The Windows Firewall is greatly improved in SP3, but even the default un-patched firewall in XP is more or less a joke if you plan on doing any network sharing. So either way you have to deal with it. Also, I think it's SP3 you mean about the tampering with IE. It'll install IE7 if you want it or not unless you already had it installed. The only way to uninstall it without going through a big hassle is to have IE7 installed prior to installing SP3 if I remember right.
There are very few reasons to not install a service pack for Windows. I've not heard of any hardware compatibility issues, and for sure that is not a problem with new hardware. It may take forever, but from high end gaming systems to crappy E-Machines with at best 512MB of RAM, installing SP2 for XP is the only smart thing to do and doesn't slow the system down once its installed.
If anyone has some proof otherwise (as in links, not anecdotal) please correct me. But I've neither heard of nor seen an issue caused by SP2 that hasn't been patched for a long while (over a year or two).
I'm sorry, but you didn't really counter any of his arguments. You say you are under an NDA so you can't name "two big organizations" that are using more Linux than Windows/OSX. Since you can't prove it, its useless. Hearsay. Moot.
And not just for our little argument here either. You apparently can't point to these places for other sysadmins and say "it works there, why not where you do business?" because of your NDA. The problem with Linux is visibility in certain marketplaces. "Invisible ripples" don't help in any way until someone shines a light on them.
Okay, glad to see that stuff like UI layout is being modded up. It only is a matter of personal taste but whatever. I personally hate the Office Ribbon, but haven't had to use Office 2007 much so I can't be sure if its bad or not. I have used Vista and played with Windows 7 and I personally like the new UI for Windows Explorer. I think its oodles better than the flat gray color used in Windows XP, 2000, and 95/98.
But who cares about the way the UI looks. That's really a minor thing compared to the issues that were amplified. The first poster here gets modded +5 Insightful for saying "Ars Technia is Wrong" without providing any evidence of the fact.
I'm sorry dude, but you are wrong. What was wrong with Vista? Well there were some hardware incompatibility issues that were resolved within the first four months, and for the most part that was strictly NVIDIA, who behaved like a child and got a few other vendors to tell MS "NO! We're NOT going to correct our drivers for the changes you made!" Granted, it was bullshit that MS made those kinds of changes that late in development, but really all they did was boost Intel and ATI sales slightly since OEMs needed "Vista Capable" hardware to go with the new OS they had to use.
Which brings us to the biggest issues with Vista: the hardware requirements. Oh no, it requires a whole 2G of RAM to XP's 1G. Given the price of RAM, this is REALLY a non-issue for people who build their own systems. All it did was irritate OEMs, and you just know it was a marketing guy at MS not one of the engineers who told the OEMs to use the 512 and it'll all be fine. I'll let the class action lawsuit settle that dispute. It was a non issue for myself and the people I know that built a Vista system were gamers, and for the most part the benchmarks for games while using Vista Ultimate x64 and XP SP2 were the pretty much the same.
The software incompatibilities were only to be expected. For the most part Vista's built in backwards compatibility modes work awesome and now that people have been needing to develop on 64 bit OS its a non issue. From the start this was a given for an architecture change and personally I don't count it against Vista since it was going to happen eventually anyways, but I'll count it against it anyways since everyone else seems to too.
The only other major issue I can think of was the file transfer times. Before SP1, I personally never noticed this issue. Not sure what I was doing different, other than most people seemed to be referencing Windows Server 2003 so these people were using Vista most likely around the office rather than at home. Given how many people that rag on Vista that aren't network admins and mention the transfer times I'm sort of interested to know if it was THAT widespread for home users but couldn't find any quick references. Either way, once SP1 came out I stopped hearing of this issue. Given its MS it was pretty obvious the OS would be flakey until the first SP. I'm not sure why people freaked out over this when XP had a few more issues along similar lines but whatever.
So mod on you MS bashers! I just love how a supposedly intelligent site like Slashdot has this rabid fanaticism about OS choices. The flaming of Apple's OS and the various Linux distros (not to mention the BSD based ones) never ceases to amaze. I guess humans just need something to cling to. With apologies to Terry Pratchett: "Give them a slogan and a uniform, and their hearts and minds will follow."
There was a time such comments would be graced by me ignoring them. Another when they filled me with anger. Now, I sadly think those that say it may be on to something. Something bad, and very sadly real.
Gasp! He's right! People will know when to call you and ask if your refrigerator is running! This is terrible! We must ban this before it starts to prevent those whippersnappers from tormenting us all!
Seriously. What the hell privacy issue is there with someone knowing when your refrigerator is running? Enlighten me.
Common misconception. EA doesn't make games. They buy the companies of teams that make games, give them a deadline, and ship out whatever is there on the deadline. They're basically a publisher except now they're on Steam as well so they're getting redundant.
What strikes me as funny as if there was/is a God he must have a fantastically disgusting mean streak. Technically it was the Church under the Pope that like burned Gallelio right? The same Church who God supposedly told he would honor the decisions they make down here. So if the Pope condemned Gallelio to hell for telling the truth then he would be there being flayed constantly.
Of course there are other ways you can take that, but since we're talking 100% hypothetical BS I figured I'd be lazy and take the wordings at face value. Alternate beliefs and theories include bits like that "promise" being bullshit by the Church so they can keep power, or God telling lies to people down here and doing whatever He wants up there, etc etc.
Slightly less off topic though I've always wondered what past great scientists would do with modern technology. I blame Star Trek for putting the idea in my head, what with Data and his holodeck friends of Einstein, Freud, Edison and so forth. I wonder if in some cases if these "greats" are only great because they had primitive tools and were more adept at using those and would be considered mediocre if they had modern gear and knew how to use it.
After all, using an IR or Radio telescope is different than using an optical one.
How about you just google it in the first place? Chances are the wiki entry is the top search result ANYWAYS. And really, their search isn't bad. You just have to know what the subject is called and be willing to scroll down to see the "possible matches". The article your looking for is probably in the top 5....
Yar, inside of the president's limo or air force one is pretty crazy. You can talk with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Wouldn't be surprised if it FORCED them to answer too.
Please cite sources. I'm googling right now (hurray slow work day) but I'd be interested to see some real conspiracies that there were conspiracy theorists for before it all came out. Active conspiracy theories have yet to be proven as actually happening or have happened.
So you aren't going to fly here because they are asking you to fill out the same forms you already had to online, before you reach the US? How dare they actually provide some convenience (surprisingly).
I mean, I know the DHS has made shit worse for travellers but this update to the policy is really a non-issue. It actually helps more than it hurts, especially since there is no new information. Really when you think about it all they are doing is cutting out a step on their end; they don't have to higher some data entry personnel to make electronic versions of the files your submitting. They're just getting you to do it for them, and on the plus side you can find out if you are approved before you get on your airplane.
Disclaimer: I'm an American, and I'd apologize for the jackassery of so-called "patriots" (such as the border guard to Canada another poster mentioned) who seem to despise all foreigners if it weren't apparently a part of every single nation out there. I just hope the US government gets back on track instead of putting those fools in power to make policy.
Note: My numbered rebuttals correspond to your numbered statements.
1) Apple doesnegotiate with the RIAA about the terms of the DRM service that Apple has to maintain and run. I'm far from an Apple fanboy, but there have been stories over the years going off on how the DRM wasn't Apple's idea and so forth. There are even quotes of Steve Jobs saying that DRM is bad, and that guy sure as hell isn't the type to just take it. I seem to remember a Slashdot story telling of how they were forcing the RIAA to accept their terms, but over the years the opposite I admit has been more likely.
Of course, the actual music execs have been saying for years that DRM is bad but the lawyers at the RIAA seem to be running their companies into the ground for them.
2)The private info consists of the email address related to the account that purchased it. I do not believe it actually contains a lot of 'personal information' such as your name, or social security number, or bank account numbers. I don't personally buy DRM'd music (which means I've yet to buy an iTunes track) so I can't be 100% positive, but I'm fairly sure there would of been an article on Slashdot before given this is nothing new to iTunes.
By the way, how is it any different than leaving a card or sticker with your name and phone number on an item in case you lose it so a good Samaritan (in the unlikely event your stuff is found by one) can return it to you? Honestly I think this is a non-argument.
3)You're the kind of person that would put a kid in a bubble to keep him from getting hurt, but not thing of how to feed him aren't you? The 'private info' consists of an e-mail address. Your pedophile argument is no better than the morons who scream "think of the children" in politics, equally pointless and used as an exaggeration of a problem to prove your point.
A pedophile isn't going to go track down someone by their bloody email address when they can just watch the school and pick their target in person. They wouldn't even know its a kids iPod until they found out who owned the email address, it could be a teacher's. Never mind the difficulties in actually associating a face to an email address when all you have to go by is the address itself and the fact they have an iPod.
The scams are equally as bad. Worst case, you have someone use the email address on a few porn sites so they get some XXX spam mail. If you are a mature parent, you can deal with that easy enough and if you are a tech savvy parent it shouldn't be a problem anyways unless you don't supervise your kids online experience (which means ALL online aspects, not just browsing and IRC).
So tell me. What would you do with my email address? How will you track me down with mine if I don't use it on Myspace? What if its only used on iTunes?
And what pray tell does that have to do exactly with what the OP said, of "if you build it they will come"? No one said this stuff had to come immediately. The space shuttle is the first re-usable spacecraft the US created. Many of the first escort fighters (Allison-engined P-51 mustangs didn't live up to expectations either, nor did the first assault rifle for the US (M-16 before they lined the barrel and chamber with chrome).
First and early attempts rarely tend to their tasks as well as people hope or require. Typically you have to go through several revisions while the old models are still "in the field" as it were. Really the only difference is the expense of space exploration. NASA has been able to do some slick stuff on a low budget since the 60's or 70's, but its been a hamper.
You mention no one has gone back to the moon in the last few decades. What, may I ask, exactly would you have them do there? They still have the moon rocks from Apollo. We've gotten pretty handy with a spectrometer, being able to tell chemical compositions of planets and stars light-years away. What exactly were they to do there besides build a telescope, which we have easily done in orbit anyways (see Hubble).
The economics of space exploration are slowly changing to make it as feasible as deep ocean exploration (which is also hurting from lack of interest, outside of oil companies). The politics of it are leading to like what? Three manned missions from countries outside the US? I believe Russian, India, and China were all discussing targeting the southern end of Luna.
Anyways, manned space exploration will continue to happen and eventually we will colonize other planets. The pace of space is different. The amount of resources it takes to leave Earth and head for another system are unlike anything we've had to deal with before. The distances likewise, with it easier to measure it light-seconds and light-minutes or AU within the solar system than kilometers.
How long has it taken humanity as a whole to explore the bulk of the dry surface of Earth? You do realize I hope that there are large uncharted tracts of land. This is why we still discover new species as we cut down the rain forests. And don't even get me started on the sea, we don't even know what all is living in our oceans and can't even reach the bottom in some places.
Personally I say do as much as we can from remote without sending people out as possible. Saves lives, saves money, saves time. Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 are still sending information back occasionally. They haven't left the solar system entirely yet. In the last 10-15 years we've uncovered more information about our solar system than in the previous hundred. We're learning more about all the planets every day, and we haven't been sending out people.
May as well find out what we can know before sending someone out since we may not have too many shots to do so.
Yea, basically impossible to replace IE fully in XP. Little known fact, the "User Accounts" panel in Control Panel actually is running off of IE rather than Windows Explorer.
Sigh, wasting a good thread for modding by replying to this but since no one else has I'll bite.
Why legislate? If the lamps were cost effective, then the municipalities would make the switch. Right now in central Ohio the primary electric provider charges in the neighborhood of $5 per lamp per month for power. The muni is responsible for purchasing the bulbs if I am remembering correctly.
First, you legislate it since its the only way to get it done. Sad but true. Next, you only need LED light bulbs. You don't have to replace the full lamp, at least if theseconsumersites are anything to go by.
If the cost of power and the cost of the bulb are figured in, the LED street lamps take an insane amount of time to recoup the cost. Even when you figure in the labor to replace the bulbs every couple of years it still doesn't add up.
Per the source Wikipedia provided the extra initial cost is paid off within two years just from the electricity savings, and barring a physical disaster (such as the streetlamp falling over or getting shot with a gun) you don't have to change the bulb for 20 years. Really, it is a better choice but it would require work by city employees to actually make the change happen. They may even have to do a slide show!
When many budgets are being stretched to the breaking point would you advocate for your town to install LED street lights that will cost more? Would you vote for your taxes to be increased to purchase the lights, or would you prefer that a couple of employees be terminated to pay for the cost difference? I, myself, am not opposed to the idea of installing power saving, pollution reducing equipment, but there has to be a balance somewhere.
Hell yes I would advocate for this. Budgets don't magically get bigger on their own. You have to work for it. You have to plan and invest for it. This is a very, fucking, simple, means to save the city/town a lot of money and power, and it cuts down on light pollution as an added bonus!
Oh and something else to chew on: as more demand for LED lights increases, in the form of cities and towns using them for streetlights, the manufacturing process will be improved as companies compete with one another to produce a cheaper light bulb to sell. That's basic market principles. Demand drives innovation. Yet another long term economic bonus by mandating a switch to LED lights.
Apparently the Department of Energy in the US thinks they're a damn good thing that should be improved so they can become the defacto light source. They're hosting a contest since May 2008 to create a better LED light bulb. They call it the L-Prize.
Really, once you look at the known facts and the future potential you have to ask yourself why not? A handful of employees might lose their job? Taxes may go up a fraction of a percent? You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, and you can't make improvements for the future without paying for it. To hold back on something as simple as this for the reasons you gave is petty, just petty.
I've never heard of the first two games, and the 4th one sounds familiar but I couldn't tell you what its about off the top of my head. As for Diablo 2, running it without issue on Vista x64 for a while now. My only complaint: the hard-coded resolution restriction.
So whatever you did to "configure" Vista to run "better", FIX IT. It is amazing to me how many people think they are "pro" and "optimize" their OS and then complain when programs that work fine for others (on the same OS) without those "optimizations".
Shorthand: KIDS! Editing the registry is potentially dangerous! MS actually spoke the truth when they mention that!
FYI, a commonly overlooked issue into why some 32-bit applications didn't initially work on a 64-bit OS was the 16-bit installer program. Occasionally, you could just move file programs over from a 32-bit XP install to a 64-bit XP or Vista install and run it without too many issues. Granted this is largely an irrelevant issue now that 64-bit OSes are prevalent but still. I'm sure in a business environment more than a domestic its still an issue.
Hey now, don't belittle the strengths of a bureaucracy because of Bush. There are certain things it can do well, licensing is one of them. It's not perfect (not hard to get a fake ID) but its good enough (moderately difficult to get a GOOD fake ID). Plus, then you know for sure that someone is checking on the security of the certificates because that's 50% of their job.
Now if only they'll make it so where there is a road, there is pipe (for the most part) and get some of the boonie yahoos some decent DSL/Cable/Fiber runs. I wouldn't mind paying taxes as a means for internet access, just like I do for road access. It's convenient and helps everyone. And like the government can't tap my 'Net connection easily now anyways...
Probably just a coincidence for me. My Nokia phone had an OS lockup when I was leaving me mate's house this morning. Had to take out the battery and reboot it. But that was like, 8:36 AM or some shit.
No joke. People openly played MTG or D&D in my school, where the vast majority were your stereotypical "hick" (including the occasional person who was 'close' to a sheep; I wish I were joking). Words may be said, but you return them in kind or ignore them. A "fight" consists of one kid punching another once and getting hauled off. "Beatings" were pretty much unheard of. I guess WA schools are just weird...
Oh yea, I'm sure everyone around the world is totally in for a violent revolution because they are told they shouldn't be watching obscene things on the Internet, and an exceptionally small handful of those people get punished for it.
Some people need a reality check, or better yet a history lesson. Armed revolutions are not unheard of by any measure but they tend to happen for some very specific reasons. Namely, the oppression affects the vast majority of people and hampers the lives of the majority of people. Given A) the limited number of people punished for the action, B) the almost complete lack of regulation on the distribution of the material, C) the social stigma attached to the subject matter, and B) general psychology of the average perpetrator I'd say 'revolution' is a damn long way off.
Or you could mean the general 'censorship' of the Internet that is taking place and not this subject matter specifically? If that is the case its a bit off topic but I'll bite anyways.
Firstly, you are dead wrong about real democracies. You don't want to have that. Believe me, you really don't. Mob rule and mob justice tend to leave a sour taste in ones mouth, even if you were part of the mob. I'm not saying a democratic republic is a terribly great thing either, and while monarchies are romantic they're a bit too much like dictatorships in many cases, but you don't want whim running a nation. And that's just assuming the government isn't so inefficient it can't actually DO anything. No, a pure Democracy is a terrible form of government.
At the end of your post you mentioned three things and you don't seem to understand the last two fully. You're right about the generation gap relationship with technological advancement. We have people who when they were growing up didn't have computers making decisions affecting technology that came about when they were busy dealing with children for the most part. They just aren't qualified in many cases.
The last two bits you mentioned were greed and politics. This is a little different. This is not something you can change or expect to change. They're components of human nature. Survival traits. Social traits.
Regardless how you feel about Christianity, the Bible at least got that bit right (IMO): Greed is bad. It tends to hurt others anyways. But acquisitiveness seems to be a common human trait. You see it with consumers, you see it with collectors, you see it with fans of a movie or book series or TV show. It's not limited to physical goods either. You see it with any "resource" that is available. Money for some, power for others. It can be relatively harmless, like the guy at the party that is eating as much as he can rather than socializing, or it can be dangerous like what seems to be affecting most politicians these days, or the CEOs of all those 'failing' companies that are giving themselves millions of dollars.
Then you have politics. Just like greed this scales. Politics is really just group dynamics. You see it in your small family, or even the relationship you have with your loved one. Most people don't realize that. They just see the politics between nations which are on a grander scale. They fail to realize that even if humanity united there would be politics and it will be 'dirty'. As I mentioned before, it seems to be a survival trait of our species and as they say life isn't "fair".
Politics and survival brings up the big reason your idea of a "global" resolution is A) bad and B) farcical. Revolutions won't happen simultaneously the world over. Especially over something as "unimportant" as Internet Neutrality or "Simulated Child Pornography". Aside from either one just not affecting a large enough percentage of people (globally) the pressures aren't building up at the same pace in every country. Without that pressure pushing on the populace, they aren't going to go grab their gun and march on city hall.
No, if a "global armed revolution" was to occur it would just b
Slashdot Mirror
The Windows Firewall is greatly improved in SP3, but even the default un-patched firewall in XP is more or less a joke if you plan on doing any network sharing. So either way you have to deal with it. Also, I think it's SP3 you mean about the tampering with IE. It'll install IE7 if you want it or not unless you already had it installed. The only way to uninstall it without going through a big hassle is to have IE7 installed prior to installing SP3 if I remember right.
There are very few reasons to not install a service pack for Windows. I've not heard of any hardware compatibility issues, and for sure that is not a problem with new hardware. It may take forever, but from high end gaming systems to crappy E-Machines with at best 512MB of RAM, installing SP2 for XP is the only smart thing to do and doesn't slow the system down once its installed.
If anyone has some proof otherwise (as in links, not anecdotal) please correct me. But I've neither heard of nor seen an issue caused by SP2 that hasn't been patched for a long while (over a year or two).
I'm sorry, but you didn't really counter any of his arguments. You say you are under an NDA so you can't name "two big organizations" that are using more Linux than Windows/OSX. Since you can't prove it, its useless. Hearsay. Moot.
And not just for our little argument here either. You apparently can't point to these places for other sysadmins and say "it works there, why not where you do business?" because of your NDA. The problem with Linux is visibility in certain marketplaces. "Invisible ripples" don't help in any way until someone shines a light on them.
Okay, glad to see that stuff like UI layout is being modded up. It only is a matter of personal taste but whatever. I personally hate the Office Ribbon, but haven't had to use Office 2007 much so I can't be sure if its bad or not. I have used Vista and played with Windows 7 and I personally like the new UI for Windows Explorer. I think its oodles better than the flat gray color used in Windows XP, 2000, and 95/98.
But who cares about the way the UI looks. That's really a minor thing compared to the issues that were amplified. The first poster here gets modded +5 Insightful for saying "Ars Technia is Wrong" without providing any evidence of the fact.
I'm sorry dude, but you are wrong. What was wrong with Vista? Well there were some hardware incompatibility issues that were resolved within the first four months, and for the most part that was strictly NVIDIA, who behaved like a child and got a few other vendors to tell MS "NO! We're NOT going to correct our drivers for the changes you made!" Granted, it was bullshit that MS made those kinds of changes that late in development, but really all they did was boost Intel and ATI sales slightly since OEMs needed "Vista Capable" hardware to go with the new OS they had to use.
Which brings us to the biggest issues with Vista: the hardware requirements. Oh no, it requires a whole 2G of RAM to XP's 1G. Given the price of RAM, this is REALLY a non-issue for people who build their own systems. All it did was irritate OEMs, and you just know it was a marketing guy at MS not one of the engineers who told the OEMs to use the 512 and it'll all be fine. I'll let the class action lawsuit settle that dispute. It was a non issue for myself and the people I know that built a Vista system were gamers, and for the most part the benchmarks for games while using Vista Ultimate x64 and XP SP2 were the pretty much the same.
The software incompatibilities were only to be expected. For the most part Vista's built in backwards compatibility modes work awesome and now that people have been needing to develop on 64 bit OS its a non issue. From the start this was a given for an architecture change and personally I don't count it against Vista since it was going to happen eventually anyways, but I'll count it against it anyways since everyone else seems to too.
The only other major issue I can think of was the file transfer times. Before SP1, I personally never noticed this issue. Not sure what I was doing different, other than most people seemed to be referencing Windows Server 2003 so these people were using Vista most likely around the office rather than at home. Given how many people that rag on Vista that aren't network admins and mention the transfer times I'm sort of interested to know if it was THAT widespread for home users but couldn't find any quick references. Either way, once SP1 came out I stopped hearing of this issue. Given its MS it was pretty obvious the OS would be flakey until the first SP. I'm not sure why people freaked out over this when XP had a few more issues along similar lines but whatever.
So mod on you MS bashers! I just love how a supposedly intelligent site like Slashdot has this rabid fanaticism about OS choices. The flaming of Apple's OS and the various Linux distros (not to mention the BSD based ones) never ceases to amaze. I guess humans just need something to cling to. With apologies to Terry Pratchett: "Give them a slogan and a uniform, and their hearts and minds will follow."
There was a time such comments would be graced by me ignoring them. Another when they filled me with anger. Now, I sadly think those that say it may be on to something. Something bad, and very sadly real.
Gasp! He's right! People will know when to call you and ask if your refrigerator is running! This is terrible! We must ban this before it starts to prevent those whippersnappers from tormenting us all!
Seriously. What the hell privacy issue is there with someone knowing when your refrigerator is running? Enlighten me.
Common misconception. EA doesn't make games. They buy the companies of teams that make games, give them a deadline, and ship out whatever is there on the deadline. They're basically a publisher except now they're on Steam as well so they're getting redundant.
What strikes me as funny as if there was/is a God he must have a fantastically disgusting mean streak. Technically it was the Church under the Pope that like burned Gallelio right? The same Church who God supposedly told he would honor the decisions they make down here. So if the Pope condemned Gallelio to hell for telling the truth then he would be there being flayed constantly.
Of course there are other ways you can take that, but since we're talking 100% hypothetical BS I figured I'd be lazy and take the wordings at face value. Alternate beliefs and theories include bits like that "promise" being bullshit by the Church so they can keep power, or God telling lies to people down here and doing whatever He wants up there, etc etc.
Slightly less off topic though I've always wondered what past great scientists would do with modern technology. I blame Star Trek for putting the idea in my head, what with Data and his holodeck friends of Einstein, Freud, Edison and so forth. I wonder if in some cases if these "greats" are only great because they had primitive tools and were more adept at using those and would be considered mediocre if they had modern gear and knew how to use it.
After all, using an IR or Radio telescope is different than using an optical one.
Turn in your Star Trek card. That chest was FAKE! It was part of the costume.
How about you just google it in the first place? Chances are the wiki entry is the top search result ANYWAYS. And really, their search isn't bad. You just have to know what the subject is called and be willing to scroll down to see the "possible matches". The article your looking for is probably in the top 5....
Yar, inside of the president's limo or air force one is pretty crazy. You can talk with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Wouldn't be surprised if it FORCED them to answer too.
Please cite sources. I'm googling right now (hurray slow work day) but I'd be interested to see some real conspiracies that there were conspiracy theorists for before it all came out. Active conspiracy theories have yet to be proven as actually happening or have happened.
So you aren't going to fly here because they are asking you to fill out the same forms you already had to online, before you reach the US? How dare they actually provide some convenience (surprisingly).
I mean, I know the DHS has made shit worse for travellers but this update to the policy is really a non-issue. It actually helps more than it hurts, especially since there is no new information. Really when you think about it all they are doing is cutting out a step on their end; they don't have to higher some data entry personnel to make electronic versions of the files your submitting. They're just getting you to do it for them, and on the plus side you can find out if you are approved before you get on your airplane.
Disclaimer: I'm an American, and I'd apologize for the jackassery of so-called "patriots" (such as the border guard to Canada another poster mentioned) who seem to despise all foreigners if it weren't apparently a part of every single nation out there. I just hope the US government gets back on track instead of putting those fools in power to make policy.
1) Apple does negotiate with the RIAA about the terms of the DRM service that Apple has to maintain and run. I'm far from an Apple fanboy, but there have been stories over the years going off on how the DRM wasn't Apple's idea and so forth. There are even quotes of Steve Jobs saying that DRM is bad, and that guy sure as hell isn't the type to just take it. I seem to remember a Slashdot story telling of how they were forcing the RIAA to accept their terms, but over the years the opposite I admit has been more likely.
Of course, the actual music execs have been saying for years that DRM is bad but the lawyers at the RIAA seem to be running their companies into the ground for them.
2)The private info consists of the email address related to the account that purchased it. I do not believe it actually contains a lot of 'personal information' such as your name, or social security number, or bank account numbers. I don't personally buy DRM'd music (which means I've yet to buy an iTunes track) so I can't be 100% positive, but I'm fairly sure there would of been an article on Slashdot before given this is nothing new to iTunes.
By the way, how is it any different than leaving a card or sticker with your name and phone number on an item in case you lose it so a good Samaritan (in the unlikely event your stuff is found by one) can return it to you? Honestly I think this is a non-argument.
3)You're the kind of person that would put a kid in a bubble to keep him from getting hurt, but not thing of how to feed him aren't you? The 'private info' consists of an e-mail address. Your pedophile argument is no better than the morons who scream "think of the children" in politics, equally pointless and used as an exaggeration of a problem to prove your point.
A pedophile isn't going to go track down someone by their bloody email address when they can just watch the school and pick their target in person. They wouldn't even know its a kids iPod until they found out who owned the email address, it could be a teacher's. Never mind the difficulties in actually associating a face to an email address when all you have to go by is the address itself and the fact they have an iPod.
The scams are equally as bad. Worst case, you have someone use the email address on a few porn sites so they get some XXX spam mail. If you are a mature parent, you can deal with that easy enough and if you are a tech savvy parent it shouldn't be a problem anyways unless you don't supervise your kids online experience (which means ALL online aspects, not just browsing and IRC).
So tell me. What would you do with my email address? How will you track me down with mine if I don't use it on Myspace? What if its only used on iTunes?
I think people are knee-jerking a bit much.
Timestamps people! Be nice to your fellow posters. If its redundant to a post with the same timestamp just ignore it!
The Stand.
I'd laugh, but its not as funny knowing you'd have to black out the entire city in order to get rid of the light pollution.
And what pray tell does that have to do exactly with what the OP said, of "if you build it they will come"? No one said this stuff had to come immediately. The space shuttle is the first re-usable spacecraft the US created. Many of the first escort fighters (Allison-engined P-51 mustangs didn't live up to expectations either, nor did the first assault rifle for the US (M-16 before they lined the barrel and chamber with chrome).
First and early attempts rarely tend to their tasks as well as people hope or require. Typically you have to go through several revisions while the old models are still "in the field" as it were. Really the only difference is the expense of space exploration. NASA has been able to do some slick stuff on a low budget since the 60's or 70's, but its been a hamper.
You mention no one has gone back to the moon in the last few decades. What, may I ask, exactly would you have them do there? They still have the moon rocks from Apollo. We've gotten pretty handy with a spectrometer, being able to tell chemical compositions of planets and stars light-years away. What exactly were they to do there besides build a telescope, which we have easily done in orbit anyways (see Hubble).
The economics of space exploration are slowly changing to make it as feasible as deep ocean exploration (which is also hurting from lack of interest, outside of oil companies). The politics of it are leading to like what? Three manned missions from countries outside the US? I believe Russian, India, and China were all discussing targeting the southern end of Luna.
Anyways, manned space exploration will continue to happen and eventually we will colonize other planets. The pace of space is different. The amount of resources it takes to leave Earth and head for another system are unlike anything we've had to deal with before. The distances likewise, with it easier to measure it light-seconds and light-minutes or AU within the solar system than kilometers.
How long has it taken humanity as a whole to explore the bulk of the dry surface of Earth? You do realize I hope that there are large uncharted tracts of land. This is why we still discover new species as we cut down the rain forests. And don't even get me started on the sea, we don't even know what all is living in our oceans and can't even reach the bottom in some places.
Personally I say do as much as we can from remote without sending people out as possible. Saves lives, saves money, saves time. Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 are still sending information back occasionally. They haven't left the solar system entirely yet. In the last 10-15 years we've uncovered more information about our solar system than in the previous hundred. We're learning more about all the planets every day, and we haven't been sending out people.
May as well find out what we can know before sending someone out since we may not have too many shots to do so.
Yea, basically impossible to replace IE fully in XP. Little known fact, the "User Accounts" panel in Control Panel actually is running off of IE rather than Windows Explorer.
Sigh, wasting a good thread for modding by replying to this but since no one else has I'll bite.
Why legislate? If the lamps were cost effective, then the municipalities would make the switch. Right now in central Ohio the primary electric provider charges in the neighborhood of $5 per lamp per month for power. The muni is responsible for purchasing the bulbs if I am remembering correctly.
First, you legislate it since its the only way to get it done. Sad but true. Next, you only need LED light bulbs. You don't have to replace the full lamp, at least if these consumer sites are anything to go by.
If the cost of power and the cost of the bulb are figured in, the LED street lamps take an insane amount of time to recoup the cost. Even when you figure in the labor to replace the bulbs every couple of years it still doesn't add up.
Per the source Wikipedia provided the extra initial cost is paid off within two years just from the electricity savings, and barring a physical disaster (such as the streetlamp falling over or getting shot with a gun) you don't have to change the bulb for 20 years. Really, it is a better choice but it would require work by city employees to actually make the change happen. They may even have to do a slide show!
When many budgets are being stretched to the breaking point would you advocate for your town to install LED street lights that will cost more? Would you vote for your taxes to be increased to purchase the lights, or would you prefer that a couple of employees be terminated to pay for the cost difference? I, myself, am not opposed to the idea of installing power saving, pollution reducing equipment, but there has to be a balance somewhere.
Hell yes I would advocate for this. Budgets don't magically get bigger on their own. You have to work for it. You have to plan and invest for it. This is a very, fucking, simple, means to save the city/town a lot of money and power, and it cuts down on light pollution as an added bonus!
Oh and something else to chew on: as more demand for LED lights increases, in the form of cities and towns using them for streetlights, the manufacturing process will be improved as companies compete with one another to produce a cheaper light bulb to sell. That's basic market principles. Demand drives innovation. Yet another long term economic bonus by mandating a switch to LED lights.
Apparently the Department of Energy in the US thinks they're a damn good thing that should be improved so they can become the defacto light source. They're hosting a contest since May 2008 to create a better LED light bulb. They call it the L-Prize.
Really, once you look at the known facts and the future potential you have to ask yourself why not? A handful of employees might lose their job? Taxes may go up a fraction of a percent? You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, and you can't make improvements for the future without paying for it. To hold back on something as simple as this for the reasons you gave is petty, just petty.
I've never heard of the first two games, and the 4th one sounds familiar but I couldn't tell you what its about off the top of my head. As for Diablo 2, running it without issue on Vista x64 for a while now. My only complaint: the hard-coded resolution restriction.
So whatever you did to "configure" Vista to run "better", FIX IT. It is amazing to me how many people think they are "pro" and "optimize" their OS and then complain when programs that work fine for others (on the same OS) without those "optimizations".
Shorthand: KIDS! Editing the registry is potentially dangerous! MS actually spoke the truth when they mention that!
FYI, a commonly overlooked issue into why some 32-bit applications didn't initially work on a 64-bit OS was the 16-bit installer program. Occasionally, you could just move file programs over from a 32-bit XP install to a 64-bit XP or Vista install and run it without too many issues. Granted this is largely an irrelevant issue now that 64-bit OSes are prevalent but still. I'm sure in a business environment more than a domestic its still an issue.
Hey now, don't belittle the strengths of a bureaucracy because of Bush. There are certain things it can do well, licensing is one of them. It's not perfect (not hard to get a fake ID) but its good enough (moderately difficult to get a GOOD fake ID). Plus, then you know for sure that someone is checking on the security of the certificates because that's 50% of their job.
Now if only they'll make it so where there is a road, there is pipe (for the most part) and get some of the boonie yahoos some decent DSL/Cable/Fiber runs. I wouldn't mind paying taxes as a means for internet access, just like I do for road access. It's convenient and helps everyone. And like the government can't tap my 'Net connection easily now anyways...
Probably just a coincidence for me. My Nokia phone had an OS lockup when I was leaving me mate's house this morning. Had to take out the battery and reboot it. But that was like, 8:36 AM or some shit.
No joke. People openly played MTG or D&D in my school, where the vast majority were your stereotypical "hick" (including the occasional person who was 'close' to a sheep; I wish I were joking). Words may be said, but you return them in kind or ignore them. A "fight" consists of one kid punching another once and getting hauled off. "Beatings" were pretty much unheard of. I guess WA schools are just weird...
Oh yea, I'm sure everyone around the world is totally in for a violent revolution because they are told they shouldn't be watching obscene things on the Internet, and an exceptionally small handful of those people get punished for it.
Some people need a reality check, or better yet a history lesson. Armed revolutions are not unheard of by any measure but they tend to happen for some very specific reasons. Namely, the oppression affects the vast majority of people and hampers the lives of the majority of people. Given A) the limited number of people punished for the action, B) the almost complete lack of regulation on the distribution of the material, C) the social stigma attached to the subject matter, and B) general psychology of the average perpetrator I'd say 'revolution' is a damn long way off.
Or you could mean the general 'censorship' of the Internet that is taking place and not this subject matter specifically? If that is the case its a bit off topic but I'll bite anyways.
Firstly, you are dead wrong about real democracies. You don't want to have that. Believe me, you really don't. Mob rule and mob justice tend to leave a sour taste in ones mouth, even if you were part of the mob. I'm not saying a democratic republic is a terribly great thing either, and while monarchies are romantic they're a bit too much like dictatorships in many cases, but you don't want whim running a nation. And that's just assuming the government isn't so inefficient it can't actually DO anything. No, a pure Democracy is a terrible form of government.
At the end of your post you mentioned three things and you don't seem to understand the last two fully. You're right about the generation gap relationship with technological advancement. We have people who when they were growing up didn't have computers making decisions affecting technology that came about when they were busy dealing with children for the most part. They just aren't qualified in many cases.
The last two bits you mentioned were greed and politics. This is a little different. This is not something you can change or expect to change. They're components of human nature. Survival traits. Social traits.
Regardless how you feel about Christianity, the Bible at least got that bit right (IMO): Greed is bad. It tends to hurt others anyways. But acquisitiveness seems to be a common human trait. You see it with consumers, you see it with collectors, you see it with fans of a movie or book series or TV show. It's not limited to physical goods either. You see it with any "resource" that is available. Money for some, power for others. It can be relatively harmless, like the guy at the party that is eating as much as he can rather than socializing, or it can be dangerous like what seems to be affecting most politicians these days, or the CEOs of all those 'failing' companies that are giving themselves millions of dollars.
Then you have politics. Just like greed this scales. Politics is really just group dynamics. You see it in your small family, or even the relationship you have with your loved one. Most people don't realize that. They just see the politics between nations which are on a grander scale. They fail to realize that even if humanity united there would be politics and it will be 'dirty'. As I mentioned before, it seems to be a survival trait of our species and as they say life isn't "fair".
Politics and survival brings up the big reason your idea of a "global" resolution is A) bad and B) farcical. Revolutions won't happen simultaneously the world over. Especially over something as "unimportant" as Internet Neutrality or "Simulated Child Pornography". Aside from either one just not affecting a large enough percentage of people (globally) the pressures aren't building up at the same pace in every country. Without that pressure pushing on the populace, they aren't going to go grab their gun and march on city hall.
No, if a "global armed revolution" was to occur it would just b