WGA Ain't So Bad

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

Jon wrote:

Um, that implant is voluntary.

My kitty says otherwise.

It's about the same thing the vet implanted in her neck in case she
escapes the house.

<deadpan> I think they should be mandatory for men.

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Insisting on perfect safety is for people
without the balls to live in the real world.
Mary Shafer Iliff

 

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

IAlias wrote
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/02/washington/02records.html

Except that you don't have any more privacy in any other country, even
less in most, than you did when you lived in the USA. If you really
think that Spain offers you more privacy, well, lets just say you
really are delusional.

I'm not a world traveler, Leythos, but most of my friends are, and many
of my friends are native to other countries, including Spain.

I'm pretty sure the Alias is not delusional anyway, but your statement
makes you sound provincial.

Were it not for the weather, however, I would choose Norway over Spain.

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Insisting on perfect safety is for people
without the balls to live in the real world.
Mary Shafer Iliff

 

[Leythos]

I'm not a world traveler, Leythos, but most of my friends are, and many
of my friends are native to other countries, including Spain.

I'm pretty sure the Alias is not delusional anyway, but your statement
makes you sound provincial.

Were it not for the weather, however, I would choose Norway over Spain.

Today, in the newspaper, interesting stats on Piracy:

Piracy rates held steady in 2005 (meaning number of units pirated), but
the LOSS of revenue increased by more than $1.5 Million!

Interesting that China's piracy rate dropped 4%, but they attribute it
to Government and Educational groups and software being "Pre-Installed"
on machines.

It was also interesting that the BIGGEST piracy rates increased in
several countries: Bolivia, Guatemala, Greece, Italy, Pakistan,
Paraguay, Portigual, and SPAIN!

The USA has the lowest piracy rate in the world, but one in every five
software applications being used is illegal.

Seems like MS has some very valid reasons to implement WGA based on the
above information.

 

[Alias]

Today, in the newspaper, interesting stats on Piracy:

Piracy rates held steady in 2005 (meaning number of units pirated), but
the LOSS of revenue increased by more than $1.5 Million!

You're assuming a couple of erroneous things.

1. There is no way of knowing who has and who hasn't installed pirated
software. These figures are guessestimates.

2. That the people who are using pirated software would buy that
software if forced to. Many people don't have the money you do and a
pirated software is all they can afford. XP pirates would revert to
Linux, W2K or 98. Office pirates would go for OpenOffice or just use
Word Pad.

Interesting that China's piracy rate dropped 4%, but they attribute it
to Government and Educational groups and software being "Pre-Installed"
on machines.

It was also interesting that the BIGGEST piracy rates increased in
several countries: Bolivia, Guatemala, Greece, Italy, Pakistan,
Paraguay, Portigual, and SPAIN!

Software piracy is rampant in Spain. Not only that; they're proud of it.
The cracks for WGA are posted on Spanish Usenet a few days after the
WGA is out.

The USA has the lowest piracy rate in the world, but one in every five
software applications being used is illegal.

Just how do they know that? Have they checked every computer in the USA?

Seems like MS has some very valid reasons to implement WGA based on the
above information.

If you think someone is stealing from you, you call the police or the
FBI. You don't require your paying customers to help you catch the
thief, especially without even asking them first!

Alias

 

[Leythos]

You're assuming a couple of erroneous things.

1. There is no way of knowing who has and who hasn't installed pirated
software. These figures are guessestimates.

2. That the people who are using pirated software would buy that
software if forced to. Many people don't have the money you do and a
pirated software is all they can afford. XP pirates would revert to
Linux, W2K or 98. Office pirates would go for OpenOffice or just use
Word Pad.

I didn't assume anything. I just posted the segments of the article that
seemed relevant here.

Software piracy is rampant in Spain. Not only that; they're proud of it.
The cracks for WGA are posted on Spanish Usenet a few days after the
WGA is out.

That says a lot about the people and government.

Just how do they know that? Have they checked every computer in the USA?

I would imagine that they know about as well as anyone can know. Sort of
like Kurt claiming that there are/were no WMD in Iraq, how would they
know unless they checked every spec of sand in the country and all the
trucks leaving Iraq before we went in?

If you think someone is stealing from you, you call the police or the
FBI. You don't require your paying customers to help you catch the
thief, especially without even asking them first!

Sorry, you're wrong. Piracy has always been fought by the vendors in
various means, this is not the first time people have been required to
validate their software, MS was not the first and won't be the last.

 

[Alias]

I didn't assume anything. I just posted the segments of the article that
seemed relevant here.

OK, the article assumed it. You believed it.

That says a lot about the people and government.

Yeah, we don't have the rich/poor divide you have. We don't have the
homeless you have. The government here cares more about the people than
an obscenely rich multinational. How terrible!

I would imagine that they know about as well as anyone can know. Sort of
like Kurt claiming that there are/were no WMD in Iraq, how would they
know unless they checked every spec of sand in the country and all the
trucks leaving Iraq before we went in?

IOW, they don't know but you believe their guesses anyway.

Sorry, you're wrong.

Sorry, I'm right.

Piracy has always been fought by the vendors in
various means,

That's like saying they lynched hundreds of blacks in the South and,
because they did it before, it's all right to do it now.

this is not the first time people have been required to

validate their software, MS was not the first and won't be the last.

Five times? LOL! If MS wants to know if my copies of XP are legit, they
can make an appointment and, if I have time, maybe I'll let them check
it out. If they think I stole the software, then they should call the
police who will get a warrant and come check what I have. Putting
spyware on my machine is not the way to do it.

Alias

 

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/02/washington/02records.html

Today, in the newspaper, interesting stats on Piracy:

Piracy rates held steady in 2005 (meaning number of units pirated),
but the LOSS of revenue increased by more than $1.5 Million!

Interesting that China's piracy rate dropped 4%, but they attribute it
to Government and Educational groups and software being
"Pre-Installed" on machines.

It was also interesting that the BIGGEST piracy rates increased in
several countries: Bolivia, Guatemala, Greece, Italy, Pakistan,
Paraguay, Portigual, and SPAIN!

The USA has the lowest piracy rate in the world, but one in every five
software applications being used is illegal.

Seems like MS has some very valid reasons to implement WGA based on
the above information.

First of all, this is a non-sequitur to accusing Alias of being
delusional.

Second of all, you haven't cited a source for your statistics. "The
newspaper" means nothing to me, because most newspapers never get it
right. So from whence come these numbers?

But letting both points lie for a moment, let's apply the logic in your
last paragraph. Do you think it would be perfectly reasonable for the US
government to begin tomorrow going door to door and searching for
evidence of...whatever it feels like, as long what it's searching for is
illegal?

Really?

The reason that the USA holds itself superior above all other countries
is because of the freedoms given to its citizens. That's what we say,
anyway. Start taking that away, and what's left?

WGA lets Microsoft into my computer, which is nearly the same as letting
it into my home. I see some people jumping up and down about IP
addresses and demographics, but I'm a little more concerned about my HDD
serial number, because it leads straight back to me.

So not only is Microsoft doing all that I've argued before, it is also,
most definitely, collecting personally identifiable information.

You're trying to defend the indefensible, Leythos. It's like beating
your head against a brick wall.

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Insisting on perfect safety is for people
without the balls to live in the real world.
Mary Shafer Iliff

 

[Leythos]

Do you think it would be perfectly reasonable for the US
government to begin tomorrow going door to door and searching for
evidence of...whatever it feels like, as long what it's searching for is
illegal?

Really?

Yes, if the government has already been given permission to access my
home, by default, then they can come in anytime and look for anything
they want.

Notice how I worded that - just like you authorized MS to do anything
they want with Windows, by default, so you don't really have any counter
position - you've already agreed to let them change anything they want.
Oh, and your question about the Government, well, it really shows how
flawed your thinking is, as you didn't address the same situation.

Microsoft can do anything they want with the OS and I've only got two
choices, live with it or change to a non-MS solution.

 

[Alias]

Microsoft can do anything they want with the OS

Oh, so if they wanted to shove it up your ass, you would bend over?

Alias

 

[Jeff]

Which ; most people are; about WGA.
LOL

Oh, so if they wanted to shove it up your ass, you would bend over?

Alias

 

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:

Yes, if the government has already been given permission to access my
home, by default, then they can come in anytime and look for anything
they want.

There have been different agencies that have tried to operate under that
theory. People have died as a result, and the government has been
adjudged wrong.

Notice how I worded that - just like you authorized MS to do anything
they want with Windows, by default, so you don't really have any
counter position - you've already agreed to let them change anything
they want. Oh, and your question about the Government, well, it
really shows how flawed your thinking is, as you didn't address the
same situation.

My thinking is not flawed, and I did address the same situation.

My EULA specifically says: "This EULA applies to updates, supplements,
add-on components, product support services, or Internet-based services
components, of the SOFTWARE that you may obtain from...."

It does not say that I must accept these updates, etc., nor does it say
that I have agreed to an invasion of my privacy.

Furthermore, it specifies what constitutes my "End User Proof of
License" as follows:

"If you acquired the SOFTWARE on a device, or on a compact disc or other
media, a genuine Microsoft "Proof of License" COA label with a genuine
copy of the SOFTWARE identifies a licensed copy of the SOFTWARE. To be
valid, the label must be affixed to the COMPUTER, or appear on the
SOFTWARE packaging. If you receive the label separately, it is invalid.
You should keep the label on the COMPUTER or packaging to prove that
you are licensed to use the SOFTWARE."

I cannot, on the other hand, find anything in the EULA that requires me
to accept WGA.

But more than that, Leythos, what do you know about what is referred to
as "the public policy"? Because WGA is unconscionable.

Microsoft can do anything they want with the OS and I've only got two
choices, live with it or change to a non-MS solution.

The fact that Microsoft keeps going to court and getting its weenie
whacked should be proof enough that it cannot do anything it wants.

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Insisting on perfect safety is for people
without the balls to live in the real world.
Mary Shafer Iliff

 

[Leythos]

Oh, so if they wanted to shove it up your ass, you would bend over?

And again, you go off kilter. MS can do anything they want with their
products, I didn't say anything about my/your a$$.

 

[Leythos]

My thinking is not flawed, and I did address the same situation.

My EULA specifically says: "This EULA applies to updates, supplements,
add-on components, product support services, or Internet-based services
components, of the SOFTWARE that you may obtain from...."

It does not say that I must accept these updates, etc., nor does it say
that I have agreed to an invasion of my privacy.

Yes, your thinking is flawed. There is nothing that says MS has to
provide updates, you personally elected to allow that function for your
own reasons.

There is nothing that states what they will allow you to PULL to your
machine via Windows Updates, you choose to allow them when you enable
automatic updates or when you manually update your computer.

At no point are you forced to install ANY updates, you made the decision
to install/allow the updates.

You don't have to participate in WGA, but you won't get the benefits
tied to WGA unless you participate, it's your decision.

 

[Alias]

And again, you go off kilter. MS can do anything they want with their
products, I didn't say anything about my/your a$$.

No sense of humor, eh? Why am I not surprised?

My EULA says nothing about allowing MS to install spyware on my machine
so, as usual, you're wrong.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Yes, your thinking is flawed. There is nothing that says MS has to
provide updates, you personally elected to allow that function for your
own reasons.

There is nothing that states what they will allow you to PULL to your
machine via Windows Updates, you choose to allow them when you enable
automatic updates or when you manually update your computer.

At no point are you forced to install ANY updates, you made the decision
to install/allow the updates.

You don't have to participate in WGA, but you won't get the benefits
tied to WGA unless you participate, it's your decision.

Translation:

Customer: I don't want spyware on my computer

Leythos F!ck off then.

Great PR, Leythos.

Alias

 

[Leythos]

Translation:

Customer: I don't want spyware on my computer

Leythos F!ck off then.

Great PR, Leythos.

Wrong, it's more like this:

Customer: I fell for the crap being spewed on Usenet that WGA is spyware
and was to ignorant to determine anything about it for myself.

Customer: Do I want WGA and all the support/updates to continue or do I
want to go it without them?

Customer: WGA isn't a problem as my version of XP is legit and I have
nothing to hide concerning pirated products.

Customer: Installs WGA and goes on working with their computer without
any other impact than the time wasted thinking about the tin-foil hat
wearing zealots.

Lethos: Never notices anything that helps Customer from any of the
posters with a anti-MS rant.

Great that people can actually think for their own, that they can see
through the Spyware claims, that they understand the benefits that don't
cause them any heartache.

 

[Leythos]

No sense of humor, eh? Why am I not surprised?

My EULA says nothing about allowing MS to install spyware on my machine
so, as usual, you're wrong.

As usual, you have to agree to Updates when you select to allow them.
The EULA has nothing to do with something you agree too after the fact.
I expected some distraction from you like this.

Automatic and Manual updates don't just start, you have to agree to
them.

 

[Jeff]

Um,
I think you miss the point;entirely.
Most people don't see that they have the opportunity to NOT download
KB905474. The way KB905474 is distributed;does IN FACT classify;by MS own
standards; as spyware. As to your claim that you have a choice; I would beg
to differ.
Ah, MS states that you have an opportunity to opt-in/opt-out of said
download. Technically,yes. If you pay extremely close attention to
updates;as most people do not. Also they conveniently sidestep this issue of
consent;by the methodology of automatic downloads itself. Consent to have
the choice NOT to download KB905474 is inherentedly precluded;if you use
Automatic Updates. And BTW have had this same discussion with the MS
spokesman of WGA;who could NOT satisfactorily defend the method of
distribution as to NOT be spyware. This issue is not about validating said
o.s. ;it is however;one of deceit;convenient "truths" and out and out lies.
Voluntarily submitting oneself to validation is one thing(Windows Genuine
Validation Tool); constantly having to prove that you are not a
thief(KB905474) is however; bordering on harrassement;at best. Using it's
"trust" from the consumer;MS 1) packages KB905474 as a "high" priority" 2)
Tailor's said "high priority" update(wording and all) deceptively similiar
to Genuine Advantage Validation Tool;to the point of which;many people
assume;1) oh;it's from MS so it must be GOOD; or even better; "darn I
thought I already had that;must be an update. And to further the deception;
if you are astute enough;not to download KB905474; the next time you go to
the download site;a bright yellow
module states" You have chosen to hide "high priority" updates;pls
reinstall,or your computer may be at risk!!!
I think you miss the point entirely;that it is NOT the customer that has
to assume the burden of proof.
And would wonder;as I have used the analogy to death; how you would feel
if you had to "phone home" to GM,Ford;whomever; to "validate" that-in
fact;you were the legal owner/lessee of said vehicle;every SINGLE time you
used it? Oh;and without your knowledge;I might add?
But I guess;that would be O.K. with you,huh?
Point being; there is an arguement for WGA;voluntarily;
There is no acceptable arguement;or rationale;that ANYONE could put forward
as to the methodology of KB905474 being acceptable or even tolerable.
Jeff

 

[Leythos]

I think you miss the point entirely;that it is NOT the customer that has
to assume the burden of proof.
And would wonder;as I have used the analogy to death; how you would feel
if you had to "phone home" to GM,Ford;whomever; to "validate" that-in
fact;you were the legal owner/lessee of said vehicle;every SINGLE time you
used it? Oh;and without your knowledge;I might add?
But I guess;that would be O.K. with you,huh?

When I accepted the licensing and PA and other functions that were built
into Windows, I didn't complain, as I understood the need for them and
accepted them.

When WGA came out, I accepted it for what it is - and I don't have any
issues with it either.

As for a Car, if they start including functions which phone home, then I
will either accept it or I will purchase a different car. As it is, many
new cars track all that you do in them, without your knowledge, without
your permission, and only the Police/Insurance company can access them.

I don't see you complaining about Antivirus software, which updates
nightly with some code that you have no clue about.

If you don't like WGA then stop using Windows and show MS that you're
serious, as your complaints here mean nothing to anyone except the
others wearing the foil hats.

 

[Jeff]

Ah,
Do you know IF I use antivrus stuff? And
many people don't have the luxury to drop Windows;as you say. And; I
again;do not have an issue with WGA;just the method.
Jeff