Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411556 is a reply to message #411555] |
Sun, 03 October 2021 17:14 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>
>>>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>
>>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>
>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>
> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>
> Do you have a source for that assertion?
No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
estimation felt you should not have.
That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
has always amazed me.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Life is perverse.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | It can be beautiful -
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | but it won't.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lily Tomlin
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411557 is a reply to message #411556] |
Sun, 03 October 2021 17:56 |
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Sun, 03 Oct 2021 21:14:46 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
<cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>
>>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>
>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>
>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>
> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
> estimation felt you should not have.
>
> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
> has always amazed me.
>
> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
It's rather distressing the degree to which big corporations will
trust other big corporations. If everything you do runs on computers
that are in someone else's physical posession and all your
communications with those computers travels over a route that neither
of you control, security is pretty much a joke.
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411563 is a reply to message #411557] |
Sun, 03 October 2021 21:56 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-10-03, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2021 21:14:46 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
> <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >
>>>> > The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> > they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>>
>>>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>
>>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>
>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>
>> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>> estimation felt you should not have.
>>
>> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>> has always amazed me.
>>
>> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>
> It's rather distressing the degree to which big corporations will
> trust other big corporations.
It's just as distressing the degree to which individuals will trust
big corporations.
> If everything you do runs on computers that are in someone else's
> physical posession and all your communications with those computers
> travels over a route that neither of you control, security is
> pretty much a joke.
Ditto for the Cloud, in which all your data lives on servers that
you don't control. Even if you could encrypt your data unbreakably,
you're still subject to ransomware attacks (possibly by the owners
of those servers), not to mention accidental loss. I can't see why
more people don't find this obvious and arrange their own backups.
"All your data are belong to us."
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Life is perverse.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | It can be beautiful -
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | but it won't.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lily Tomlin
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411569 is a reply to message #411567] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 03:12 |
|
Originally posted by: Mainlander
On 2021-10-04, Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>
>>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>
>>
>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>
>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>
>> Andy
> No need to be paranoid :P
> Just don''t Interfere in Politics :P
>
>
I remember something about stallman having a key combination in emacs
that would insert dangerous words into text. I don't know if it works
now.
--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411585 is a reply to message #411188] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 11:12 |
|
Originally posted by: Bud Frede
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
> On 05/09/2021 18.28, Grant Taylor wrote:
>> On 9/5/21 3:55 AM, Jason Evans wrote:
>>> First of all, what is "real work"? Let's say that you're a
>>> Linux/Unix/BSD system administrator who spends 90% of his day on the
>>> command line. What is the oldest computer that he could get by with to
>>> do his job?
>>
>> The problem is the remaining 10%. (I'm re-using your numbers.)
>>
>> IMM/RSA/iLO/LOM/iDRAC/etc consoles that are inherently GUI which are
>> invaluable when recovering systems during outages.
>>
>> Don't forget that email clients /almost/ *need* to be GUI to display
>> more than simple text ~> attachments. -- We can't forget the venerable
>> Power Point slides that we need to look at before the next meeting.
>
> I use a pure text mail client a lot of the time.
I use mutt sometimes, but I couldn't really do so for work. There are a
lot of times when clients send me screen captures so I can see the issue
they're running into. I need a way of displaying those or I can't
effectively do my job. A text-only display like was common years ago
just wouldn't work.
Yes, I suppose I could force my clients to decribe what they're seeing
instead of sending a screen capture, but I think they'd find it
frustrating and I don't know how long I'd retain them as clients. (I'd
find it frustrating too, but they're the ones that are paying so I want
to avoid making things awkward of difficult for them.)
I also work a lot with an app suite that has a web GUI with plenty of
graphics and javascript. You can do some management and configuration of
it from a CLI, and I do so. You can even use it to some extent with only
CLI tools. However, my clients don't use it that way - they use the web
GUI.
It might be possible to control the VOIP service I use via the CLI, but
I haven't seen any tools for doing so. (I haven't really looked, but I
did look for ways of accessing it from a Linux system. Someone had
created a very basic app with Electron, but I didn't see anything for
CLI.)
The problem with a lot of this is that, while I might be able to do more
than I am with the CLI, it might not be supported by the vendors I work
with. If there's a DDoS against bandwidth.com and the VOIP service we
use is not working as a result of that, my boss will understand why I
couldn't answer the phone. If I don't or can't answer the phone because
of some unsupported CLI client I insist on using, he's going to be mad
at me because there's a GUI client that runs fine on the computer he
provides me with, and that all the other employees are using on the
computers he provides us with - and I wasn't using it!
I don't mind using a GUI for many things, and I've actually become quite
comfortable and pretty productive in this environment (macOS). I can use
the CLI when I need to, I have most of the same Unix tools at my
fingertips that I would on Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. It's pretty
usable and livable. I've found that I like it enough that I bought a Mac
for myself and use it about half the time for my personal
computing. (The rest of the time I use Linux Mint MATE, or I'm doing
something on one of the handful of Raspberry Pis I have.)
Some days at work I spend most of my time in a terminal, writing scripts
(vim is my preferred editor for most things) or connected to a remote
system via SSH and doing various tasks.
Yes, I am sometimes nostalgic for when I was sitting in front of a
terminal in college using VM/370, or using an Apple ][, dialed into a
BBS using Telix or {Commo}, using one of the Freenets, or Linux at a time
when I didn't have a good video card in the PC I used for Linux and thus
used virtual consoles instead of X. I did have a friend who had a Timex
Sinclair, and we did some learning to use BASIC on it. I've only used
the C64 in an emulator. A former employer used a TRS-80, and I used it a
little. So I do feel a yearning to remind myself of what looking back
seem like simpler times. (They often didn't seem that simple then.)
I can't really get too retro for work though, and when I'm not working,
there are so many things to do - more than I have time for. I tend to do
more modern things. If I want a more simple computing experience, I use
the Raspberry Pi. It feels to me like a hobby computer from when I was
first using personal computers. It's far more powerful than those old
8-bit computers were, but still not nearly as poweful as the servers I
typically work with that have dozens of cores, etc. Sometimes it feels
really nice to be working on a limited system though. It feels like
sometimes I have to be more creative to work within those limits and
still get what I want done.
One thing I do regularly that's pretty retro is read and post to
Usenet. :-) I've moved on from the newsreaders I used in the past, but
gnus is still pretty venerable (it's evidently 34 years old now). I
hadn't really thought about how long it's been around before, or checked
to see when it was first released. From that perspective, almost all of
the newsreaders I used previously were younger than gnus. IIRC, the
Freenets provided rn or nn, or maybe both. Those are both a bit older
than gnus.
Getting back to the topic of the thread... I suppose that the oldest
computer I could use would be something that supports modern
cryptographic software and a modern browser. I'd actually need two
browsers, firefox and chrom[e|ium]. I very occasionally need to try
using the browser that my client is using, and I can reasonably suggest
that they try using either firefox or chrome if they're using something
else. I use chrome for work since it better supports some other software
we use. I do have to fire up firefox from time to time to try to see
what a client is experiencing. I need to be able to run various VPN
clients, need to be able to securely access various things via HTTPS,
need to be able to use ssh and scp to remote systems, and I also need a
mail client that can connect securely to the mail server and I sign all
my messages with PGP and encrypt some of them.
Given that I would also need to be running a current and fully-patched
OS, even if I were able to use Linux for work, I'd probably be looking
at an x86_64 machine. (I'm not sure what the state of 32-bit x86 is for
Linux distros these days. I see that Ubuntu is only x86_64 now.) Even if
I were able to use something older that's 32-bit, the days of that are
probably limited.
I'm not that familiar with the various Intel CPUs for personal computers
since I've typically gone with AMD when possible. I see that AMD64 came
out in 2003 with the Opteron and Athlon64. I guess that would tend to
place a limit of ≥ 2003 for my use.
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411586 is a reply to message #411569] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 11:22 |
|
Originally posted by: Branimir Maksimovic
On 2021-10-04, Mainlander <Mainlander@katamail.com> wrote:
> On 2021-10-04, Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >
>>>> > The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> > they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>>
>>>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>
>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>
>>> Andy
>> No need to be paranoid :P
>> Just don''t Interfere in Politics :P
>>
>>
Well if you wish good and LOVE to world and every single
individual in this Earth, no one will hurt you :P
>
> I remember something about stallman having a key combination in emacs
> that would insert dangerous words into text. I don't know if it works
> now.
Well if you write evil someone will stop you :P
§
>
>
--
7-77-777
Evil Sinner!
to weak you should be meek, and you should brainfuck stronger
https://github.com/rofl0r/chaos-pp
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411597 is a reply to message #411585] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 12:50 |
scott
Messages: 4237 Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> writes:
> "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 05/09/2021 18.28, Grant Taylor wrote:
>>> On 9/5/21 3:55 AM, Jason Evans wrote:
>>>> First of all, what is "real work"? Let's say that you're a
>>>> Linux/Unix/BSD system administrator who spends 90% of his day on the
>>>> command line. What is the oldest computer that he could get by with to
>>>> do his job?
>>>
>>> The problem is the remaining 10%. (I'm re-using your numbers.)
>>>
>>> IMM/RSA/iLO/LOM/iDRAC/etc consoles that are inherently GUI which are
>>> invaluable when recovering systems during outages.
>>>
>>> Don't forget that email clients /almost/ *need* to be GUI to display
>>> more than simple text ~> attachments. -- We can't forget the venerable
>>> Power Point slides that we need to look at before the next meeting.
>>
>> I use a pure text mail client a lot of the time.
>
> I use mutt sometimes, but I couldn't really do so for work. There are a
> lot of times when clients send me screen captures so I can see the issue
> they're running into. I need a way of displaying those or I can't
> effectively do my job. A text-only display like was common years ago
> just wouldn't work.
mutt works for that. From the 'v' screen, just hit enter on the attached
image and if your .mailcap is setup correctly, it will fire up lynx/firefox (for html)
or your favorite image viewer for jpg.
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411598 is a reply to message #411585] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 13:00 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-10-04, Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> I don't mind using a GUI for many things, and I've actually become quite
> comfortable and pretty productive in this environment (macOS). I can use
> the CLI when I need to, I have most of the same Unix tools at my
> fingertips that I would on Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. It's pretty
> usable and livable.
And that's the point. Use the tool that gets the job done for you.
Sometimes I use a GUI because it works better. At other times a CLI
will do the job more easily.
If you're talking about the tools you use to do your own work,
it doesn't matter whether Joe Blow can do it better with a GUI.
He might need 10 minutes using a CLI and 5 minutes using a GUI -
but if you need 5 minutes using a GUI when you can do it in 30
seconds with a CLI, then the CLI is a win for you.
A well-designed GUI will offer keyboard shortcuts so you don't
have to move your hands from the home position (and move them
back afterwards).
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Life is perverse.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | It can be beautiful -
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | but it won't.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lily Tomlin
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411600 is a reply to message #411597] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 14:25 |
|
Originally posted by: Bud Frede
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> writes:
>> "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On 05/09/2021 18.28, Grant Taylor wrote:
>>>> On 9/5/21 3:55 AM, Jason Evans wrote:
>>>> > First of all, what is "real work"? Let's say that you're a
>>>> > Linux/Unix/BSD system administrator who spends 90% of his day on the
>>>> > command line. What is the oldest computer that he could get by with to
>>>> > do his job?
>>>>
>>>> The problem is the remaining 10%. (I'm re-using your numbers.)
>>>>
>>>> IMM/RSA/iLO/LOM/iDRAC/etc consoles that are inherently GUI which are
>>>> invaluable when recovering systems during outages.
>>>>
>>>> Don't forget that email clients /almost/ *need* to be GUI to display
>>>> more than simple text ~> attachments. -- We can't forget the venerable
>>>> Power Point slides that we need to look at before the next meeting.
>>>
>>> I use a pure text mail client a lot of the time.
>>
>> I use mutt sometimes, but I couldn't really do so for work. There are a
>> lot of times when clients send me screen captures so I can see the issue
>> they're running into. I need a way of displaying those or I can't
>> effectively do my job. A text-only display like was common years ago
>> just wouldn't work.
>
> mutt works for that. From the 'v' screen, just hit enter on the attached
> image and if your .mailcap is setup correctly, it will fire up lynx/firefox (for html)
> or your favorite image viewer for jpg.
I was thinking about a system without X or any other framework for a
GUI. For instance, virtual consoles on Linux. I could fire up lynx, but
are there image viewers that don't need X? I know there were for DOS,
but can't remember if I used anything like that on Linux.
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411603 is a reply to message #411598] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 14:32 |
|
Originally posted by: Bud Frede
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
> On 2021-10-04, Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't mind using a GUI for many things, and I've actually become quite
>> comfortable and pretty productive in this environment (macOS). I can use
>> the CLI when I need to, I have most of the same Unix tools at my
>> fingertips that I would on Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. It's pretty
>> usable and livable.
>
> And that's the point. Use the tool that gets the job done for you.
> Sometimes I use a GUI because it works better. At other times a CLI
> will do the job more easily.
>
> If you're talking about the tools you use to do your own work,
> it doesn't matter whether Joe Blow can do it better with a GUI.
> He might need 10 minutes using a CLI and 5 minutes using a GUI -
> but if you need 5 minutes using a GUI when you can do it in 30
> seconds with a CLI, then the CLI is a win for you.
>
> A well-designed GUI will offer keyboard shortcuts so you don't
> have to move your hands from the home position (and move them
> back afterwards).
I try to pay at least some attention to when I'm using the keyboard and
when I'm using the mouse. Then I try to find ways I can avoid using the
mouse when that makes sense. I get thrown off a bit sometimes because
the Mac and my Linux desktop of preference (MATE) do things differently,
but I'm managing.
It's been a process of some years to do this, but it's very satisfying
to learn a new keyboard shortcut and get myself to start using it.
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411619 is a reply to message #411586] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 20:31 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375 Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
> On 2021-10-04, Mainlander <Mainlander@katamail.com> wrote:
>> On 2021-10-04, Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> > On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >
>>>> > Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> > don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>> No need to be paranoid :P
>>> Just don''t Interfere in Politics :P
>>>
>>>
> Well if you wish good and LOVE to world and every single
> individual in this Earth, no one will hurt you :P
>>
>> I remember something about stallman having a key combination in emacs
>> that would insert dangerous words into text. I don't know if it works
>> now.
>
> Well if you write evil someone will stop you :P
>
What’s evil to one may not be evil to another. The crazy Chinese, for
example, seem to want to control anything anyone might say about them.
Free Hong Kong!
--
Pete
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411620 is a reply to message #411556] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 20:32 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375 Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>
>>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>
>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>
>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>
> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
> estimation felt you should not have.
>
> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
> has always amazed me.
>
> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>
I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
--
Pete
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411621 is a reply to message #411620] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 20:59 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >
>>>> > The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> > they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>>
>>>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>
>>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>
>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>
>> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>> estimation felt you should not have.
>>
>> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>> has always amazed me.
>>
>> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>
> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
Need details, exact details to make sense of that story.
If they were purchased from Amazon, there's no problem.
The book is reloaded when you try to access it.
I used to have Amazon's free book deal. Download and read up to 10
books at a time. To get the 11th, you have to return 1. When you
cancel, all books currently in the deal get deleted when you try
to access them.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411622 is a reply to message #411619] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 21:09 |
|
Originally posted by: Branimir Maksimovic
On 2021-10-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>> On 2021-10-04, Mainlander <Mainlander@katamail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-04, Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> > On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> >> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> >> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>> >
>>>> > Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>> >
>>>> > Andy
>>>> No need to be paranoid :P
>>>> Just don''t Interfere in Politics :P
>>>>
>>>>
>> Well if you wish good and LOVE to world and every single
>> individual in this Earth, no one will hurt you :P
>>>
>>> I remember something about stallman having a key combination in emacs
>>> that would insert dangerous words into text. I don't know if it works
>>> now.
>>
>> Well if you write evil someone will stop you :P
>>
> What’s evil to one may not be evil to another. The crazy Chinese, for
> example, seem to want to control anything anyone might say about them.
>
> Free Hong Kong!
YES! Evil is always Evil, we know what's Evil it's inside us :P
--
7-77-777
Evil Sinner!
to weak you should be meek, and you should brainfuck stronger
https://github.com/rofl0r/chaos-pp
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411623 is a reply to message #411621] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 22:29 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375 Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >
>>>> > Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> > don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>>
>>>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>
>>> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>>> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>>> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>>> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>>> estimation felt you should not have.
>>>
>>> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>>> has always amazed me.
>>>
>>> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>>
>> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
>> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
>
> Need details, exact details to make sense of that story.
>
> If they were purchased from Amazon, there's no problem.
> The book is reloaded when you try to access it.
>
> I used to have Amazon's free book deal. Download and read up to 10
> books at a time. To get the 11th, you have to return 1. When you
> cancel, all books currently in the deal get deleted when you try
> to access them.
>
Why Amazon is within its rights to remove access to your Kindle books
https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-amazon-is-within-its-right s-to-remove-access-to-your-kindle-books/
--
Pete
|
|
|
Re: unbooks, was What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411625 is a reply to message #411620] |
Mon, 04 October 2021 22:57 |
John Levine
Messages: 1405 Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
According to Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>:
> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
In 2009, Amazon was notified that the publisher of a Kindle book did not
have the rights to sell the book, so they both removed that edition from the catalog
and also deleted it from all of the Kindles of people who had bought it and refunded
what they'd paid.
The book, inevitably, was Orwell's "1984".
https://gizmodo.com/amazon-secretly-removes-1984-from-the-ki ndle-5317703
They said they wouldn't do it again, but they weren't super clear about
what they consider "it" to have been.
--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
|
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411637 is a reply to message #411619] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 03:42 |
|
Originally posted by: Maus
On 2021-10-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>> On 2021-10-04, Mainlander <Mainlander@katamail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-04, Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> > On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> >> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> >> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>> >
>>>> > Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>> >
>>>> > Andy
>>>> No need to be paranoid :P
>>>> Just don''t Interfere in Politics :P
>>>>
>>>>
>> Well if you wish good and LOVE to world and every single
>> individual in this Earth, no one will hurt you :P
>>>
>>> I remember something about stallman having a key combination in emacs
>>> that would insert dangerous words into text. I don't know if it works
>>> now.
>>
>> Well if you write evil someone will stop you :P
>>
> What’s evil to one may not be evil to another. The crazy Chinese, for
> example, seem to want to control anything anyone might say about them.
>
> Free Hong Kong!
With every pack of cornflakes?
Do a bit of history reading. Hong Kong was set during the opium wars to
ease the smuggling of opium into china. Not England's finest hour.
--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411638 is a reply to message #411620] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 03:45 |
|
Originally posted by: Maus
On 2021-10-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>
>> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>> estimation felt you should not have.
>>
>> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>> has always amazed me.
>>
>> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>>
>
> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
>
I can attest that is true. There used to be a trick that I do not know
still work, you install a pirated copy of something on a windows
machine, and the next time you start up, it is gone.
--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411639 is a reply to message #411621] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 03:47 |
|
Originally posted by: Maus
On 2021-10-05, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >
>>>> > Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> > don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>>
>>>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>
>>> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>>> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>>> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>>> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>>> estimation felt you should not have.
>>>
>>> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>>> has always amazed me.
>>>
>>> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>>
>> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
>> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
>
> Need details, exact details to make sense of that story.
Details are unlikely if you want to remain friends with Amazon.
>
> If they were purchased from Amazon, there's no problem.
> The book is reloaded when you try to access it.
>
> I used to have Amazon's free book deal. Download and read up to 10
> books at a time. To get the 11th, you have to return 1. When you
> cancel, all books currently in the deal get deleted when you try
> to access them.
>
--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!
|
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411648 is a reply to message #411621] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 06:29 |
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Mon, 04 Oct 2021 20:59:45 -0400, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >
>>>> > Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> > don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>>
>>>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>
>>> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>>> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>>> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>>> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>>> estimation felt you should not have.
>>>
>>> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>>> has always amazed me.
>>>
>>> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>>
>> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
>> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
>
> Need details, exact details to make sense of that story.
>
> If they were purchased from Amazon, there's no problem.
> The book is reloaded when you try to access it.
If Amazon removed it, why would Amazon allow you to reload it?
> I used to have Amazon's free book deal. Download and read up to 10
> books at a time. To get the 11th, you have to return 1. When you
> cancel, all books currently in the deal get deleted when you try
> to access them.
That's not what is under discussion.
< https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18am azon.html>
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411649 is a reply to message #411638] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 06:31 |
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On 5 Oct 2021 07:45:45 GMT, Maus <Greymaus@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2021-10-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>
>>> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>>> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>>> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>>> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>>> estimation felt you should not have.
>>>
>>> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>>> has always amazed me.
>>>
>>> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>>>
>>
>> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
>> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
>>
>
> I can attest that is true. There used to be a trick that I do not know
> still work, you install a pirated copy of something on a windows
> machine, and the next time you start up, it is gone.
It doesn't matter what kind of machine you are using. It's the Kindle
software that allowed the removal.
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411655 is a reply to message #411637] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 09:48 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375 Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Maus <Greymaus@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2021-10-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-04, Mainlander <Mainlander@katamail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2021-10-04, Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>>>> > On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> >>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >>>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> >>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Andy
>>>> > No need to be paranoid :P
>>>> > Just don''t Interfere in Politics :P
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>> Well if you wish good and LOVE to world and every single
>>> individual in this Earth, no one will hurt you :P
>>>>
>>>> I remember something about stallman having a key combination in emacs
>>>> that would insert dangerous words into text. I don't know if it works
>>>> now.
>>>
>>> Well if you write evil someone will stop you :P
>>>
>> What’s evil to one may not be evil to another. The crazy Chinese, for
>> example, seem to want to control anything anyone might say about them.
>>
>> Free Hong Kong!
>
> With every pack of cornflakes?
>
> Do a bit of history reading. Hong Kong was set during the opium wars to
> ease the smuggling of opium into china. Not England's finest hour.
>
>
Sure, but most recently they were relatively free and democratic, and were
an financial powerhouse. Now the first two are gone, and the third is
circling the drain.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411658 is a reply to message #411648] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 09:54 |
|
Originally posted by: Maus
On 2021-10-05, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Oct 2021 20:59:45 -0400, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> >> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>> >
>>>> > Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>>
>>>> No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>>>> around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>>>> entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>>>> take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>>>> estimation felt you should not have.
>>>>
>>>> That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>>>> has always amazed me.
>>>>
>>>> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>>>
>>> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
>>> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
>>
>> Need details, exact details to make sense of that story.
>>
>> If they were purchased from Amazon, there's no problem.
>> The book is reloaded when you try to access it.
>
> If Amazon removed it, why would Amazon allow you to reload it?
>
>> I used to have Amazon's free book deal. Download and read up to 10
>> books at a time. To get the 11th, you have to return 1. When you
>> cancel, all books currently in the deal get deleted when you try
>> to access them.
>
> That's not what is under discussion.
IMHO, if you didn't like amazon's policy, you had an alternative. Start
your own ebook selling system, and publish your stuff yourself.
My own policy since leaving school early was, if anyone asked you to do
a job, you did it, regardless of who they were. Once I left a job
because of an argument, and i regret it still.
>
> < https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18am azon.html>
--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411659 is a reply to message #411637] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 10:11 |
scott
Messages: 4237 Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Maus <Greymaus@mail.com> writes:
> On 2021-10-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Well if you write evil someone will stop you :P
>>>
>> What’s evil to one may not be evil to another. The crazy Chinese, for
>> example, seem to want to control anything anyone might say about them.
>>
>> Free Hong Kong!
>
> With every pack of cornflakes?
>
> Do a bit of history reading. Hong Kong was set during the opium wars to
> ease the smuggling of opium into china. Not England's finest hour.
Indeed. Hence their invasion of Kabul in the 1840s and various
idiocies in what is now India and Pakistan, just to secure the
supply line.
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411663 is a reply to message #411658] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 11:49 |
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On 5 Oct 2021 13:54:33 GMT, Maus <Greymaus@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2021-10-05, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Oct 2021 20:59:45 -0400, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>> > On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >>>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> >>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>> >
>>>> > No definite examples, but I did read the entire Windows EULA back
>>>> > around the XP days. I found a clause in which Microsoft claimed
>>>> > entitlement to walk into your machine whenever they felt like it,
>>>> > take a look around, and remove anything which they in their sole
>>>> > estimation felt you should not have.
>>>> >
>>>> > That nobody recognizes automatic updates as a wide-open back door
>>>> > has always amazed me.
>>>> >
>>>> > Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
>>>>
>>>> I know of situations where someone, maybe Amazon, has gone into peoples’
>>>> eReaders and deleted eBooks which they had purchased.
>>>
>>> Need details, exact details to make sense of that story.
>>>
>>> If they were purchased from Amazon, there's no problem.
>>> The book is reloaded when you try to access it.
>>
>> If Amazon removed it, why would Amazon allow you to reload it?
>>
>>> I used to have Amazon's free book deal. Download and read up to 10
>>> books at a time. To get the 11th, you have to return 1. When you
>>> cancel, all books currently in the deal get deleted when you try
>>> to access them.
>>
>> That's not what is under discussion.
>
> IMHO, if you didn't like amazon's policy, you had an alternative. Start
> your own ebook selling system, and publish your stuff yourself.
>
> My own policy since leaving school early was, if anyone asked you to do
> a job, you did it, regardless of who they were. Once I left a job
> because of an argument, and i regret it still.
Well that's all nice but we aren't talking about selling books, we're
talking about buying them and then having bought and paid for them
having them taken back by the book seller.
>> < https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18am azon.html>
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411664 is a reply to message #411655] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 11:50 |
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Tue, 5 Oct 2021 06:48:44 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Maus <Greymaus@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2021-10-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2021-10-04, Mainlander <Mainlander@katamail.com> wrote:
>>>> > On 2021-10-04, Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> wrote:
>>>> >> On 2021-10-03, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>> On 01/10/2021 18:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> >>>> On 2021-10-01, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> On 23/09/2021 02:15, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> The problem is that a lot of updates don't add any real functionality,
>>>> >>>>> they just plug security holes that someone has found.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Or they add security holes when the vendors decide they don't
>>>> >>>> don't have their hooks into you deeply enough.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I'm paranoid, but I'm not _that_ paranoid.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Do you have a source for that assertion?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Andy
>>>> >> No need to be paranoid :P
>>>> >> Just don''t Interfere in Politics :P
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> Well if you wish good and LOVE to world and every single
>>>> individual in this Earth, no one will hurt you :P
>>>> >
>>>> > I remember something about stallman having a key combination in emacs
>>>> > that would insert dangerous words into text. I don't know if it works
>>>> > now.
>>>>
>>>> Well if you write evil someone will stop you :P
>>>>
>>> What’s evil to one may not be evil to another. The crazy Chinese, for
>>> example, seem to want to control anything anyone might say about them.
>>>
>>> Free Hong Kong!
>>
>> With every pack of cornflakes?
>>
>> Do a bit of history reading. Hong Kong was set during the opium wars to
>> ease the smuggling of opium into china. Not England's finest hour.
>>
>>
>
> Sure, but most recently they were relatively free and democratic, and were
> an financial powerhouse. Now the first two are gone, and the third is
> circling the drain.
And China once again snatches defeat from the jaws of victory.
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411682 is a reply to message #411663] |
Tue, 05 October 2021 19:04 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-10-05, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 Oct 2021 13:54:33 GMT, Maus <Greymaus@mail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> My own policy since leaving school early was, if anyone asked you to
>> do a job, you did it, regardless of who they were.
Only if you agree to the terms beforehand.
>> Once I left a job because of an argument, and i regret it still.
If they move the goalposts, walking might be the moral thing to do.
> Well that's all nice but we aren't talking about selling books, we're
> talking about buying them and then having bought and paid for them
> having them taken back by the book seller.
But they don't consider you to have bought them, only rented.
Welcome to the wonderful world of Software as a Service (SaaS).
Its goal is the same as that of Karl Marx: the elimination of
private property. (Large corporations are no longer private
entities, but another layer - or a parallel form - of government.)
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Life is perverse.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | It can be beautiful -
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | but it won't.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lily Tomlin
|
|
|
|
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411692 is a reply to message #411682] |
Wed, 06 October 2021 01:37 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Oct 2021 23:04:31 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> But they don't consider you to have bought them, only rented.
> Welcome to the wonderful world of Software as a Service (SaaS).
> Its goal is the same as that of Karl Marx: the elimination of
> private property. (Large corporations are no longer private
> entities, but another layer - or a parallel form - of government.)
It's a bit less sinister than that, Wall Street investors like
companies that sell open ended rental contracts because they produce
predictable income for years out of each sale and so every sale produces
growth in the company.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|