Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 192 posts

Re: Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

#131

Post by nickjj »

jedieaston wrote: post #96
unicornfinder wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If memory serves the group policy setting does work but only on the Enterprise version of Windows 10.

Just checked: in Windows 8.1 (and therefore, all versions of Windows 10), the "Don't search the web or display web results in Search" Group Policy works fine in Pro/Enterprise/Education/Business. The "Disable Microsoft Consumer Experiences" one only works in Enterprise/Education, however. If you are on Home, and don't have gpedit.msc, make a new DWORD in "Computer\HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows…

On my Windows 10 Pro 20.04 edition, that group policy has no effect. The only way to get rid of it was to use the registry edit you've also referenced.

Re: Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

#132

Post by iso1631 »

Ntrails wrote: post #80
smolder wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bad move for MS. It's user hostile enough to have telemetry and ads in the OS in the first place. If they fight against people's efforts to make it usable again, they lose market share, developers/power users lose interest in the platform, less software gets bought from and made for their store, and so on. I think what they really need is a pro version of Windows that attracts pro users by removing the bull…

> It's user hostile enough to have telemetry and ads in the OS in the first place. I may be alone, but I think those two things are very different classes of feature, and am very relaxed about the former as an opt out.

I'm happy about the former as an opt in, and where I can target which server I want the data to go. Could be quite handy actually.

Re: Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

#134

Post by mrkstu »

redis_mlc wrote: post #125
jeroenhd wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyright law does not grant you tge right to spread something you downloaded even if it was free. The original rights holder may decide who can and cannot host what part of their product for what reason. Free software usually permits you to redistribute the software you download, but there's no such freedom in closed source software. This is part of the "free as in speech" qualifier of open source software. Microsof…

> Copyright law does not grant you the right to spread something you downloaded even if it was free. Software source code is copyrightable (to a large extent, for the past 30 years) in the US, but a program exe might not be as there's no artistic expression at all in the bit pattern alone. So an exe might just fall under license terms. Source: I have successfully filed software copyrights and trademarks.

An OS iso is going to have a multitude of copyrighted assets beyond complied programs.

Re: Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

#135

Post by sjwright »

redis_mlc wrote: post #125
jeroenhd wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyright law does not grant you tge right to spread something you downloaded even if it was free. The original rights holder may decide who can and cannot host what part of their product for what reason. Free software usually permits you to redistribute the software you download, but there's no such freedom in closed source software. This is part of the "free as in speech" qualifier of open source software. Microsof…

> Copyright law does not grant you the right to spread something you downloaded even if it was free. Software source code is copyrightable (to a large extent, for the past 30 years) in the US, but a program exe might not be as there's no artistic expression at all in the bit pattern alone. So an exe might just fall under license terms. Source: I have successfully filed software copyrights and trademarks.

That's so wrong it's almost painful. Copyright is the only reason why anyone pays attention to the license associated with compiled software. What would be the point of a license for an artefact not protected by copyright?

It also is absurd to suggest that there is artistic expression in source code but not in a direct translation of that same artistic expression.

And it's also worth remembering that binaries contain more than just executable machine code—they also contain strings, bitmaps etc. Are you claiming that strings and bitmaps cannot be copyrighted too?

Re: Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

#136

Post by BoysenberryPi »

Elinvynia wrote: post #127
selectodude wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nvidia has always had super high quality Linux drivers. It’s their lack of desire to open source pieces of them to make them work better with desktop Linux that is the issue. I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of Nvidia GPUs used on Linux don’t have a screen connected to them, so supporting wayland isn’t really a priority.

It's really hard to consider these drivers "high quality" if they don't even work with Wayland properly.

Why would Nvidia care about supporting Wayland at this point in time? Steam itself doesn't even work properly with Wayland. 9 of 10 people are going to be using X right now and within the near future.

Re: Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

#138

Post by iso1631 »

redis_mlc wrote: post #125
jeroenhd wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyright law does not grant you tge right to spread something you downloaded even if it was free. The original rights holder may decide who can and cannot host what part of their product for what reason. Free software usually permits you to redistribute the software you download, but there's no such freedom in closed source software. This is part of the "free as in speech" qualifier of open source software. Microsof…

> Copyright law does not grant you the right to spread something you downloaded even if it was free. Software source code is copyrightable (to a large extent, for the past 30 years) in the US, but a program exe might not be as there's no artistic expression at all in the bit pattern alone. So an exe might just fall under license terms. Source: I have successfully filed software copyrights and trademarks.

That's a crazy viewpoint, I've never signed any license agreement with microsoft, but if I were to have a copy of a windows 10 ISO, or even just calc.exe, I wouldn't be allowed to share it

Re: Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

#139

Post by pixxel »

Mikhail_K wrote: post #137

If somebody still wondered, why Microsoft acquired Github, this article provides the answer. They bought the ability to control major distribution point of non-proprietary software and shut down at will any perceived threats.

They paid $7.5B to delete code repositories? What about all the other non github repository hosts, not forgetting self-hosted, torrents etc.

Re: Removing “Annoying” Windows 10 Features Is a DMCA Violation, Microsoft Says

#140

Post by sloshnmosh »

There are several companies and even security companies that modify Windows 10 and remove unwanted programs.

A couple that come to mind are Malwarebytes "Adwcleaner" and FireEye's "commando-vm" (found on Github).

But I do see a problem with Ninjutsu OS offering an preconfigured Windows ISO as others have mentioned.

I think Ninjutsu OS will be allowed to continue if they just offer some tools and scripts to modify a "normal" Windows10 iso instead like FireEye does.

Also, I hads never heard of Ninjutsu OS until now. I will be looking forward to playing with it. (Streisand Effect)

Post reply on HN