3016 posts • joined 25 Mar 2008
Security is fine
The customer's details and systems are 100% protected 100% of the time.
"Customer" in this case being the utility company who owns the meter.
The consumers security is of no corporate or regulatory concern. :-(
I was thinking "How long before that gets hacked?"
It is worrying, no doubt about that. In many countries encryption is already heavily curtailed and there is the presumption of guilt (e.g. UK, keys *must* be handed over on demand).
If SOPA does get passed with those draconian measures, it will just be the USA passing draconian and totalitarian laws.
@AC at 09:37
"Thieving is wrong"
Cool, we can agree 100% on that. Shame theft has nothing to do with the story.
Would you perhaps care to discuss copyright infringement instead? The curtailing of fair use, parody, remix and the diminishing of our future culture?
"How will they stop a legit EU site hosting something like PB in Germany? They declare the host undesirable, block it along with all the legitimate business that uses the host."
You are quite correct and that is, pretty much, "The Plan". Only one problem. This is Internet, progeny of Arpanet, survivor of nuclear attacks. SOPA is just another blockage, it will be identified and by-passed.
Maybe not legally by-passed, but technically and almost certainly morally.
If the companies started playing with their customers rather than booting them in the balls constantly, they may get more support (case in point, the absolute bollocking those illicitly torrenting the "Humble Indie Bundle" got from the community). If they also stopped manufacturing total dross (there's a reason the top 5 films on Netflix are non-USA and that big-media cinema numbers are falling). If they further stopped lying and committing near-frauds (e.g. "Harry Potter" was a loss-maker? Really?) And, finally, if they made sure some cash actually went to the creatives and not up the noses of the execs and the handful of mega-stars.
Big Media made this problem for itself, but rather than change their practices they have gone running to the legislature with stuffed brown-envelopes. Every time in history that money has made law and ignored the people there has been revolt and revolution. We already have the rise of various "Pirate Parties" who seek to protect our culture from these land-grabs. What will be next?
@BigYin - Typa
'How about the concept of "fair use" and where agreements over that can occur?'
Should, of course, read:
'How about the concept of "fair use" and where DISagreements over that can occur?'
@AC at 18:18
I agree. Pirates are scum and should be dealt with severely.
But tell me, what about people who breach copyright license? Which is (or was) a civil offence? How about the concept of "fair use" and where agreements over that can occur? What about the right to use a meme that passes into popular culture? To remix a work? To pass a copy of work on? Doctrine of first sale? etc.
This is an attempt at a land-grab of epic proportions to privatise our culture. It must not be permitted. Can you imagine a world where Mozart, Monet, Shakespeare, Confucius or any number of other creator's/thinker's works were still privately held? How weak, grey, dull and expensive would we be then?
This is the future people such as yourself wish to create.
You have not thought things through.
You are in error.
You must be opposed with all vigour.
Does Skype do that?
Can you cite a reliable source, please?
I thought it did some client-client sync thing, but that was all.
Must say, all this makes me want to use Jitsi.
How long before some dodgy html/jpegs get used to pwn the new AOL IM then?
"With digital stuff, the reality changes. The cost of "publication"(sharing) is trivial. It can happen, it will happen, it does happen, it will continue to happen, and it can't be stopped.
The laws need to change to reflect this new, modern reality. The cats can't be swept back into the worm can behind the open stable door."
To a very large extent I agree with you. The majors (be they print, film, whatever) have made it their business to exploit just how hard it was to make and distribute stuff, charging a huge premium for their service. As you rightly say, a lot of the old problem no longer exist (although there are some new ones).
And this is why we have the RIAA, MPAA et al trying to push through the likes of SOPA. Their business is against the wall, the firing squad is ready and they are trying to argue that bullets should be illegal rather than move with the times.
So, yes, copyright etc should change but it won't change in the way it should. It will just become more and more entrenched to enforce the status quo (e.g. now lasting 50+ years), create artificial barrier to trade (DRM, region codes) and maintain this years bottom-line (meanwhile the actual content creators will get screwed over and films like "Harry Potter" will be declared loss-making on paper).
There will always be a place for Random House, MGM etc. It will just be different and they are afraid of change.
And this is before we even consider the total dog's-dinner that is the patent system.
...intall NoScript, AdBlock Plus, CookieCuller, Ghostery, TrackMeNot and BetterPrivacy; then tell the lot of them to piss off.
(Also, update hosts files etc)
Wrong way round
This mean I have to store a cookie that says "Do not track" and this is clearly wrong.
What each ad network should be required to do is get explicit consent to store a "Please track" cookie. No cookie, no track.
Although I realise there are other methods to rack people that do no need cookies (browser, font, OS and plugin combinations are fairly unique).
Strong with fat is this one
Much cholesterol in their blood is there
Not long for this world will they be
...if only there was some way to run an application on a server and have the client appear elsewhere. If only such a thing existed. And I don't mean a website, that's far too limited constrained to the limitations of the browser/HTML.
What's needed some kind of crazy mechanism for the server to "run" the application but have it display somewhere else. Not Terminal Services of Citrix, much lower level than that.
I can't believe that after all these years no one has created and tried to push - it would be the perfect solution. Some apps run on the server, some on the client. Where depends on the use-case/hardware needs.
Such a thing would be a paradigm shift in computing to rival "the cloud" and an X-cellent idea.
I'm glad it wasn't just me then. I thought this was going to be some clever way of reversing a virtual image out on to physical hardware or something else.
Instead it's just bizarre-o and IMHO wasteful. Games inside virtual machines? Over RDP? Yuck.
Full consumer PCs to simply remote into an XP image? Huh?
Maybe I too a missing something, but it strikes me that most of the issues could be resolved with a lot less complexity.
Whilst I want this to succeed...
...because I want to see some actual competition and innovation, I have my doubts. I have seen stories about GNU/Linux getting on to consumer devices one too many times. Whilst it is there (routers, set-top boxes) it's always behind the scenes and unnoticed by the masses who drool over iOS.
It would be good to get some more open hardware in the TV market. Most decent TVs today are small computers (probably running some Linux flavour, natch) but they are all so crippled and locked into walled-gardens. What I want from a TV is a monitor. Err, that's it.
To that I will attach a device (say a RaspberryPi or something) and have that broker all the media requests. The TV is not the hub, it's just the display.
Also, click on the "A" once it's done, you'll get a mini-report on other tests that failed.
ACID3 - 100/100 is ***NOT*** a pass, people!
Try understanding what 100/100 means on the Acid3 test first and what it takes to actually pass the test.
Linux != An Operating System
An Open API...
...is all well and good, and a boon to integration; but if one does not also have an open implementation then final control still lives with the proprietary code holder who can hold the entire developer community to ransom on a whim.
In fact the whole phrase "Open API" is a misnomer that does nothing expect dilute and obscure the meaning of "open" (just as "open" did for "free"). What we have here is a nothing more than public APIs.
The increasing dependence of "Open API"s as people integrate their toilet with Twitter (or whatever banality they think people care about) merely entrenches proprietary code and companies. The F/OSS community should resist the urge to depend on "Open API"s unless they can also roll their own fully-operational implementation.
Failure to do so will leave F/OSS at the mercy of proprietary.
Maybe this is why MS are so keen to push "Open Surface" it's the same Trojan Horse, just a different jockey. Or maybe an "Open API" means one that can be invoked without patent infringement. After all, we have ISO "Standards" that can't be full implemented without begging for patent protection.
As for APIs for internal systems, whether over SOAP/JSON/XYZ (pref using open libraries for future-proofing and resilience), this is just good planning and should be part of any design process. The various layers should all have well documented APIs (and test sets for same) so that any one layer can be swapped/updated without the other layers being overly disturbed. If you can only access your CMS (say) via a single client and the CMS can only access a single database via a single connection; then you are a bloody moron.
No layer should care what the other layer is beyond the API boundary.
1) Who the shuddering fuck are Strafor?
2) Why should I care that they can't secure their network?
"What's not to like?"
I am supposed to be fixing this house up, instead I am wondering what order will tip the balance in my next Gratuitous Space Battle :-S
He breached the terms of his license. That should be a civil matter at best, not criminal, as a license is basically a contract.
He may have caused loss (i.e. *some* downloaders did not buy the DVD or a cinema ticket who would otherwise have done so). OK, recover that loss from him. Once it can be quantified (and remember, 1 download!=1 lost sale).
He can't pay? Garnish his wages or use other measures open to the judge.
If the media companies want their productions dealt with like a physical product (e.g. "theft" etc) then they should also assign the rights of a physical product. e.g I can do what I want with it (cut it up, re-purpose it, whatever), I can give it away, it can be inherited and so on.
At the moment they want license terms in their favour (no copying, no format shifting etc) but product terms when it suits them ("theft", jail etc). They are trying to have it both ways and are getting away with it for now - this is not something that can continue. Our culture will eventually suffer, innovation will suffer, economies will suffer.
The biggest threat to the digital economy is not the license-breachers, it's the corporate trying to legally entrench their fiefdoms and create barriers to free-trade and innovation. These are the same morons who think the Internet should have been patented! My yes, what a bloody great idea that would have been! THEY are the one now benefiting from the freedom the Internet offers and they want to lock-it down.
It's so short-sighted it's like trying to monetise collaterised debt...wait a minute...
...so copyright infringement is now a greater threat to society than burglary, theft and bodily harm?
Something is seriously screwed up.
As @Craig 12 said, they still made money. If one assumed that all the downloads were lost sales (which is highly, highly unlikely) what would they have gained? 0.001%? The lawyers probably cost more than that.
And haven't other surveys shown that the downloaders are also their biggest customers? They are not just biting the hand that feeds, now they are jailing it.
"Was it any good?"
No. Never mind downloading it for free, you should be paid to compensate you for the wasted bandwidth!
"Buying 2nd hand DVD's since 2009."
I buy second-hand games, films come from the bargain-bin (I am a patient man).
This is a key point
I was at a talk where RMS mentioned an experiment Stephen King tried whereby Mr. King did a book on a "Pay what you want basis". Mr. King got US$100k profit or something and called it a failure. RMS made the point that US$100k is a success. It's a *very* nice annual wage and it was one book! It can only be a "failure" if one was hoping to gouge people for US$millions.
These big-name media types (people and companies) need to lower their expectations. I do not owe them a living, the sun does not shine out their fundament.
Support indie, support sharing (e.g. Humble Indie Bundle, vo.do, Jamendo, Magnatue [all distribution channels] also "The Tunnel", "Sintel", "Person of Interest" [all actual releases]). Screw the parasitic majors.
You seem to be acting under the false assumption that downloading is somehow divested from paying. It isn't, it's just that the majors can't be bothered to provide the service that consumers want, or are only willing to do so at a price-point the consumers can't stomach; so some consumers look for an alternative/
It doesn't have to e this was at all. Some of us download AND pay. Just not from the likes of Sony, EMI, WB or any other those idiots.
Ah yes, Disney
Remind me, how old is Mickey Mouse?
Who keeps campaigning to extend copyright again and again and again and again and...?
At some point people need to realise that their culture is being restricted and entrenched by corporates. There is not such thing as "intellectual property", that's just a PR buzzwords to collate disparate ideas (a bit like "the cloud" in that respect). It confuses the consumer, makes them fear legal action and erodes their rights.
Copyright needs to be cut right back (a max of 20 years is more than reasonable if you ask me). We do not need our culture held hostage by inhuman corporates.
Oh, and how do Irish pirates get an Internet connection? They must have some really cool undersea cable tech or satellite uplinks. Maybe they can help Cameron's broadband Britain scheme?
They are moving to a dying platform? WTF?
Glad I'm not a customer!
What does the USA say about statutory rights? Is a class action one of those? Can they be waived in a contract? Could it be considered an unfair term and thus unenforceable?
I have more sense than to use PSN, but I am nonetheless curious.
Prison is the bet place for pirates. The actions of pirates can never be condoned. Ever.
As for alleged copyright infringers, that should be a civil matter and once costs/losses have been paid that should be the end of it.
As others have said:
Cost per print
Cartridge type (single inks, or 3 colours in 1?)
Are pattern ink available (and in fully working cartridges)?
For the WiFi ones what band? Are they WiFi only or can then be cabled (USB or Ethernet)?
OS support? Are these MS only?
I am glad to see you did not include any Lexmark ones, I am suffering a re-badged Lexmark (Dell 964). What a hunk of junk. Can't use pattern ink, OEM ink is a rip-off, lacking in drivers for non-Windows OSs, just horrible (came with a PC, heading for the skip soon).
Next printer will have to be a laser or support a continuous ink system. And not be wedded at the hip to MS.
I've had my motorcycle act in a similar manner.
So I pulled over and had a look.
Thing is, my bike is carbed so it took about 5 seconds to realise fuel was low and it was running lean, flick to reserve and off to the petrol station (no fuel gauge).
And there's the thing - my bike was user servicable at the road-side, modern cars (and bikes) are now. Heck, it can even be impossible to replace a bulb without removing the front wheel on some cars!
This all comes down to poor type approval. Basic repairs should be achievable by an untrained driver by the roadside and only with the tools/manuals carried by the car. Wheels, fuse and bulb changes should all be in that requirement. If it can't be done in reasonable time (say 15 minutes) then the design fails approval and is no allowed on the road.
If one's vehicle is going bat-shit, one should pull over where safe to do so. No excuse really.
We cannot have people like this going around pointing out security flaws.
Security needs to be 100% black-boxed and hidden from view.
Only via total obscurity can we ever have safe systems otherwise people will be able to work out how to circumvent them. Anyone trying to shed light on security matters is clearly dangerous, quite possibly a terrorist and should be dealt with in the most sever terms possible.
Thus the only response from the courts should be to deport him to the USA (Facebook is, after all American) when he can be tried by a military court and executed.
The world will then be a safer place for us all.
"...I expect they just looked at the resultant horror show when a number of German & US municipalities, school districts etc ditched MSO for Gnu/Open Office a few years back.......the financial cost of the initial migration and then crawling back to MS was terrible and, probably more importantly for negotiators, ended the careers of many involved."
Nice spin, but not the dull truth. In Germany there was an election and a power shift. The new incumbents were more closely tied to Big Business and keen to help their pals rake it in. Even the internal analysis conducted by the German equivalent of NAO seemed to show that the F/OSS solution was value for money.
I say "seemed" and I have no way of knowing how independent or unbiased that report was.
Well, if you don't want to spend money on re-training everyone/re-writing all integrations; don't upgrade. There's a solution for you, won't work forever though.
If you are going to spend millions (probably billions the way government IT contracts go) in retraining/recoding on the same application from the same vendor, then there is a very good case for at least thinking about the alternatives. It's shame that in the NHS (heck, UK in general) that beyond a few examples such as "Open Molar" this simply does not happen.
"Open standards are a great goal, but it's the work of years to transition to them."
And it begins with one contract stating something along the lines of "All files and communications will be in openly documented standards that can be implemented by any person or vendor without fear of patent, copyright or trademark infringement. In perpetuity."
Still, we live in a country that would rather spend billions off-balance sheet, lumber future generations with crushing debt and not prosecute fraudsters than do the right thing.
Unlike the previous AC, at least you have the courage to use you forum name in the clear.
"Training about 1m people in how to use a new office package"
So they can NEVER move beyond Office 98 or whatever they have now? Office 2010 is a big change, a F/OSS version could be made to ape the current interface to cut the training budget.
"Rolling out a new office package across several hundred thousand devices"
So they'll NEVER upgrade?
"Supporting a new office package across a user base of 1m people"
So they'll NEVER upgrade?
"Rewriting every internal application that interfaces with Office"
So, once again, they'll NEVER upgrade?
"The loss of productivity through use of an inferior product that users are unfamiliar with"
And again, they'll NEVER upgrade?
"Would represent a SAVING for the NHS?"
I'll give you a choice. You can spend millions to upgrade to a product with the same brand name from the same vendor that will cost a massive reduction in productivity, increase your training bills and force you to buy entirely new kit; OR
You can spend millions on a F/OSS solution will cost a some reduction in productivity, potentially increase your training bills but you can keep your current kit. The first hit will be the worst. After the that, the traction gained from your investment will reduce future costs and the improvements you sponsor will be available to other departments, NGOs and society in general.
You clearly have not thought through your argument as everything you state as being anti-F/OSS counts double for MS Office. That does not mean there is no place for MS Office or MS back-end software, just that it is not the be-all and end-all of corporate IT.
Once last thing AC - grow a pair. Use your "real" login and reply to me directly.
...the NHS is a big customer. Very big. I am sure if they said "Standards only" people would have obeyed. If the NHS had any spine.
Maybe if the NHS spent less on lawyers to attack whistle-blowers, they'd be able to afford better IT.
Windows runs IE6
This is still the standard in the NHS because they blew so much on MS-only ActiveX and IE6-only sites back in the day. If they had gone with the standards (and helped shape the standards where none existed) they would not be in this mess. The vendors would have to compete on a level playing field and on merit.
But today's economy is not about open competition.
Whilst Open/Libre Office are not perfect, I would think that it would cost less to throw money at one of those projects and having the missing/non-working parts sorted than splurge on MS.
Either that or the code used on the projects should be opened, the custom code was paid for with public money, the code should be public as well.
...they are still hostage to a single platform from a single vendor, just for slightly less?
Is everything black-and-white in your world? One is anti-SOPA so one must be pro-Google?
Do you think by being anti-SOPA, I am pro the BBC's actions on orphaned works?
Or that by objecting to Israeli policy I think the Palestinians are a swell bunch of guys who would like flower arranging?
Here is a clue: the world is not black-and-white and SOPA goes way, way too far.
They should have done an ACTA. Had it all agreed behind closed doors, then signed into law before the people have a chance. That is democracy.
Open debate and consensus is, well, communism. And better dead than red!
So bend over and take it for freedom!
Oh, I don't mean your freedom. Not personal freedom. Corporate freedom! That's the freedom that counts. We should do away with this silly idea of people voting, shares should vote. Whoever has the most shares basically calls all the shots.
It'd at least be a bit more honest than the farce we endure now.
Not the same
It's one thing to find that piece of enemy scum, place your crosshairs over them and blow their brains out in a game. It's quite another to do it in real life where one knows someone is actually going to get hurt/killed. And the kind of person who would willingly do it IRL is so far gone, I rather doubt the game has much influence.
Are they considering "Risk" a breach of human rights as well? Chess?
This is just a piece of PR grabbing straight from the PeTA game book and it is shameful for an institution such as the Red Cross to stoop so low.
More "I sponsored this guy and 66 of his friends with by annual bonus - thanks tax payers!"
Win or lose, he's got more drive an courage than you have.
Surely one of our highly-bonused financial geniuses or CEOs could spare that from their pocket changes?
Top marks to James for trying to get the funds together like this.
"I was currently working on a small Windows Vista/7 sidebar gadget for the members of a small local social club that I am part of that would provide updates pertaining to the club on their desktops."
You mean like an RSS feed? I don't mean to be rude, but it reads like you are solving a problem that has already been solved. If you are doing for yucks and to learn, that's cool (I do it myself) but a more widely used app will have more features, be more stable and less of a burden to support. Just join a team and get going. Of course, maybe yours is better than all the others, in which case release that sucker as free software! Consider it a job hunting ploy. :)
"I would prefer to write and distribute my own software however I darn well choose to, just as PC developers have always been able to do"
Well, don't expect me to download it. I want to see the downloads signed, md5 hashes etc. I want to be sure what I download it what I expect to download. Which it why I use the repositories and don't download random stuff off random sites. Way too dangerous.
Unfortunately Windows is so far behind the curve that Windows users are conditioned to think this is "normal" (and that every piece of software needs to run its own update mechanism, rather than rely on a central one). Thus the culture shock when some more resilient and secure comes along. Not that repositories are perfect, just less bad.
@AC (why is it always a coward?)
Apple market share - ~6%
MS market share - ~90%
Guess which one is the effective monopoly and has to be regulated?
Not that this makes Apple's actions correct, just not a matter for regulators (yet).
"And of course, antitrust issues."
That's the big one. Canonical has one store that they control, but you could create your own I guess. They are a tiny fraction of a sub-1% market, so no big issue there.
Apple have one store, you cannot add you own (without rooting etc). They are around a 5-6% share (more on mobile) so no huge issue there (even on mobile, there is competition from 'droid).
MS is circa 90% of the market. If they do not allow other stores on to their platform, then I could see that being a major issue for the regulators and rightly so.