I forgot to mention, Virginia allows you to file your state taxes in a form online on their website for free (probably only people with pretty easy taxes can use this form). I used this form this year, and it worked quite well.
It would be awesome if the US did this. I couldn't imagine it happening though--the IRS is full of very conservative boring people (no offense, I applied to work there as a lawyer, so I fit the mold...well, except that they didn't hire me); I think they wouldn't write a program because they're afraid they'd write it wrong. They know how to tax, not how to write code.
However, I'd be willing to lobby for this. Anyone with me?
I think this is only an issue for people that are doing things "on the edge." For the vast majority of us, paying taxes is a pretty straightforward affair with clear black and white answers. A program just helps us do the math and make sure we put the answers in the correct boxes.
I think this relatively simple open source program is intended to serve the masses, not replace accountants.
The situation I offered was bait and switch though. In my example, I didn't posit that the advertisement said "quantities limited." That is the reason why stores now advertise "quantities limited"; before that they were being succesfully prosecuted for bait and switch when they only had very few of an advertised item.
I actually had no idea of this--I don't keep up on my Best Buy news, but this is very interesting, and obviously illegal.
I wonder if Best Buy corporate is directly to blame though (certainly they are vicariously to blame through laws of agency, but I don't know about directly). See--the Best Buy employees do this, and may even have learned it from those who have gone before, but I doubt it would be corporate policy. My guess is that Best Buy employees are paid at least partially on commission, and they make more money of some items than they do others. So the commission policy would drive the employees to do that.
However, no matter the reason, Best Buy Corporate can get in trouble if a lawyer someplace could actually prove the case.
I'm not positive, but this seems very similar to me to "bait and switch," which is illegal. In that scheme, the store would advertise an exceptionally low price on an object...but only had 3 in stock. Then, when you come to the store as the 100th person looking for that item, they say, "sorry we ran out... but since you came, we can offer you a "good deal" on this other similar item for only a slightly higher [and much more profitable] price!"
This is similar, except the low price draws customers to the store, and then...where's the low price? That's fraudulant. Also--it's especially bad because it involves deceiving the consumer: "You say you saw a lower price on the internet? Why don't we look at the site right now..." Outright deception is rarely legal.
I just wanted to make a note here on the wording of the DMCA:
No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
Is a "technological measure" effective under the statute if it was cracked this quickly? I am wondering what exactly is the meaning behind the word "effective" in that sentence. If it to have a meaning at all (and every word in a statute is assumed to not be superfluous, if possible), then it seems that it would mean the "technological measures" would have to do their job.
On the other hand--the "technological measure" that was used would be effective against an attempted crack by most people. Perhaps that is sufficient to make a measure "effective."
I'm running Opera 9.20, build 8713 on Windows XP. When I tried the IE version of the bug, the page automatically turned to:
Below should be a copy of your C:\BOOT.INI file. If nothing is shown, chances are you don't have this file in the first place, your account has no permission to read that file, you didn't use a vulnerable browser, or I screwed something up.
=== RECEIVED DATA ===
When I try the Firefox version, it just won't go on to the following page at all. Then I tried it in IE7 and Firefox to see what was supposed to happen. That didn't happen. (or, in other words, I apparently do have a boot.ini file, and I do have permission to access it)
The author did speculate that Opera might not be vulnurable. However, the Firefox version did not work in IE7, and the IE7 version didn't work in Firefox, so can we really expect the IE7 and Firefox versions to work in Opera? So, perhaps Opera isn't vulnerable, or maybe it just needs an Opera-specific version for it to work, like Firefox and IE7 do.
nah--more likely it will just increase thieves' tendencies to put their kidnapped "treasures" inside lead boxes. That doesn't sound good for the children.
Anyone know if spoofing resolves this? I thought I'd try it just now, but the link on the wal-Mart site to the downloads section seems to be slashdotted(?).
Also, does anyone know if Wal-Mart does something similar to that with its music downloads?
Good morning. I feel it is my mission in life to correct misconceptions regarding what it means to "beg the question." It does not, as the popular media would have you believe, mean something equivalent to "raise the question," as you have used it. It is a logical concept defined as an argument in which the conclusion is assumed in a premise (ex from Wikipedia: "The Bible is the revealed word of God, therefore God must exist." As you can see, this argument "cheats"; the conclusion is only logically valid because the premise presupposes the conclusion).
You still don't get it--my comment is not about whether or not it is difficult to make something have mp3 playback capability; my comment is about the fact that this USB stick doesn't come with it. Further, on this stick, it is not particularly easy to add mp3 playback capability, because it does not come with any means by which to do so--it does not have Amarok on it (and, I have Amarok, and it was the first program I installed under OpenSUSE, and it did not come with mp3 capability. Tangent: Although it was easy enough to get the capability, I found that I don't particularly like Amarok), and it does not have synaptic (graphic), or anything else that would install programs. These kids would have to go get those programs. I'm not saying that is particularly hard to do (this is getting repetitive), I'm just saying that, even though it isn't hard, it's still easier for them to use that which they already have, which already works. Because of this, the USB sticks will not serve their intended purpose.
Now, if you choose to respond to this, keep your response focused on (a) the fact that these USB sticks do not have a program on them by which the USB sticks can have more programs installed; (b) these USB sticks are not carrying an operating system, just a few programs designed to run under Windows off the USB stick; (c) the fact that doing nothing or close to it is easier that having to do something; and (d) the fact that this whole discussion is intended to be based around the usability of these OSS USB sticks by high school students, not how hard or easy it is for me to install Amarok on my Ubuntu box (I already know how to do that).
The things you are saying are the types of things that run a company into the ground: "it's easy enough to do this..." whithout facing the reality that people won't do it when they already have something that serves their purposes.
Right, the masses use iTunes, Winamp or the like--free but proprietary software (not OSS). Software that just works. Not software that requires extra steps to get to do what they want (note that WMP isn't very good).
My point is that these memory sticks are being given out with the intention of exposing kids to OSS; but I'm saying these kids are going to say, "does it do what I want? No; not unless I get on the command line and.... Then I'll stick to iTunes, because all I have to do is press one button and it just works." (note also that the memory stick doesn't come with apt, synaptic, etc anyway, so installing mp3 playback capability would be far more difficult than just "sudo apt-get...")
I'm not saying it's difficult to impliment mp3 playback capability, I'm just saying that it's more difficult than just using what is already available. And that is the reason that I don't think these memory sticks being given out will really have any effect.
Also, I have not found an open source music player that works as well as iTunes, but I think Songbird will be good once the bugs are worked out.
OH--I forgot to note this on the offical Ubuntu instructions:
Legal Notice Patent and copyright laws operate differently depending on which country you are in. Please obtain legal advice if you are unsure whether a particular patent or restriction applies to a media format you wish to use in your country.
I'm sure that the official Ubuntu instructions violate the European Union Copyright Directive, to which Italy is a party. This is why I know the Italian school district didn't include the mp3 codecs on the memory stick (besides the fact that this is an OSS stick and the codecs are proprietary).
This isn't my point--I did exactly what you're saying (actually, I used Automatix). My point is that these memory sticks given out by Italian schools are going to be thrown in a drawer someplace because they don't come with the ability to play mp3s (which is necessarily the case because the mp3 codec is proprietary, and these memory sticks come full of OSS). All the kids have to do to enable playback is add repositories, and apt-get.... Or they can just stick with the proprietary stuff that they already have that already plays mp3s.
The few linux geeks in the school, one of which would be me, would be saying, "but all you have to do is add a couple repositories, and apt-get install these programs and then it'll play!" And they'll say I don't have to do anything at all to get Windows to play.
That's the voice of the masses--they aren't interested in OSS, they're interested in whatever already works with the least amount of effort. It's a lazy word we leave in.
Sure, I'm absolutely serious. Given, I've only used OpenSUSE and Ubuntu, but it certainly wasn't accidental that neither comes with the native ability to play mp3s. Automatix is the easiest way to install mp3 playback capability, and it has a very clear warning screen warning users that the some of what it provides violates laws in some countries (of all that Automatix provides, the codecs seem like the only thing to me that may violate law). Countries that have strong copyrights law (like those of the EU and the USA) are places where Automatix would be illegal.
I think this USB stick will only have any effect on these kids if it will do what they want it to. They probably couldn't care less about using a word processing program, but watching movies and listening to music is something they might like to do. This stick comes preloaded with music and movie software--but, since it won't play mp3s (unless the school put out some dough--every OSS system I've used required some shady means of enabling mp3 playback), it won't do what the kids want it to, so they probably won't use it.
Don't get me wrong--the kids should have all their music in ogg, but they don't, and they aren't about to go convert it all for some schtick their school gave them.
I totally agree with you. I just don't think that's the way it went--Courts are presided over by Judges, who are very old white guys that don't really understand this stuff. (I'm a law clerk for two judges; watching these guys try to check their email makes my day every time I see it) "The internet is not a truck...The internet is a series of tubes" speech makes sense to them.
Criminal sentences are rarely sealed. Generally the Judge reads them from the bench for all to hear. I've only heard of civil settlements being sealed or including a clause providing confidentiality. The restitution was probably the cost of patching the vulnerability.
Just after writing this I actually RTFA and felt a bit stupid. I had wondered why more commenters had picked up on the whole "Earth" thing. Judging from the fact my comment got modded up (so far, anyway), it goes to show some of the moderators don't RTFA either.
Here's an article about his lawyer. It is the same guy that represented his mom (and that worked out ok...sort of). It is a one man operation, with a little help from the mom herself.
It sounds to me like their short on funds, and I'm not sure what this lawyer is looking to get out of this--a judgment for attorney's fees? I guess he had to countersue for this kid if he is to have any chance of getting money out of this. It's too high profile to quit, but their is no funding to work with (except for this little fund mentioned in the linked article).
Slashdot Mirror
I forgot to mention, Virginia allows you to file your state taxes in a form online on their website for free (probably only people with pretty easy taxes can use this form). I used this form this year, and it worked quite well.
It would be awesome if the US did this. I couldn't imagine it happening though--the IRS is full of very conservative boring people (no offense, I applied to work there as a lawyer, so I fit the mold...well, except that they didn't hire me); I think they wouldn't write a program because they're afraid they'd write it wrong. They know how to tax, not how to write code.
However, I'd be willing to lobby for this. Anyone with me?
I think this is only an issue for people that are doing things "on the edge." For the vast majority of us, paying taxes is a pretty straightforward affair with clear black and white answers. A program just helps us do the math and make sure we put the answers in the correct boxes.
I think this relatively simple open source program is intended to serve the masses, not replace accountants.
The situation I offered was bait and switch though. In my example, I didn't posit that the advertisement said "quantities limited." That is the reason why stores now advertise "quantities limited"; before that they were being succesfully prosecuted for bait and switch when they only had very few of an advertised item.
I actually had no idea of this--I don't keep up on my Best Buy news, but this is very interesting, and obviously illegal.
I wonder if Best Buy corporate is directly to blame though (certainly they are vicariously to blame through laws of agency, but I don't know about directly). See--the Best Buy employees do this, and may even have learned it from those who have gone before, but I doubt it would be corporate policy. My guess is that Best Buy employees are paid at least partially on commission, and they make more money of some items than they do others. So the commission policy would drive the employees to do that.
However, no matter the reason, Best Buy Corporate can get in trouble if a lawyer someplace could actually prove the case.
I'm not positive, but this seems very similar to me to "bait and switch," which is illegal. In that scheme, the store would advertise an exceptionally low price on an object...but only had 3 in stock. Then, when you come to the store as the 100th person looking for that item, they say, "sorry we ran out... but since you came, we can offer you a "good deal" on this other similar item for only a slightly higher [and much more profitable] price!"
This is similar, except the low price draws customers to the store, and then...where's the low price? That's fraudulant. Also--it's especially bad because it involves deceiving the consumer: "You say you saw a lower price on the internet? Why don't we look at the site right now..." Outright deception is rarely legal.
Is a "technological measure" effective under the statute if it was cracked this quickly? I am wondering what exactly is the meaning behind the word "effective" in that sentence. If it to have a meaning at all (and every word in a statute is assumed to not be superfluous, if possible), then it seems that it would mean the "technological measures" would have to do their job.
On the other hand--the "technological measure" that was used would be effective against an attempted crack by most people. Perhaps that is sufficient to make a measure "effective."
When I try the Firefox version, it just won't go on to the following page at all. Then I tried it in IE7 and Firefox to see what was supposed to happen. That didn't happen. (or, in other words, I apparently do have a boot.ini file, and I do have permission to access it)
The author did speculate that Opera might not be vulnurable. However, the Firefox version did not work in IE7, and the IE7 version didn't work in Firefox, so can we really expect the IE7 and Firefox versions to work in Opera?
So, perhaps Opera isn't vulnerable, or maybe it just needs an Opera-specific version for it to work, like Firefox and IE7 do.
PETA's gonna be mad when sharks eat these.
Word, brother! This isn't the same as the "plain old MacBook"--the pro has more memory, a better graphics card, etc.
I want a mac for my next computer, but I'm not finding the features I want matching with the size computer I want.
Oh man, I've already spent so much money on lead...
nah--more likely it will just increase thieves' tendencies to put their kidnapped "treasures" inside lead boxes. That doesn't sound good for the children.
Anyone know if spoofing resolves this? I thought I'd try it just now, but the link on the wal-Mart site to the downloads section seems to be slashdotted(?).
Also, does anyone know if Wal-Mart does something similar to that with its music downloads?
Good morning. I feel it is my mission in life to correct misconceptions regarding what it means to "beg the question." It does not, as the popular media would have you believe, mean something equivalent to "raise the question," as you have used it. It is a logical concept defined as an argument in which the conclusion is assumed in a premise (ex from Wikipedia: "The Bible is the revealed word of God, therefore God must exist." As you can see, this argument "cheats"; the conclusion is only logically valid because the premise presupposes the conclusion).
Good luck on your future endeavors.
You still don't get it--my comment is not about whether or not it is difficult to make something have mp3 playback capability; my comment is about the fact that this USB stick doesn't come with it. Further, on this stick, it is not particularly easy to add mp3 playback capability, because it does not come with any means by which to do so--it does not have Amarok on it (and, I have Amarok, and it was the first program I installed under OpenSUSE, and it did not come with mp3 capability. Tangent: Although it was easy enough to get the capability, I found that I don't particularly like Amarok), and it does not have synaptic (graphic), or anything else that would install programs. These kids would have to go get those programs. I'm not saying that is particularly hard to do (this is getting repetitive), I'm just saying that, even though it isn't hard, it's still easier for them to use that which they already have, which already works. Because of this, the USB sticks will not serve their intended purpose.
Now, if you choose to respond to this, keep your response focused on (a) the fact that these USB sticks do not have a program on them by which the USB sticks can have more programs installed; (b) these USB sticks are not carrying an operating system, just a few programs designed to run under Windows off the USB stick; (c) the fact that doing nothing or close to it is easier that having to do something; and (d) the fact that this whole discussion is intended to be based around the usability of these OSS USB sticks by high school students, not how hard or easy it is for me to install Amarok on my Ubuntu box (I already know how to do that).
The things you are saying are the types of things that run a company into the ground: "it's easy enough to do this..." whithout facing the reality that people won't do it when they already have something that serves their purposes.
Right, the masses use iTunes, Winamp or the like--free but proprietary software (not OSS). Software that just works. Not software that requires extra steps to get to do what they want (note that WMP isn't very good).
.... Then I'll stick to iTunes, because all I have to do is press one button and it just works." (note also that the memory stick doesn't come with apt, synaptic, etc anyway, so installing mp3 playback capability would be far more difficult than just "sudo apt-get...")
My point is that these memory sticks are being given out with the intention of exposing kids to OSS; but I'm saying these kids are going to say, "does it do what I want? No; not unless I get on the command line and
I'm not saying it's difficult to impliment mp3 playback capability, I'm just saying that it's more difficult than just using what is already available. And that is the reason that I don't think these memory sticks being given out will really have any effect.
Also, I have not found an open source music player that works as well as iTunes, but I think Songbird will be good once the bugs are worked out.
This isn't my point--I did exactly what you're saying (actually, I used Automatix). My point is that these memory sticks given out by Italian schools are going to be thrown in a drawer someplace because they don't come with the ability to play mp3s (which is necessarily the case because the mp3 codec is proprietary, and these memory sticks come full of OSS). All the kids have to do to enable playback is add repositories, and apt-get.... Or they can just stick with the proprietary stuff that they already have that already plays mp3s.
The few linux geeks in the school, one of which would be me, would be saying, "but all you have to do is add a couple repositories, and apt-get install these programs and then it'll play!" And they'll say I don't have to do anything at all to get Windows to play.
That's the voice of the masses--they aren't interested in OSS, they're interested in whatever already works with the least amount of effort. It's a lazy word we leave in.
Sure, I'm absolutely serious. Given, I've only used OpenSUSE and Ubuntu, but it certainly wasn't accidental that neither comes with the native ability to play mp3s. Automatix is the easiest way to install mp3 playback capability, and it has a very clear warning screen warning users that the some of what it provides violates laws in some countries (of all that Automatix provides, the codecs seem like the only thing to me that may violate law). Countries that have strong copyrights law (like those of the EU and the USA) are places where Automatix would be illegal.
I think this USB stick will only have any effect on these kids if it will do what they want it to. They probably couldn't care less about using a word processing program, but watching movies and listening to music is something they might like to do. This stick comes preloaded with music and movie software--but, since it won't play mp3s (unless the school put out some dough--every OSS system I've used required some shady means of enabling mp3 playback), it won't do what the kids want it to, so they probably won't use it.
Don't get me wrong--the kids should have all their music in ogg, but they don't, and they aren't about to go convert it all for some schtick their school gave them.
It'll go in a drawer someplace.
I totally agree with you. I just don't think that's the way it went--Courts are presided over by Judges, who are very old white guys that don't really understand this stuff. (I'm a law clerk for two judges; watching these guys try to check their email makes my day every time I see it) "The internet is not a truck...The internet is a series of tubes" speech makes sense to them.
Criminal sentences are rarely sealed. Generally the Judge reads them from the bench for all to hear. I've only heard of civil settlements being sealed or including a clause providing confidentiality. The restitution was probably the cost of patching the vulnerability.
Just after writing this I actually RTFA and felt a bit stupid. I had wondered why more commenters had picked up on the whole "Earth" thing. Judging from the fact my comment got modded up (so far, anyway), it goes to show some of the moderators don't RTFA either.
Here's an article about his lawyer. It is the same guy that represented his mom (and that worked out ok...sort of). It is a one man operation, with a little help from the mom herself.
It sounds to me like their short on funds, and I'm not sure what this lawyer is looking to get out of this--a judgment for attorney's fees? I guess he had to countersue for this kid if he is to have any chance of getting money out of this. It's too high profile to quit, but their is no funding to work with (except for this little fund mentioned in the linked article).