seem further and further apart each day. What - does anyone REALLY expect that the people who put this crap together don't know how it rips off and abuses users? C'mon nobody intelligent enough to think up a law and draft it could possibly miss the negative aspects - they simply don't care because it's a money maker..and the rest is just postering. The only way this stuff will change for the better is when business is held accountable in the same manner as individuals..
This makes economic sense even if the cost of providing the service to both is the same, although, ironically, consumers tend to feel cheated if they find out.
Why are these people always surprised when this type of behaviour backfires? The role of sales seems to have shifted; from filling needs customers have, we instead have this constant bombardment of useless don't need crap which sales invariably passes off as absolute necessities. And how do they do it; by lying to customers and telling them that the Customer is #1 and that each customer is AS important as the next, at least until the sale is made. Naturally the definition of important is based largely on how expensively a good/service costs- the lower the price the more important the customer, right?
And the fact that EM's picture looks like it was snapped by a convenience store camera during a holdup certainly doesn't help things either. Look at that IBM guy- certainly looks the part of the "
Big Brave Corporate Crusader who is protecting the poor little guy"...
With more and more of this *shit* becoming the norm, I begin to wonder when the trigger point will finally be reached. It seems very plausible to me that some time within the near future we can expect to begin hearing about DDoS'd sites belonging to such groups as the MPAA, RIAA etc..
From there, I wonder how long will it be before things begin to get physical? Pie attacks on Bill Gates are one thing, but how long until we begin hearing about the "Unabomber II" who "targets members of the Entertainment industry for contributing to the death of the Bill of Rights" or equivalent...??
For all the brain power that resides in Redmond under the banner of Microsoft, you'd think they would be a little smarter. Let's be realistic; does anyone really believe that porting their apps over to a different operating system can do anything other than make them money? I find it highly doubtfull that anyone not already using Linux would jump ship from Windows *just* because of an Office Suite. It's far more likely that an Office port would result in their taking market share away from whatever "free" office-type apps already exist.
And then of course comes the *other* stupidity they always engage in- denying things which are confirmed facts. Ok- so they could make it truth by cancelling the project but what point is there to that line of thought? Instead of denying this kind of thing they should be broadcasting to the world - it would be perceived as a lack of fear concerning Linux. Almost like saying "We are so confident that Windows is better that we're going to *own* the Linux Suite-space as well!"..
...just because they leave the office?
Linus must think so, according to this:
"Windows is still a no-brainer for most people," he said, adding it will take Linux "perhaps five or 10 years" to catch up, at least for home-computer users. But he said average business users might move to Linux sooner, perhaps by next year.
I don't quite understand how it can be as soon as next year, but then suddenly it will take at least 5 years. The users being discussed as *business* are the same people who go home at the end of the day. It would seem to me that it's more likely that if someone uses Linux at work that when they get home they will be familiar and proficient with it already and thus MORE likely to use it, not less. Naturally if they are more likely to use it, then they're more likely to use it *AT HOME* as well.
I think Linus is way off with his numbers.. It's either going to happen in the next year, or not - take your pick.
Although the statement is redundant, at least in the U.S.
And there is part of the problem; for all those with their heads up their asses listen carefully - there are other countries out there besides the U.S. ...(minors can't enter into legal contracts) the Slashdot legal scholars don't see it that way.
and naturally the "Slashdot legal scholars" know all about law everywhere, right..?
Cripes, Corel *may* (or may not!) have screwed them but it certainly wasn't cause of those particular reasons.
...as the example. You can expect that for the most part all languages which are from the same family tree (e.g. English, French, Spanish, Italian etc..) would be similar. The real issue is that not all modern languages even have technology terms. Historically English does because it is the language in which all these things were "invented". But- but what do you do with a language like Navaho, where even the word "Tank" (army vehicle) is just the two words for "metal" and "turtle" put together..?!
after that the rest of the distro's get support for it as well. Based on the article, I would question just how much effort is going to be put into the actual applications.
Sure the OS will support this, but since this new X64 will run X32 apps just as well where is the incentive for writing enhanced applications..?
It would seem to be a very good fit and very little work. Why not have a Novell server for file and print services and have *whatever* IBM Linux as the workstation/desktop OS. Combine the two into a package and away we go.. Integrated and bundled together we have an equivalent of Microsoft Enterprise Server - except that this would actually work..!
Is what I'd like to know. Forcing me to provide personal information just for the sake of my being given "the privilege" to access some commercial website? Excuse me??!! Last I checked, I was the consumer and the one in need of protection from exploitation. I notice that no where does it seem possible for me to get ahold of the personal info of the CEO of any of these companies, so where do they get off expecting me to - no wait, TRYING TO FORCE ME to provide my personals. It's getting ridiculous. I've never been one to cry out "down with the man", but this is starting to turn my stomach...
While I heartily applaud the steps being taken to make screen more legible, I question the truth of the Microsoft claim to have invented this technology. Steve Gibson of Gibson Research Corporation , has a whole page dedicated to this very issue, located here. He makes some very straighforward points, including reminding us that Apple had something which worked the same way around 15 years ago.
And of course this does absolutely nothing for screens other than LCD..
to just start ping flooding that IP without any other info about the situation. Let's be realistic about what we want when we define security. What we should really be doing is to create a system which could be called "the perfect firewall" because it is impregnable to outside attack; ignoring all those zombie packets and such that DoS-type attacks create would be a great first step. A long term solution (maybe rewriting TCP/IP?)which makes it unappetizing to even bother with this crap would be far more usefull to the computer world than taking a retaliatory stance. I think it's fair to say that if we Ping first ask questions latter then we're no better than *whatever* jerk started the whole thing..
..the very idea of emulating Windows on Linux. Sure, there is the argument that it allows people to move over to Linux and continue to use the software they have invested in. Sure there are any number of other positive reasons to use it -but when everything is taken into consideration the final reality is that this reduces the incentive for companies to write good code that can be easily ported. Native code? Why bother..
Should credit be given to the team for their hard work and effort - absolutely! But I recall this project having it's roots in a time when Linux wasn't in a position to *demand* native applications..
Slashdot had an article not too far back about a company doing REAL open source architecture. CPU blueprints that were available for anyone to look at and change.. What Intel is doing certainly doesn't qualify as open sourcing; better to call it what it is, DOCUMENTING..
I don't know how you figure this is an issue of quality. The fact that
It's clearly written in the 60-70's in the US of A. The world view and such things as mind-expanding drugs are of that time.
is not as cut and dry as you think. The best stories are usually _not_ those with characters completely dissimilar to the reader, but those with characters that the reader can emphasize with. A story whose protagonists (or even antagonists) are so totally dissimilar to the reader that they can not see themselves in that character usually fail to engender the emotional link that makes a story moving (moved to anger or tears, take your pick!). And if I recall correctly, the books were written around that time..
For this new effort if the story is not meddled with, then any other concerns are secondary. The example of what I mean is the "RED DWARF" British Sci-Fi. Low budget sets and props, but good stories and *fun* acting provided us with a very enjoyable show..
Seems a bit odd that the lawyer Martin Garbus was just previously defending these MPAA bastards and is now fighting against them. Anyone have any ideas what that case was concerning? That aside, it would seem only obvious that should the judge rule for this technicality then the only *right* thing to do would be for Garbus to quit the firm - or take a sabbatical. As I understand it, the firm is what the technicality focus' on, not the specific counsel, and that would certainly prove that Garbus *get's it*. While I applaud the fact that Garbus wants to fight on the side of right, I am always suspicious that this is simply -yet again- a stepping stone in a law career. Of course, it's natural to be suspicious of lawyers, since they ARE the ones that invariably become the politicos that write BS into law..
Many individuals using the software or rival products believed they were operating anonymously Surely by now everyone has clued in to the very lack of real anonymity that exists on the Internet?
or that individual actions would go unnoticed among the massive quantity of files being traded at any given time. So were they expecting that they could use the system for music they don't have a right to listen to?? Really very silly- we can certainly expect that once Napster bans the users listed by Metallica, that ALL members of RIAA will demand the same. And while Metallica may say now that no lawsuits are pending against those people (on the list)- I wouldn't trust them (their lawyers?) as far as I can throw them to NOT begin legal precending against a few; just to make their point.
is translating theory into the practical. With the exception of some *very* specific-to-use benchmarks that I've seen, everything else has always been a very poor approximation of what someone "Thinks" actually is a practical sample of what DOES happen when a computer is used. As the old saying goes, "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics", and benchmarks are the most advanced form of statistics. Draw your own conclusions..
If we're serious about supporting Open Source, then we should support it right down the line - no patent-encumbered formats like MP3 and GIF. If we all live by that, then new standards like Vorbis and PNG will win in the end.
I actually hadn't realized that MPEG is strictly an open standard and not free AND open.. It certainly is worthwhile under those circumstances to make something like this Vorbis the "choice of a new generation" (take that Pepsi!) and use it to replace anything not BOTH free and Open..
Very Interesting the part about
on
CFP 2000 Wrapup
·
· Score: 1
Another proposaal was that you take a videostream that is monitoring your home, and split it into multiple streams, so that all parties have to agree that it is nessisaarry to look at it. One goes to your local police, another to your ACLU ( or your countrie's equiv) and a third to your most trusted friend/relative. If there is a break in, for example, and all three parties agree, then you can have all the streams combined, and a video of the breakin to your house will help the police investigate things
but even the best intentioned systems of surveillance are still just that; surveillance of my privacy. Frankly while I think that IS a kick-ass concept, it's invariably in the execution that everything falls apart. I'm not the most paranoid person on the planet, but I for one will resist direct *anything* of this nature, even when there are clear benefits. The simplest of reasons should suffice - my privacy is it's own end, and no means should comprimise that just for the sake of expediency.
scheme to add to the piles and piles of "to be discarded". So it sounds good and compresses nearly as well as MPEG. Wasn't the whole point of MPEG that it too is an open standard? And frankly, looking at the current state of affairs it would seem that MPEG has already won the necessary mindshare to BE the defacto standard. Looks like a steep uphill battle..
"and, by the way, put an end to the same good old francophobic stuff, which is obviously unjustified after the study of this report.."
I don't see where the use of cryto-tech has anything to do with the small-minded attitude that France takes towards anything and everything. Just because they finally got their act moving forwards as concerns crypto doesn't explain everything else they do. On the other hand, it's good to see the general direction this is going (for many countries). Natch I'm NOT suprised at the stand taken by the Canadian gov..all we need now is for the American gov to wake up and realize that honest citizens have rights too, and that there isn't a true correlation between the use of crypto and the likelyhood that criminals will "get away with *it*", whatever *it* may be..
Just from the review alone, I get the feeling that this book will come across more as a "feel-good for Geeks" kind of thing. Happily seeing as I fit the category I expect that this would be a great read. I especially like the choice quotes:
The Internet has broken these chains, however. The market no longer stares exlusively at the great tube, but instead is engaged in the greatest conversation in human history
I would disagree with this on the premise that rather than breaking the chains, the truth is that the Internet is making people aware that there ARE chains on their backs.. And the other bit about
The rise of mass media completed the transformation from conversation to lecture. No longer did customers roam the marketplace, but instead consumers were lulled, bribed and manipulated into buying the latest and greatest, because TV told them so. The idea of the interchangeable consumer came to be the industrial ideal. Nothing was left to chance: You could get anyone to buy anything made by anyone, and all that mattered was the money.
would seem to be the very definition of the current war being waged between Corporatism and Individualism on the net..
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, if you look at this link it looks like a computer generated image. In fact when I take a second look at it, most CGI planets look better!
seem further and further apart each day. What - does anyone REALLY expect that the people who put this crap together don't know how it rips off and abuses users? C'mon nobody intelligent enough to think up a law and draft it could possibly miss the negative aspects - they simply don't care because it's a money maker..and the rest is just postering. The only way this stuff will change for the better is when business is held accountable in the same manner as individuals..
This makes economic sense even if the cost of providing the service to both is the same, although, ironically, consumers tend to feel cheated if they find out.
Why are these people always surprised when this type of behaviour backfires? The role of sales seems to have shifted; from filling needs customers have, we instead have this constant bombardment of useless don't need crap which sales invariably passes off as absolute necessities. And how do they do it; by lying to customers and telling them that the Customer is #1 and that each customer is AS important as the next, at least until the sale is made. Naturally the definition of important is based largely on how expensively a good/service costs- the lower the price the more important the customer, right?
And the fact that EM's picture looks like it was snapped by a convenience store camera during a holdup certainly doesn't help things either. Look at that IBM guy- certainly looks the part of the " Big Brave Corporate Crusader who is protecting the poor little guy"...
With more and more of this *shit* becoming the norm, I begin to wonder when the trigger point will finally be reached. It seems very plausible to me that some time within the near future we can expect to begin hearing about DDoS'd sites belonging to such groups as the MPAA, RIAA etc..
From there, I wonder how long will it be before things begin to get physical? Pie attacks on Bill Gates are one thing, but how long until we begin hearing about the "Unabomber II" who "targets members of the Entertainment industry for contributing to the death of the Bill of Rights" or equivalent...??
For all the brain power that resides in Redmond under the banner of Microsoft, you'd think they would be a little smarter. Let's be realistic; does anyone really believe that porting their apps over to a different operating system can do anything other than make them money? I find it highly doubtfull that anyone not already using Linux would jump ship from Windows *just* because of an Office Suite. It's far more likely that an Office port would result in their taking market share away from whatever "free" office-type apps already exist.
And then of course comes the *other* stupidity they always engage in- denying things which are confirmed facts. Ok- so they could make it truth by cancelling the project but what point is there to that line of thought? Instead of denying this kind of thing they should be broadcasting to the world - it would be perceived as a lack of fear concerning Linux. Almost like saying "We are so confident that Windows is better that we're going to *own* the Linux Suite-space as well!"..
...just because they leave the office? Linus must think so, according to this: "Windows is still a no-brainer for most people," he said, adding it will take Linux "perhaps five or 10 years" to catch up, at least for home-computer users. But he said average business users might move to Linux sooner, perhaps by next year.
I don't quite understand how it can be as soon as next year, but then suddenly it will take at least 5 years. The users being discussed as *business* are the same people who go home at the end of the day. It would seem to me that it's more likely that if someone uses Linux at work that when they get home they will be familiar and proficient with it already and thus MORE likely to use it, not less. Naturally if they are more likely to use it, then they're more likely to use it *AT HOME* as well.
I think Linus is way off with his numbers.. It's either going to happen in the next year, or not - take your pick.
Although the statement is redundant, at least in the U.S.
...(minors can't enter into legal contracts) the Slashdot legal scholars don't see it that way.
and naturally the "Slashdot legal scholars" know all about law everywhere, right..?
Cripes, Corel *may* (or may not!) have screwed them but it certainly wasn't cause of those particular reasons.
And there is part of the problem; for all those with their heads up their asses listen carefully - there are other countries out there besides the U.S.
...as the example. You can expect that for the most part all languages which are from the same family tree (e.g. English, French, Spanish, Italian etc..) would be similar. The real issue is that not all modern languages even have technology terms. Historically English does because it is the language in which all these things were "invented". But- but what do you do with a language like Navaho, where even the word "Tank" (army vehicle) is just the two words for "metal" and "turtle" put together..?!
after that the rest of the distro's get support for it as well. Based on the article, I would question just how much effort is going to be put into the actual applications. Sure the OS will support this, but since this new X64 will run X32 apps just as well where is the incentive for writing enhanced applications..?
It would seem to be a very good fit and very little work. Why not have a Novell server for file and print services and have *whatever* IBM Linux as the workstation/desktop OS. Combine the two into a package and away we go.. Integrated and bundled together we have an equivalent of Microsoft Enterprise Server - except that this would actually work..!
Is what I'd like to know. Forcing me to provide personal information just for the sake of my being given "the privilege" to access some commercial website? Excuse me??!! Last I checked, I was the consumer and the one in need of protection from exploitation. I notice that no where does it seem possible for me to get ahold of the personal info of the CEO of any of these companies, so where do they get off expecting me to - no wait, TRYING TO FORCE ME to provide my personals. It's getting ridiculous.
I've never been one to cry out "down with the man", but this is starting to turn my stomach...
While I heartily applaud the steps being taken to make screen more legible, I question the truth of the Microsoft claim to have invented this technology. Steve Gibson of Gibson Research Corporation , has a whole page dedicated to this very issue, located here. He makes some very straighforward points, including reminding us that Apple had something which worked the same way around 15 years ago.
And of course this does absolutely nothing for screens other than LCD..
to just start ping flooding that IP without any other info about the situation. Let's be realistic about what we want when we define security. What we should really be doing is to create a system which could be called "the perfect firewall" because it is impregnable to outside attack; ignoring all those zombie packets and such that DoS-type attacks create would be a great first step. A long term solution (maybe rewriting TCP/IP?)which makes it unappetizing to even bother with this crap would be far more usefull to the computer world than taking a retaliatory stance. I think it's fair to say that if we Ping first ask questions latter then we're no better than *whatever* jerk started the whole thing..
..the very idea of emulating Windows on Linux. Sure, there is the argument that it allows people to move over to Linux and continue to use the software they have invested in. Sure there are any number of other positive reasons to use it -but when everything is taken into consideration the final reality is that this reduces the incentive for companies to write good code that can be easily ported. Native code? Why bother..
Should credit be given to the team for their hard work and effort - absolutely! But I recall this project having it's roots in a time when Linux wasn't in a position to *demand* native applications..
Slashdot had an article not too far back about a company doing REAL open source architecture. CPU blueprints that were available for anyone to look at and change.. What Intel is doing certainly doesn't qualify as open sourcing; better to call it what it is, DOCUMENTING..
I don't know how you figure this is an issue of quality. The fact that
It's clearly written in the 60-70's in the US of A. The world view and such things as mind-expanding drugs are of that time.
is not as cut and dry as you think. The best stories are usually _not_ those with characters completely dissimilar to the reader, but those with characters that the reader can emphasize with. A story whose protagonists (or even antagonists) are so totally dissimilar to the reader that they can not see themselves in that character usually fail to engender the emotional link that makes a story moving (moved to anger or tears, take your pick!). And if I recall correctly, the books were written around that time..
For this new effort if the story is not meddled with, then any other concerns are secondary. The example of what I mean is the "RED DWARF" British Sci-Fi. Low budget sets and props, but good stories and *fun* acting provided us with a very enjoyable show..
Seems a bit odd that the lawyer Martin Garbus was just previously defending these MPAA bastards and is now fighting against them. Anyone have any ideas what that case was concerning? That aside, it would seem only obvious that should the judge rule for this technicality then the only *right* thing to do would be for Garbus to quit the firm - or take a sabbatical. As I understand it, the firm is what the technicality focus' on, not the specific counsel, and that would certainly prove that Garbus *get's it*. While I applaud the fact that Garbus wants to fight on the side of right, I am always suspicious that this is simply -yet again- a stepping stone in a law career. Of course, it's natural to be suspicious of lawyers, since they ARE the ones that invariably become the politicos that write BS into law..
Many individuals using the software or rival products believed they were operating anonymously Surely by now everyone has clued in to the very lack of real anonymity that exists on the Internet?
or that individual actions would go unnoticed among the massive quantity of files being traded at any given time.
So were they expecting that they could use the system for music they don't have a right to listen to?? Really very silly- we can certainly expect that once Napster bans the users listed by Metallica, that ALL members of RIAA will demand the same. And while Metallica may say now that no lawsuits are pending against those people (on the list)- I wouldn't trust them (their lawyers?) as far as I can throw them to NOT begin legal precending against a few; just to make their point.
is translating theory into the practical. With the exception of some *very* specific-to-use benchmarks that I've seen, everything else has always been a very poor approximation of what someone "Thinks" actually is a practical sample of what DOES happen when a computer is used.
As the old saying goes, "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics", and benchmarks are the most advanced form of statistics. Draw your own conclusions..
hmm, you have good points.
If we're serious about supporting Open Source, then we should support it right down the line - no patent-encumbered formats like MP3 and GIF. If we all live by that, then new standards like Vorbis and PNG will win in the end.
I actually hadn't realized that MPEG is strictly an open standard and not free AND open.. It certainly is worthwhile under those circumstances to make something like this Vorbis the "choice of a new generation" (take that Pepsi!) and use it to replace anything not BOTH free and Open..
Another proposaal was that you take a videostream that is monitoring your home, and split it into multiple streams, so that all parties have to agree that it is nessisaarry to look at it. One goes to your local police, another to your ACLU ( or your countrie's equiv) and a third to your most trusted friend/relative. If there is a break in, for example, and all three parties agree, then you can have all the streams combined, and a video of the breakin to your house will help the police investigate things
but even the best intentioned systems of surveillance are still just that; surveillance of my privacy. Frankly while I think that IS a kick-ass concept, it's invariably in the execution that everything falls apart. I'm not the most paranoid person on the planet, but I for one will resist direct *anything* of this nature, even when there are clear benefits. The simplest of reasons should suffice - my privacy is it's own end, and no means should comprimise that just for the sake of expediency.
scheme to add to the piles and piles of "to be discarded". So it sounds good and compresses nearly as well as MPEG. Wasn't the whole point of MPEG that it too is an open standard? And frankly, looking at the current state of affairs it would seem that MPEG has already won the necessary mindshare to BE the defacto standard. Looks like a steep uphill battle..
"and, by the way, put an end to the same good old francophobic stuff, which is obviously unjustified after the study of this report.."
I don't see where the use of cryto-tech has anything to do with the small-minded attitude that France takes towards anything and everything. Just because they finally got their act moving forwards as concerns crypto doesn't explain everything else they do. On the other hand, it's good to see the general direction this is going (for many countries). Natch I'm NOT suprised at the stand taken by the Canadian gov..all we need now is for the American gov to wake up and realize that honest citizens have rights too, and that there isn't a true correlation between the use of crypto and the likelyhood that criminals will "get away with *it*", whatever *it* may be..
Just from the review alone, I get the feeling that this book will come across more as a "feel-good for Geeks" kind of thing. Happily seeing as I fit the category I expect that this would be a great read. I especially like the choice quotes:
The Internet has broken these chains, however. The market no longer stares exlusively at the great tube, but instead is engaged in the greatest conversation in human history
I would disagree with this on the premise that rather than breaking the chains, the truth is that the Internet is making people aware that there ARE chains on their backs.. And the other bit about
The rise of mass media completed the transformation from conversation to lecture. No longer did customers roam the marketplace, but instead consumers were lulled, bribed and manipulated into buying the latest and greatest, because TV told them so. The idea of the interchangeable consumer came to be the industrial ideal. Nothing was left to chance: You could get anyone to buy anything made by anyone, and all that mattered was the money.
would seem to be the very definition of the current war being waged between Corporatism and Individualism on the net..