Everyone will keep using and paying for the MS product, just like they do now. Only now the saved files won't be lost on those unable or unwilling to adopt MSOffice ( not that they're lost per se given OpenOffices excellent translation skills, but there will no longer be the chance that MS says hey you can't do that ). Life will get a little better all around.
This is a good thing, like everyone using IP and TCP. Sure we can translate this to IPX and bridge across, but it's much easier if instead of everyone pushing a format, they're just doing the best they can to utilize a well defined standard.
Frankly, the whiners will still whine, the fanboys will still fanaticise, and the world will keep spinning without skipping a beat.
Point 1 - Your post contradicts its own supposed respect of the GPL. Point 2 - Linux is FSF free, share and share alike by license. BSD is not. You can't generalize them together on this issue. If you don't get the difference, you don't know what the hell your talking about. Point 3 - The operating system doesn't _have_ to do shit. If the companies want their shit to run in Linux, the should submit GPL'd drivers or suffer their rightful hell for being miserly with their code in a project based on sharing. To hell with them. Point 4 - There is a fairly standard API. And when they change it they fix the GPL drivers. There is not an ABI, `application binary interface' since you obviously don't know, which is not require or desired as Linux runs on many different types of hardware. Should we instead suffer to create an ABI for each hardware platform that each driver must uphold? There is more than x86 out there. Hell, even in x86, should we make all drivers have to suffer to a 16 bit driver interface, or create different ABIs for 32 and 64 and the future 256 and 1024 bit systems? Point 5 - Cry more noob. Point 6 - If a hardware manufacturer wants to sell their hardware to us, they will either suffer intolerably or they will give in and release some GPL'd code. If coders want it bad enough, someone will reverse engineer it and create free code on their own. It's not like we're going to start using our DVD-Rs to burn off graphics cards. Well, not until my chinese GFX-RW comes in anyway.
Assuming any possible positive real increment of time to acheive a transfer between an individual have the sig and any number of others short of the infinate limit, it would take about infinately long.
The music is not the point. The interoperability is. Without the ability to reverse engineer competing technologies and the ability to legally interface with these, everyone suffers.
Hey, why should IBM release its ``system interconnect proprietary protocol version 5''? You bought IBM, you knew what you were getting into. If you want to transfer files between systems, it's not the only option. You could have bought Microsoft or Apple or just use IBM proprietary disks and sneakernet the information. There's a lot of options for transferring files between computers.
Of course, God help you if you want to move files to a _competitors_ system.
Without interoperability as a goal, the internet would not exist and everyone would still be locked in a hellish series of uncooperative island networks, occasionally hooked together through a flaky bridge setup. All technology would be like that. Multitudes of devices, formats, protocols, APIs, and calling conventions. None of them talking, and noone allowed to try to change that, because someone else `owns' the ideas.
Useless? That's because everyone sues them every time they try to package useful things in with the OS. It's anti-competitive for an OS monopoly to use that monopoly to push its applications, remember? But, no. It's either monopoly abuse, or it's useless because they don't package in everything they can. No win. No wonder they just try to violently attack everyone, there's no gain in not doing so.
And a line between _any_ two objects on the earths surface will perfectly bisect the earth ( not accounting for the unsightly lateral buldge we pick up from all that obnoxious spinning ). The OPs' were obvious statements.
I heard a great rushing of wind as I read through the responses to the OP. The rains must be coming...
Only a small percent of the webs users event know what a user agent string is. The false positives by the six visiting geeks pretending to be googlebot, lynx, IE, and YourMomIsGayBrowser aren't really going to fuck up statistics all that much.
I'm sure they fall well within any reasonable margin of error.
I see what you mean, they could buy a few legit addresses and have their rDNS say it is ok to mail whatever domain they want from their IP. Easy to track down the person that way of course, but I agree with the flaw.
Modifying a bit, perhaps DNS rDNS pairs. The rDNS MXPTR records have to have a matching MXSNDR record pointing at the system, or they are false and vice versa. That should make it appropriately difficult to forge.
example.com MXSNDR 10.93.13.43
mx1.example.com.43.13.93.10.in-addr.arpa MXPTR
It would increase the amount of traffic needed to send an otherwise simple email, surely. But reducing the amount of spam flow would be a greater change than this.
I agree also concerning the `not really stopping spam just forged spam' bit but my network gets a hell of a lot of forged spam.
And reading your linked to list, I'm more of a senior-IETF-member-5.:P
* Make every sending entity register rDNS MXPTR records that state IPs allowed to send mail for the domain. * Don't accept mail that doesn't have properly registered rDNS MXPTR entries. * Profit from ending site spoofing in spam, making the only outlets open relays and subverted real mail servers, which is considerably less than the whole of home systems worldwide
It's easy. It's distributed. It recognizes the frequent difference between Sending and Receiving MTAs. There are no new control structures to deal with, just an extra reverse DNS entry.
Make it impossible for a business to own a business. Wham. Suddenly you can trace ownership and people get just a little more responsible for their actions.
Not gonna happen, but it is a possibility to float with the force a purpose group.
Meaning they just need to alter this new notifier program to not actually do the check on the other part where it would see the other part isn't checking. I doubt this will stop any of the software pirates out there. But it's not really for them, it's targetted at the casual non-hex reading crowds.
BTW, circumvention of security is cracking it. All cracking is the circumvention of security, be it through offline modification, as in replaced DLLs, or in utilizing programming errors to bypass regular access.
If I had a gazillion MB in bandwidth, I'd multiplex a gazillion connections together and send a few years worth of backups across all at once. Time : a little more than 0.25 seconds.
And no whining about the NICs being unable to handle it. Would I be paying gazillion MB connection fees if I weren't able to use it? The prices start at $243,000i per month!
why credit cards have a minimum commission I will never understand
... those 50p transactions add up to large numbers very quickly
I believe you've answered your own question. There's no market for stopping the practice either as if anyone were to try to capture market share by attacking minimum fees, everyone would drop them, and the new company would be crushed anyway. So there's no point in starting a company to get rid of the process, and none of the providers want to stop lining their profits. Hence, status quo.
I doubt `HOIST.JPG.EXE (82MB)' is going to come in as an attachment. More likely a more mundane rootkit is first loaded by the malware, downloads this in the background, gets it all setup on the hard drive, then forces a `STOP Error'. At that point the original rootkit could be deleted and no trace of the infection would remain.
That said, this product seems interesting for its hardware approach. I wonder what kind of performance hit will result from installing this system.
Incidentally, the installer for bochs on windows is only 3,244,098 bytes.
And Joe, this is the metermaid. I'm skipping town with your wife. Don't forget to drop the check for last months bill in the mail. It's expensive in Hawaii this time of year.
Gates : Hey steve, looks like we're going to be taking a 500 million euro fine in sector 3. Balmer shifts a single bead on an abacus labeled `War Chest' Balmer : So?
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone will keep using and paying for the MS product, just like they do now. Only now the saved files won't be lost on those unable or unwilling to adopt MSOffice ( not that they're lost per se given OpenOffices excellent translation skills, but there will no longer be the chance that MS says hey you can't do that ). Life will get a little better all around.
This is a good thing, like everyone using IP and TCP. Sure we can translate this to IPX and bridge across, but it's much easier if instead of everyone pushing a format, they're just doing the best they can to utilize a well defined standard.
Frankly, the whiners will still whine, the fanboys will still fanaticise, and the world will keep spinning without skipping a beat.
Point 1 - Your post contradicts its own supposed respect of the GPL.
Point 2 - Linux is FSF free, share and share alike by license. BSD is not. You can't generalize them together on this issue. If you don't get the difference, you don't know what the hell your talking about.
Point 3 - The operating system doesn't _have_ to do shit. If the companies want their shit to run in Linux, the should submit GPL'd drivers or suffer their rightful hell for being miserly with their code in a project based on sharing. To hell with them.
Point 4 - There is a fairly standard API. And when they change it they fix the GPL drivers. There is not an ABI, `application binary interface' since you obviously don't know, which is not require or desired as Linux runs on many different types of hardware. Should we instead suffer to create an ABI for each hardware platform that each driver must uphold? There is more than x86 out there. Hell, even in x86, should we make all drivers have to suffer to a 16 bit driver interface, or create different ABIs for 32 and 64 and the future 256 and 1024 bit systems?
Point 5 - Cry more noob.
Point 6 - If a hardware manufacturer wants to sell their hardware to us, they will either suffer intolerably or they will give in and release some GPL'd code. If coders want it bad enough, someone will reverse engineer it and create free code on their own. It's not like we're going to start using our DVD-Rs to burn off graphics cards. Well, not until my chinese GFX-RW comes in anyway.
Touche monsieur. Hmm, I think that am glad I jabbed at you. The response was well worth it.
*cou-- massively parrellel processing with nonexistant downtime --ough*
... and cloned Hitlers that are terrorists.
Assuming any possible positive real increment of time to acheive a transfer between an individual have the sig and any number of others short of the infinate limit, it would take about infinately long.
The music is not the point. The interoperability is. Without the ability to reverse engineer competing technologies and the ability to legally interface with these, everyone suffers.
Hey, why should IBM release its ``system interconnect proprietary protocol version 5''? You bought IBM, you knew what you were getting into. If you want to transfer files between systems, it's not the only option. You could have bought Microsoft or Apple or just use IBM proprietary disks and sneakernet the information. There's a lot of options for transferring files between computers.
Of course, God help you if you want to move files to a _competitors_ system.
Without interoperability as a goal, the internet would not exist and everyone would still be locked in a hellish series of uncooperative island networks, occasionally hooked together through a flaky bridge setup. All technology would be like that. Multitudes of devices, formats, protocols, APIs, and calling conventions. None of them talking, and noone allowed to try to change that, because someone else `owns' the ideas.
The set of those bearing this sig is composed of between zero and infinity thieves, and exactly one liar.
Useless? That's because everyone sues them every time they try to package useful things in with the OS. It's anti-competitive for an OS monopoly to use that monopoly to push its applications, remember? But, no. It's either monopoly abuse, or it's useless because they don't package in everything they can. No win. No wonder they just try to violently attack everyone, there's no gain in not doing so.
In other news, Microsoft is accused of mass torrent poisoning of MAC OS X patch system...
And a line between _any_ two objects on the earths surface will perfectly bisect the earth ( not accounting for the unsightly lateral buldge we pick up from all that obnoxious spinning ). The OPs' were obvious statements.
I heard a great rushing of wind as I read through the responses to the OP. The rains must be coming...
Holy shit. I thought you were just joking and tried it offhand. That's fucking hilarious.
Only a small percent of the webs users event know what a user agent string is. The false positives by the six visiting geeks pretending to be googlebot, lynx, IE, and YourMomIsGayBrowser aren't really going to fuck up statistics all that much.
I'm sure they fall well within any reasonable margin of error.
Well, that clears that up.
So... the secondborn still good then, no?
I see what you mean, they could buy a few legit addresses and have their rDNS say it is ok to mail whatever domain they want from their IP. Easy to track down the person that way of course, but I agree with the flaw.
:P
Modifying a bit, perhaps DNS rDNS pairs. The rDNS MXPTR records have to have a matching MXSNDR record pointing at the system, or they are false and vice versa. That should make it appropriately difficult to forge.
example.com MXSNDR 10.93.13.43
mx1.example.com.43.13.93.10.in-addr.arpa MXPTR
It would increase the amount of traffic needed to send an otherwise simple email, surely. But reducing the amount of spam flow would be a greater change than this.
I agree also concerning the `not really stopping spam just forged spam' bit but my network gets a hell of a lot of forged spam.
And reading your linked to list, I'm more of a senior-IETF-member-5.
* Make every sending entity register rDNS MXPTR records that state IPs allowed to send mail for the domain.
* Don't accept mail that doesn't have properly registered rDNS MXPTR entries.
* Profit from ending site spoofing in spam, making the only outlets open relays and subverted real mail servers, which is considerably less than the whole of home systems worldwide
It's easy. It's distributed. It recognizes the frequent difference between Sending and Receiving MTAs. There are no new control structures to deal with, just an extra reverse DNS entry.
1.2.3.4 @example.com
1.2.3.5 @example.com
1.2.3.4 @subdomain.example.com
1.2.3.5 @subdomain.example.com
Make it impossible for a business to own a business. Wham. Suddenly you can trace ownership and people get just a little more responsible for their actions.
Not gonna happen, but it is a possibility to float with the force a purpose group.
Meaning they just need to alter this new notifier program to not actually do the check on the other part where it would see the other part isn't checking. I doubt this will stop any of the software pirates out there. But it's not really for them, it's targetted at the casual non-hex reading crowds.
BTW, circumvention of security is cracking it. All cracking is the circumvention of security, be it through offline modification, as in replaced DLLs, or in utilizing programming errors to bypass regular access.
If I had a gazillion MB in bandwidth, I'd multiplex a gazillion connections together and send a few years worth of backups across all at once. Time : a little more than 0.25 seconds.
And no whining about the NICs being unable to handle it. Would I be paying gazillion MB connection fees if I weren't able to use it? The prices start at $243,000i per month!
I believe you've answered your own question. There's no market for stopping the practice either as if anyone were to try to capture market share by attacking minimum fees, everyone would drop them, and the new company would be crushed anyway. So there's no point in starting a company to get rid of the process, and none of the providers want to stop lining their profits. Hence, status quo.
I doubt `HOIST.JPG.EXE (82MB)' is going to come in as an attachment. More likely a more mundane rootkit is first loaded by the malware, downloads this in the background, gets it all setup on the hard drive, then forces a `STOP Error'. At that point the original rootkit could be deleted and no trace of the infection would remain.
That said, this product seems interesting for its hardware approach. I wonder what kind of performance hit will result from installing this system.
Incidentally, the installer for bochs on windows is only 3,244,098 bytes.
And Joe, this is the metermaid. I'm skipping town with your wife. Don't forget to drop the check for last months bill in the mail. It's expensive in Hawaii this time of year.
Gates : Hey steve, looks like we're going to be taking a 500 million euro fine in sector 3.
Balmer shifts a single bead on an abacus labeled `War Chest'
Balmer : So?
I thought PIXAR aquired Disney...