I think the problem is that people don't have enough information about what the politicians they are voting for are planning to do. It would be nice to have some way (a website, perhaps?) of finding a politician that you are able to vote for who will stand up for the issues that are important to you.
Right now, how am I supposed to find out this information? By searching for politicians that I can vote for, and then researching each one? Most people are not willing to do any research before voting. Lessening the amount of research people need to do in order to vote for the politician that best represents them is a first step toward fixing political problems in America, and the rest of the world, if Australia is anything to go by. (I think Australians care even less about political issues than Americans do, something the Howard government is enjoying taking advantage of!)
Don't attribute to stupidity what can be attributed to malice, or else you'll end up making excuses for these people. It's very unlikely that someone would be so consistently stupid in a way that leads up to fascism.
Nine Inch Nails, Radiohead, The Beatles, Nirvana...
I actually hadn't listened to the music before I posted, and I didn't mean that I didn't like this music in particular. I meant that I don't like the idea of automatically generating music and TV shows. I believe that anything composed by a human rather than a computer will always be of higher quality.
Why should game publications have a go at an unfinished game, possibly even before they have had a chance to play it? It's only fair to save the negative stuff for the review.
Basically, they sent a letter to Sony before suing them outlining the steps that they should take to correct their mistake. Sony ignored the letter, and the EFF sued them. They came to a settlement that achieved most of the suggestions outlined in the original EFF letter.
The settlement wasn't too bad. Sure, they didn't hit Sony as hard as they could have, but everyone is getting replacement CDs and a small amount of compensation money. Anyone whose computer was severely damaged should probably sue Sony separately.
I'd argue that in some ways, the iTunes DRM is worse. At least with the Sony CDs, the DRM stayed the same. Apple has changed what you can do with the music AFTER you have purchased it.
Apple has changed the number of CDs you can burn it to, and the number of computers you can have the music on at the same time. Apple also force upgrades by requiring new software for new model iPods, so not updating iTunes isn't a viable way of escaping changes in the DRM permissions.
If Apple ever decided to build backdoors into iTunes, people would still have no choice but to upgrade and have all the backdoors affect all of their music, if they want iTunes to work with their latest iPod... or if they chose not to buy the latest iPod because of the backdoors, they would lose the ability to play all of their music on-the-go, since the music can't be played on any competing MP3 players.
True. I wonder if this latest admission from Symantec is a response to Microsoft's new (when Vista comes out...) virus/spyware scanner subscription service. Symantec are now competing with Microsoft.
I'm not talking about the previews. Those are okay, I understand that most people (myself included) like watching trailers and seeing what sort of movies are coming up.
Perhaps what I was talking about isn't done in the US, but in Australia, we also get a large dose of advertising for other things before the movie: anti-smoking ads, anti-movie-copying ads, and ads for various stores and services. Those are the ads I'm complaining about, although I'd be happy to watch them if they let me in to the movie for free. I just don't like the way they're double-dipping with the over-priced candy bar, tickets, and ads.
Good work on the correction, but does it matter so much?
The important thing is who is there and who isn't. The order in which the browsers arrived at compliance is of no consequence to users of the browsers.
I don't think this should be judged based on how much of an achievement it is. The important part is that the browser passes the ACID2 test. How hard it was for each individual browser to get there is not important.
Who got there first also isn't important, we just need all browsers to get there.
This is a bit like reality TV. No planning involved, just get some equipment and see what happens automatically. The result is something that consumers will consume, but it isn't high in quality, just cheap to produce.
I want television shows with scripts and plots. I want music that has been carefully composed and made to sound good.
Welcome to 2 years ago. This new Firefox browser is pretty cool, eh?
I wonder if anyone ever took Symantec seriously when they made this claim. Most computer illiterate users wouldn't have even heard about Symantec saying this, and those that did (eg. Slashdot readers) would already know better. It's as if Symantec is in their own little universe where it seems as thought everything incorrect is actually correct.
I'm not too sure this article should be posted under "your rights online". It should be more like "the CIA's rights online".
... look, the poor CIA are getting their privacy invaded because people are looking at what they've been searching for!!:-(
Maybe the CIA could get a blanket, some hot chocolate, and sit down with the DOJ to share their thoughts and feelings about this invasion of their privacy. Perhaps then the DOJ might stop trying to demand search data from Google.
I'm starting to believe that there's some truth to this. I've noticed, while browsing the "popular" category on Google Video, that a lot of the videos are borderline porn.
I can't help but think that if Google allowed porn videos, the "popular" category would eventually be filled with them.
id Software have been making the most popular games in the industry for over a decade, and have never bothered with heavy copy restrictions. They tend to put in copy restrictions as long as they have zero chance of inconveniencing their customers.
If only more game companies would just follow the leaders and dump this Starforce DRM crap...
This is the Ubuntu that will be competing with Windows Vista. It needs to be polished.
There is going to be a reasonably large number of desktop users willing to "try Linux out" just before they "upgrade" to Vista. The distribution they're most likely to try is currently Ubuntu, and if it is good enough, they might switch to Linux rather than Vista.
I didn't say that free operating systems were a "majority", but the fact remains that there are still a lot of people using Linux who are in need of a solution to their graphics card problem.
Any company that fills this gap will be the ONLY company serving what is becoming a rather large niche. This means that they will get some sort of a bump in sales.
Companies don't need to target majorities in order to make money.
Yet not enough with free software drivers. If any video card company wants to increase the number of customers that they have and get a competitive edge, they could release technical information that would help free software developers, or write some free software drivers themselves.
It could. Other free software just needs to find a way of partnering with companies that are relevant for their software. It's not impossible.
I think the hardest part would be finding companies that are as open-minded as Google is. Most companies don't like trying new things, whereas Google understands that its success is due to it trying new ways of doing things.
Yes, it sustainable. It's just as sustainable as Google Adsense.
Google aren't really the ones giving the money. Advertisers are giving Google money whenever someone uses the Google search bar on Firefox and ends up clicking on the ads on the resulting search page. Google themselves get the money and give Mozilla a cut.
Through the sheer number of searches being done in Firefox, Mozilla ends up getting a rather large cut.
Unless the anti-establishment mavericks in tech communities like SlashDot aggressively support Opera by buying commercial Opera-Software products, Opera just might disappear, being squeezed to death by the big 3 browers: Safari, Internet Explorer, Firefox.
Do we care? Opera could have been Firefox if they had GPLed it. Mozilla saw their opportunity and now they're benefiting from their foresight.
Opera could become an open source (as in "freedom") company any time they want, and they'd instantly see a jump in the number of people using their browser, because suddenly it would be included in Red Hat, Debian, Ubuntu, and so on. Instead they've decided to sell (via a third party) closed-source browsers for mobiles. Good for them, and if they ever decide to put the big "GPL" stamp on their software, then they can count on a sudden jump in the number of people using their software. You can only get that jump with GPL, though.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the problem is that people don't have enough information about what the politicians they are voting for are planning to do. It would be nice to have some way (a website, perhaps?) of finding a politician that you are able to vote for who will stand up for the issues that are important to you.
Right now, how am I supposed to find out this information? By searching for politicians that I can vote for, and then researching each one? Most people are not willing to do any research before voting. Lessening the amount of research people need to do in order to vote for the politician that best represents them is a first step toward fixing political problems in America, and the rest of the world, if Australia is anything to go by. (I think Australians care even less about political issues than Americans do, something the Howard government is enjoying taking advantage of!)
The US is just a mirror image of the middle east. Opposite sides of the world, both heavily driven by a religion, both despise each other.
There are a few differences in capabilities. The US has high-tech weapons, whereas the middle-east has oil.
Don't attribute to stupidity what can be attributed to malice, or else you'll end up making excuses for these people. It's very unlikely that someone would be so consistently stupid in a way that leads up to fascism.
Nine Inch Nails, Radiohead, The Beatles, Nirvana...
I actually hadn't listened to the music before I posted, and I didn't mean that I didn't like this music in particular. I meant that I don't like the idea of automatically generating music and TV shows. I believe that anything composed by a human rather than a computer will always be of higher quality.
The president shouldn't have anything to worry about if he's innocent, so there's no need for this law.
So either the "innocent people have nothing to fear" argument is flawed for the surveillance program, or the US president is far from innocent...
Why should game publications have a go at an unfinished game, possibly even before they have had a chance to play it? It's only fair to save the negative stuff for the review.
The EFF explain their decision in this lecture at Google.
Basically, they sent a letter to Sony before suing them outlining the steps that they should take to correct their mistake. Sony ignored the letter, and the EFF sued them. They came to a settlement that achieved most of the suggestions outlined in the original EFF letter.
The settlement wasn't too bad. Sure, they didn't hit Sony as hard as they could have, but everyone is getting replacement CDs and a small amount of compensation money. Anyone whose computer was severely damaged should probably sue Sony separately.
I'd argue that in some ways, the iTunes DRM is worse. At least with the Sony CDs, the DRM stayed the same. Apple has changed what you can do with the music AFTER you have purchased it.
Apple has changed the number of CDs you can burn it to, and the number of computers you can have the music on at the same time. Apple also force upgrades by requiring new software for new model iPods, so not updating iTunes isn't a viable way of escaping changes in the DRM permissions.
If Apple ever decided to build backdoors into iTunes, people would still have no choice but to upgrade and have all the backdoors affect all of their music, if they want iTunes to work with their latest iPod... or if they chose not to buy the latest iPod because of the backdoors, they would lose the ability to play all of their music on-the-go, since the music can't be played on any competing MP3 players.
... and now the tables have turned, and Microsoft is competing with Symantec. (Windows OneCare)
All of a sudden Symantec retaliates by deciding that Internet Explorer does indeed have more "critical" flaws than Mozilla Firefox does.
True. I wonder if this latest admission from Symantec is a response to Microsoft's new (when Vista comes out...) virus/spyware scanner subscription service. Symantec are now competing with Microsoft.
I'm not talking about the previews. Those are okay, I understand that most people (myself included) like watching trailers and seeing what sort of movies are coming up.
Perhaps what I was talking about isn't done in the US, but in Australia, we also get a large dose of advertising for other things before the movie: anti-smoking ads, anti-movie-copying ads, and ads for various stores and services. Those are the ads I'm complaining about, although I'd be happy to watch them if they let me in to the movie for free. I just don't like the way they're double-dipping with the over-priced candy bar, tickets, and ads.
Good work on the correction, but does it matter so much?
The important thing is who is there and who isn't. The order in which the browsers arrived at compliance is of no consequence to users of the browsers.
I don't think this should be judged based on how much of an achievement it is. The important part is that the browser passes the ACID2 test. How hard it was for each individual browser to get there is not important.
Who got there first also isn't important, we just need all browsers to get there.
This is a bit like reality TV. No planning involved, just get some equipment and see what happens automatically. The result is something that consumers will consume, but it isn't high in quality, just cheap to produce.
I want television shows with scripts and plots.
I want music that has been carefully composed and made to sound good.
Welcome to 2 years ago. This new Firefox browser is pretty cool, eh?
I wonder if anyone ever took Symantec seriously when they made this claim. Most computer illiterate users wouldn't have even heard about Symantec saying this, and those that did (eg. Slashdot readers) would already know better. It's as if Symantec is in their own little universe where it seems as thought everything incorrect is actually correct.
I'm not too sure this article should be posted under "your rights online". It should be more like "the CIA's rights online".
... look, the poor CIA are getting their privacy invaded because people are looking at what they've been searching for!! :-(
Maybe the CIA could get a blanket, some hot chocolate, and sit down with the DOJ to share their thoughts and feelings about this invasion of their privacy. Perhaps then the DOJ might stop trying to demand search data from Google.
I agree. They end up getting you to pay for the movie three times over: ticket, over-priced candy bar, and advertising.
I'm starting to believe that there's some truth to this. I've noticed, while browsing the "popular" category on Google Video, that a lot of the videos are borderline porn.
I can't help but think that if Google allowed porn videos, the "popular" category would eventually be filled with them.
id Software have been making the most popular games in the industry for over a decade, and have never bothered with heavy copy restrictions. They tend to put in copy restrictions as long as they have zero chance of inconveniencing their customers.
If only more game companies would just follow the leaders and dump this Starforce DRM crap...
This is the Ubuntu that will be competing with Windows Vista. It needs to be polished.
There is going to be a reasonably large number of desktop users willing to "try Linux out" just before they "upgrade" to Vista. The distribution they're most likely to try is currently Ubuntu, and if it is good enough, they might switch to Linux rather than Vista.
I didn't say that free operating systems were a "majority", but the fact remains that there are still a lot of people using Linux who are in need of a solution to their graphics card problem.
Any company that fills this gap will be the ONLY company serving what is becoming a rather large niche. This means that they will get some sort of a bump in sales.
Companies don't need to target majorities in order to make money.
Yet not enough with free software drivers. If any video card company wants to increase the number of customers that they have and get a competitive edge, they could release technical information that would help free software developers, or write some free software drivers themselves.
It could. Other free software just needs to find a way of partnering with companies that are relevant for their software. It's not impossible.
I think the hardest part would be finding companies that are as open-minded as Google is. Most companies don't like trying new things, whereas Google understands that its success is due to it trying new ways of doing things.
Yes, it sustainable. It's just as sustainable as Google Adsense.
Google aren't really the ones giving the money. Advertisers are giving Google money whenever someone uses the Google search bar on Firefox and ends up clicking on the ads on the resulting search page. Google themselves get the money and give Mozilla a cut.
Through the sheer number of searches being done in Firefox, Mozilla ends up getting a rather large cut.
Unless the anti-establishment mavericks in tech communities like SlashDot aggressively support Opera by buying commercial Opera-Software products, Opera just might disappear, being squeezed to death by the big 3 browers: Safari, Internet Explorer, Firefox.
Do we care? Opera could have been Firefox if they had GPLed it. Mozilla saw their opportunity and now they're benefiting from their foresight.
Opera could become an open source (as in "freedom") company any time they want, and they'd instantly see a jump in the number of people using their browser, because suddenly it would be included in Red Hat, Debian, Ubuntu, and so on. Instead they've decided to sell (via a third party) closed-source browsers for mobiles. Good for them, and if they ever decide to put the big "GPL" stamp on their software, then they can count on a sudden jump in the number of people using their software. You can only get that jump with GPL, though.