Most people today don't care. They will not be bothered until it is their own heads disappearing into the bag. If you could force most people to even think about this issue at all they would just come up with something like that's the way it is, why don't you just get a different hobby, etc... The hope is in the proles... and they aren't listening.
What does a key which prevents someone from changing out the software have to do with copy protection. Now, if they were applying that key to the existing OS to allow it to be copied that's another thing but even if they could use the key that way it doesn't sound like anyone is doing so. Why would they?
"Since the last two series' really ran their course and deserved to end"
Why so? OK, SG-1 kept re-inventing new villains often enough it did give the impression they were trying a bit too hard to keep an old series new. Still, there barely even started to explore the Lucian Alliance. And as for Atlantis, that ended with pretty much nothing resolved. OK, so they are supposed to come out with movies. Still, their movies seem to be little more than a season's worth of episodes condensed into a single show. I'd rather watch the show.
As someone else mentioned, way too much interpersonal conflict. So far there is no character I can really like. Eli is too much of a mama's boy. He was beamed into a spaceship and looking down on earth all he wanted to do was call mommy. Come on! Dr. Rush is an @ss and I can't figure out if the military people are too whiny about it or not angry enough given the situation. I think they should either congratulate Dr. Rush for figuring it out (he did do all the groundwork, even if Eli put in the last piece or two) or shoot him for pretty much eliminating all chance they will see their families again. The whiny bs just isn't a good fit for soldiers. I guess this is all part of the remake for a younger audience. Does this just indicate we have a generation of whiny mamas boys reaching the age where they watch ads and buy stuff?
I'll watch a while longer. It isn't nearly as bad as I'd feared and it will probably get better when they actually get off the ship and do something. Speaking of which I was rather disappointed that in an hour they never really got beyond setting up the plot we all knew was coming a year ago. Very slow start.
And how exactly do those ratings get recorded? I don't think my cable box reports back to Nielson everything I watch yet. Even if it does I know my TV doesn't if I watch without the cable box. If you are really worried about hurting the ratings of your favorite show then when you get one of those Nielson Family envelopes in the mail fill it out and participate. Just fill in whatever you watch off of bittorrent as though you watched it on regular TV.
I stand corrected. My knowledge only goes to the reasons history books claim it is was written into the US constitution. If true, this older English version is no doubt where they got the idea.
OK, after writing the long reply I realize a shorter version is better. I was pointing out that parental controls are a horrible analogy. An employer controlling their resources or a parent raising their child are good things. They are as it should be.
A service provider controlling it's customer is backwards. We customers are the provider's employers. We write their checks. They get too much control.
>>Sounds like you prefer to complain about subjects irrelevant to you.
Here in in communist Amerika to borrow your not so great analogy there really aren't any truly open wireless service providers to chose. Apple is empowering AT&T to be more controlling of how it's customers use the network they are paying to access.
This applies to all US wireless customers because dit sets a precedent which very well could lead the state of US wireless service towards being even more closed than it already is. Unfortunately we do not have a history of open cellphones the way we do open computers. (Think back to the 80s, early 90s when open IBM Clones beat out closed Apples in the market). People aren't thinking about what they should be able to do with a handheld device that has a wireless connection to the internet and internals not much different from their home computer. They are remembering a plain old telephone and see all these shiny apps from the iPhone store as something really new and wonderful.
This time the closed devices are winning the hearts and minds of the population because there is not open device to see and most don't have enough imagination to think to demand one. This starts with the carriers of course but given that Apple phones are more closed than any others it would seem that Apple, not AT&T must have ultimately made the decision to build them that way.
>>Parental Controls and MCX are examples of provisioning features. They're not to benefit children and employees, they're there to serve parents and employers.
Again, what does this have to do with anything? Your cellphone provider is neither your parent or your employer. Well, unless you work for your provider but most of us do not. Now, if my work gave me a cellphone and they installed security software on the phone so I couldn't abuse it that would be an entirely different matter. At 30 y/o my parents don't get that ability anymore. Maybe I will want that for my kid's phones (1st one is due next year) but that still has nothing to do with anything here.
>>it's really not ready
That mantra is getting old. What does it not do that either of the other two do? I understood when Linux was difficult to set up but now you just pop in your KUbuntu CD and go...
>>Both are proprietary
Yes
>>Apple is somewhat more open - it at least sponsors a bunch of open source work
What does donating some money have to do with being open? As a consumer why do I care?
>>Microsoft has attempted to do so through anti-competitive measures and monopoly pressures.
True, and I do see how there use of formats and their monopoly has made things very difficult for open software or even closed software competitors. Still as an end user, that only slows down the market from providing me alternatives I can use. It does not prevent me from installing them or disable my device when I do. Clearly the Apple way is more evil there. I can only imagine what Apple would do if they ever did have monopoly power. Keep buying their junk!
>>as long as that hardware only ran Windows
Huh? I can run Windows on any PC compatible computer. I can run Linux or BSD or Syllable or etc... on the same machine. It's always been that way. Granted, I could run those on a Mac too these days. Now on the embedded side, many Windows Mobile PDAs can run Linux. You can even boot it on my own cellphone, an XV6700 though there isn't enough driver support to make it useful. I'm not exactly giving Microsoft credit for this as it certainly isn't due to anything they have done but how does your statement make any sense?
>>This is only new as of iPhone. Microsoft is always playing catch-up.
Yes, this particular way of being closed is currently limitted to iPhone. I suppose Microsoft could follow even. They may even have to, now with carriers empowered by Apple they don't need Microsoft as much and they can demand that Microsoft close down their platform. Still, any way this happens, even if Microsoft does this totally of their own free will it will always be Apple that did this to their customers first. How is Apple not the more evil of the two very evil companies? This sounds like such fanboy logic. If it's evil and Microsoft does it first they are evil for doing it first. If Apple does it first then Microsoft is playing catch-up by not thinking of it first?
Ive had Verizon about 2 years now. Reading various internet posts I get the impression they used to be one of the worst providers for limiting their customers. I think the only things disallowed in the service agreement now are tethering and VoIP. I've done both. They work just fine. Verizon has not disconnected me either. I think they just hold those out for people who start downloading gigs of movies or who buy minimum voice minutes just to use Skype all the time. I never really did much with bluetooth though. I usually sync via internet or USB so maybe that's why my experience has been positive.
The difference is if you own the unix box you have root.
If you own the cellphone Apple or AT&T get root?
Should your home internet provider get root on your computer?
Why is it so hard for people to get the concept of ownership?!?
Are you for real?
My network provider is not my boss. I do not work for them. I pay my money for my bandwidth.
My network provider is not my parent. They should not get parental controls over me.
Not to defend Microsoft but how are they worse (or even as bad) as Apple?
I was alive in the 90s. I was alive in the 80s too! Apple has always put out closed garbage and locked it's users into doing things their way. Microsoft tried to make it difficult to use OSs other than Windows and Office Suites other than MSOffice but at least they never cared what hardware you ran it on or what other software you might chose to add.
It's an easy thing to download and install an app that enables tethering on my Windows Mobile phone. It does not require a dangerous jailbreaking process. It cannot result in bricking the phone. By doing so I do not lose access to any sort of market place and if I did I wouldn't need it anyway as any app I want is just a website away.
I've never seen Microsoft block an app. Apple has censored rss readers just because they saw an article in an rss feed they wanted to censor! They have blocked music apps because they didn't approve of a CD cover image which it displayed!
Other than the slight inconvenience they created regarding tethering Microsoft seems to have taken no steps to block anything else my provider, Verizon does not allow in it's user agreement. Skype works just fine even though Verizon does not allow VoIP.
Correction: it's primary purpose is to encourage creators to create and share what they create
Allowing creators to make money is the means towards that end, not the end itself. Or at least that's my understanding of the original intent. It's lobbyist's self serving abbreviation of the idea being strictly about money and Congress's failure to see the difference that has allowed copyright and patent law to become so perverted over the last 30 or so years.
But WHY oh WHY is it not losing them the phone market? I fear a generation gap... Someone failed to teach the value of freedom to their children and they might not lose the market this time.
It is not a good idea to chose Apple products if you want an ability like tethering.
If an ability is outside of what Apple offers on a shiny plate in their app store you can't trust Apple not to take it away. Apple has always tried to control exactly what their users can do. It's Apple that locks it's users into a marketplace where they actively censor any software they don't like. It's Apple that completely locks out the ability to tether.
Isn't this how it's always been? Apple cares to control what you do with their product even after you pay for it. This has been apparent since the early days of Apple vs the IBM clones. This is why Microsoft grew to become the evil monopoly we would all like to see fall and Apple has been relegated to a distant number 2.
Even the carriers aren't really all that active in trying to prevent people from tethering. They could easily route their traffic through proxies, only forwarding protocols which are likely to be used on a phone. Care for some web only internet anyone? Maybe limit the bandwidth of individual streams, how much bandwidth is needed for a mobile phone optimized stream with it's tiny screen and low fidelity speakers vs one meant for a lap/desktop? I think the fact that carriers even offer as high of bandwidth as they do to the cellphone indicates they really are interested in catering to all their customers including those who insist on tethering even if they wish to discourage as many as possible of the less stubborn users from using the bandwidth they have paid for.
An open source phone is probably the only way to ensure the capabilities you care about will still be there after the next update. Android and Pre might be nice if your on a network which can support them. Also, I don't think Google has enough track record in the cellphone business to accurately predict what moves they might make next. If I'm going to pay 3 digits for anything, including a phone I want to know it will still do what I want it to do for at least 3 years. I suppose Palm has a track record with their old Palm OS offerings. How locked down were they?
Stuck on a CDMA network it's down to Windows Mobile. Evil, closed source monopoly as they may be it's been possible to tether their phones for a long time now! And they also allow you to install whatever program you want whenever from wherever. This is completely opposite of Apple and of the two it's the more open, consumer friendly stance to take.
I suspect that other vendors don't completely lock their users out because they are only out for money. They add hoops to jump through because the carriers make them. But if you are purchasing their device with real money and the carrier is allowing it then what do they care if you re-enable tethering? The carriers discourage open tethering because they want more money but they don't really pursue disconnecting those who tether because that would eliminate paying customers.
Peple however seems to be a completely different form of evil. They aren't just out for money, Apple employees exist to keep the inflated ego of Steve Jobs supplied with a plentiful quantity of hot air. If you install an app from outside the store, enable a feature Apple disabled or otherwise diverge from what Apple wants it is a personal jab at Jobs ego and must be squelched.
I used to work in a web shop which did this once. The site had a stock photo with three white people. The client wanted something more diverse. Rather than pay for a new stock photo the web designer just photoshopped one black and one asian. It came out convincing enough. Of course, he did the hands too and there wasn't another version of the page out there with an original copy of the stock photo. I bet that's more common than we know.
Slashdot Mirror
They could do this better in Florida.
790 is that you?
Well... The fact that there is a key in the first place shows they never wanted people changing the software on the calculators.
Most people today don't care. They will not be bothered until it is their own heads disappearing into the bag. If you could force most people to even think about this issue at all they would just come up with something like that's the way it is, why don't you just get a different hobby, etc... The hope is in the proles... and they aren't listening.
What does a key which prevents someone from changing out the software have to do with copy protection. Now, if they were applying that key to the existing OS to allow it to be copied that's another thing but even if they could use the key that way it doesn't sound like anyone is doing so. Why would they?
Really? Sexism? So now 52% of us [Slashdotters] are women? Oh, wo/man, the world just turned upside down didn't it?
Wonder how well this could be trained to recognize characters in captchas. Here come the spambots!
"Since the last two series' really ran their course and deserved to end"
Why so? OK, SG-1 kept re-inventing new villains often enough it did give the impression they were trying a bit too hard to keep an old series new. Still, there barely even started to explore the Lucian Alliance. And as for Atlantis, that ended with pretty much nothing resolved. OK, so they are supposed to come out with movies. Still, their movies seem to be little more than a season's worth of episodes condensed into a single show. I'd rather watch the show.
As someone else mentioned, way too much interpersonal conflict. So far there is no character I can really like. Eli is too much of a mama's boy. He was beamed into a spaceship and looking down on earth all he wanted to do was call mommy. Come on! Dr. Rush is an @ss and I can't figure out if the military people are too whiny about it or not angry enough given the situation. I think they should either congratulate Dr. Rush for figuring it out (he did do all the groundwork, even if Eli put in the last piece or two) or shoot him for pretty much eliminating all chance they will see their families again. The whiny bs just isn't a good fit for soldiers. I guess this is all part of the remake for a younger audience. Does this just indicate we have a generation of whiny mamas boys reaching the age where they watch ads and buy stuff?
I'll watch a while longer. It isn't nearly as bad as I'd feared and it will probably get better when they actually get off the ship and do something. Speaking of which I was rather disappointed that in an hour they never really got beyond setting up the plot we all knew was coming a year ago. Very slow start.
And how exactly do those ratings get recorded? I don't think my cable box reports back to Nielson everything I watch yet. Even if it does I know my TV doesn't if I watch without the cable box. If you are really worried about hurting the ratings of your favorite show then when you get one of those Nielson Family envelopes in the mail fill it out and participate. Just fill in whatever you watch off of bittorrent as though you watched it on regular TV.
I stand corrected. My knowledge only goes to the reasons history books claim it is was written into the US constitution. If true, this older English version is no doubt where they got the idea.
OK, after writing the long reply I realize a shorter version is better. I was pointing out that parental controls are a horrible analogy. An employer controlling their resources or a parent raising their child are good things. They are as it should be.
A service provider controlling it's customer is backwards. We customers are the provider's employers. We write their checks. They get too much control.
That is why I took issue with your analogy.
>>Sounds like you prefer to complain about subjects irrelevant to you.
Here in in communist Amerika to borrow your not so great analogy there really aren't any truly open wireless service providers to chose. Apple is empowering AT&T to be more controlling of how it's customers use the network they are paying to access.
This applies to all US wireless customers because dit sets a precedent which very well could lead the state of US wireless service towards being even more closed than it already is. Unfortunately we do not have a history of open cellphones the way we do open computers. (Think back to the 80s, early 90s when open IBM Clones beat out closed Apples in the market). People aren't thinking about what they should be able to do with a handheld device that has a wireless connection to the internet and internals not much different from their home computer. They are remembering a plain old telephone and see all these shiny apps from the iPhone store as something really new and wonderful.
This time the closed devices are winning the hearts and minds of the population because there is not open device to see and most don't have enough imagination to think to demand one. This starts with the carriers of course but given that Apple phones are more closed than any others it would seem that Apple, not AT&T must have ultimately made the decision to build them that way.
>>Parental Controls and MCX are examples of provisioning features. They're not to benefit children and employees, they're there to serve parents and employers.
Again, what does this have to do with anything? Your cellphone provider is neither your parent or your employer. Well, unless you work for your provider but most of us do not. Now, if my work gave me a cellphone and they installed security software on the phone so I couldn't abuse it that would be an entirely different matter. At 30 y/o my parents don't get that ability anymore. Maybe I will want that for my kid's phones (1st one is due next year) but that still has nothing to do with anything here.
>>Linux+KDE is even safer
I agree
>>it's really not ready
That mantra is getting old. What does it not do that either of the other two do? I understood when Linux was difficult to set up but now you just pop in your KUbuntu CD and go...
>>Both are proprietary
Yes
>>Apple is somewhat more open - it at least sponsors a bunch of open source work
What does donating some money have to do with being open? As a consumer why do I care?
>>Microsoft has attempted to do so through anti-competitive measures and monopoly pressures.
True, and I do see how there use of formats and their monopoly has made things very difficult for open software or even closed software competitors. Still as an end user, that only slows down the market from providing me alternatives I can use. It does not prevent me from installing them or disable my device when I do. Clearly the Apple way is more evil there. I can only imagine what Apple would do if they ever did have monopoly power. Keep buying their junk!
>>as long as that hardware only ran Windows
Huh? I can run Windows on any PC compatible computer. I can run Linux or BSD or Syllable or etc... on the same machine. It's always been that way. Granted, I could run those on a Mac too these days. Now on the embedded side, many Windows Mobile PDAs can run Linux. You can even boot it on my own cellphone, an XV6700 though there isn't enough driver support to make it useful. I'm not exactly giving Microsoft credit for this as it certainly isn't due to anything they have done but how does your statement make any sense?
>>This is only new as of iPhone. Microsoft is always playing catch-up.
Yes, this particular way of being closed is currently limitted to iPhone. I suppose Microsoft could follow even. They may even have to, now with carriers empowered by Apple they don't need Microsoft as much and they can demand that Microsoft close down their platform. Still, any way this happens, even if Microsoft does this totally of their own free will it will always be Apple that did this to their customers first. How is Apple not the more evil of the two very evil companies? This sounds like such fanboy logic. If it's evil and Microsoft does it first they are evil for doing it first. If Apple does it first then Microsoft is playing catch-up by not thinking of it first?
Ive had Verizon about 2 years now. Reading various internet posts I get the impression they used to be one of the worst providers for limiting their customers. I think the only things disallowed in the service agreement now are tethering and VoIP. I've done both. They work just fine. Verizon has not disconnected me either. I think they just hold those out for people who start downloading gigs of movies or who buy minimum voice minutes just to use Skype all the time. I never really did much with bluetooth though. I usually sync via internet or USB so maybe that's why my experience has been positive.
The difference is if you own the unix box you have root. If you own the cellphone Apple or AT&T get root? Should your home internet provider get root on your computer? Why is it so hard for people to get the concept of ownership?!?
Are you for real? My network provider is not my boss. I do not work for them. I pay my money for my bandwidth. My network provider is not my parent. They should not get parental controls over me.
As a Verizon customer I hope not!
Not to defend Microsoft but how are they worse (or even as bad) as Apple? I was alive in the 90s. I was alive in the 80s too! Apple has always put out closed garbage and locked it's users into doing things their way. Microsoft tried to make it difficult to use OSs other than Windows and Office Suites other than MSOffice but at least they never cared what hardware you ran it on or what other software you might chose to add.
It's an easy thing to download and install an app that enables tethering on my Windows Mobile phone. It does not require a dangerous jailbreaking process. It cannot result in bricking the phone. By doing so I do not lose access to any sort of market place and if I did I wouldn't need it anyway as any app I want is just a website away. I've never seen Microsoft block an app. Apple has censored rss readers just because they saw an article in an rss feed they wanted to censor! They have blocked music apps because they didn't approve of a CD cover image which it displayed! Other than the slight inconvenience they created regarding tethering Microsoft seems to have taken no steps to block anything else my provider, Verizon does not allow in it's user agreement. Skype works just fine even though Verizon does not allow VoIP.
Correction: it's primary purpose is to encourage creators to create and share what they create
Allowing creators to make money is the means towards that end, not the end itself. Or at least that's my understanding of the original intent. It's lobbyist's self serving abbreviation of the idea being strictly about money and Congress's failure to see the difference that has allowed copyright and patent law to become so perverted over the last 30 or so years.
But WHY oh WHY is it not losing them the phone market? I fear a generation gap... Someone failed to teach the value of freedom to their children and they might not lose the market this time.
There is hope for you! You are well on your way toward becoming a Mac. You didn't wash your hands!
If you wanted tethering and you bought an iPhone you are a moron!
It is not a good idea to chose Apple products if you want an ability like tethering.
If an ability is outside of what Apple offers on a shiny plate in their app store you can't trust Apple not to take it away. Apple has always tried to control exactly what their users can do. It's Apple that locks it's users into a marketplace where they actively censor any software they don't like. It's Apple that completely locks out the ability to tether.
Isn't this how it's always been? Apple cares to control what you do with their product even after you pay for it. This has been apparent since the early days of Apple vs the IBM clones. This is why Microsoft grew to become the evil monopoly we would all like to see fall and Apple has been relegated to a distant number 2.
Even the carriers aren't really all that active in trying to prevent people from tethering. They could easily route their traffic through proxies, only forwarding protocols which are likely to be used on a phone. Care for some web only internet anyone? Maybe limit the bandwidth of individual streams, how much bandwidth is needed for a mobile phone optimized stream with it's tiny screen and low fidelity speakers vs one meant for a lap/desktop? I think the fact that carriers even offer as high of bandwidth as they do to the cellphone indicates they really are interested in catering to all their customers including those who insist on tethering even if they wish to discourage as many as possible of the less stubborn users from using the bandwidth they have paid for.
An open source phone is probably the only way to ensure the capabilities you care about will still be there after the next update. Android and Pre might be nice if your on a network which can support them. Also, I don't think Google has enough track record in the cellphone business to accurately predict what moves they might make next. If I'm going to pay 3 digits for anything, including a phone I want to know it will still do what I want it to do for at least 3 years. I suppose Palm has a track record with their old Palm OS offerings. How locked down were they?
Stuck on a CDMA network it's down to Windows Mobile. Evil, closed source monopoly as they may be it's been possible to tether their phones for a long time now! And they also allow you to install whatever program you want whenever from wherever. This is completely opposite of Apple and of the two it's the more open, consumer friendly stance to take.
I suspect that other vendors don't completely lock their users out because they are only out for money. They add hoops to jump through because the carriers make them. But if you are purchasing their device with real money and the carrier is allowing it then what do they care if you re-enable tethering? The carriers discourage open tethering because they want more money but they don't really pursue disconnecting those who tether because that would eliminate paying customers.
Peple however seems to be a completely different form of evil. They aren't just out for money, Apple employees exist to keep the inflated ego of Steve Jobs supplied with a plentiful quantity of hot air. If you install an app from outside the store, enable a feature Apple disabled or otherwise diverge from what Apple wants it is a personal jab at Jobs ego and must be squelched.
I used to work in a web shop which did this once. The site had a stock photo with three white people. The client wanted something more diverse. Rather than pay for a new stock photo the web designer just photoshopped one black and one asian. It came out convincing enough. Of course, he did the hands too and there wasn't another version of the page out there with an original copy of the stock photo. I bet that's more common than we know.