It's been a while since I've written any WMF software, but if I remember correctly, the problem here is with the general principle of a WMF, not a bug in any libraries, hence windows and wine both being vulnerable.
A wmf is not a graphics format in a traditional sense, but rather a list of API calls to the GDI libraries that when fired off one after another will recreate an image.
For this reason, saying that the WMF insecurity is a bug, is like saying that the fact that you can make a malicious EXE for windows is a bug also.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be fixed, becuase it is a vulnerability, I'm just trying to shine some light on why similar vulnerabilities exist in WINE.
If I have given an incorrect explanation of WMF, please feel free to comment.
Didn't microsoft have IBM build all the cpu's for their Xbox360 platform? Those are powerPC chips in the xbox, so they must have come from IBM.
Seems odd they would partner and claim them as an enemy as the same time.
That brings me to another point, shouldn't IBM be suffering pretty hard now that Apple is moving to Intel for its chips? That must have been a large source of income for IBM.
I remember there had been some hype about google developing some advanced translation technology based on neural nets learning natural language by comparing UN documents from many languages.
I wonder if google will soon integrate this sort of technology into their chat client, and hopefully outperform the existing machine translation tech.
I know everyone likes to bash microsoft around here, but to imply Apple is somehow giving them an ass-whooping is just stupid.
Microsoft maintains between a 90% and 95% market-share for its operating system, and provides the only practical 'Home Media' solution for a consumer PC, along with massively popular (and arguably useful) development tools and game systems. And since they haven't even launched their media service yet, how can you say iTunes is whooping it? Theres no way to know how nice their service will be, but I am very glad to see more real competition in this area as it can only be good for us, the consumers. Microsoft has enough 'power' to potentially force to the recording industry into sticking to their deals, as opposed to constantly raising prices as they have attempted to do to Apple (iTunes).
And to defend myself, while I personally use mythTV in addition to MediaCenter at home I do not consider it as practical solution for most consumers (yet!), as it requires alot of tech savvy to setup and use, it even involved building a custom IR transmitter in my case.
Anyway, I disdain microsoft as much as the next guy, but it's counter-productive to just make up stupid comments... Microsoft is (and will remain to be) a very competetive and successful company, and they have just as much ability to compete with Apple as anyone else, as they have proven time and again.
I agree that many ergonomic keyboards are angled, I've seen them angled both concave and convex, but the main problem here is that both hands in a single direction, rather than symmetrically, and that one hand is substantially higher than the other... in addition to the lateral force issue you mentioned.
I also hope there is some design feature that keeps the mouse from sliding off the 'mouse area' as nothing could be more annoying than your mouse flying across the floor everytime you move.
So I looked at the picture and the first thing I think to myself is "How the f*ck am I supposed to type efficiently with my keyboard at a huge angle"
So I sat for a moment, puzzled as to how they thought this thing would be useful...
Then I decided to try it myself, So i've propped my keyboard up at a comparable angle, and I'm typing on it right now... I've got to admit it hasn't slowed my typing down at all, or decreased my accuracy (Although it does obviously take longer to make the keyboard->mouse->keyboard transition with the right hand)
While I'm still able to type quite well, I can't help but get the feeling that this could be a near-instant cuase of a significant repetitive stress injury, with all the odd angles and such.
Also, if the keyboard is in your lap, how do you get to your........
A proper review
on
Pro C#
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I happy to say, that IMO, this is the first proper/quality book review we've had for quite some time on/.
The author clearly listed what is, and is not, contained in the book, and also provided his opinion on how useful these various chapters were to him.
Hopefully future book-related-articles will try to provide atleast this level of information, as opposed to common "The book had alot of good stuff, but then some stuff was missing.".
More on-topic, I would say that in my experience I've never found these sorts of books particularly helpful, as anyone with software experience should have no trouble finding the information they need in the MSDN library, or on various other websites. Also, I imagine it would be difficult to find a developer who does not already have experience with a syntactically similar language.
I can imagine though, that this sort of reading might bring up questions (and answers) to questions that many developers had not yet thought to ask (primarily regarding CIL, GAC, etc), which could of course be helpful.
Well, assuming you still have the same TV in 3 years, and you do all your tv watching on Over-The-Air stations (no cable or sat) then you will have to get what they are calling a 'digital converter box', which is essentially what we now refer to as an HD Tuner, but alot cheaper since it doesn't need the high quality output for your standard definition television.
Current AVerMedia already sells a nice HD Tuner for $90, with digital audio and component video, so I am MORE than confident that in the next few years, as the demand increases dramatically, that you will be able to get your digital converter box for a price within the $40 the government is offering you as a tradeoff for discontinuing your current service.
In fact, i'm quite confident that with the high demand for these things you'll likely find them cheaper than $40, which means you'll probably make a few dollars profit out of the deal and end up with much higher quality picture (and likely more channels)...
I just can't really see how you are getting a shabby deal.
And to go a bit off-topic, are there actually people who do significant TV watching via over-the-air analog broadcasts? Where I live I would be lucky to get 2 stations and they would be of almost unwatchable quality (OKC,OK).... Do larger cities have more useful OTA broadcasts, so that there are actually people without cable/sat that are able to do tv-watching?
I didn't see this rather obvious fact in a post yet, but people keep debating the government spending the 1.5 billion, so I guess I'll go ahead and state the obvious...
If you RTFA you will see that the government will be selling off the spectrum used by analog tv for an estimated 10 billion dollars... Hence, spending a small portion of that to facilitate the switch still leaves them with a 8.5 BILLION DOLLAR profit.
So can we please not have any more stupid posts about increased spending, when this deal is entirely designed to make money, not spend it. 8.5 billion will be made almost immediately, with a likely increase in other technologies boosting the economy in the long run as a direct effect.
On a side note, I'd love to see any conversation about this move to digital being driven, in part, by the ease of applying DRM to a digital signal.
I am likely confused, as the article is light on details, but as I see it this seems perfectly legitmate, as much as I might disagree...
The.kz domain was set aside for a particular country, so It seems to me that they somewhat 'own' that, since it is labeled with their name. Hence, if that government decides that there is something utilizing their.kz domain which they do not approve of, then it seems reasonable that they would be able to remove it, right? Don't get me wrong, I completely disagree with it, but that is beside the point.
They aren't 'censoring' the site per-se, they are just saying they don't want it to use their name, the site can be posted under plenty of other domains, and is of course still accessible via it's IP address.
If I let someone use my domain for their site, and then they put up a webpage bashing me, I would likely remove the DNS entry, making their site inaccessible via my domain.... I think that would be reasonable on my part, given that my domain reflects directly on me.
I will be eager to hear feedback, I expect that perhaps the issue here is not the particular events that have occured, but rather the broad reaching effects that may infringe on other aspects of internet usage, so please do advise.
On a side note, does it not seem reasonable that if you want to put up a site that is somewhat 'extreme' or that you fear would be censored by various governments, that you try to keep it independent of any government control? Are there ways to do this? I can use different domains, or are all of these controlled by some government? Must I simply have my site accessible by IP address and without DNS to avoid outside control? Is there someway that someone could/would still shutdown access to my site even if I do not use DNS?
Why on earth would you want to print to all your printers at once? I mean I can imagine some various obscure things you might do with that, but nothing that makes practical sense.
I'm sure you have a very good reason that i'm not aware of, but I assume microsoft is in the same boat as me and is also not aware of any reason to implement such a feature.
Couldn't all your printers have very different settings required? Where a single print job might not be configured properly for all of them? And if they were all identical it seems like you could script the functionality in just a few lines.
I'll be curious to find out what the common uses of this functionality are, off the top of my head I imagine using it to send notices to many departments at once, etc. Although maybe email would be more suited to that.
I know this is Slashdot as we love to just talk trash about microsoft, but this has nothing to do with their "demanding ways".
Microsoft is backing out becuase they were losing nearly 400 million a year on MSNBC, becuase no one is watching the station.
MSNBC doesn't appeal to any single audience, they have extreme left leaning shows, and extreme right leaning shows, which just manages to piss off any single viewer.
Those that prefer a left slant are watching CNN, and those that prefer a right slant are watching Fox News.
People like to watch a channel that gently reenforces their opinions, not one that flops back and forth.
In addition to that, IMHO, MSNBC has some of the worst anchor talent i've ever seen.
I must have been taking a nap, or out of the office... Becuase I apparently missed the memo that Slashdot decided to start posting entirely political stories targetted at the President of the United States.
We've always had some political issues arise in comments, but can we atleast let our geek news site not get sucked into publicly bashing the leader of the free world?
I don't care if you like him or not, he's the president, have some respect for heaven's sake. Didn't your mother teach you to be polite to your elders? Don't you show respect to the CEO of your company, even if he's a dick? Just becuase a bunch of propogandizing media outlets feel its appropriately to bash every politician that will make the juciest story, doesn't mean we all have to follow suit. We are all americans, and I beleive the vast majority of our politicians, including Mr. Bush, are actually doing their best.... even if their best isn't good enough, they deserve the same decent treatment you'd give to the ticket taker at your local movie theater.
Geez, It looks like i've got to disagree with everyone here.
I think the aforementioned telco ideas are probably some of the worst ideas telco companies have come up with yet. But that's not the point here, they built wires to your house, why would they not have the right to setup whatever services they want and offer them to you for purchase?
Why does the fact that currently they make the internet accessible via these wires make the wires suddenly not theirs? Why should they not be able to withdraw their internet access plans and instead sell plans wherein internet access is available, but with varying priority given to sites? It seems like a legitimate offering... It's certainly not one that I, or anyone else here, would be interested in purchasing, but why should that restrict them from offering it?
I assure you, if they decide to sell service that no one wants over their wires, then someone else will sprout up and sell the service that everyone DOES want. These are telcos after all, anyone who gets their internet access via a telco should already be searching for other options, and these other options will undoubtedly sprout up if customers are dissatisfied with the "prioritized" internet access telcos want to provide.
How would you feel if you paid to build a wire from your house to mine, and when you were done I told you that you no longer had rights to send what you wanted through the wire because the internet somehow magically removes your ownership?
I understand the underlying idea here is that there are a limited number of methods for connecting to a persons home, and people feel as if these methods have been monopolized, there for we must take control of the connection methods to ensure we can have the access we want. ---- That however, is complete rubbish. For instance, I will use cable access, not telco access, and if the cable companies do not suit me I will use satellite access, and if these technologies all turn sour, the demand will be so high for a new connection method that it will easily/undoubtedly become available, either by someone laying new wires, or some new wireless technology, or simply the telcos realizing no one will buy their service if they don't offer what we want.
Instead of thinking about how upset you'll be if your DSL stops working the way you want, try to realize that you have no right or privlige to your DSL, it is a service that you have chosen to purchase from a telco, and if they want to provide a different service you will have the choice, as always, whether or not you want to purchase it.
I can't begin to explain how furious I am over this situation.
I came home today and turned on the evening news, and saw nothing but one news show after the other bashing Wikipedia, and displaying complete ignorance towards both the technology and the purpose of the site.
I literally am left with a sick feeling in my stomach over some of the things I have seen. I have a hard time believing that most of the wikipedia hatred is related to any libel, but instead believe that there are many people who are horrified of the idea that information is being made available without any government censorship.
I feel so strongly that wikipedia, and the entire notion of community knowledge, is an important thing. I am trying to find anyway I can to help the cause.
I have registered www.support-wikipedia.com, although there is no content there yet. I have a hosting service available to host the site on as well. If there is anyone who feels they would like to join me in this effort, or contribute in any way, please contact me and let me know how you can help. I do not have an enormous amount of free time so any group effort will be appreciated.
I envision the site can contain facts and information to fight the effect of techno-ignorance, as well as information on the importance of freely available information. Maybe I can even setup a cafe-press account to sell "Support Wikipedia" t-shirt, with all proceeds donated to wikimedia.
To avoid posting my email publicly, please contact me via slashdot, or the feedback form on my personal website: http://www.xmilk.com/
This is an amazing piece of work. Hofstadter worked for years and years on that book, and many people (myself included) feel that it is one of the most marvelous books ever written.
I've heard many people say it should be required reading for every college student. While that is a novel thought, I don't know that 95% of people could grasp even the most simplistic meaning of the book.
So, my opinion:
G.E.B. is a duanting read, it is extrodinarly lengthy, and requires mathematical, musical, and artistic knowledge to fully understand. That being said, if there is a geek on your shopping list that you feel is highly intelligent and a dedicated reader, there is no better gift for them than G.E.B.
I think you make a good point, but I will say that my fear is if companies have to fear unreasonable lawsuits, it might have an effect on their ability to make new products, or increase the price consumers have to pay for these products.
I expect we both agree there is a fine line that establishes a balance between protecting the consumer and protecting the company. Often this balance sways one way or the other for some period of time, but usually manages to correct itself naturally.
I think personally my opinion would depend almost entirely on whether or not microsoft was eager/happy to replace the damaged xbox units without hesitation. (reasonable problems due to shortage are understandable, as long as it is not too long a wait). I don't see a problem if a company manufactures hundreds of thousands of units and
I just want to ensure that Microsoft is not being targetted becuase they can afford to pay off lawsuits. I expect the percentage of faulty xbox units is well below the average defective units shipped by other electronics manufacturers, which for some companies, especially consumer networking gear, can be as high as 10% defective units shipped to stores.
I find this utterly absurd, and upsetting too.... This is what our country is coming too? You just get to sue anyone you want to and try to get rich?
To be completely honest, I don't care if his xbox is freezing up from overheating, I don't recall microsoft promising that the xbox would not overheat, and there have yet to be any cases of the system starting a fire or some such thing, so If its not dangerous, then there is no legal case.
Every time someone bought a computer that overheated and shut down they could sue the computer company for damages? At the most, you deserve a new system, or to get yours repaired, and thats it.
I'll also add, that in my opinion, all the cases of xbox overheats are cuased by end-users that are not smart enough to keep it in a well ventilated place. It is an incredibly powerful computer dissipating several hundred watts of power. It is simply impossible for it to work in a closed cabinet, or if the power supply is set behind it wherein the xbox draws in hot air.
Sorry to go on a rant, and I'm not defending consumer electronics companies that send out flakey hardware, but you took a risk on buying one of the first units off the shelf, and regardless of whether or not it works you have no right to file litigation against the company. Get a refund for your box, i'm sure they'll be happy to give you one, and thats all.
The article is critical of apple for sacrificing function for form. This has long been apples way of doing things.
I'm not sure its a valid reason to be critical though, apple users expect this tradeoff, and prefer it. They pay for Apple products becuase they are idiot-proof, and either don't know or don't care that they perhaps do not have all the functions of other products.
This obviously doesn't apply to all apple products, the new OSX is a wonderful piece of work, finding ways to make it very accessible yet maintain the power of a *nix based operating system was not an easy task.
Well I tried to think of something negative about this, but in all honestly it seems to be just awesome!
The company seems legitimate, and they actually have the product in use in retail products already... And they provide an API for programming the chips yourself.
This sounds so cool, I'm going to try to have to get one of those jackets, or some sample of the system for myself!
Although I find the idea of trying to block OSS disgusting, I am trying to see the other side of it.
I see that there is a legitimate concern that OSS could destroy/damage commercial software/technology. OSS is essentially a little communist organization, which just happens to work great for us, becuase we are intelligent people willing to share for the benefit of others. Unfortunately, communism doesn't mesh well with capitalism, hence the problem here.
And no, I don't think its an option to try to bring everyone else into our little communist party either, the vast majority of people do not possess the will or capability to do something purely to benefit others, hence they need to work in their current (seemingly effective) capitalist market.
I agree that it is indeed a good thing. I do worry somewhat about the fact that windows having its own virus protection is likely to put other vendors out of business, but with the current quality of Norton and other similar products, I can't say that i'd complain.
I just worry about microsoft putting other vendors out of business and then not taking the effort to maintain their product in the manner needed.
Slashdot Mirror
It's been a while since I've written any WMF software, but if I remember correctly, the problem here is with the general principle of a WMF, not a bug in any libraries, hence windows and wine both being vulnerable.
A wmf is not a graphics format in a traditional sense, but rather a list of API calls to the GDI libraries that when fired off one after another will recreate an image.
For this reason, saying that the WMF insecurity is a bug, is like saying that the fact that you can make a malicious EXE for windows is a bug also.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be fixed, becuase it is a vulnerability, I'm just trying to shine some light on why similar vulnerabilities exist in WINE.
If I have given an incorrect explanation of WMF, please feel free to comment.
Didn't microsoft have IBM build all the cpu's for their Xbox360 platform? Those are powerPC chips in the xbox, so they must have come from IBM.
Seems odd they would partner and claim them as an enemy as the same time.
That brings me to another point, shouldn't IBM be suffering pretty hard now that Apple is moving to Intel for its chips? That must have been a large source of income for IBM.
I remember there had been some hype about google developing some advanced translation technology based on neural nets learning natural language by comparing UN documents from many languages.
I wonder if google will soon integrate this sort of technology into their chat client, and hopefully outperform the existing machine translation tech.
This is surprisingly similar to the exact same story 15 days ago...
How many times do we have to post a story that about "Futurama possibly being restarted but no one knows for sure"
I know everyone likes to bash microsoft around here, but to imply Apple is somehow giving them an ass-whooping is just stupid.
Microsoft maintains between a 90% and 95% market-share for its operating system, and provides the only practical 'Home Media' solution for a consumer PC, along with massively popular (and arguably useful) development tools and game systems. And since they haven't even launched their media service yet, how can you say iTunes is whooping it? Theres no way to know how nice their service will be, but I am very glad to see more real competition in this area as it can only be good for us, the consumers. Microsoft has enough 'power' to potentially force to the recording industry into sticking to their deals, as opposed to constantly raising prices as they have attempted to do to Apple (iTunes).
And to defend myself, while I personally use mythTV in addition to MediaCenter at home I do not consider it as practical solution for most consumers (yet!), as it requires alot of tech savvy to setup and use, it even involved building a custom IR transmitter in my case.
Anyway, I disdain microsoft as much as the next guy, but it's counter-productive to just make up stupid comments... Microsoft is (and will remain to be) a very competetive and successful company, and they have just as much ability to compete with Apple as anyone else, as they have proven time and again.
"get out the dremel and cut a hole in it"
lmao.
I agree that many ergonomic keyboards are angled, I've seen them angled both concave and convex, but the main problem here is that both hands in a single direction, rather than symmetrically, and that one hand is substantially higher than the other... in addition to the lateral force issue you mentioned.
I also hope there is some design feature that keeps the mouse from sliding off the 'mouse area' as nothing could be more annoying than your mouse flying across the floor everytime you move.
So I looked at the picture and the first thing I think to myself is "How the f*ck am I supposed to type efficiently with my keyboard at a huge angle"
........
So I sat for a moment, puzzled as to how they thought this thing would be useful...
Then I decided to try it myself, So i've propped my keyboard up at a comparable angle, and I'm typing on it right now... I've got to admit it hasn't slowed my typing down at all, or decreased my accuracy (Although it does obviously take longer to make the keyboard->mouse->keyboard transition with the right hand)
While I'm still able to type quite well, I can't help but get the feeling that this could be a near-instant cuase of a significant repetitive stress injury, with all the odd angles and such.
Also, if the keyboard is in your lap, how do you get to your
I happy to say, that IMO, this is the first proper/quality book review we've had for quite some time on /.
The author clearly listed what is, and is not, contained in the book, and also provided his opinion on how useful these various chapters were to him.
Hopefully future book-related-articles will try to provide atleast this level of information, as opposed to common "The book had alot of good stuff, but then some stuff was missing.".
More on-topic, I would say that in my experience I've never found these sorts of books particularly helpful, as anyone with software experience should have no trouble finding the information they need in the MSDN library, or on various other websites. Also, I imagine it would be difficult to find a developer who does not already have experience with a syntactically similar language.
I can imagine though, that this sort of reading might bring up questions (and answers) to questions that many developers had not yet thought to ask (primarily regarding CIL, GAC, etc), which could of course be helpful.
Well, assuming you still have the same TV in 3 years, and you do all your tv watching on Over-The-Air stations (no cable or sat) then you will have to get what they are calling a 'digital converter box', which is essentially what we now refer to as an HD Tuner, but alot cheaper since it doesn't need the high quality output for your standard definition television.
.... Do larger cities have more useful OTA broadcasts, so that there are actually people without cable/sat that are able to do tv-watching?
Current AVerMedia already sells a nice HD Tuner for $90, with digital audio and component video, so I am MORE than confident that in the next few years, as the demand increases dramatically, that you will be able to get your digital converter box for a price within the $40 the government is offering you as a tradeoff for discontinuing your current service.
In fact, i'm quite confident that with the high demand for these things you'll likely find them cheaper than $40, which means you'll probably make a few dollars profit out of the deal and end up with much higher quality picture (and likely more channels)...
I just can't really see how you are getting a shabby deal.
And to go a bit off-topic, are there actually people who do significant TV watching via over-the-air analog broadcasts? Where I live I would be lucky to get 2 stations and they would be of almost unwatchable quality (OKC,OK)
I didn't see this rather obvious fact in a post yet, but people keep debating the government spending the 1.5 billion, so I guess I'll go ahead and state the obvious...
If you RTFA you will see that the government will be selling off the spectrum used by analog tv for an estimated 10 billion dollars... Hence, spending a small portion of that to facilitate the switch still leaves them with a 8.5 BILLION DOLLAR profit.
So can we please not have any more stupid posts about increased spending, when this deal is entirely designed to make money, not spend it. 8.5 billion will be made almost immediately, with a likely increase in other technologies boosting the economy in the long run as a direct effect.
On a side note, I'd love to see any conversation about this move to digital being driven, in part, by the ease of applying DRM to a digital signal.
I am likely confused, as the article is light on details, but as I see it this seems perfectly legitmate, as much as I might disagree...
.kz domain was set aside for a particular country, so It seems to me that they somewhat 'own' that, since it is labeled with their name. Hence, if that government decides that there is something utilizing their .kz domain which they do not approve of, then it seems reasonable that they would be able to remove it, right? Don't get me wrong, I completely disagree with it, but that is beside the point.
The
They aren't 'censoring' the site per-se, they are just saying they don't want it to use their name, the site can be posted under plenty of other domains, and is of course still accessible via it's IP address.
If I let someone use my domain for their site, and then they put up a webpage bashing me, I would likely remove the DNS entry, making their site inaccessible via my domain.... I think that would be reasonable on my part, given that my domain reflects directly on me.
I will be eager to hear feedback, I expect that perhaps the issue here is not the particular events that have occured, but rather the broad reaching effects that may infringe on other aspects of internet usage, so please do advise.
On a side note, does it not seem reasonable that if you want to put up a site that is somewhat 'extreme' or that you fear would be censored by various governments, that you try to keep it independent of any government control? Are there ways to do this? I can use different domains, or are all of these controlled by some government? Must I simply have my site accessible by IP address and without DNS to avoid outside control? Is there someway that someone could/would still shutdown access to my site even if I do not use DNS?
Why on earth would you want to print to all your printers at once? I mean I can imagine some various obscure things you might do with that, but nothing that makes practical sense.
I'm sure you have a very good reason that i'm not aware of, but I assume microsoft is in the same boat as me and is also not aware of any reason to implement such a feature.
Couldn't all your printers have very different settings required? Where a single print job might not be configured properly for all of them? And if they were all identical it seems like you could script the functionality in just a few lines.
I'll be curious to find out what the common uses of this functionality are, off the top of my head I imagine using it to send notices to many departments at once, etc. Although maybe email would be more suited to that.
I didn't see anything in TFA about what the commercial level would cost. If the 1cm accuracy statement in true, it would be pretty darn cool!
Did I miss it in the article? Or has someone else seen the price somewhere else? Or has it likely not been determined yet?
This was clearly planted by an Intelligent Designer to challenge our faith.
I know this is Slashdot as we love to just talk trash about microsoft, but this has nothing to do with their "demanding ways".
Microsoft is backing out becuase they were losing nearly 400 million a year on MSNBC, becuase no one is watching the station.
MSNBC doesn't appeal to any single audience, they have extreme left leaning shows, and extreme right leaning shows, which just manages to piss off any single viewer.
Those that prefer a left slant are watching CNN, and those that prefer a right slant are watching Fox News.
People like to watch a channel that gently reenforces their opinions, not one that flops back and forth.
In addition to that, IMHO, MSNBC has some of the worst anchor talent i've ever seen.
I must have been taking a nap, or out of the office... Becuase I apparently missed the memo that Slashdot decided to start posting entirely political stories targetted at the President of the United States.
We've always had some political issues arise in comments, but can we atleast let our geek news site not get sucked into publicly bashing the leader of the free world?
I don't care if you like him or not, he's the president, have some respect for heaven's sake. Didn't your mother teach you to be polite to your elders? Don't you show respect to the CEO of your company, even if he's a dick? Just becuase a bunch of propogandizing media outlets feel its appropriately to bash every politician that will make the juciest story, doesn't mean we all have to follow suit. We are all americans, and I beleive the vast majority of our politicians, including Mr. Bush, are actually doing their best.... even if their best isn't good enough, they deserve the same decent treatment you'd give to the ticket taker at your local movie theater.
Geez, It looks like i've got to disagree with everyone here.
I think the aforementioned telco ideas are probably some of the worst ideas telco companies have come up with yet. But that's not the point here, they built wires to your house, why would they not have the right to setup whatever services they want and offer them to you for purchase?
Why does the fact that currently they make the internet accessible via these wires make the wires suddenly not theirs? Why should they not be able to withdraw their internet access plans and instead sell plans wherein internet access is available, but with varying priority given to sites? It seems like a legitimate offering... It's certainly not one that I, or anyone else here, would be interested in purchasing, but why should that restrict them from offering it?
I assure you, if they decide to sell service that no one wants over their wires, then someone else will sprout up and sell the service that everyone DOES want. These are telcos after all, anyone who gets their internet access via a telco should already be searching for other options, and these other options will undoubtedly sprout up if customers are dissatisfied with the "prioritized" internet access telcos want to provide.
How would you feel if you paid to build a wire from your house to mine, and when you were done I told you that you no longer had rights to send what you wanted through the wire because the internet somehow magically removes your ownership?
I understand the underlying idea here is that there are a limited number of methods for connecting to a persons home, and people feel as if these methods have been monopolized, there for we must take control of the connection methods to ensure we can have the access we want. ---- That however, is complete rubbish. For instance, I will use cable access, not telco access, and if the cable companies do not suit me I will use satellite access, and if these technologies all turn sour, the demand will be so high for a new connection method that it will easily/undoubtedly become available, either by someone laying new wires, or some new wireless technology, or simply the telcos realizing no one will buy their service if they don't offer what we want.
Instead of thinking about how upset you'll be if your DSL stops working the way you want, try to realize that you have no right or privlige to your DSL, it is a service that you have chosen to purchase from a telco, and if they want to provide a different service you will have the choice, as always, whether or not you want to purchase it.
I can't begin to explain how furious I am over this situation.
I came home today and turned on the evening news, and saw nothing but one news show after the other bashing Wikipedia, and displaying complete ignorance towards both the technology and the purpose of the site.
I literally am left with a sick feeling in my stomach over some of the things I have seen. I have a hard time believing that most of the wikipedia hatred is related to any libel, but instead believe that there are many people who are horrified of the idea that information is being made available without any government censorship.
I feel so strongly that wikipedia, and the entire notion of community knowledge, is an important thing. I am trying to find anyway I can to help the cause.
I have registered www.support-wikipedia.com, although there is no content there yet. I have a hosting service available to host the site on as well. If there is anyone who feels they would like to join me in this effort, or contribute in any way, please contact me and let me know how you can help. I do not have an enormous amount of free time so any group effort will be appreciated.
I envision the site can contain facts and information to fight the effect of techno-ignorance, as well as information on the importance of freely available information. Maybe I can even setup a cafe-press account to sell "Support Wikipedia" t-shirt, with all proceeds donated to wikimedia.
To avoid posting my email publicly, please contact me via slashdot, or the feedback form on my personal website: http://www.xmilk.com/
I want to second your recommendation of G.E.B.
This is an amazing piece of work. Hofstadter worked for years and years on that book, and many people (myself included) feel that it is one of the most marvelous books ever written.
I've heard many people say it should be required reading for every college student. While that is a novel thought, I don't know that 95% of people could grasp even the most simplistic meaning of the book.
So, my opinion:
G.E.B. is a duanting read, it is extrodinarly lengthy, and requires mathematical, musical, and artistic knowledge to fully understand. That being said, if there is a geek on your shopping list that you feel is highly intelligent and a dedicated reader, there is no better gift for them than G.E.B.
I think you make a good point, but I will say that my fear is if companies have to fear unreasonable lawsuits, it might have an effect on their ability to make new products, or increase the price consumers have to pay for these products.
I expect we both agree there is a fine line that establishes a balance between protecting the consumer and protecting the company. Often this balance sways one way or the other for some period of time, but usually manages to correct itself naturally.
I think personally my opinion would depend almost entirely on whether or not microsoft was eager/happy to replace the damaged xbox units without hesitation. (reasonable problems due to shortage are understandable, as long as it is not too long a wait). I don't see a problem if a company manufactures hundreds of thousands of units and
I just want to ensure that Microsoft is not being targetted becuase they can afford to pay off lawsuits. I expect the percentage of faulty xbox units is well below the average defective units shipped by other electronics manufacturers, which for some companies, especially consumer networking gear, can be as high as 10% defective units shipped to stores.
I find this utterly absurd, and upsetting too.... This is what our country is coming too? You just get to sue anyone you want to and try to get rich?
To be completely honest, I don't care if his xbox is freezing up from overheating, I don't recall microsoft promising that the xbox would not overheat, and there have yet to be any cases of the system starting a fire or some such thing, so If its not dangerous, then there is no legal case.
Every time someone bought a computer that overheated and shut down they could sue the computer company for damages? At the most, you deserve a new system, or to get yours repaired, and thats it.
I'll also add, that in my opinion, all the cases of xbox overheats are cuased by end-users that are not smart enough to keep it in a well ventilated place. It is an incredibly powerful computer dissipating several hundred watts of power. It is simply impossible for it to work in a closed cabinet, or if the power supply is set behind it wherein the xbox draws in hot air.
Sorry to go on a rant, and I'm not defending consumer electronics companies that send out flakey hardware, but you took a risk on buying one of the first units off the shelf, and regardless of whether or not it works you have no right to file litigation against the company. Get a refund for your box, i'm sure they'll be happy to give you one, and thats all.
The article is critical of apple for sacrificing function for form. This has long been apples way of doing things.
I'm not sure its a valid reason to be critical though, apple users expect this tradeoff, and prefer it. They pay for Apple products becuase they are idiot-proof, and either don't know or don't care that they perhaps do not have all the functions of other products.
This obviously doesn't apply to all apple products, the new OSX is a wonderful piece of work, finding ways to make it very accessible yet maintain the power of a *nix based operating system was not an easy task.
Well I tried to think of something negative about this, but in all honestly it seems to be just awesome!
The company seems legitimate, and they actually have the product in use in retail products already... And they provide an API for programming the chips yourself.
This sounds so cool, I'm going to try to have to get one of those jackets, or some sample of the system for myself!
Although I find the idea of trying to block OSS disgusting, I am trying to see the other side of it.
I see that there is a legitimate concern that OSS could destroy/damage commercial software/technology. OSS is essentially a little communist organization, which just happens to work great for us, becuase we are intelligent people willing to share for the benefit of others. Unfortunately, communism doesn't mesh well with capitalism, hence the problem here.
And no, I don't think its an option to try to bring everyone else into our little communist party either, the vast majority of people do not possess the will or capability to do something purely to benefit others, hence they need to work in their current (seemingly effective) capitalist market.
Anyone want to comment?
I agree that it is indeed a good thing. I do worry somewhat about the fact that windows having its own virus protection is likely to put other vendors out of business, but with the current quality of Norton and other similar products, I can't say that i'd complain.
I just worry about microsoft putting other vendors out of business and then not taking the effort to maintain their product in the manner needed.