headkase writes: There is an article countering the FSF's Secure Boot petition over on ZDNet. That article seems to paint Linux users with a broad brush. I don't think that many Linux users are against Secure Boot in itself. Rather we would just like it to be a mandatory part of the UEFI standard that you have the choice to turn it off.
Of course, if you don't wish to ever install Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows XP, or yes, any version of Linux, BSD, or Hackin'Tosh then this is not an issue for you. The question simply is: do you presume to actually own the computer you bought?
headkase writes: Ask Slashdot indeed. If you travel by plane then you have a vested interest in this story. The terrorists are winning. The purpose of terrorism is not to kill as many people as possible but rather to disrupt the systems of your enemy. In the United States terrorists have succeeded brilliantly. The main agency formed to combat terrorism, the TSA, is a reactionary organization. It does not operate by logic but rather operates by "theater". Its purpose is to say that "something is being done" is more important than actually doing something. The TSA is being manipulated by terrorists. Terrorists are succeeding is disrupting the lives and quality of life of millions of Americans daily. Jerks. This "Ask Slashdot" is to generate ideas and seed them into the wider Internet community so that the purposes of terrorism can be more effectively negated. Please contribute any suggestion, criticize and build on any others, and in general act like a Citizen instead of a sheep. Thank you.
headkase writes: Recently I conducted an experiment on slashdot. I started with an issue that has relevance to this community and I sought a community validation for a definitive truth on it. The experiment was to explore whether or not social networks could be used as vehicles of debate to collect, refine, and present opinion. I believe it was successful as I encountered someone who was able to present, and validate to me, a position that was the absolute pragmatic approach that should be taken for the issue in question. If you would like to jump straight to what I believe to be the authoritative answer then please see this: link. The debate in general was about the importance of the public domain, see the instigation of the discussion: here. Now that I have defined global issues in my mind I need mechanics who dwarf my abilities. I have outlined some basics of how to manage a forum that seeks truth through discussion but as an individual compared to the group it could be developed much better by an "us." If you would like to contribute to the mechanics of such a forum, please see a feature request on the Facebook developer forums: here. If you would like to discuss the values associated with it then please see this group: here.
Individually we are relatively intelligent. As a whole we are a juggernaut. Please contribute.
headkase writes: I'd like to preface this with the fact that I have a working prototype that performs well. What has the MPAA prevented in their quest to control how citizens interact with their entertainment media? Right now my setup consists of a "video jukebox". It is composed of a PC networked with an Xbox 360 which is connected to an HDTV via HDMI. Two pieces of software work together to provide the primary functionality. They are "Fair Use Wizard 2" and "Tversity". This is Windows-centric but the organization applies to all systems. Fair Use Wizard 2 is used to rip my DVD collection to the PC. The MPAA is preventing innovation at this point because they have successfully lobbied to categorize the act known as "ripping" a DVD an offense under legislation called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or DMCA. Fortunately I don't live in a Nation that subscribes to this particular idiocy. So, from there. TVersity then handles streaming the video over my home network with the origin of the media being a general purpose PC and the destination after decoding on the Xbox 360 is the HDTV. Tversity not only streams but will transcode on-the-fly if needed to greatly mitigate the formatting issues that could arise. The organization of PC, 360, and Network defines this "video jukebox" as a concrete example of innovation that the MPAA has retarded.
Please add your own examples ideally using no more than two words in combination to describe the purpose of the device.