I don't buy that theory. Most of the OSS that I use at work does not interface with the registry at all. They are simple utilities. Heck I even have ActiveState PERL. You have to be more concerned about the commerical software that install DLLs and registry entries every which way.
The whole idea of remotely killing applications is a very bad idea and we travel down a slippery slope. Does this mean that soon PC software makers and manufacturers will soon have a remote kill switch for us? Well, I guess there is already one in Vista. But, I don't use non-free as in beer operating systems or software. And, I don't want government getting ideas from indsutry and enacting legislation that would force back doors into freely available software. Thank god for using cryptographic checksums to verify that what you are downloading doesn't containt any "extras."
When you download source code in the recommended way, you can also download cryptographic checksums which check the code you downloaded against what is actually supposed to be. The argument that open source is less secure is made by those out of FUD or ignorance. Point of fact: open source operating systems and software are actually more secure because they have been extensively peer reviewed and debugged. If someone in a decision making capacity uses bias against open source software it may be very difficult to convince them otherwise. I found it funny once when a "self-proclaimed" anti-open source peer of mine touted his success of scoring a Juniper SSL VPN appliance. I was more amused at his dismay when I pointed out that Juniper makes extensive use of FreeBSD. At first he was full of disbelief but the proof is in the pudding. Look at the credits in the manual. Instead of opening his mind he got more fervent. This is basic human nature folks.
Carbon Sciences states that this is more of a stop gap mesaure than anything. They believe that technologies such as this don't create an excuse for gas guzzling vehicles. From the article, "We're not crazy about the concept of encouraging people to gas up in the future . .." Their advocacy of cleaner, alternative energy sources is good.
The article attached to this piece has a very interesting one liner, "We sue because we care." If only people believed that hogwash. The only reason Bridgewater sued Monticello was because if Monticello had deployed that network, Bridgewater would be out of business. It has nothing to do with care or concern for the citizenry but concern about profit and loss. The only reason Bridgewater was placed in this situation to begin with was because they were not going to spend money to improve the poor quality and paucity of broadband for Monticello. Instead, Bridgwater took to the media and its own advertising campaign to tout its "advanced" network. Meanwhile, the truth of the matter suggested otherwise. What a shame that it took a lawsuit for them to wake up and stop smelling the crap they were shovelling. Hooray for the people of Monticello for taking public action when the private sector would not.
Do you really believe this? Actually, it is anti-competitive. If Apple chose to allow replaceable batteries, third party options would arise and cost much less than the 85.95 replacement program. And, you wouldn't be without your iPod for 3 days.
Well, don't you think normal people should be concerned about this? Maybe, instead of an impulse buy, people should consider what it is that they are buying. This isn't a question of being a geek or normal. It is a question about making an informed purchase. They are buying a product that requires Apple stuff lock, stock, and barrel. It would not surprise me if Apple just out and out said that you may no longer use your own encoded videos and forcibly end support for MP4. Remember: In the 1970's GM tried to force its customers to use only GM parts with the threat of voiding warranties and other such maneuvers. In the end a law was passed making this practice illegal. Funny, how Apple gets away with it. Apple banks on the ignorance of its customer base.... if its customer base doesn't raise a ruckus, fine. I'll never buy an iPod or iPhone. Once, I went in to an Apple store and started talking with a sales rep who played up on the power and innovation of the touch. Another customer approached me and asked me what I thought. I mentioned that the battery and memory were, for the lack of a better term, soldered on to the board so if either fail, you better hope you have one awesome warranty. I even said that you cannot upgrade the memory if you want more storage space. The customer responds, "I had no idea." What's better, he turned around on his heel and walked out without having purchased an iPod. This isn't an issue of geekdom. It is an issue of ignorance.
McCain favored such de-regulation that lead to the collapse of our financial markets. Now he favors the least regulation possible of the internet. Already the telecom companies have too much power and control. They can arbitrarily declare what content we can and cannot get to. They can arbitrarily throttle competitors. The internet should remain neutral and such laws need to be passed to ensure this. Sorry, Ma Bell, you cannot get an extra million out of us for a tiered service.
I would say this claim by Qantas is highly suspect. The mythbusters did a special to debunk the myth of wireless device interference. Ostensibly, Airbus uses some form of protection for their avionics. If not, as others are sure to say, fly Boeing! A wireless mouse uses a very, very low transmission power. This is not to say that I am in favor of cell phones on planes. If you are going to be crammed into a hollow tube, the last thing you want to hear is someone yaking on their cell phone while sitting in a seat with a cushion so thin that you are really sitting on the seat frame.
Very well said!! I think we need to strike a healthy balance between free market capitalism and government regulation. Regulation keeps some basic human nature in check.
When US workers must seek jobs outside of their country, something is fundamentally and woefully wrong. My heart bleeds for my fellow people in this position. It looks like 25+ years of Reagenomics has brought this serious onset of economic failure and the IT professional will likely be one of the hardest hit. The bean counters do not always see the intangible benefits that we bring as they tend to see in black and white. The bean counters see us more as a cost liability than a means of reducing the cost of revenue by streamlining the revenue earning process.
Well, actually that is incorrect. The Chinese Government uses propaganda to call themselves quote-democratic-unquote. They can be and are just as hypocritical. There is no such thing as due process in China and you can be permanently imprisoned almost at will. If you think law enforcement is arbitrary in the USA, try life in China where sometimes outright bribery is expected. Sometimes law enforcement in China create laws just to extort money. I know, I've been there. I've had to pay all kinds of extra "protection" fees. In the USA, we still have some semblence of due process left. There is hope that Obama will overturn much of the freedoms the Bush administration forcibly took away.
It is illegal because the password suggests a heightened expectation of privacy. Finally, if you are guessing some user's password you are still fraudently posing as them to get at their email. And, this is politically driven, that is one reason why such a large hoopla is being raised.
Seems like a lot work for around $6.00 a PC. I figured the Navy would want a smart sysadmin. Imagine carrying off 19,706 items for so little return.... it's almost laughable.
Good point, more than likely this mandatory upgrade will break the dongle's functionality. And, the mandatory update just might include code to protect future attempts at dongles.
I can understand where a lot of people's frustration comes from. Speaking from experience, management has a tendency to keep wanting to do more with less and keep lumping responsibility on top of us to the point where the salary paid becomes far from comensurate with the job expectations. Now go ahead and mod this down. I am sure managers will be so inclined. But remember, IT is what keeps the business in business.
It is a sorry shame that the university, a place of free and open ideas, should openly advocate against the use of open source and/or an embrace and extend mentality. I for one an very much pro open source and the grass roots of open source will win out over the long haul. Especially, when market driven economics suggest that if there is a less expensive (albeit free) alternative, people will gravitate to that solution. The advice these professors have given to their students is very poor. Look at Microsoft where there was a huge EU judgement that forced open their protocols to good and adequate documentation. The amount of money Microsoft spent defending and deferring this judgement would have been better spent on research if they had just not tried to play the big, arrogant bully on the block.
IT professionals have been hit very hard and nowhere is this more evident than in Phoenix, where I live. Salaries are down again. Can you believe that help desk technicians and professionals are getting 12.00 an hour!? I could make this amount of money working as an Armored Car Guard and not work as hard. This is very sad. Don't believe this article.... I sure don't.
That this would be too good to be true. Same deal as Scalix which offers you 10 Outlook-compatible CALs. Not really and truely free, is it? I have my eye on something more interesting, www.openchange.org. This, while still a good bit away from a release, aims to be an open source implementation of Exchange Server. Once this comes to release, I am sure it will put some pressure on these "crippleware" packages.
It also provides them a stream of revenue to assist in the development efforts. This could only help Ubuntu Linux become a better product. Anyone that would poo-poo this decision to sell the codecs is shortsighted.
This is an interesting proposition but still does nothing to address the periphery problems associated with a coal fired power plant. For one, coal has to be mined and that usually entails destruction of land to get at the resource. Secondly, it takes significant amounts of energy to mine the coal thereby reducing its return. Thirdly, lots of energy is spent on transportation of the coal to the power plant itself. Finally, more energy is expended in trucking off the waste CO2. So my question is: Is this really a clean solution? More money and research should be plugged into hydrogen as a fuel for power generation. Hydrogen is ubiquitous whereas coal is a diminishing resource. Why not continue efforts into nuclear fusion for power generation?
Antarctica would be kind of a neat place for a data center. You have all of the cold air you need and there is enough wind for power. Just have to find a way to keep it stable amidst moving ice.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't buy that theory. Most of the OSS that I use at work does not interface with the registry at all. They are simple utilities. Heck I even have ActiveState PERL. You have to be more concerned about the commerical software that install DLLs and registry entries every which way.
The whole idea of remotely killing applications is a very bad idea and we travel down a slippery slope. Does this mean that soon PC software makers and manufacturers will soon have a remote kill switch for us? Well, I guess there is already one in Vista. But, I don't use non-free as in beer operating systems or software. And, I don't want government getting ideas from indsutry and enacting legislation that would force back doors into freely available software. Thank god for using cryptographic checksums to verify that what you are downloading doesn't containt any "extras."
When you download source code in the recommended way, you can also download cryptographic checksums which check the code you downloaded against what is actually supposed to be. The argument that open source is less secure is made by those out of FUD or ignorance. Point of fact: open source operating systems and software are actually more secure because they have been extensively peer reviewed and debugged. If someone in a decision making capacity uses bias against open source software it may be very difficult to convince them otherwise. I found it funny once when a "self-proclaimed" anti-open source peer of mine touted his success of scoring a Juniper SSL VPN appliance. I was more amused at his dismay when I pointed out that Juniper makes extensive use of FreeBSD. At first he was full of disbelief but the proof is in the pudding. Look at the credits in the manual. Instead of opening his mind he got more fervent. This is basic human nature folks.
Carbon Sciences states that this is more of a stop gap mesaure than anything. They believe that technologies such as this don't create an excuse for gas guzzling vehicles. From the article, "We're not crazy about the concept of encouraging people to gas up in the future . . ." Their advocacy of cleaner, alternative energy sources is good.
The article attached to this piece has a very interesting one liner, "We sue because we care." If only people believed that hogwash. The only reason Bridgewater sued Monticello was because if Monticello had deployed that network, Bridgewater would be out of business. It has nothing to do with care or concern for the citizenry but concern about profit and loss. The only reason Bridgewater was placed in this situation to begin with was because they were not going to spend money to improve the poor quality and paucity of broadband for Monticello. Instead, Bridgwater took to the media and its own advertising campaign to tout its "advanced" network. Meanwhile, the truth of the matter suggested otherwise. What a shame that it took a lawsuit for them to wake up and stop smelling the crap they were shovelling. Hooray for the people of Monticello for taking public action when the private sector would not.
Do you really believe this? Actually, it is anti-competitive. If Apple chose to allow replaceable batteries, third party options would arise and cost much less than the 85.95 replacement program. And, you wouldn't be without your iPod for 3 days.
Well, don't you think normal people should be concerned about this? Maybe, instead of an impulse buy, people should consider what it is that they are buying. This isn't a question of being a geek or normal. It is a question about making an informed purchase. They are buying a product that requires Apple stuff lock, stock, and barrel. It would not surprise me if Apple just out and out said that you may no longer use your own encoded videos and forcibly end support for MP4. Remember: In the 1970's GM tried to force its customers to use only GM parts with the threat of voiding warranties and other such maneuvers. In the end a law was passed making this practice illegal. Funny, how Apple gets away with it. Apple banks on the ignorance of its customer base .... if its customer base doesn't raise a ruckus, fine. I'll never buy an iPod or iPhone. Once, I went in to an Apple store and started talking with a sales rep who played up on the power and innovation of the touch. Another customer approached me and asked me what I thought. I mentioned that the battery and memory were, for the lack of a better term, soldered on to the board so if either fail, you better hope you have one awesome warranty. I even said that you cannot upgrade the memory if you want more storage space. The customer responds, "I had no idea." What's better, he turned around on his heel and walked out without having purchased an iPod. This isn't an issue of geekdom. It is an issue of ignorance.
McCain favored such de-regulation that lead to the collapse of our financial markets. Now he favors the least regulation possible of the internet. Already the telecom companies have too much power and control. They can arbitrarily declare what content we can and cannot get to. They can arbitrarily throttle competitors. The internet should remain neutral and such laws need to be passed to ensure this. Sorry, Ma Bell, you cannot get an extra million out of us for a tiered service.
I would say this claim by Qantas is highly suspect. The mythbusters did a special to debunk the myth of wireless device interference. Ostensibly, Airbus uses some form of protection for their avionics. If not, as others are sure to say, fly Boeing! A wireless mouse uses a very, very low transmission power. This is not to say that I am in favor of cell phones on planes. If you are going to be crammed into a hollow tube, the last thing you want to hear is someone yaking on their cell phone while sitting in a seat with a cushion so thin that you are really sitting on the seat frame.
Very well said!! I think we need to strike a healthy balance between free market capitalism and government regulation. Regulation keeps some basic human nature in check.
When US workers must seek jobs outside of their country, something is fundamentally and woefully wrong. My heart bleeds for my fellow people in this position. It looks like 25+ years of Reagenomics has brought this serious onset of economic failure and the IT professional will likely be one of the hardest hit. The bean counters do not always see the intangible benefits that we bring as they tend to see in black and white. The bean counters see us more as a cost liability than a means of reducing the cost of revenue by streamlining the revenue earning process.
Well, actually that is incorrect. The Chinese Government uses propaganda to call themselves quote-democratic-unquote. They can be and are just as hypocritical. There is no such thing as due process in China and you can be permanently imprisoned almost at will. If you think law enforcement is arbitrary in the USA, try life in China where sometimes outright bribery is expected. Sometimes law enforcement in China create laws just to extort money. I know, I've been there. I've had to pay all kinds of extra "protection" fees. In the USA, we still have some semblence of due process left. There is hope that Obama will overturn much of the freedoms the Bush administration forcibly took away.
It is illegal because the password suggests a heightened expectation of privacy. Finally, if you are guessing some user's password you are still fraudently posing as them to get at their email. And, this is politically driven, that is one reason why such a large hoopla is being raised.
No scape-goating here. You proved point by replying anonymously.
I don't use windows and I don't use social networking sites and I am proud of that. Keep up the good work! I think privacy is really underrated
Seems like a lot work for around $6.00 a PC. I figured the Navy would want a smart sysadmin. Imagine carrying off 19,706 items for so little return .... it's almost laughable.
Good point, more than likely this mandatory upgrade will break the dongle's functionality. And, the mandatory update just might include code to protect future attempts at dongles.
I can understand where a lot of people's frustration comes from. Speaking from experience, management has a tendency to keep wanting to do more with less and keep lumping responsibility on top of us to the point where the salary paid becomes far from comensurate with the job expectations. Now go ahead and mod this down. I am sure managers will be so inclined. But remember, IT is what keeps the business in business.
It is a sorry shame that the university, a place of free and open ideas, should openly advocate against the use of open source and/or an embrace and extend mentality. I for one an very much pro open source and the grass roots of open source will win out over the long haul. Especially, when market driven economics suggest that if there is a less expensive (albeit free) alternative, people will gravitate to that solution. The advice these professors have given to their students is very poor. Look at Microsoft where there was a huge EU judgement that forced open their protocols to good and adequate documentation. The amount of money Microsoft spent defending and deferring this judgement would have been better spent on research if they had just not tried to play the big, arrogant bully on the block.
IT professionals have been hit very hard and nowhere is this more evident than in Phoenix, where I live. Salaries are down again. Can you believe that help desk technicians and professionals are getting 12.00 an hour!? I could make this amount of money working as an Armored Car Guard and not work as hard. This is very sad. Don't believe this article .... I sure don't.
That this would be too good to be true. Same deal as Scalix which offers you 10 Outlook-compatible CALs. Not really and truely free, is it? I have my eye on something more interesting, www.openchange.org. This, while still a good bit away from a release, aims to be an open source implementation of Exchange Server. Once this comes to release, I am sure it will put some pressure on these "crippleware" packages.
It also provides them a stream of revenue to assist in the development efforts. This could only help Ubuntu Linux become a better product. Anyone that would poo-poo this decision to sell the codecs is shortsighted.
This is an interesting proposition but still does nothing to address the periphery problems associated with a coal fired power plant. For one, coal has to be mined and that usually entails destruction of land to get at the resource. Secondly, it takes significant amounts of energy to mine the coal thereby reducing its return. Thirdly, lots of energy is spent on transportation of the coal to the power plant itself. Finally, more energy is expended in trucking off the waste CO2. So my question is: Is this really a clean solution? More money and research should be plugged into hydrogen as a fuel for power generation. Hydrogen is ubiquitous whereas coal is a diminishing resource. Why not continue efforts into nuclear fusion for power generation?
Antarctica would be kind of a neat place for a data center. You have all of the cold air you need and there is enough wind for power. Just have to find a way to keep it stable amidst moving ice.
Surprised this one ws tagged as insightful. It was meant to be funny