Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:To a coward... (Score 1) 361

They say to a hammer, everything looks like a nail. To a frightened small-minded cop, everyone looks like a crook. To an agency charged with protecting a nation against people who keep secrets, everyone looks shifty, and like he has something to hide.

To the hanging judge, every man looks guilty, and to a coward, every man is a terrorist.

Their attitude reflects their mindset: they're a bunch of frightened, small-minded cowards

And this kind of insightful eloquence (from an AC, no less) is the reason I still come to /., despite Dice's best efforts at killing it.

Comment Re:Sue them for all they're worth (Score 1) 495

Uh, no. Because Microsoft's security team didn't put the ex-parte petition together. Microsoft's legal team did. And Microsoft's legal team most definitely gives a big, massive shit about copyright infringement.

MS Legal may have used a lot of information from the security team for their reasoning, but to say it's got nothing to do with copyright infringement because the security team doesn't care about it is incredibly naive.

Comment Re:Sue them for all they're worth (Score 2) 495

And:

No-IP domains are used 93 percent of the time for Bladabindi-Jenxcus infections, which are the most prevalent among the 245 different types of malware currently exploiting No-IP domains.

[Emphasis Mine]

So, Microsoft is alleging that No-IP is assisting (presumably knowingly) in the distribution of malware and that 93% of No-IP's domains are vehicles for malware distribution. Is this true?

I'm guessing that MS intentionally used vague wording for this, with the intent of misleading the judge, but without definitely being at fault for doing it. "No-IP domains are used 93 percent of the time" could mean either "93 percent of all No-IP domains are used for these infections," or it could mean "Out of all the domains used for these infections, 93% of them are No-IP domains." I'm willing to bet that the second is true, but the first is what MS wanted the judge to read into it, and of course, the 93% of malware No-IP domains could be only 0.01% of total No-IP domains.

I'm also willing to bet that MS wanted to do this because of the fact that various Windows KMS servers are set up on No-IP.com hosts, allowing unofficial activation of volume licenced versions of Windows without paying MS a cent.

If I'm right, I really hope the truth comes out in court, and Microsoft gets slapped, HARD, fined by the court, is required to issue a very loud public apology to No-IP, and give them a bundle of cash for damaging their business.

Comment Re:Sue them for all they're worth (Score 1, Informative) 495

I bet it's nothing to do with malware.
It's because there are instructions like this on Facebook, as well as other places.....

**Activate Windows 8 without using crack or patch***
1) Open your command prompt as administrator
2) Type exactly what you see below (Press enter after each line)
slmgr /upk
slmgr /ipk XXXXX-11111-XXXXX-11111-XXXXX
slmgr /skms lunar21.no-ip.org:80
slmgr.vbs -ato
3) Restart your system and enjoy your activated windows 8.
Note: This trick was tested on Windows 8 Professional Retail. Enjoy!!!

Once again, content providers and piracy take precedence over all other interests, business or otherwise.

Comment Re:Weather is NOT climate (Score 1) 567

GP stated figures for the last 60 million years. Your graph covers less than 2.5% of that range, so it doesn't have anywhere near enough data to refute the GP's claim.

However, if you look at the graph of the last 65 million years, you'll see that we are, quite literally, the coldest we've been during that entire period.

Comment Re:Nice Synergy (Score 1) 347

The extent to which they could use this against you is to tell you that you can't claim a charitable deduction for making contributions to these tea party organizations. This isn't quite the jack-booted thugs trampling over your liberties which you seem to imagine. Problematic, certainly, but let's try to have at least a little perspective here.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people see something like this situation, and voice an opinion that basically states:
"I can conceive of a possible worse situation than what we currently have, so let's not bother doing anything about it until it gets to be equivalent to that worse situation."

The problem with this, of course, is that it's ALWAYS possible to conceive of a worse situation than what we're currently in.
Imagine if we did that with our health:
"Well...I'm getting a bit overweight, but I don't need to start exercising, because I'm not dead yet."
"Well, I know I stink, and I'm always short of breath, but I don't need to quit smoking, because I haven't been diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer yet."

Once we get to the point of the worse situation, it's frequently too late to do anything about it.

Comment Re:He also forgot to mention... (Score 5, Insightful) 343

What's more, his analogy actually supports Comcast NOT charging Netflix, rather than the other way around.
Being a Canadian resident, if I want to send a letter to someone in Canada, I pay Canada Post to deliver it.
If, on the other hand, I want to send a letter to someone in a different country, say, the USA, or England, I pay Canada Post to deliver it. I do not have to pay the United States Postal Service or Royal Mail to deliver my letter sent from Canada.

In this analogy, countries and regional postal services are equivalent to ISPs. If I want to send a network packet (letter) to someone on a different ISP (in a different country), I pay my local ISP (postal service) to deliver it. Any ISP (country) beyond that is not my responsibility.

Comment Re:Wait a sec (Score 1) 772

No, the thing about science is that all the successful theories give useful and correct predictions. Religion does not.

Really? Christianity predicts (implicitly, not necessarily explicitly) that people will be dirtbag pricks who will do rotten stuff to get ahead. Seems pretty accurate and useful to me.....

Comment Re:Just Tack on a Fee (Score 1) 626

Why should a car that won't be committing traffic infractions pay a fee for traffic infractions? That doesn't even come close to making sense. That's like saying everyone who puts on a seat belt should pay an extra fee to make up for "lost revenue" from fewer tickets for not wearing a seat belt.

You must be new here. Welcome to government.

Slashdot Top Deals

If the aborigine drafted an IQ test, all of Western civilization would presumably flunk it. -- Stanley Garn

Working...