I guess it's comparing apples and oranges, in a way, but my system drive for linux (OS AND all apps, but not personal data) takes up 3.6 gB of hard drive space. Granted, I don't have any particularly huge apps on it, but still. With my typical memory footprint, I could pretty much have my OS and all apps in memory as well. It's obviously not an entirely fair comparison, but it does put things into perspective.
There is no need to assume some civilization would colonize the whole universe. Most space-faring civilizations have accepted the opinion of a well-respected being who said (or diffracted, or immolated, or floobied):
Applications that are today 1mb in download size would grow to 100mb with dependencies that I already have. But I wouldn't mind that. I have plenty of disk space and bandwidth, and I'd rather update all my applications to make use of a new version of a dependency, than worry about how my applications whould handle a central update of the dependency.
Yuck! Not me. Think of updating. As some core library update gets propagated throughout the various packages, I don't want my system churning away, wasting bandwidth, doing the same thing hundreds of times. Nor do I want my system bloated so unnecessarily. That solution would work, but it's kind of a cludge, and I'd prefer the current systems over that. It's all a matter of taste and available technology, I suppose.
That's the year that the brand new Windows Vienna comes out. Make sure you upgrade your version of Outlook, or you too will be part of the ultra-bot-net of the future.
Sure, we are greedy, competitive and mistrustful. We are also giving, co-operative, and trustful. Both pure capitalism and pure socialism suffer from the same weakness: not fully taking into account the actual variability of Man. (I don't know if a communist system could do this or not.) For most of our history sharing, co-operating, and acting in the common interest (in some areas) have not only been practicable, but necessary for survival. And sure we all want power and wealth, but many don't want more and more of it, or screw each other to get it.
So, basically, I'd dispute that it is contrary to our natures, more accurately: it doesn't take our natures fully into account.
Freedom (or the illusion of it) causes complacency with a lot of people. Seriously, do you think Nixon (or even Reagan) could have gotten around one of the most important parts of the Geneva Convention on a technicality?
Does the whole DRM issue remind anyone else of the "New Coke" thing?
1. Company alters product
2. Consumers upset at new product
3. Company delivers original product, looking like heroes and generating positive buzz
4. Profit
It doesn't even need an: X. ???
That's true. I don't think it will take very much more of that sort of thing, though, before changing our international trade policy becomes a popular idea. Canadians aren't generally riled over the softwood lumber shenanigans, but there's definitely some anger over the issue. Canada is not Nicaragua, and we have the capabilities to alter our trade policy to the detriment of the US. Granted, it would take pretty serious planning to do that in a way that doesn't cause economic disaster in Canada, but I find resentment of US economic interference pretty common now, and a couple more softwood lumber fiascoes could generate a strong majority in Parliament for a party which endorse altering our economic relation. (ie. A strong Liberal majority, perhaps, or even an NDP opposition.) Regardless, the US will be Canada's largest trade partner, but the economic closeness (to the benefit of both sides) could easily lessen.
IANAL, but it seems like this could open the US government to being sued. Couldn't any legitimate Canadian company sue if this impacts their business? I haven't looked to see what the mechanics of the blacklist are (port-blocking?), but any limitation placed on a business would be anti-competitive, and providing unfair protections to American businesses. Obviously there would have to be proof of financial loss in court, but this seems like a stupid decision. Risk American tax payer dollars (which would then be paid to Canadian companies), because an American industry wants another country to change its laws.
Of course, I'm sure the Canadian Government will cave, without a great deal of public dissent, but this seems like a silly way to go about stopping piracy.
On the surface, this seems reasonable. But it's garbage. It's similar to saying someone who's been abused as a kid is more likely to abuse, so it's reasonable to restrict the rights of everyone who was abused, or at least place them under suspicion of wrong-doing). Or saying blacks have a higher probability of committing a crime (sure, it's bound to happen during some periods), so it's appropriate to be suspicious of black people. Or whites have a higher rate (sure, it's bound to happen during some periods)...
Sandbagging a moment in history, isn't really fair, or just. Nor is questioning the legitimacy of someone's behaviour, based on what someone else is doing, especially on such limited datasets
Post Disclaimer:
Sorry if this comes across as inflamatory, due to the nature of my examples. They seem illustrative to me, and no offense is meant. I'll take the modding if I have to.
You are saying exactly opposite things. On one hand, commending Jobs on choosing common sense over greed, and then on the other, commending him on making this choice based on improving sales.
"Who should Avie be working with? Do we have a clear plan on what we want Apple to do to undermine Sun?"
The Apple guy's complaint back to Bill that IE4 is screwing with the.mov extension is priceless. I wonder how many similar emails Novell will send because of their deal.
This has actually improved my view of Vista's DRM issue somewhat. It is unfortunate, however, that you don't give users the option of installing your entire HDDVD reading and DRM communication/enforcement suite. It would be nice to have this on an install screen (though more user friendly):
"Do you wish to install HDDVD software and DRM/restriction software used to combat piracy? This may limit your Vista experiences if you have media which fails authentication. If you choose not to install at this time, it is available later. You may also choose to use third party software which does not enforce media authentication, but it may be illegal in your area.[Cancel] [Install]"
It's win/win. A minor change could have improved the corporation's image on this issue, probably made them a few sales which will otherwise be lost, and given customers a little more control over the uses of their computers.
Of course, I have no idea how intertwined the DRM is with other subsystems in the OS. Perhaps it couldn't be removed, as was suggested for IE. That would change things somewhat.
You missed my joke. Probably my fault, and undoubtedly it was a weak joke. If Barry Trotter is more fun to read and as much entertainment at a tenth the size, imagine how great Larry Potter must be, at 0/10th the size. Links were provided for info (wiki) and amusement (geo). Apologies for the misunderstanding.
The release of a Microsoft Operating System failing to function for perfectly legitimate users IS tech news. It may not be the tech news you want to here, but it is not unreasonable to post it.
Sure, we can do with a lot less of "person X says MS product Y may have problem Z", just like we can do with a lot less "person X used Linux distro Y and felt he could not overcome problem Z". But come on. This is a legitimate piece of information, and it is hardly FUD. Microsoft is shipping a product which they have had in development for a long time, and I, as a potential purchaser (not really), may not even be able to use a legally purchased copy. That sounds like perfectly acceptable tech news to me.
I'd agree that the voice recognition story is more funny than a serious piece of information, and may not belong here. And I'd agree that corporate America liking Bill Gates (or hating him) doesn't belong here, but be realistic.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess it's comparing apples and oranges, in a way, but my system drive for linux (OS AND all apps, but not personal data) takes up 3.6 gB of hard drive space. Granted, I don't have any particularly huge apps on it, but still. With my typical memory footprint, I could pretty much have my OS and all apps in memory as well. It's obviously not an entirely fair comparison, but it does put things into perspective.
There is no need to assume some civilization would colonize the whole universe. Most space-faring civilizations have accepted the opinion of a well-respected being who said (or diffracted, or immolated, or floobied):
"640 kilo-parsecs is enough for anybody."
Yuck! Not me. Think of updating. As some core library update gets propagated throughout the various packages, I don't want my system churning away, wasting bandwidth, doing the same thing hundreds of times. Nor do I want my system bloated so unnecessarily. That solution would work, but it's kind of a cludge, and I'd prefer the current systems over that. It's all a matter of taste and available technology, I suppose.
That's the year that the brand new Windows Vienna comes out. Make sure you upgrade your version of Outlook, or you too will be part of the ultra-bot-net of the future.
Sure, we are greedy, competitive and mistrustful. We are also giving, co-operative, and trustful. Both pure capitalism and pure socialism suffer from the same weakness: not fully taking into account the actual variability of Man. (I don't know if a communist system could do this or not.) For most of our history sharing, co-operating, and acting in the common interest (in some areas) have not only been practicable, but necessary for survival. And sure we all want power and wealth, but many don't want more and more of it, or screw each other to get it.
So, basically, I'd dispute that it is contrary to our natures, more accurately: it doesn't take our natures fully into account.
Freedom (or the illusion of it) causes complacency with a lot of people. Seriously, do you think Nixon (or even Reagan) could have gotten around one of the most important parts of the Geneva Convention on a technicality?
Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!
I can hardly wait to see the desicated corpses of Billy Bob Thornton and Ben Affleck on Entertainment Tonight! ---wait, wrong mission...
Well, as long as it means I can keep getting ultra-hi-res pics of cameltoe, me, and most everyone else, will sleep peacefully. [/crass]
Won't someone think of the porn?
Does the whole DRM issue remind anyone else of the "New Coke" thing?
1. Company alters product
2. Consumers upset at new product
3. Company delivers original product, looking like heroes and generating positive buzz
4. Profit
It doesn't even need an: X. ???
That's true. I don't think it will take very much more of that sort of thing, though, before changing our international trade policy becomes a popular idea. Canadians aren't generally riled over the softwood lumber shenanigans, but there's definitely some anger over the issue. Canada is not Nicaragua, and we have the capabilities to alter our trade policy to the detriment of the US. Granted, it would take pretty serious planning to do that in a way that doesn't cause economic disaster in Canada, but I find resentment of US economic interference pretty common now, and a couple more softwood lumber fiascoes could generate a strong majority in Parliament for a party which endorse altering our economic relation. (ie. A strong Liberal majority, perhaps, or even an NDP opposition.) Regardless, the US will be Canada's largest trade partner, but the economic closeness (to the benefit of both sides) could easily lessen.
IANAL, but it seems like this could open the US government to being sued. Couldn't any legitimate Canadian company sue if this impacts their business? I haven't looked to see what the mechanics of the blacklist are (port-blocking?), but any limitation placed on a business would be anti-competitive, and providing unfair protections to American businesses. Obviously there would have to be proof of financial loss in court, but this seems like a stupid decision. Risk American tax payer dollars (which would then be paid to Canadian companies), because an American industry wants another country to change its laws.
Of course, I'm sure the Canadian Government will cave, without a great deal of public dissent, but this seems like a silly way to go about stopping piracy.
On the surface, this seems reasonable. But it's garbage. It's similar to saying someone who's been abused as a kid is more likely to abuse, so it's reasonable to restrict the rights of everyone who was abused, or at least place them under suspicion of wrong-doing). Or saying blacks have a higher probability of committing a crime (sure, it's bound to happen during some periods), so it's appropriate to be suspicious of black people. Or whites have a higher rate (sure, it's bound to happen during some periods)...
Sandbagging a moment in history, isn't really fair, or just. Nor is questioning the legitimacy of someone's behaviour, based on what someone else is doing, especially on such limited datasets
Post Disclaimer:
Sorry if this comes across as inflamatory, due to the nature of my examples. They seem illustrative to me, and no offense is meant. I'll take the modding if I have to.
= city (maybe not, except copyright infringement...)
A pound of coke?!?!?
I've got to change OS. All I got when I installed Linux was a recipe for meth.
Just a nitpick:
You are saying exactly opposite things. On one hand, commending Jobs on choosing common sense over greed, and then on the other, commending him on making this choice based on improving sales.
To paraphrase Gandalf: "In which case, it is no longer freedom."
Bloody splinters groups, all of ya! We're the Open Alliance of Freedom in Software!
Bill Gates: http://www.iowaconsumercase.org/122106/PLEX0_6114. pdf
.mov extension is priceless. I wonder how many similar emails Novell will send because of their deal.
"Who should Avie be working with? Do we have a clear plan on what we want Apple to do to undermine Sun?"
The Apple guy's complaint back to Bill that IE4 is screwing with the
That's it. mister! The mittens are off. Them's fighting words, eh.
This has actually improved my view of Vista's DRM issue somewhat. It is unfortunate, however, that you don't give users the option of installing your entire HDDVD reading and DRM communication/enforcement suite. It would be nice to have this on an install screen (though more user friendly):
"Do you wish to install HDDVD software and DRM/restriction software used to combat piracy? This may limit your Vista experiences if you have media which fails authentication. If you choose not to install at this time, it is available later. You may also choose to use third party software which does not enforce media authentication, but it may be illegal in your area.[Cancel] [Install]"
It's win/win. A minor change could have improved the corporation's image on this issue, probably made them a few sales which will otherwise be lost, and given customers a little more control over the uses of their computers.
Of course, I have no idea how intertwined the DRM is with other subsystems in the OS. Perhaps it couldn't be removed, as was suggested for IE. That would change things somewhat.
You missed my joke. Probably my fault, and undoubtedly it was a weak joke. If Barry Trotter is more fun to read and as much entertainment at a tenth the size, imagine how great Larry Potter must be, at 0/10th the size. Links were provided for info (wiki) and amusement (geo). Apologies for the misunderstanding.
And that, folks, is the good side of virus writing.
I'll stick with the (ahem), less derivative: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Stouffer
Pics of Larry:
http://www.geocities.com/versetrue/rowling.htm
What's the problem, exactly?
The release of a Microsoft Operating System failing to function for perfectly legitimate users IS tech news. It may not be the tech news you want to here, but it is not unreasonable to post it.
Sure, we can do with a lot less of "person X says MS product Y may have problem Z", just like we can do with a lot less "person X used Linux distro Y and felt he could not overcome problem Z". But come on. This is a legitimate piece of information, and it is hardly FUD. Microsoft is shipping a product which they have had in development for a long time, and I, as a potential purchaser (not really), may not even be able to use a legally purchased copy. That sounds like perfectly acceptable tech news to me.
I'd agree that the voice recognition story is more funny than a serious piece of information, and may not belong here. And I'd agree that corporate America liking Bill Gates (or hating him) doesn't belong here, but be realistic.