Solve : no more updates for me?

1.	Solve : no more updates for me?
Answer» Quote from: patio on August 30, 2009, 06:16:19 AM Well he has no use for the EULA agreements....probably why he doesn't know this EITHER. True..He's talking about WGA... it's a completely unnecessary "UPDATE" that used to be classed as a "critical" update, that provided absolutely no functionality other then examining the PC and sending information back to MS on it (or maybe it simply notified the user itself that it was possibly counterfeit, I can't remember all the specifics) nonetheless is caused such a furor that MS reduced it to a "Important" update. The windows update program, which examines the local PC to see what can be updated, runs on the local machine- in a similar FASHION to minesweeper. WGA, onb the other hand, would for most PCs be installed and run silently by pushing it through their update system, despite it being completely unnecessary from the perspective of the end-user.Still hardly spyware when it's from MS. Quote from: Mulreay on August 30, 2009, 09:22:36 AM Still hardly spyware when it's from MS. Microsoft is not above privacy laws... their EULA cannot, under any circumstances, remove rights a person holds from their country's constitution. By the same (if not an extreme example) If you sign a "waiver" for a person to kill you, and they do- they are still on the hook for murder, because it's considered a crime against society rather then an individual. Once you start eroding the rights of the people it breaks down exponentially- this is why the idea is that citizens have certain INALIENABLE human rights, that cannot be REMOVED, via agreement, EULA, or otherwise. Quote from: BC_Programmer on August 30, 2009, 10:10:14 AM Microsoft is not above privacy laws... their EULA cannot, under any circumstances, remove rights a person holds from their country's constitution. By the same (if not an extreme example) If you sign a "waiver" for a person to kill you, and they do- they are still on the hook for murder, because it's considered a crime against society rather then an individual. Once you start eroding the rights of the people it breaks down exponentially- this is why the idea is that citizens have certain inalienable human rights, that cannot be removed, via agreement, EULA, or otherwise. thank you bc_programmerThe British courts have struck down "shrink wrap" EULAs, that is, an end user licence agreement that you cannot read and decide to accept or reject until you have opened the pack. In fact many of them may be illegal (in the sense of "having no force") under The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No 2083) which provide that... "a term which has not been individually negotiated in a consumer contract is unfair (and hence non-binding on the consumer) if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties to the detriment of the consumer."

Answer»

Quote from: patio on August 30, 2009, 06:16:19 AM

Well he has no use for the EULA agreements....probably why he doesn't know this EITHER.

True..He's talking about WGA... it's a completely unnecessary "UPDATE" that used to be classed as a "critical" update, that provided absolutely no functionality other then examining the PC and sending information back to MS on it (or maybe it simply notified the user itself that it was possibly counterfeit, I can't remember all the specifics)

nonetheless is caused such a furor that MS reduced it to a "Important" update.

The windows update program, which examines the local PC to see what can be updated, runs on the local machine- in a similar FASHION to minesweeper. WGA, onb the other hand, would for most PCs be installed and run silently by pushing it through their update system, despite it being completely unnecessary from the perspective of the end-user.Still hardly spyware when it's from MS. Quote from: Mulreay on August 30, 2009, 09:22:36 AM

Still hardly spyware when it's from MS.

Microsoft is not above privacy laws...

their EULA cannot, under any circumstances, remove rights a person holds from their country's constitution.

By the same (if not an extreme example) If you sign a "waiver" for a person to kill you, and they do- they are still on the hook for murder, because it's considered a crime against society rather then an individual.

Once you start eroding the rights of the people it breaks down exponentially- this is why the idea is that citizens have certain INALIENABLE human rights, that cannot be REMOVED, via agreement, EULA, or otherwise. Quote from: BC_Programmer on August 30, 2009, 10:10:14 AM

Microsoft is not above privacy laws...

their EULA cannot, under any circumstances, remove rights a person holds from their country's constitution.

By the same (if not an extreme example) If you sign a "waiver" for a person to kill you, and they do- they are still on the hook for murder, because it's considered a crime against society rather then an individual.

Once you start eroding the rights of the people it breaks down exponentially- this is why the idea is that citizens have certain inalienable human rights, that cannot be removed, via agreement, EULA, or otherwise.

thank you bc_programmerThe British courts have struck down "shrink wrap" EULAs, that is, an end user licence agreement that you cannot read and decide to accept or reject until you have opened the pack. In fact many of them may be illegal (in the sense of "having no force") under The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No 2083) which provide that... "a term which has not been individually negotiated in a consumer contract is unfair (and hence non-binding on the consumer) if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties to the detriment of the consumer."

Solve : no more updates for me?

Discussion

No Comment Found

Related InterviewSolutions

Reply to Comment