June 26, 2002 02:30 am, Damian G wrote: <snip> > ..the word is all over the place. lately i've been getting palladium > even in my soup.
I get you Damian. I've read it in too many places myself. The article I linked just seemed to be one of the better analyses of what is proposed/intended. > there's a couple of threads about this already on the lists... Guess I'll have to pay more attention then won't I? :-) Sorry. > however i still think they are going to fail. Let's hope so. It still reminds me of the processor serial number idea Intel tried a few years back but more malevolent. > first of all, in order for their plan to work, they would need to force > every single windoze user to "upgrade" to their paladium hardware, > which i don't think they'll be able to do easily. I didn't think there would be nearly as many people willing to buy the last version of Win 9x as did either. "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity," nor the power of OEMs and hardware manufacturers to play along with anything "His Billness" conceives. Under the heading "anything for a buck." > second, concerning web access/trusted applications, etc... if > about 50% of the internet runs under UNIX/Linux/BSD servers, > which are, of course, not certified by M$ as "trusted", > does this mean that MS's machines will be unable to interact > with 50% of the internet? ( yes, the security of this new hardware > goes as far as web content, which means that it can block "untrusted" > websites ) It's been established as fact for years that MS has as one of it's primary goals the utter control, if not outright 'ownership' of the entire internet. Or at the very least to be able to force others to accept their "embraced and extended" protocols as the defacto standards. Having unfettered influence (ownership?) over any number of those "feeding at the public trough" is one way that may be feasible, since it ain't just Mickeysoft. DMCA, TCPA, PSN, RIAA,DRM, ....... alphabet soup. > > every single attempt to guess the computer world's future based > on this palladuim stuff ( and i mean i've read about it nearly in > every site i went to ) was based upon the suposition that every single > Windows user will be buying this palladium hardware instantly after > it goes out. My guess is: that won't happen. it will probably not > happen at all. not while there's a choice. I again refer you to the Heinlein quote above regarding my perception of the native intelligence of a large portion of the human race. The vast majority can't think at the best of times. Not creatively or independently at any rate. Case in point? Have you actually paid any attention to the absurd marketing schemes on TV/Radio/Newspapers/Websites? Would anyone that can think spend money on anything being promoted by such abysmally stupid advertising campaigns? Those same people will buy whatever they're told to by a large enough or "clever enough" marketing campaign. > would you buy a computer that doesn't let you download MP3 files > from websites or with filesharing proggies? Myself? Not in this lifetime. I don't do filesharing, but it's nice to know that I could if I chose. At presnt anyway. For a while longer? > would you buy a computer that decides for you wether the code > inside of a program is "trustworthy", and thus tells you which > programs you can run and which you cannot? i mean, imagine this > situation: i've just finished coding a small demo for a little game > i'm making. > let's say i want you to test it and tell me what you think. > but, aha, you got the palladium machine, and when my binary > file arrives to your computer, it cannot run because i have > not certified my little beta proggie to run with your windoze... Again; no. I'd be more inclined to trust a thief in a bank vault or a weasel in a chicken coop personally. Or any politician, or group of them, with control of any spending or legislation without any checks and balances. (Woops redundant, sorry.) I understand your points, and the reason I said I'd go troglodyte first was just that. From what I've seen on this and other GNU/Linux users lists there isn't a problem with those that have chosen to use open source software. It's the drones that succumb to the "Windows Upgrade" virus that will; and they're still the vast majority of computer users on this planet. Not developers; not contributors to open source in any way; even only in a willingness to use open source software and report any bugs, then share experiences with others using it. Or only to use it and try to learn more. Most of these people have already chosen to think for themselves. I'm worried about the ones that still whine that "Linux is too hard!" There are a lot of them. > ... at this poit i even begin to wonder how will self-extracting > compression utilities ( as self-extracting winZIP or winRAR exe files) > will manage to keep up! what if i need to compress and send to a machine > that doesn't have a licensed copy of winzip? will a self-extracting > file need to be "certified" in order to run and uncompress my docs? > will the receiving computer think my .exe attachment in an e-mail > is risky and therefore won't let it open? The only hope that I have against the scheme is such logistics problems. I don't think that a person or group of people intelligent enough to make it work would ever build such a system. Actually I pray not, but I'm probably wrong. > if not, how will this system tell the difference between: > > a) i'm trying to send you a program > > and > > b) my machine got infected with a virus which is forwarding itself > into your machine using my e-mail contacts list > > i mean.. if i'm not trusted, i cannot send you a perfectly legal > file, but then again, if i really am trusted, i may be able to > send you a virus anyway!! If a person can devise a tool to make any of this possible there _will_ be another person clever enough to break it. I hope the breakage happens before the proposal gets off the ground myself. > i sincerely hope they go along with their plan. it will be nice > to watch them bite the dust and lose a couple hundred billions... MS has made billions through "knowing what makes the frog jump." I wouldn't want to wish hardship on anyone. Unless they were engineering their own demise through greed and arrogance. In other words I agree. To a point. > ..and anyway, this still feels like it's..... uhmm.. what's the word... > imaginary? fiction?.. something like that.. i simply don't see it > happening in the near future. a lot of things would have to make > big changes... My fondest hope is that this never gets off the ground Damian. However, Microsoft knows their target audience, do they not? There's so little personal freedom left on this planet that the whole thing feels like a nightmare. To take the last freedoms away. Privacy. The internet. > ... what do you think? tell me. > > Damian I think life is stranger than fiction, and I hope you're correct. But I dread what develops if you aren't. -- Charlie Edmonton,AB,Canada Registered user 244963 at http://counter.li.org There must be at least 500,000,000 rats in the United States; of course, I never heard the story before.
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
