But the fact that some non-savvy mom and her gadget-loving 13 year old daughter don't like it is supposed to mean something? If that's the market they're selling to then, yes, it does mean something...
Personally, I believe they're getting off scott-free because TVBoxSet.com is a company, but P2P networks and their filesharers are not. It's easy to compete against another company (like TVBoxSet.com), especially one which allegedly offers questionable content; on the other hand, with P2P, how in the world does a company compete against free? I may be wrong but I can't think of a business has yet figured a way to do that (Microsoft is presently trying to answer that question as it pertains to GNU/Linux and FOSS).
Seems to me that , correctly or not, they don't percieve a much of a threat to their bottom line coming from TVBoxSet.com as they do from some kid with a torrent client.
I've already started seeing.docx format attachments in my email at the office. Never mind the fact that my office is nearly 100% Linux/FOSS (except for the sole Windows machine running proprietary apps requiring outdated API's); I'd figured that since the vast majority of companies I've seen haven't (yet) started to migrate to Office 2007 then maybe sending.docx fils to everyone might not be such a smart move. For now we simply kick these emails back along with a friendly reminder that we don't do.docx or OOXML here, and will never accept anyhting in that format.
Microsoft says the 'O' in 'OOXML' stands for "open". My ass...
I really want to buy this woman (and her lawyers) a drink. They are probably doing more for our digital rights than any single group of people right now. I don't mean to discount the contributions of organizations such as the EFF (I have, in fact, contributed money in the past), but it's hard to root for a nameless, faceless group like that. This woman is fast becoming an icon for fighting the good fight against the frivilous lawsuits that the RIAA continues to file.
It may be a tad melodramatic to say this (especially now), but I certainly hope that she finds her place in the history books. Isn't it uber-ironic how this woman, who may be "doing more for our digital rights than any single group of people right now", doesn't even use a computer, or probably never even heard of P2P software until this trial?
Re:The only thing stopping me from using Opera
on
A Talk With Opera CEO
·
· Score: 1
Okay, done:
(1) OperaAdFilter (http://www.monroeworld.com/operafilter/documentat ion.php) does a pretty good job of providing a way to modify the built-in ad filter (yeah, Opera actually had one all along contrary to popular belief), otherwise known as UserCss.
(2) And if that isn't enough for you then you can also use Opera's (also) built-in content blocker (http://www.opera.com/products/desktop/). It's pretty neat: once you choose it from the menu it "whites out" everything on the page except for the ad banners and graphics; fro there you simply click on which object you want blocked and then click "save" near the top of the browser window. Quick, easy, intuitive, and it does it on a per-webpage basis.
I don't blame folks for stating how Opera lacks this, that or the other thing; the browser's so chock-full of built-in features which a lot of people don't think the browser even has, and the fact that they even exist isn't made very obvious. Of course, the other side of that coin is that if Opera decided to turn on all those features simultaneously then the browser would be accused of having a cluttered interface. The result is that quite a few settings are turned off by default and must be enabled by using the "Preferences" menu.
Instead of whining about the fact that people are blocking ads, the industry should be asking themselves _why_ people are doing it in the first place. The fact is, a lot of these ads are annoying as hell (especially those bandwidth-stealing, "Hey Look at me, Damn it!!!" Flash-based pop-ups and scrolling sidebars), and they just plain get in the way of the web experience. If there were a way to incorporate their advertisements into websites without being so grating and annoying then maybe users wouldn't mind seeing the ads anyway.
That seems to be a fatal flaw with most marketing types: they feel they must always "shout" loud enough to drown out the competition. The problem is that, on web pages, they often end drowning out the content as well, and sometimes seem either too arrogant or too dense to realize they're doing it.
I don't think they realize that not only is Opera indeed capable of blocking ads, but can also block content on a per-webpage basis. Maybe they should have checked out http://www.opera.com/products/desktop/ before making that recommendation.
The article makes it seem as if Microsoft rushed DX10 out before it was truly ready; when you consider that this is what they often seem to do with their OS's, this should probably come as no surprise.
Of course, we're seeing this news on the Inquirer, often considered to be a slightly less-than-reliable source of tech news. Maybe I'll reserve judgement until I hear another explanation from some other source.
I, too, work in a completely Windows-free enviroment at our company (in fact, I'm the one who spec'd everything, from our database server to the workstations). But I still insist on everyones' machine running ClamAV because, while we don't have many/any worries about being compromised by malware, we do exchange web traffic with our customers (like, say, most any business using at least one computer with an internet connection). I'd hate like hell to think that we may have inadvertently passed a virus- or trojan-infected email or spreadsheet to a customer - doesn't exactly do wonders for customer relations, ya know?
I agree with the OP 100%. In my experience ATI has always had superior hardware, but what good is that when the driver situation makes that hardware barely useable? I've been able to enjoy Beryl on my HP Pavillion notebook thanks to the open-source Radeon driver but this graphics unit is only doing less than half of what it's capable do doing, and installing it has been like pulling teeth. Kinda sucks not being able to kick back and relax with my favorite OSS FPS.
My next purchase is definitely going to be powered by Nvidia or Intel.
Business computing needs will always drive bigger / better / faster computer hardware... Somehow I doubt this. Scientific needs and gaming needs will always mandate an insatiable thirst for more computing power but in my experience businesses are loathe to upgrade to more powerful machines simply because they exist. If a business can run the same accounting package on its servers and use the same thin clients for 10 years or more then it wouldn't make economic sense to upgrade any hardware until it really needed to do so.
That probably why all these corporations are still running XP and Windows 2K on PIII machines.
Others have argued there is no scarcity of the resource you are talking about, so no regulation is required. Er, I think you're wrong. I work in the two-way radio communications field, and I can tell you from expereince that the resource is indeed limited. When a transmitter sends its payload over the air that transmission takes up a certain amount of bandwidth (usually about 12 to 25Khz). As one can infer from that statement alone, there's only so much room in any certain frequency spectrum; you try to pack any more transmissions into a band (past the theoretical limit) and you'll start running into issues such as massive interference, dropped packets, missing data, and all sorts of other real big fun. It's kind of like what happens when you go online at the end of the day (your online experience is a bit slower due to all the users online at that time)
This, of course, is why the FCC grants licenses for spectrums in the first place.
I think this is already happening (except for the going to jail part). Rumor has it that some Limewire users have been getting tracked just like that. Don't know if it's true, but I figured "why take the chance?"
That's why I got rid of Limewire.
The relatively recent explosion of P2P filesharing and user content sites like Youtube created a new and (mostly) unregulated means of delivering media to the masses. This is a threat to the technologically antiquated business models of the big traditional media conglomerates and it scared them senseless. The difference I see here is that CBS is trying to adjust their business model around the new "paradigm" (sorry, I couldn't come up with a better word), while the RIAA/MPAA is trying to fight it to save their own apparently outdated business models. I'm not saying that CBS's methods are going to be without fault, but I will give hem credit for at least trying to adapt to the new enviroment. If the RIAA/MPAA would stop their bitching and try to adapt their own businesses to this new enviroment then they might not have as many problems as they do now (of course, putting out music and movies that people actually WANT to see badly enough to pay for would help a great deal).
Okay, you've got the "driving forces behind SaaS" down. Now let me tell you about the "Brick Wall" that's going to stop those
"forces" cold in their tracks: mission-critical applications.
Here's an example: I service radio transmitter sites, often located in remote (rural) areas, and these site often have *NO* internet access at all, let alone high-speed connections. Many (actually, nearly all) of the software I use for servicing, installing and troubleshooting the high-power repeaters are proprietary Motorola local apps - meaning there is NO web app equivalent, nor will there ever be.
So what happens when the world starts going to web apps? Well, I won't be able to do my job. And that's going to be bad news for both you and I in a very major way because my customers probably include your police, fire, and ambulance services. Imagine your local police department with no radio communications AT ALL because I can't fix it - that's really going to suck when someone's breaking into your house at 3 in the morning. A pretty high price to pay for convenience indeed.
Fortunately I work on off-site infrastructure, so telecommuting wouldn't bother me a bit. After all, you might be able to hire a code monkey from Beijeng or Bophal, but he sure he sure as hell can't fix a hardware-related issue within 30 minutes of receiving a customer complaint.
The parent seems to have some very harsh words for Sprint-Nextel, but I'm not about to argue with him. I work for a small radio dealer in the Southeast and we operate three 800-Mhz radio tranmsitter sites covering a 10-county fooprint; in fact, we hold the *only* privately-owned 800Mhz spectrum in that part of the state (everyone else there sold out to - you guessed it - Sprint/Nextel). About a couple of years ago we (along with Sprint/Nextel) started our FCC-mandated rebanding; this involved Sprint/Nextel lending us the repeaters to keep our networks on line while we tuned our own repeaters to the new frequencies.
Earlier this year the rebanding process was completed and we were due at least a $40,000 payment from Sprint/Nextel for fees and expenses incurred during the rebanding process. This payment was actually due months ago, but Sprint/Nextel has been using various tactics to delay this payment. They seem to know that this company is operating at a razor-thin margin and are hoping for us to go out of business. My guess is that they want to obtain these frequencies and hold them to eliminate any potential competition in the area.
As it stands now, our shop is more or less a thorn in Sprint/Nextel's side as far as this particular mid-state market is concerned. I say that because few people I know actually buy Nextel cellphones because of the phone service (their service area sucks outside of interstate and urban areas); they buy these phones because of the radio feature. The problem for Sprint/Nextel is that we can provide similar midstate coverage for nowhere near what they charge customers in the same area - in other words, we are a direct threat to their local business model and they'd love to see us close up shop. The two-way radio industry is a small world and (from what I've heard from other shops) Sprint/Nextel has been sued several times before for using similar tactics against other entities. Apparently we weren't the only victims of Sprint/Nextel's tendency to play fast and loose with the rules, and that fact is the reason we 've had a Washington, D.C. communications attorney on retainer for the past few months (BTW the attorney's fees are also included in that payment due to us, so they've also managed to piss off a couple of D.C. lawyers as well).
We'll see if we can avoid having to sue them ourselves, as our attorneys seem to have made some headway in the case. As of this writing we should be receiving payment within the next couple of days (I can hardly wait - Sprint/Nextel owes a few thousand dollars in rebanding fees alone). Otherwise, I guess we'll be seeing them in court.
I, too, would have to give Ubuntu the edge. Sure, the evaluation has them about even, but one of these can run you hundreds of dollars; the other is "equivalent" in quality but doesn't cost one red cent. In this case a tie means Ubuntu wins on cost effectiveness alone (at least according to their comparison results).
As someone who used to work in a TV repair shop I wonder what the repair procedures for these behemoths are going to be. People already get really bent out of shape when a shop has to take the TV to their facilities for repair; and it seems as if the larger the TV the more upset they become (of course I'm well aware that this may be because when they buy the "extended warranty" from the salesperson at Best Buy, et al, they are promised "in-home servicing" but soon find that there almost is no such thing - many troubleshooting issues exist which simply cannot be resolved at the customer's house. But that's a whole other thread of discussion by itself).
Also, what of the logistics involved in transporting this beast to the repair shop? Just how light or heavy is this thing? I ask because most TV shops that are lucky enough to be able to provide such a service have (at best) 2 men and a small, "U-Haul" type delivery truck, which (in most cases) may not be spacious enough to accomodate such a large screen. Also, many of the customers I've encountered loved to place their widescreen TV's in some of the darndest places (usually on the 2nd floor higher and around some tight corners). Since placing a TV in such precarious locations can increase the chances of damage being done to the TV or the house when moving said appliance most TV shops will actually refuse to even consider touching a TV in that situation (mine was one of them).
These are situations which, in my experience, a large number of customers simply never consider when buying these outsized TV's.
I can answer the article's question quite easily, and that answer is a big, fat "NO". There are times when a web app just isn't feasible, especially in mission-critical situations. For example, I'm a Motorola 800Mhz radio systems technician and one of the tasks I constantly perform in my job is the programming and troubleshooting of radios and repeaters at transmitter tower sites. Often one can find these tower sites located in some rural backwater in the middle of nowhere, and these areas are often devoid of any sort of broadband intenet service (or any other kind for that matter). Obviously my laptop is an important and often-used tool of my trade, but what happens when there is an emergency or critical maintenance, and all your programming software is web-based? Imagine your local police and fire departments not having *any* radio communications for days or even weeks while waiting on a repairs. Web-based apps do you absolutely no good when you have to apply them in situations in which access just isn't available.
BTW, the same issues often apply to cellular network and Wifi/WiMax technicians, so this isn't just a one-off problem.
...is that they never bothered with a minor in business while they were in school. Having some sort of business background makes you a hot property because: (1) if you look at the areas from where most managers are being promoted, you'll find that there is a dearth of managers from IT, usually due to a general lack of business accumen in that field; and (2) having that business background makes you a more valuable employee (the company can always find another code monkey in India to work for half of what they're paying you, but does said code monkey have any further value to the company? What happens when they can find IT workers in, say, Africa to work for less? Probably the same thing that happened to your downsized former colleagues.) Having some business training can also help alleviate some of the usual frustrations felt by the IT staff toward the users, as you can now view how you job fits within the framework of the company's mission (i.e. you have some insight as to how some of the "stupid" decisions coming down from the top came to be that way).
The only reason the Jack Thompsons of our society are even given credibility in the first place is because of all these folks who aren't doing such a hot job in raising their offspring. The kids start acting up but the parents don't really want to take any blame in this, so the Jack Thompsons of this world provide them with a convienient scapegoat; doesn't matter whether that scapegoat happens to be Unreal Tournament, Marilyn Manson or MySpace - just as long as it's anything to give the parents something (other than themselves) at whch to point an accusatory finger.
As long as folks are willing to shift the blame for their parental shortcomings (rather than owning up) there will always be another Jack Thompson to make them feel better about themselves (while harnessing this blame-shifting for political reasons, of course).
After all, there is this little thing called the NCIC (http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fbi/is/ncic.htm ) that has already been in use by Law Enforcement for decades now. Everytime you've been pulled over by a cop and asked for your drivers' license (and/or other ID), what do you think he's doing when he takes them back to his vehicle? He's running your name through the NCIC and checking for any warrants. All of the paranoia and "Big Brother" talk may very well be much ado about nothing; when a criminal is caught and processed the government collects and therefore already possesses a lot of this information, and none of it is a big secret at that point.
You almost had me until your last statement. People aren't going to stop using an entire operating system merely because a browser is broken; if anything, they're going to find another browser.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I believe they're getting off scott-free because TVBoxSet.com is a company, but P2P networks and their filesharers are not. It's easy to compete against another company (like TVBoxSet.com), especially one which allegedly offers questionable content; on the other hand, with P2P, how in the world does a company compete against free? I may be wrong but I can't think of a business has yet figured a way to do that (Microsoft is presently trying to answer that question as it pertains to GNU/Linux and FOSS). Seems to me that , correctly or not, they don't percieve a much of a threat to their bottom line coming from TVBoxSet.com as they do from some kid with a torrent client.
I've already started seeing .docx format attachments in my email at the office. Never mind the fact that my office is nearly 100% Linux/FOSS (except for the sole Windows machine running proprietary apps requiring outdated API's); I'd figured that since the vast majority of companies I've seen haven't (yet) started to migrate to Office 2007 then maybe sending .docx fils to everyone might not be such a smart move. For now we simply kick these emails back along with a friendly reminder that we don't do .docx or OOXML here, and will never accept anyhting in that format.
Microsoft says the 'O' in 'OOXML' stands for "open". My ass...
Okay, done: (1) OperaAdFilter (http://www.monroeworld.com/operafilter/documentat ion.php) does a pretty good job of providing a way to modify the built-in ad filter (yeah, Opera actually had one all along contrary to popular belief), otherwise known as UserCss.
(2) And if that isn't enough for you then you can also use Opera's (also) built-in content blocker (http://www.opera.com/products/desktop/). It's pretty neat: once you choose it from the menu it "whites out" everything on the page except for the ad banners and graphics; fro there you simply click on which object you want blocked and then click "save" near the top of the browser window. Quick, easy, intuitive, and it does it on a per-webpage basis.
I don't blame folks for stating how Opera lacks this, that or the other thing; the browser's so chock-full of built-in features which a lot of people don't think the browser even has, and the fact that they even exist isn't made very obvious. Of course, the other side of that coin is that if Opera decided to turn on all those features simultaneously then the browser would be accused of having a cluttered interface. The result is that quite a few settings are turned off by default and must be enabled by using the "Preferences" menu.
Instead of whining about the fact that people are blocking ads, the industry should be asking themselves _why_ people are doing it in the first place. The fact is, a lot of these ads are annoying as hell (especially those bandwidth-stealing, "Hey Look at me, Damn it!!!" Flash-based pop-ups and scrolling sidebars), and they just plain get in the way of the web experience. If there were a way to incorporate their advertisements into websites without being so grating and annoying then maybe users wouldn't mind seeing the ads anyway. That seems to be a fatal flaw with most marketing types: they feel they must always "shout" loud enough to drown out the competition. The problem is that, on web pages, they often end drowning out the content as well, and sometimes seem either too arrogant or too dense to realize they're doing it.
I don't think they realize that not only is Opera indeed capable of blocking ads, but can also block content on a per-webpage basis. Maybe they should have checked out http://www.opera.com/products/desktop/ before making that recommendation.
The article makes it seem as if Microsoft rushed DX10 out before it was truly ready; when you consider that this is what they often seem to do with their OS's, this should probably come as no surprise. Of course, we're seeing this news on the Inquirer, often considered to be a slightly less-than-reliable source of tech news. Maybe I'll reserve judgement until I hear another explanation from some other source.
I, too, work in a completely Windows-free enviroment at our company (in fact, I'm the one who spec'd everything, from our database server to the workstations). But I still insist on everyones' machine running ClamAV because, while we don't have many/any worries about being compromised by malware, we do exchange web traffic with our customers (like, say, most any business using at least one computer with an internet connection). I'd hate like hell to think that we may have inadvertently passed a virus- or trojan-infected email or spreadsheet to a customer - doesn't exactly do wonders for customer relations, ya know?
I agree with the OP 100%. In my experience ATI has always had superior hardware, but what good is that when the driver situation makes that hardware barely useable? I've been able to enjoy Beryl on my HP Pavillion notebook thanks to the open-source Radeon driver but this graphics unit is only doing less than half of what it's capable do doing, and installing it has been like pulling teeth. Kinda sucks not being able to kick back and relax with my favorite OSS FPS. My next purchase is definitely going to be powered by Nvidia or Intel.
I think this is already happening (except for the going to jail part). Rumor has it that some Limewire users have been getting tracked just like that. Don't know if it's true, but I figured "why take the chance?" That's why I got rid of Limewire.
The relatively recent explosion of P2P filesharing and user content sites like Youtube created a new and (mostly) unregulated means of delivering media to the masses. This is a threat to the technologically antiquated business models of the big traditional media conglomerates and it scared them senseless. The difference I see here is that CBS is trying to adjust their business model around the new "paradigm" (sorry, I couldn't come up with a better word), while the RIAA/MPAA is trying to fight it to save their own apparently outdated business models. I'm not saying that CBS's methods are going to be without fault, but I will give hem credit for at least trying to adapt to the new enviroment. If the RIAA/MPAA would stop their bitching and try to adapt their own businesses to this new enviroment then they might not have as many problems as they do now (of course, putting out music and movies that people actually WANT to see badly enough to pay for would help a great deal).
Okay, you've got the "driving forces behind SaaS" down. Now let me tell you about the "Brick Wall" that's going to stop those "forces" cold in their tracks: mission-critical applications. Here's an example: I service radio transmitter sites, often located in remote (rural) areas, and these site often have *NO* internet access at all, let alone high-speed connections. Many (actually, nearly all) of the software I use for servicing, installing and troubleshooting the high-power repeaters are proprietary Motorola local apps - meaning there is NO web app equivalent, nor will there ever be. So what happens when the world starts going to web apps? Well, I won't be able to do my job. And that's going to be bad news for both you and I in a very major way because my customers probably include your police, fire, and ambulance services. Imagine your local police department with no radio communications AT ALL because I can't fix it - that's really going to suck when someone's breaking into your house at 3 in the morning. A pretty high price to pay for convenience indeed.
Fortunately I work on off-site infrastructure, so telecommuting wouldn't bother me a bit. After all, you might be able to hire a code monkey from Beijeng or Bophal, but he sure he sure as hell can't fix a hardware-related issue within 30 minutes of receiving a customer complaint.
Probably the best description of Vista's UAC I've ever heard.
The parent seems to have some very harsh words for Sprint-Nextel, but I'm not about to argue with him. I work for a small radio dealer in the Southeast and we operate three 800-Mhz radio tranmsitter sites covering a 10-county fooprint; in fact, we hold the *only* privately-owned 800Mhz spectrum in that part of the state (everyone else there sold out to - you guessed it - Sprint/Nextel). About a couple of years ago we (along with Sprint/Nextel) started our FCC-mandated rebanding; this involved Sprint/Nextel lending us the repeaters to keep our networks on line while we tuned our own repeaters to the new frequencies. Earlier this year the rebanding process was completed and we were due at least a $40,000 payment from Sprint/Nextel for fees and expenses incurred during the rebanding process. This payment was actually due months ago, but Sprint/Nextel has been using various tactics to delay this payment. They seem to know that this company is operating at a razor-thin margin and are hoping for us to go out of business. My guess is that they want to obtain these frequencies and hold them to eliminate any potential competition in the area. As it stands now, our shop is more or less a thorn in Sprint/Nextel's side as far as this particular mid-state market is concerned. I say that because few people I know actually buy Nextel cellphones because of the phone service (their service area sucks outside of interstate and urban areas); they buy these phones because of the radio feature. The problem for Sprint/Nextel is that we can provide similar midstate coverage for nowhere near what they charge customers in the same area - in other words, we are a direct threat to their local business model and they'd love to see us close up shop. The two-way radio industry is a small world and (from what I've heard from other shops) Sprint/Nextel has been sued several times before for using similar tactics against other entities. Apparently we weren't the only victims of Sprint/Nextel's tendency to play fast and loose with the rules, and that fact is the reason we 've had a Washington, D.C. communications attorney on retainer for the past few months (BTW the attorney's fees are also included in that payment due to us, so they've also managed to piss off a couple of D.C. lawyers as well). We'll see if we can avoid having to sue them ourselves, as our attorneys seem to have made some headway in the case. As of this writing we should be receiving payment within the next couple of days (I can hardly wait - Sprint/Nextel owes a few thousand dollars in rebanding fees alone). Otherwise, I guess we'll be seeing them in court.
I, too, would have to give Ubuntu the edge. Sure, the evaluation has them about even, but one of these can run you hundreds of dollars; the other is "equivalent" in quality but doesn't cost one red cent. In this case a tie means Ubuntu wins on cost effectiveness alone (at least according to their comparison results).
As someone who used to work in a TV repair shop I wonder what the repair procedures for these behemoths are going to be. People already get really bent out of shape when a shop has to take the TV to their facilities for repair; and it seems as if the larger the TV the more upset they become (of course I'm well aware that this may be because when they buy the "extended warranty" from the salesperson at Best Buy, et al, they are promised "in-home servicing" but soon find that there almost is no such thing - many troubleshooting issues exist which simply cannot be resolved at the customer's house. But that's a whole other thread of discussion by itself). Also, what of the logistics involved in transporting this beast to the repair shop? Just how light or heavy is this thing? I ask because most TV shops that are lucky enough to be able to provide such a service have (at best) 2 men and a small, "U-Haul" type delivery truck, which (in most cases) may not be spacious enough to accomodate such a large screen. Also, many of the customers I've encountered loved to place their widescreen TV's in some of the darndest places (usually on the 2nd floor higher and around some tight corners). Since placing a TV in such precarious locations can increase the chances of damage being done to the TV or the house when moving said appliance most TV shops will actually refuse to even consider touching a TV in that situation (mine was one of them). These are situations which, in my experience, a large number of customers simply never consider when buying these outsized TV's.
I can answer the article's question quite easily, and that answer is a big, fat "NO". There are times when a web app just isn't feasible, especially in mission-critical situations. For example, I'm a Motorola 800Mhz radio systems technician and one of the tasks I constantly perform in my job is the programming and troubleshooting of radios and repeaters at transmitter tower sites. Often one can find these tower sites located in some rural backwater in the middle of nowhere, and these areas are often devoid of any sort of broadband intenet service (or any other kind for that matter). Obviously my laptop is an important and often-used tool of my trade, but what happens when there is an emergency or critical maintenance, and all your programming software is web-based? Imagine your local police and fire departments not having *any* radio communications for days or even weeks while waiting on a repairs. Web-based apps do you absolutely no good when you have to apply them in situations in which access just isn't available. BTW, the same issues often apply to cellular network and Wifi/WiMax technicians, so this isn't just a one-off problem.
...is that they never bothered with a minor in business while they were in school. Having some sort of business background makes you a hot property because: (1) if you look at the areas from where most managers are being promoted, you'll find that there is a dearth of managers from IT, usually due to a general lack of business accumen in that field; and (2) having that business background makes you a more valuable employee (the company can always find another code monkey in India to work for half of what they're paying you, but does said code monkey have any further value to the company? What happens when they can find IT workers in, say, Africa to work for less? Probably the same thing that happened to your downsized former colleagues.) Having some business training can also help alleviate some of the usual frustrations felt by the IT staff toward the users, as you can now view how you job fits within the framework of the company's mission (i.e. you have some insight as to how some of the "stupid" decisions coming down from the top came to be that way).
The only reason the Jack Thompsons of our society are even given credibility in the first place is because of all these folks who aren't doing such a hot job in raising their offspring. The kids start acting up but the parents don't really want to take any blame in this, so the Jack Thompsons of this world provide them with a convienient scapegoat; doesn't matter whether that scapegoat happens to be Unreal Tournament, Marilyn Manson or MySpace - just as long as it's anything to give the parents something (other than themselves) at whch to point an accusatory finger. As long as folks are willing to shift the blame for their parental shortcomings (rather than owning up) there will always be another Jack Thompson to make them feel better about themselves (while harnessing this blame-shifting for political reasons, of course).
After all, there is this little thing called the NCIC (http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fbi/is/ncic.htm ) that has already been in use by Law Enforcement for decades now. Everytime you've been pulled over by a cop and asked for your drivers' license (and/or other ID), what do you think he's doing when he takes them back to his vehicle? He's running your name through the NCIC and checking for any warrants. All of the paranoia and "Big Brother" talk may very well be much ado about nothing; when a criminal is caught and processed the government collects and therefore already possesses a lot of this information, and none of it is a big secret at that point.
You almost had me until your last statement. People aren't going to stop using an entire operating system merely because a browser is broken; if anything, they're going to find another browser.