Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Windows

+ - MS Tells Best Buy Employees Lies About Linux->

Submitted by jimmi_hendrix
jimmi_hendrix (1562941) writes "According to http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/09/microsoft-teaches-best-buy-employees-how-to-troll-linux-users.ars, Microsoft is distributing slides to Best Buy employees that are designed to train them to give windows to all customers looking at netbooks because of many incorrect Linux myths. Including that Linux is unsecure, there are no step by step tutorials, and that updates are hard (and apparently weekly updates for installed packages are bad...). Also, many things are alluded to that are false, like that there is no way to run your favorite game in Linux and that Linux downloads are not free."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Ghost in the Shell (Score 1) 196

by Teferison (#29282651) Attached to: Augmented Reality In a Contact Lens
You seem to have missed some of the darker shades of the GiTS future. Do you remember that they didn't even own their own body, because only the government and/or high profile criminals could finance such hardware?
So only the very rich could enhance their body any way they like, creating a world where a persons value is tied even stronger to their wealth

Comment: Re: potential diplomatic damage (Score 1) 154

by Teferison (#28633675) Attached to: WikiLeaks' Daniel Schmitt Speaks

I merely added "after the event" to exclude ongoing investigations and operations. Although I'm not a big fan of wars, I can understand how some general wouldn't like the position of his snipers broadcasted in realtime.

However I don't think the public should be kept in the dark about these operations indefinitely, therefore I can't agree with your examples, except maybe the UFOs.

Comment: Re: potential diplomatic damage (Score 1) 154

by Teferison (#28623133) Attached to: WikiLeaks' Daniel Schmitt Speaks

Publishing information that is classified is certainly unlawful, but it's not the same as "taking the law into your own hand". They don't judge the parties involved, but merely allow the public to come to their own conclusions.

Of course some people can and probably are misusing sites as wikileaks to further their own agendas, by only posting documents that support their side of the story. But is in this case the damage done by the information that the "lesser knowledgeable individuals" received or by the information that was withheld?

I'm not saying that every information should be available to everyone at any time, but I do believe(because it's hard to prove) that more damage has been done by missing or false information then by exposure of information that should not have been available to the public.

BTW: What would be a good example for information that should been kept secret (indefinitely/ longer then one month after the event)?

Comment: potential diplomatic damage (Score 1) 154

by Teferison (#28595635) Attached to: WikiLeaks' Daniel Schmitt Speaks

They do this without realizing the potential impact to national security or potential diplomatic damage

Would you prefer that none learns of human rights abuses, executions or torture and therefore everyone believes your country is "good", or that the world knows and your country is forces to become "better" in order to improve its public image?

Comment: Re:Scary that they sold the disk at all (Score 1) 369

by Teferison (#27859213) Attached to: Unclean Military Hard Drives Sold On eBay
It doesn't have to end up as a constant magnetization for someone to be able to recover the data. A predictable pattern would suffice.
Actually not even overwriting the disc with random data might be enough to ensure that noone can recover the data. Dedicated forensic experts can read overwritten data, by distinguishing between a 0 -> 1 and a 1 -> 1 magnetization (Simplified example).

Comment: Malice? (Score 1) 414

by Teferison (#27797387) Attached to: Linux Reaches 1% Usage Share
You're quoting the first sentence and conclude:

the phrase "market share" means that they are only counting things that are purchased

Even though the second sentence says:

This data is derived by aggregating the traffic across our network of websites that use our service

It is hard to believe that this was a honest mistake.

I have never seen anything fill up a vacuum so fast and still suck. -- Rob Pike, on X.

Working...