already had code to interface with Palm - maybe there was a good technical reason for dropping it from this release of their OS but, as you say, it looks suspicious.
How does this "indicate otherwise"? If you receive one of these letters, you have already been caught.
I wasn't aware of this research before, and it seems ironic to me that it seems to have coincided with the increased use of self-assessment forms in job applications. As someone with a high degree of knowledge of my area of work (web development) I am almost painfully aware of my areas of inadequacy. I choose to answer these questionnaires honestly, but I wonder now if that means I am getting passed over for people with an over-inflated idea of their competence? Or do people set these tests in order to weed out the ones who give themselves high scores in every area?
Seems to me like quite a good thing that people value fairness highly.
I imagine their activities do affect their country - for the better, as they effectively bring money into the economy. Isn't it odd that these activities are largely concentrated in poor countries? We could probably alleviate the problem by raising living standards in Eastern Europe, Africa, China, etc.
You're right. Unfortunately they only listen to the geeks they are paying to create systems like this, who are of course saying "yes, we can make an uncrackable security system" and suppressing their sniggers until they've made it out of the room with their fat cheque.
Whooooosh yourself. (S)he's right. The justice system is stacked in favour of the state.
You state these things as if they were unalterable facts. But as has been noted above it is the profit motive that makes people, and more importantly corporations, behave like this.
I don't think so - AFAIK the RIAA only represents the four majors.
But literally millions of people are guilty of this so-called "offence". At some point you have to challenge this insane law, although one could argue whether in front of a judge and jury is the right place to do it.
That is wrong in so many ways it's hard to know where to start. For one, those fines have been in place since long before filesharing was a twinkle in Shawn Fanning's eye, and are meant to act as actual compensation for losses caused by corporate pirates, not punishment to individuals.
If you buy music from one of the "big four" labels, you pay the RIAA to be able to conduct these ridiculous lawsuits, wether you want it or not.
Fixed that for you. Not every record label is an evil extortionist.
I bet that was good quality code.
Remind me, exactly how many cubic footballs fit into one stadium?
Everyone has JS.
No. Some mobile browsers don't have it, lynx users certainly don't have it, not every screenreader will execute it and nor will most search engines (Google being a very recent exception), plus a lot of us have noticed that javascript is the one consistent factor in browser vulnerabilities and choose to keep it switched off except when it's absolutely required (a number I'd be willing to bet is rising).
Wait, wait!
You mean they teach this stuff?
Judging by the code I've seen (and continue to see regularly), I thought EVERYONE else learned this by doing it on their own, like me!
"They" do teach it, by which I mean the world community of web coders. Even the most enthusiastic teaching professional is no match for the aggregate of everyone who is actually doing that work. Sure, there is some misinformation and bad practise being passed around but in general the google hit rate for quality advice and guidance in web development is very high. If you only looked at w3schools (for boring details) and alistapart (for higher level discussion) you'd already be off to a great start.
This is one job where you definitely don't have to be on your own.
When a software company has a website that replaces every href with an onclick, I know they're fucking idiots
Actually this is reasonably legitimate. I hate links which open in a new window as much as anyone, but if you have to do it, javascript is the way, rather than using the deprecated target attribute.
I have seen it estimated that up to 10% of users have javascript turned off. I usually find that mentioning that NoScript is the #4 Firefox add-on persuades clients that providing scriptless fallbacks is important even before getting them thinking about accessibility concerns.
(I have to turn it off in Opera on my phone, mostly because Slashdot is unreadable with it on. Some phones browsers don't even have the choice)
This site is full of double standards.
Indeed. If only all of Slashdot was written by the same person.
Apart from the ones whose machines were fucked up by installing Leopard.
Xp was good in that you could use drivers from previous windows OS.
This is not strictly true: some drivers worked ok, but many did not. I haven't read anything about this, but can't believe that Win7 is so different from Vista that the situation will be worse; I would hope it will be better. Of course I would not expect many XP drivers to work on Win7, but that was the version of Windows before last.
This whole topic is of interest to me as I would like to upgrade my Vista laptop to Win7 but really don't have the time to do a full install of all my apps.
Me neither. I would expect only sensible people to believe it.
It would be a far more interesting test case if she came out and admitted she did it. Then they lawyers would have to make the case that (non-profit) file sharing is actually legal, and/or that the damages are unconstitutional. The last trial was just about the technicalities of whether the prosecution could prove she did it, and they did quite a good job of that.
Actually Firefox uses SQLite to power the Awesome Bar.
Given that these numbers have just come to light, in the incredible coincidence that they also happen to be this week's winning lottery numbers you'll win less money because you'll have to share your winnings with all the other wrong-headed people who think this increases their likelihood. (I am having strenuously to fight my intuition, which is telling me that they are now *less* likely to come up.)