Imagine that, somebody might subpoena you for evidence relevant to a legal dispute! Shocker!
A subpoena is a legal process and is not an invasion of your privacy. If you don't want it coming up in a court room, do not do it, say it, or write it down somewhere. Is this hard to grasp?
You know this is a good point, legally speaking. The way around that rule is the same as it always has been. Don't save incriminating evidence and plead the fifth. We're now living in an America where the average citizen is a criminal throughout his or her life, without always knowing it. It is only prudent to avoid storing information about yourself which need not be stored. And, we as consumers and free persons have a right to demand that we are in control. That we say if a device we buy can track us. He's just highlighting one of the many problems raised with being tracked without consent by using a device which does not advertise this behavior. And, you are giving a good booster to his argument. Your location can be obtained via subpoena and you didn't even know it was being collected. That is now true of every iPhone owner.
First of all, Opera was late to the game with private tabs. Second of all, setting Opera to remember no history requires many more options changes than Firefox (Firefox has one setting which says in plain English "Remember Nothing"). Thirdly, tab isolation is the new frontier of privacy and I've heard no movement from Opera to add this. Now, there is a "do-not-track" setting which other browsers are implementing and Opera is again in last place.
Pay close attention to my second gripe (the privacy settings for normal browsing are complicated). It's subtle, but could be argued that it is THE most important on this list. I'm a smart guy and configuring Opera to remember nothing is onerous and error prone, which degrades its functionality as a privacy-protecting browser. Firefox, on the other hand, is super easy and could only be missed by the dumbest of the dumb. I think the security field as a whole has a big usability problem. No one wants to do usability studies and figure out how we can enable users to hold up their end of the security contract, but that's the research we need most, because user ignorance renders even the most cleverly secure software/hardware design moot in all too many cases. For example, web developers STILL don't know how to store passwords (or better, password hashes) in a database safely. This is a solved problem and it keeps coming up. That is a total failure of the security community and there are many examples.
So DRM sucks... maybe. DRM sucks in that it can strip users of the ability to exercise fair use. But, historically, it has been important for content creators to be able to monetize their work in order to incentivize better content.
\\
\\
I mean, keyboard cat is cool, but it's not as cool as "A Night at the Opera"
\\
\\
I am arguing that the age of totally free content (and essentially rampant content theft) is not the golden age you insinuate it to be.
Opera is my primary browser and it is head and shoulders above Firefox in mose areas. The one area (and it's an important one to me) that Firefox is consistently the best is privacy settings (and IE seems to be next, but I don't actually trust it). You need one setting in Firefox and the browser saves nothing. It's excellent. I wish Opera would catch up in that area.
I was attempting to make a joke about the bash-fu and the batch files needing the life long discipline of a true martial artist. Upon re-reading my comment, it's not nearly as funny as it was in my head.
Well, I mean if FF users would skip the hype for second and try Opera, they might.
But, then how would you all fill that void you currently use to search for extensions every time you need a new feature?
Wow, I'm kind of a dick. I actually think Firefox is pretty cool. But, in all fairness, Opera is just so much nicer. I guess I shouldn't stoop to the browser bashing. Next time, I'll leave that to cats like you.
QUOTE: If there's a problem - well, the user must be stupid!
I'll probably be modded down for saying so, but that one sentence nicely sums up Wikipedia's philosophy.
You've got it! This one sentence totally sums up Wikipedia's philosophy. Isn't that why is a useful tool? The internet's great potential lies in blurring the producer/consumer dichotomy, giving both parties a consumer AND producer role. I mean I don't want Wikipedia to be a heavily modded resource. It's too bad that mistakes happen, but it's no reason to damn the whole Wikipedia philosophy. We've got to take the good with the bad. The whole idea behind Wikipedia puts full responsibility on the user. If I wanted to be feed all my information, I wouldn't go there. Wikipedia is useful because we can all share our knowledge (correct or incorrect).
It all comes down to this:
We're the first generation with this new transitional technology (the net). Not everyone is capable of accepting the new implications involved in new technology. One of the biggest limitations to full use of a new technologies is applying old logic to the new concept. Wikipedia cannot be held to the same expectations as say the Boston Globe. They're inherently different. Thank the LORD they are. A major weakness of strict producer/consumer news sources is that the most (not all) consumers feel a nice warm and fuzzy trust that they won't be led astray. That same logic should not be applied to Wikipedia. Wikipedia makes us question what we read, which we probably should have been doing all along.
What's funny is that your criteria for thinking that Slashdot is a bad place for advice is being out of school for a long time or haveing little knowledge of academia. I am fall in a group completely opposite from those attributes, and my reasonable advice gets labeled trolling. You're welcome to see an advisor, but I wouldn't recommend my friends or family do so.
Well, you've heard of it, and that's a good start. But, I would really suggest trying before knocking. No one who has given Opera a fair shot would say this. Most people just see all the features and assume it's an acceptable indicator of bloat, which is just not true.
...so, how do I remove it from my windows install?...
The real issue here is (and I haven't read any post that have said this) that you cannot fully remove MSN messenger from a Windows install (similar to how you cannot fully remove IE). The Messenger performs other tasks, which to me, seem only assigned to MSN Messenger so that it is vital to the windows package. Now, I've never tried to remove WMP (because, it's actually not a terrible app, though I still prefer VLC), but I assume that it is very difficult to remove it in full.
The difference in my eyes, is that when a Linux distro bundles in software, they don't treat it any differently than if you had installed it yourself. MSN Messenger and WMP are "Windows Components" (straight from the horse's mouth, see the "Add/Remove Programs" Dialog and click "Add/Remove Windows Components"). Also, MSN Mess [no joke here, just lazy], for example, cannot, to my knowledge, be removed in full. I see this as a massive difference than just "bundled software." This software is entrenched in the Windows Install.
Slashdot Mirror
The fuck do I get modded down for? Fucking children.
Seems like there've been a lot of stories about crazy (and poorly thought out) Australian internet rules. Apparently, that got cancelled.
Ooh! Now do the one where you admit Celsius sucks for daily use!
This smug eurotrash troll gets +4? Only on Slashdot. Keep fuckin that chicken.
Do you think it's because our technological prowess obliterates that of Europe that free office software defaults to US measurement standards?
Imagine that, somebody might subpoena you for evidence relevant to a legal dispute! Shocker!
A subpoena is a legal process and is not an invasion of your privacy. If you don't want it coming up in a court room, do not do it, say it, or write it down somewhere. Is this hard to grasp?
You know this is a good point, legally speaking. The way around that rule is the same as it always has been. Don't save incriminating evidence and plead the fifth. We're now living in an America where the average citizen is a criminal throughout his or her life, without always knowing it. It is only prudent to avoid storing information about yourself which need not be stored. And, we as consumers and free persons have a right to demand that we are in control. That we say if a device we buy can track us. He's just highlighting one of the many problems raised with being tracked without consent by using a device which does not advertise this behavior. And, you are giving a good booster to his argument. Your location can be obtained via subpoena and you didn't even know it was being collected. That is now true of every iPhone owner.
First of all, Opera was late to the game with private tabs. Second of all, setting Opera to remember no history requires many more options changes than Firefox (Firefox has one setting which says in plain English "Remember Nothing"). Thirdly, tab isolation is the new frontier of privacy and I've heard no movement from Opera to add this. Now, there is a "do-not-track" setting which other browsers are implementing and Opera is again in last place. Pay close attention to my second gripe (the privacy settings for normal browsing are complicated). It's subtle, but could be argued that it is THE most important on this list. I'm a smart guy and configuring Opera to remember nothing is onerous and error prone, which degrades its functionality as a privacy-protecting browser. Firefox, on the other hand, is super easy and could only be missed by the dumbest of the dumb. I think the security field as a whole has a big usability problem. No one wants to do usability studies and figure out how we can enable users to hold up their end of the security contract, but that's the research we need most, because user ignorance renders even the most cleverly secure software/hardware design moot in all too many cases. For example, web developers STILL don't know how to store passwords (or better, password hashes) in a database safely. This is a solved problem and it keeps coming up. That is a total failure of the security community and there are many examples.
So DRM sucks... maybe. DRM sucks in that it can strip users of the ability to exercise fair use. But, historically, it has been important for content creators to be able to monetize their work in order to incentivize better content. \\ \\ I mean, keyboard cat is cool, but it's not as cool as "A Night at the Opera" \\ \\ I am arguing that the age of totally free content (and essentially rampant content theft) is not the golden age you insinuate it to be.
Opera is my primary browser and it is head and shoulders above Firefox in mose areas. The one area (and it's an important one to me) that Firefox is consistently the best is privacy settings (and IE seems to be next, but I don't actually trust it). You need one setting in Firefox and the browser saves nothing. It's excellent. I wish Opera would catch up in that area.
I was attempting to make a joke about the bash-fu and the batch files needing the life long discipline of a true martial artist. Upon re-reading my comment, it's not nearly as funny as it was in my head.
Yes, but to master same functionality using windows batch files it takes a lifetime of discipline
Fortunately, my Kroger Plus card application was littered with fake information!
If the music industry is the biggest cause for concern here, we've got bigger problems than we think...
Well, I mean if FF users would skip the hype for second and try Opera, they might.
But, then how would you all fill that void you currently use to search for extensions every time you need a new feature?
Wow, I'm kind of a dick. I actually think Firefox is pretty cool. But, in all fairness, Opera is just so much nicer. I guess I shouldn't stoop to the browser bashing. Next time, I'll leave that to cats like you.
QUOTE:
If there's a problem - well, the user must be stupid!
I'll probably be modded down for saying so, but that one sentence nicely sums up Wikipedia's philosophy.
You've got it! This one sentence totally sums up Wikipedia's philosophy. Isn't that why is a useful tool? The internet's great potential lies in blurring the producer/consumer dichotomy, giving both parties a consumer AND producer role. I mean I don't want Wikipedia to be a heavily modded resource. It's too bad that mistakes happen, but it's no reason to damn the whole Wikipedia philosophy. We've got to take the good with the bad. The whole idea behind Wikipedia puts full responsibility on the user. If I wanted to be feed all my information, I wouldn't go there. Wikipedia is useful because we can all share our knowledge (correct or incorrect).
It all comes down to this:
We're the first generation with this new transitional technology (the net). Not everyone is capable of accepting the new implications involved in new technology. One of the biggest limitations to full use of a new technologies is applying old logic to the new concept. Wikipedia cannot be held to the same expectations as say the Boston Globe. They're inherently different. Thank the LORD they are. A major weakness of strict producer/consumer news sources is that the most (not all) consumers feel a nice warm and fuzzy trust that they won't be led astray. That same logic should not be applied to Wikipedia. Wikipedia makes us question what we read, which we probably should have been doing all along.
What's funny is that your criteria for thinking that Slashdot is a bad place for advice is being out of school for a long time or haveing little knowledge of academia. I am fall in a group completely opposite from those attributes, and my reasonable advice gets labeled trolling. You're welcome to see an advisor, but I wouldn't recommend my friends or family do so.
Now I am sure you didn't try Opera, most likely you accidentally tried Oprah, it's a common mistake.
When's the last time you talked to a student advisor? I just graduated, and the advisors were my worst source of advice.
Well, you've heard of it, and that's a good start. But, I would really suggest trying before knocking. No one who has given Opera a fair shot would say this. Most people just see all the features and assume it's an acceptable indicator of bloat, which is just not true.
Define an agile person, please.
Dictionary.com says:
Characterized by quickness, lightness, and ease of movement
I say "Simply the best internet experience."
Dude, I've got Oprah 8.5, and the built-in Book Club feed and default Oprah skin are total selling points.
Did this guy just call my browser Oprah?
That's my favorite comment in at least a week.
QUOTE:
(Not to mention that the Zen weighs 20% more: 5.8 vs 4.8 oz)
But what's missing?
Elegant integration with software (mostly iTunes, but also things like iPhoto, iMovie, and so on).
That, and about 92% market share.
Well, it is missing a sub-2 hour battery life after a few months use.
...so, how do I remove it from my windows install?...
The real issue here is (and I haven't read any post that have said this) that you cannot fully remove MSN messenger from a Windows install (similar to how you cannot fully remove IE). The Messenger performs other tasks, which to me, seem only assigned to MSN Messenger so that it is vital to the windows package. Now, I've never tried to remove WMP (because, it's actually not a terrible app, though I still prefer VLC), but I assume that it is very difficult to remove it in full.
The difference in my eyes, is that when a Linux distro bundles in software, they don't treat it any differently than if you had installed it yourself. MSN Messenger and WMP are "Windows Components" (straight from the horse's mouth, see the "Add/Remove Programs" Dialog and click "Add/Remove Windows Components"). Also, MSN Mess [no joke here, just lazy], for example, cannot, to my knowledge, be removed in full. I see this as a massive difference than just "bundled software." This software is entrenched in the Windows Install.