Those are applications which have nothing to do with ownership although the user must have permission to use them. It is the user who should own the file, text or otherwise.

The Unix permissions of "user", "group" and "other" are still valid even today. If you want a more fine grained permission solution then look no further than Access Control Lists which have been in use by Unix since the late 1980's and Linux since the early 1990's.

The big problem with ACL's is not the concept it is when users expect the System Administrator to manage ACL's for them. Even on the latest OS's be it Linux, MS Windows, VMS or Unix the same base Unix permissions are still in use with ACL's only used when there is a need.

No! No! No! you are doing it wrong you should have been using the command "rm -rf /" . The Linux/Unix professionals will thank you for this. :)

You underestimate my laziness.

After a decade of only knowing Nano/pico I'm picking up Vi because I'm too lazy to install it on FreeBSD.

Matlab is a dead end if you use it for statistics.

Matlab is not a dead end if you use it for a ton of other stuff that there are toolboxes for.

I've used matlab at work for almost a decade and never come close to using it for something R was good at.

I have a huge file duplication/versioning problem because I fork stuff for home, work, friends, etc. Syncing should theoretically be a non-problem thanks to Windows 95's "Briefcase" sync folders. I forget why I only tested them once.

At some point around WinXP or Vista I think they just as quietly removed those from the "New ..." menu (right-clicking on you desktop to make blank folders or notepad files to fill out.) I wonder what my world of data-hoarding would have been like, had Apple polished and popularized the feature 20 years ago.

Thanks, I'm glad someone replied, and more so at seeing something to look into. http://www.dlna.org/consumer-h... says: "DLNA (Digital Living Network Alliance®) strives to provide more convenience, choices, and enjoyment of digital content through DLNA Certified® devices."

It seems this misses the point. Obviously it requires NEW hardware, and from your own response, clients are not very well known or built in (like say, fat32 disks and SMB shares). I do not blame you or the industry around it. What I fail to see is how there is not even a shadow of a niche to re-use even the most basic format --our own home mp3s:
1) every major mp3 player since Winamp 2 in the nineties has had streaming decoders, (including the OSS Linux players, which would translate to Android ports being just a few code ports away)
2) The world runs on Windows by sheer numbers, SMB is already there holding our music collections. AND it works seamlessly from one Windows PC to the next.

Whatever clever ideas did come up turned into cloud solutions. It is horrible to (pay|lose-privacy) to be forced to reach out with our metaphorical arm all the way around the internet just to bring that arm around to touch our own noses.
The fact that nobody talks about Windows 7+'s' weird "Homegroup" shares and other "Discovery" daemons built around Windows Media Player is a tell-tale that something is forcibly wrong with our expectations even for those half-assed non-mobile solutions. Since we need third party streaming software, boxes like chromecast and clouds to use our own stuff, it's almost like a reality distortion field was erected before we realized we SHOULD be able to enjoy our own music or pictures without duplicating our giant collections.

I came to post in this same vein. It's 2015 and nobody has implemented simple SMB home streaming.
There are FTP and SMB file sharing programs to help you duplicate stuff to your already-starved-for-space devices. However, you can't just fire up your mp3 and video collection, let alone use playlists.
Probably related to how even in modern linux (and sometimes windows), media players sometimes fail with incomprehensible errors that are fixed if you just do local copy of the files.

Apparently the problem is that
-- at the single-programmer level, people don't care to invest developer time when they can just one-time-copy their collection to their expensive flagship phone where space is more readily available. I have an SD card with 2GB, and it's nowhere near enough between curated 500+mb music, apps and pictures.
-- at the commercial level, copyright/DRM prevents big local-storage players from touching this with a 10-foot-pole. Actually, I remember that Apple released an iTunes update around version 4 to make it harder for you to sniff for and stream internet or LAN files. I'm foggy on the details, but version 3 was perfectly fine.
-- streaming services don't do LANs beause data-mining is good for them.

I have tried Shoutcast, but it is a pain and you can't just do "skip this track" or "find this track" from the clients. And the Winamp client supporting it took a large portion of my available space on the older Froyo phone.

You actually have something there. HDTV's are relatively cheap compared to the original vacuum tube variety that was used for standard definition. Even if you want to buy a 4K HDTV over the now standard 2K (1080p) 15:9 aspect ratio HDTV's you may pay about 10% more. In fact it is possible to set-up a reasonable home theatre (includes HDTV, DVD/BD player, amplifier and speakers) system for under $2000. Of course you could spend ridicules amounts of money on a home theatre system as well.

If you are into watching movies it is actually cheaper to either rent or if you think you may want to watch the movie again then purchase the Blu-ray. Even if that movie is the latest release and costs say $30 it would still be cheaper to purchase and watch with friends and family than go to a movie theatre.

Sigh! when will people learn that Hacking is not a crime. If you are breaking into a computer system or network then you are a "Cracker" and this type of activity is considered a crime.

Yes it is possible to use Hacking skills to produce software that can be used to break into computer systems, however that in itself is not a crime but using that software to break into computing systems is called Cracking and that is a criminal offence. In fact if the law is stupid enough to criminalise Hacking then you would be locking up millions of people and the entire software industry would collapse.

It really isn't hard to distinguish between a Hacker and a Cracker (think "safe-cracker") however it seems most IT reporters continue to get it wrong which in turn confuses non technical people who in turn get it wrong. As for technical people (professional or sub-professional) who confuse the two please hand in your technical credentials :-)

No that is not true. If I create some software I can license it or effectively give it away, although I should have to explicitly state my intentions with regard to the mail and/or software otherwise that mail or software can be considered copyright however I would leave this up to the Lawyers.

If someone stole my mail or anything from my computer then they are effectively "Breaking and Entering" or to use the correct wording "Cracking" which is a crime. Now if that same mail and or software is given without permission from the company or originating user to a person who published it then that person or persons are effectively "Aiding and Abetting" which is also a crime. Again I would leave this up to the Lawyers to sort this out since software and data theft is not quite the same as hardware theft and the debate rages on this still.

Right or wrong I think the best way is to ask the question. If you had your mail and/or software stolen from your PC and that "Cracker" (learn the difference between a Hacker and a Cracker) gave that data to another party who published it on the web, then would you consider legal action against the party who published? It is basically a given that you would be pissed at the "Cracker" and would file legal action if that person could be identified.

If your Xmas was ruined by not being able to play computer games maybe you should find more hobbies.

Xbox down? Go out side.

I remember when the iPhone was released and people said the same thing.

Google is sitting on a mountain of IP for both projects. Some companies look a bit beyond next quarter's results.

That they found debris and human remains is evidence that they found where this plane ended up . . . in contrast with the Malaysia flight where the authorities may never find out what really happened, and people in the affected countries will never be sure of the fate of their family members.

Hmm I suggest the following starting point for an introduction to DDoS and even possible solutions. You should also know that the Microsoft network access was also impacted as well so it was not just Sony.