Slashdot Mirror

"How does said "REAL artist" eat? Or buy art supplies?"

Obviously they eat from the royalties on the books they cannot get anyone to publish. Did you not read the choice given?

Burn the book versus let it be read for free.

Your solution only stands a chance of working where other options are before the artist.

Here are some links to some of my work which can be had for free:

http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A %22drew%20Roberts%22
http://zbcw.sourceforge.net/

and a link where you can buy some of the same stuff:

http://www.lulu.com/zotz

Knock yourself out.

I am still able to eat. Actually, I should probably eat a little less and I most certainly should excercise a lot more.

Then again, perhaps I am not one of those REAL artists either.

all the best,

drew

"People on these forums throw around terms like socialist or communist whenever they don't like things, often in response to policies which clearly are meant to grant/protect control over private property-including one's words or ideas, a basic tenet of free-market capitalism."

While I agree that people like to throw around terms without reference to their underlying meanings, I fail to see how the government granted monopolies inherent in copyrights and patents have anything to do with a free market. Capitalism perhaps, free market? no.

all the best,

drew
--
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A %22drew%20Roberts%22

'The lawsuit claims that Google's scanning and digitizing of library books as a part of the Google Print Project constitutes "massive copyright infringement".,
-----
"It's not up to Google or anyone other than the authors, the rightful owners of these copyrights, to decide whether and how their works will be copied."
-----
"Contact: Paul Aiken
staff@authorsguild.org

NEW YORK -- The Authors Guild and a Lincoln biographer, a children's book author, and a former Poet Laureate of the United States filed a class action suit today in federal court in Manhattan against Google over its unauthorized scanning and copying of books through its Google Library program."
-----
The last quote above from this link:

http://www.authorsguild.org/news/sues_google_citin g.htm

They seem to be claiming that it is the actuallcopying that is infringing.

all the best,

drew
--
http://www.archive.org/audio/audio-details-db.php? collection=opensource_audio&collectionid=drnippers
Hanging Our At Nippers
Carries a Creative Commons BY-SA License

SpecOpS Labs slaims in 1 year time-lapse...

1. We are developing our own "technology" to run Windows apps under Linux.
2. Oops! Urm... Yeah, Wine. It turns out our developers lied to us and took shortcuts. But we are using only parts of Wine and "optimizing" those parts to be able to run Windows apps.
3. Uhm... Yeah. We're still working on Project "David". Talk to you later...
4. Err... (shifts gaze left and right) We're stuck with this teeny-tiny problem that Pagemaker still has a few glitches in it. But honest and truly, we have the best programmers in the Philippines working on "David" right now.
5. Uh... Our programmers left. We'd pay Random J. Hacker $10,000 to develop XP compatible "modules" for Wine. But you only have 15 days to do it.

The VC's who put their money into SpecOpS Labs are probably itching to get their ROI by now. They probably burned through their capital funding and now the VC's want some returns, or at least a product that can be marketed. These guys are desperate now. $10,000 is probably the only money they have left and the VC's won't give them anything more unless they come up with something.

I always thought these people were just VC fishers.

See also their previous page with buzz-word laden spiels, and outlandish claims.

Google uses OCR for their books. It's not horrible, but it's far from perfect. If you looked at the text that the OCR output, it'd look like... well, like OCR output. But you see the page image, not the OCR'd text, and that's good enough for what it's doing.

What would be useful would be for Google to release the scanned pages of public-domain books, much like the Million Book Project does, so that they could be spiffed up properly by Distributed Proofreaders and made into high-quality ebooks distributed by Project Gutenberg.

Who knows; maybe they'll even do that.

"or research"

Google could easily be doing this for purposes of research and could claim that.

It is not like having a searchable index of every book in print is useless for research purposes.

That said, I have no idea if they are actually doing it for purposes of research.

The research interests could exist on more than one level.

all the best,

drew
--
http://www.archive.org/audio/audio-details-db.php? collection=opensource_audio&collectionid=dragirl
There's A Girl

"If I want to distribute an author's book I need to ask permission."

Can you or anyone else reading this define for us what is meant legally by distributing a book? Does the author selling a book to you at wholsale automatically give you the right to sell (distribute?) it at retail? Or would you still need the author's permission after having bought a thousand copies?

all the best,

drew
--
http://www.archive.org/audio/audio-details-db.php? collection=opensource_audio&collectionid=JohnConst antakisdrewRobertsRainwaterBlues
Rainwater Blues

Perhaps he is indicating that the having the right to make copies of a work does not necessarily the right to distribute said copies whereas having the copyright on the work would?

all the best,

drew
--
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A %22drew%20Roberts%22

Other investigators have examined the physiology of cursing, how our senses and reflexes react to the sound or sight of an obscene word. They have determined that hearing a curse elicits a literal rise out of people. When electrodermal wires are placed on people's arms and fingertips to study their skin conductance patterns and the subjects then hear a few obscenities spoken clearly and firmly, participants show signs of instant arousal.

Did they also bother checking what happens if you look at certain pictures?

I've only had 1 problem so far. I got a copy of Night of the Living Dead that was scrathed to hell.

Maybe Tony should really be worried about the Bookmobile (http://www.archive.org/texts/bookmobile.php) which makes the information free and just charges for the printing - a true purification of the business model.

Anyway, how is this different from the million books project over at http://www.archive.org/details/millionbooks ?

Maybe Tony should really be worried about the Bookmobile (http://www.archive.org/texts/bookmobile.php) which makes the information free and just charges for the printing - a true purification of the business model.

Anyway, how is this different from the million books project over at http://www.archive.org/details/millionbooks ?

Uh... Yes it was.

Ah, the revisionist view of the Mozilla Foundation claims another victim.

From the webpage:

Phoenix is a redesign of the Mozilla browser component, similar to Galeon, K-Meleon and Chimera, but written using the XUL user interface language and designed to be cross-platform.

Note the word 'redesign', not 'replacement.' When Phoenix was forked, it was intended to be used by people who only wanted a web browser, and wanted it to look and feel like the rest of their applications. It was not meant as a replacement for the suite, but rather, an alternative, for people who did not need an email client. In fact, up until March of this year, new features were added to the 1.8 branch of Mozilla before they were backported to Firefox and Thunderbird. It wasn't until after the Mozilla Foundation (a corporate entity intended to replace the Mozilla project) took over that the suite was dropped.

• There is no back door in Renegade. If you find someone claiming there is one, ask them to demonstrate it for you. They can't.
• A backdoor is not a bug, or a screwup by a sysop. A backdoor is a piece of code intentionally put in a software package to allow the author to get unauthorized access.
• If some idiot gives sysop access to someone, and that person hacks his BBS, that is not a backdoor.
• If you run a door game that changes or displays passwords allowing someone to hack your BBS, this is called a trojan, not a backdoor.
• If somebody breaks into your house, and steals your computer, that's not a backdoor, although they might've used one to get into your house.

Read about it here. The URL on that site is broken, so if you want to read more, try this http://www.microsoft.com/backstage/bkst_column_46. mspx">archive.org link

For those who don't live in the US: http://web.archive.org/web/20041010170233/http://w ww.sho.com/site/ptbs/topics.do?topic=r

"Nonsense. Mono is quite clean of Microsoft intellectual "property". There is no legal threat to the Mono project."

*said by a Novell representative* Oh, wait!

http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=11889&comm ent_id=32499

"1. It is not illegal to use mono or to develop mono.
2. C#/.net libraries are ECMA standards

However,

1. Microsoft has the right to charge a RAND (reasonable and non-descriminatory) fee at any time for the use of these standards.
2. They have never, ever, stated in any binding way that they would not do so in the future.
3. *any* fee, even minimal would result in the instant death of any OSS project dependent on those standards.
4. RAND can (and frequently does in the proprietary software world) mean several dollars per download! Or requiring build licenses for all developers producing binaries (every end user of gentoo for example!) that are in the hundreds of $ range. These are all reasonable and non-descriminatory in that context!

Miguel De Icasa and Ximian/Mono people *know* this full well but don't want to admit how dangerous mono adoption is for the gnome community. They cite a BS casual mailing list post from the head engineer of .net as their claim that MS will never sue.

See how much crap this is for yourself (from official Mono faq):

http://web.archive.org/web/20030609164123/http://m ailserver.di.unip.....
http://www.go-mono.com/faq.html#patents

Jim Miller's off hand email is the *only* assurance anyone has every received that MS would never charge a RAND fee! If this were truly MS's commitment then they could release a statement or legally commit themselves to that! This email is not not not legally binding people! Until MS makes a legally binding agreement to never charge for use of these standards, it is not ok to use mono!

See also Seth Nickels' blog on this subject "Why Mono is currently an unnacceptable risk":

http://www.gnome.org/~seth/blog/2004/May

The two main arguments against what I'm saying are realy crap also:

1. Java is also proprietary: Yes but Sun has licensed Java in such a way that they are legally prohibited from charging *any* royalties at all for existing releases of Java. We know with 100% certainty that Sun will never try and collect any RAND fee. Ever. The situation with Java is totally different for this reason.
2. You are always infringing somewhere, worrying about this is wasting your time: True, there is always a danger of unknowingly infringing. However, in this case mono is knowingly using patented software. If MS decided to collect or sue, mono and gnome would have absolutely zero defense! Furthermore, MS is well known for destroying threatening companies when it suits them to do so! They have done this many times in the past. Remeber how they *lost* an anti-trust lawsuit? It is because they are agressive, unscrupulous and incredibly rich. They can and will crush gnome if gnome threatens MS! Mono is the ultimate submarine. We build it, integrate it so gnome can't live without it, then they kill gnome by charging for builds. Bam. Gnome is dead on that day.

Take Away: Mono is cool but way too dangerous. Smart people and companies are staying away from it (which turns out to be *most* companies bye the way. That is why Redhat and others are pushing Java as an alternative). People who back mono either have motive (ximian), are misinformed (most of the people on this forum), or just dumb (people who are really drooling over the potential of mono so they are ignoring the risk, probably ximian and some gnome developers again)"

1. It is not illegal to use mono or to develop mono.
2. C#/.net libraries are ECMA standards

However,

1. Microsoft has the right to charge a RAND (reasonable and non-descriminatory) fee at any time for the use of these standards.
2. They have never, ever, stated in any binding way that they would not do so in the future.
3. *any* fee, even minimal would result in the instant death of any OSS project dependent on those standards.
4. RAND can (and frequently does in the proprietary software world) mean several dollars per download! Or requiring build licenses for all developers producing binaries (every end user of gentoo for example!) that are in the hundreds of $ range. These are all reasonable and non-descriminatory in that context!

Miguel De Icasa and Ximian/Mono people *know* this full well but don't want to admit how dangerous mono adoption is for the gnome community. They cite a BS casual mailing list post from the head engineer of .net as their claim that MS will never sue.

See how much crap this is for yourself (from official Mono faq):

http://web.archive.org/web/20030609164123/http://m ailserver.di.unip.....
http://www.go-mono.com/faq.html#patents

Jim Miller's off hand email is the *only* assurance anyone has ever received that MS would never charge a RAND fee! If this were truly MS's commitment then they could release a statement or legally commit themselves to that! This email is not not not legally binding people! Until MS makes a legally binding agreement to never charge for use of these standards, it is not ok to use mono!

See also Seth Nickels' blog on this subject "Why Mono is currently an unnacceptable risk":

http://www.gnome.org/~seth/blog/2004/May

The two main arguments against what I'm saying are realy crap also:

1. Java is also proprietary:

Yes but Sun has licensed Java in such a way that they are legally prohibited from charging *any* royalties at all for existing releases of Java. We know with 100% certainty that Sun will never try and collect any RAND fee. Ever. The situation with Java is totally different for this reason. Even if Sun changed its mind or was purchased by a less generous company (like MS for example), existing releases of Java and alternative implementations based on existing released specs would always remain free as in beer. The no version of the .net ecma standards ever has been comparably free.

2. You are always infringing somewhere, worrying about this is wasting your time:

True, there is always a danger of unknowingly infringing. However, in this case mono is knowingly using patented software. If MS decided to collect or sue, mono and gnome would have absolutely zero defense! Furthermore, MS is well known for destroying threatening companies when it suits them to do so! They have done this many times in the past. Remeber how they *lost* an anti-trust lawsuit? It is because they are agressive, unscrupulous and incredibly rich and illegal monopoly that used its power to destroy competition. They can and will crush gnome if gnome threatens MS! Mono is the ultimate submarine. We build it, integrate it so gnome can't live without it, then they kill gnome by charging for builds. Bam. Gnome is dead on that day.

Take Away: Mono is cool but way too dangerous. Smart people and companies are staying away from it (which turns out to be *most* companies by the way. That is why Redhat and others are pushing Java as an alternative). People who back mono either have motive (ximian), are misinformed (most of the people on this forum), or just dumb (people who are really drooling over the potential of mono so they are ignoring the risk, probably ximian a

1. Netscape the company is long gone. There are a few people left, but 99% of the "original" 4000 or so employees who had an @netscape.com email address moved on. Look at people.netscape.com and compare it to this archived version from 2000.
2. The brand has already been repeatedly scuttled by (among other things):
   1. the squandering of the server assets by AOL (to the benefit of Sun)
   2. the missed opportunity for AOL to run on Netscape products.
   3. the "Netscape Online" ISP that failed to ignite much interest.

Just be thankful that the Mozilla Foundation is independent of AOL.

I found some of your stuff from ps2insider.com. I am not one to judge the writing quality of anyone (because mine is horrible) but here is the link to ps2insider for the curious.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020614222912/www.ps2i nsider.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=FAQ&file=in dex&myfaq=yes&id_cat=1&categories=Bag+1:+Playstati on+2+Trouble+Shooting+and+General+Questions

Here is your report on a Mike Tyson fight:

Mike Tyson Has Been Defeated
Author: Dominicp2i on Sunday, June 09 @ 01:10:03 EDT

My personal wait of over 10 years for this fight between Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson has finally come and gone.

Lennox Lewis started out the fight with some dirty tactics and holding, and Mike Tyson held his ground in a fight that was not meant for him to win. Mike Tyson took every punch and hold and stayed right with Lennox till the end. Ultimately Lewis' height and reach advantage would prove to be just too much for "Iron Mike" to overcome, especially at this point in his career.

Not too many were behind Tyson, nor did most expect him to have even a chance at glory, but he proved tonight that he is a true champion and in the end just as heart felt and normal as the next guy. Graciously accepting his defeat, and bowing out to his opponents superior skill, Mike Tyson may have lost the fight but won the war.

It was a great fight, with anticipation soaring, and in the end there can be only one... so from a Mike Tyson fan through and through: Congratulations Lennox Lewis.

I believe EU iPods have a volume limit anyway, but this is easily removed.

But the Gmail address has been in use since 96... http://web.archive.org/web/19961225230437/http://g mail.com/
which then was bought Net Concept http://web.archive.org/web/20020531002509/http://g mail.com/

But the Gmail address has been in use since 96... http://web.archive.org/web/19961225230437/http://g mail.com/
which then was bought Net Concept http://web.archive.org/web/20020531002509/http://g mail.com/

And according to this Internet Archive they did in fact had a gMAIL product of sort back in May 2002. Earliest archive of that page is actually from November 2000.

And according to this Internet Archive they did in fact had a gMAIL product of sort back in May 2002. Earliest archive of that page is actually from November 2000.

gmail had releases until at least 2001; see http://web.archive.org/web/20010515203826/http://g mail.linuxpower.org/ And there was an earlier gmail by Richard Wiggins, released in 1993, which was a gopher-based event calendar with some email integration; See http://groups.google.com/group/comp.infosystems.go pher/msg/b51069df9005af1b

See http://web.archive.org/web/19991008021142/http://g mail.linuxpower.org/ So the name was already in common use and not trademark-protected well before the plaintiff's service launched, I bet.

http://web.archive.org/web/20001203002400/http://w ww.iarchitect.com/qtime.htm

Remember that it was Apple who sat on their high horse and said that every app look, feel and behave consistently. It made sense too. But then for reasons best known only to theirselves, decided that consistency was boring and have been changing UIs from one release to the next ever since. And each time there is more and more of that wretched "brushed metal".

Microsoft has occupied a peculiar middle ground. You can always bet for example that MS Office will dump whatever look and feel was used previously and then there will be a few years where every app tries to emulate the new look before the cycle repeats. For a while, apps could pick up the new look by using the common controls but even the common controls look antiquated these days and are full of horrible hacks for backwards compatibility.

The worst offender of them all is Unix (including Linux) where there are multiple competing widget sets and multiple competing themes. It's a wonder the platform survived before GNOME & KDE considering the combined might of IBM et al had come up with the shittiest widget set ever - Motif. Even these days with UI guidelines, and just two (!) predominant widget sets - QT & GTK apps do not look or behave closely enough to one another.

The one light at the end of the tunnel is most platforms now offer a theme engine so apps can look consistent even if they have their own notion of widgets (e.g. Java or Mozilla). It's just too bad that Apple and Microsoft see fit to keep the theme engine proprietary and even ignore it themselves when it suits them. I also wish that QT & GTK would share a common theme engine so that with a flick of a switch all apps, regardless of what C / C++ API is on top would render in the same way.

Archive.org cache of TV-tome:

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.tvtome.com

I think there's no problem in transferring most of that content to the new wiki.

Duck and Cover!
http://www.archive.org/details/DuckandC1951

You can download all the episodes (573!) of the PBS series The Computer Chronicles from Archive.org. Its run was from 1983 to 2002 so it's extremely dated material. But nostalgia tech is cool too!

http://www.archive.org/details/computerchronicles

What it seems like the submitter wants, is an existing online video rental company with a bunch of licensed videos who he can partner with to rent to people who use his PVR / set-top box. In much the same way that there are companies that handle B2B licensing and delivery of music, are there established companies that handle licensing and delivery of movies to hardware vendors? Who handles the in-house entertainment systems for motels and hotels?

As a side note, there are legal videos online. Check the internet archives feature film division for quite a few classics, including The Cabinet of Doctor Caligari, Night of the Living Dead, The Charlie Chaplin Film Festival, and period genre shlock like sex madness and hemp for victory. That's not really what he's asking for, but it's worth mentioning for the other people who may be reading. Anywhere that has Santa Claus Conquers the Martians deserves a nod.

What it seems like the submitter wants, is an existing online video rental company with a bunch of licensed videos who he can partner with to rent to people who use his PVR / set-top box. In much the same way that there are companies that handle B2B licensing and delivery of music, are there established companies that handle licensing and delivery of movies to hardware vendors? Who handles the in-house entertainment systems for motels and hotels?

As a side note, there are legal videos online. Check the internet archives feature film division for quite a few classics, including The Cabinet of Doctor Caligari, Night of the Living Dead, The Charlie Chaplin Film Festival, and period genre shlock like sex madness and hemp for victory. That's not really what he's asking for, but it's worth mentioning for the other people who may be reading. Anywhere that has Santa Claus Conquers the Martians deserves a nod.

What it seems like the submitter wants, is an existing online video rental company with a bunch of licensed videos who he can partner with to rent to people who use his PVR / set-top box. In much the same way that there are companies that handle B2B licensing and delivery of music, are there established companies that handle licensing and delivery of movies to hardware vendors? Who handles the in-house entertainment systems for motels and hotels?

As a side note, there are legal videos online. Check the internet archives feature film division for quite a few classics, including The Cabinet of Doctor Caligari, Night of the Living Dead, The Charlie Chaplin Film Festival, and period genre shlock like sex madness and hemp for victory. That's not really what he's asking for, but it's worth mentioning for the other people who may be reading. Anywhere that has Santa Claus Conquers the Martians deserves a nod.

What it seems like the submitter wants, is an existing online video rental company with a bunch of licensed videos who he can partner with to rent to people who use his PVR / set-top box. In much the same way that there are companies that handle B2B licensing and delivery of music, are there established companies that handle licensing and delivery of movies to hardware vendors? Who handles the in-house entertainment systems for motels and hotels?

As a side note, there are legal videos online. Check the internet archives feature film division for quite a few classics, including The Cabinet of Doctor Caligari, Night of the Living Dead, The Charlie Chaplin Film Festival, and period genre shlock like sex madness and hemp for victory. That's not really what he's asking for, but it's worth mentioning for the other people who may be reading. Anywhere that has Santa Claus Conquers the Martians deserves a nod.

What it seems like the submitter wants, is an existing online video rental company with a bunch of licensed videos who he can partner with to rent to people who use his PVR / set-top box. In much the same way that there are companies that handle B2B licensing and delivery of music, are there established companies that handle licensing and delivery of movies to hardware vendors? Who handles the in-house entertainment systems for motels and hotels?

As a side note, there are legal videos online. Check the internet archives feature film division for quite a few classics, including The Cabinet of Doctor Caligari, Night of the Living Dead, The Charlie Chaplin Film Festival, and period genre shlock like sex madness and hemp for victory. That's not really what he's asking for, but it's worth mentioning for the other people who may be reading. Anywhere that has Santa Claus Conquers the Martians deserves a nod.

What it seems like the submitter wants, is an existing online video rental company with a bunch of licensed videos who he can partner with to rent to people who use his PVR / set-top box. In much the same way that there are companies that handle B2B licensing and delivery of music, are there established companies that handle licensing and delivery of movies to hardware vendors? Who handles the in-house entertainment systems for motels and hotels?

As a side note, there are legal videos online. Check the internet archives feature film division for quite a few classics, including The Cabinet of Doctor Caligari, Night of the Living Dead, The Charlie Chaplin Film Festival, and period genre shlock like sex madness and hemp for victory. That's not really what he's asking for, but it's worth mentioning for the other people who may be reading. Anywhere that has Santa Claus Conquers the Martians deserves a nod.

What it seems like the submitter wants, is an existing online video rental company with a bunch of licensed videos who he can partner with to rent to people who use his PVR / set-top box. In much the same way that there are companies that handle B2B licensing and delivery of music, are there established companies that handle licensing and delivery of movies to hardware vendors? Who handles the in-house entertainment systems for motels and hotels?

As a side note, there are legal videos online. Check the internet archives feature film division for quite a few classics, including The Cabinet of Doctor Caligari, Night of the Living Dead, The Charlie Chaplin Film Festival, and period genre shlock like sex madness and hemp for victory. That's not really what he's asking for, but it's worth mentioning for the other people who may be reading. Anywhere that has Santa Claus Conquers the Martians deserves a nod.

"Making your own stuff, or paying for it, instead of leeching from the efforts of others?"

Please, you may be a leech, I can't say. I try to contribute, why would you make such an unfounded accusation?

"Why should they give you their stuff for free for you to make money from, but you won't give me your stuff for free?"

Did you look at the links I gave?

Also check this link:

http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A %22drew%20Roberts%22

I do make my stuff available for people to make money from. That is a hugh part of my point.

I started makeing my stuff available in this way after getting involverd with the whole Free Software thing and wanting to say thanks or contribute in some way.

Also, I think non-commercial is dangerous as courts and lawyers have a strange way of considering things commercial that regular people might not. And these days, copyright violations can carry large fines and jail time.

all the best,

drew

Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 16:27:07 -0500
To: ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com
From: David Farber
Subject: IP: yet again -- Inventing the Internet

It is nice to see confirmation of something I have said often and
loudly coming from someone like Joe DJF

>Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 16:23:51 -0500 (EST)
>From: Joseph Traub
>To: farber@cis.upenn.edu
>Subject: Inventing the Internet
>
>The media and politicians have had much fun about the Vice-President's
>purported claim that "I invented the internet". It is the case that Al
>Gore was perhaps the the first political leader to grasp the importance
>of networking the country (and later the world).
>
>In 1986 I chaired the Computer science and Telecommunications Board and
>Gore was our dinner speaker at the National Academy of Sciences. He spoke
>about the importance of a National Information Infrastructure. At the
>time he was a senator from a fairly small Southeastern state and I was
>amazed at his national vision. He has continued to be a national leader in
>promoting the importance of the internet for commerce and education.
>Could we perhaps see an end to cheap shots from politicians and pundits
>about inventing the internet.

I was trying to dig up who made the FEMA website. Was it internal or external to the government?

Looking at http://web.archive.org/web/20030417184051/http://w ww.fema.gov/library/lib04alpha.shtm .
There is a comment in the source by Jarrod Dieppa

A web search on that name brings up : http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/ 2001Oct/0075.html

so the person works for http://www.mbakercorp.com/

Baker has over the years obtained various contracts from FEMA.
Also the website http://www.bakerproject.com/fema
has links for FEMA exranet and
other fema information. Their webmaster is bperez@mbakercorp.com
or jdieppa@mbakercorp.com.

Hence most likely FEMA website is maintained
by Baker Corp.

I mean good video content, like Family Guy episodes. I don't mean free crap.

there are no legal channels through which to purchase video content which respects the author's rights.

Garbage. You can download thousands of free videos at http://www.archive.org/ alone.

another humorous fake: http://www.cambridge.ac/">The University of Different Studies

According to archive.org http://web.archive.org/web/20031226182902/atomchip .com/_wsn/page3.html
they already had 25G NvIOpSRAMs in late 2003.

Jack Shulman and American Computer Co. of the 90's.
Remember that? He claimed to be making chips from crashed UFO technology..

http://www.compamerica.com/">http://web.archive.or g/web/19970106064603/http://www.compamerica.com/

(above link doesn't display properly, copy & paste it into your broswer --> http://web.archive.org/web/19970106064603/http://w ww.compamerica.com )

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/acc.html

and here's his website where he still claims outrageous bullshit..
http://compamerica.com/about_us.htm

Jack Shulman and American Computer Co. of the 90's.
Remember that? He claimed to be making chips from crashed UFO technology..

http://www.compamerica.com/">http://web.archive.or g/web/19970106064603/http://www.compamerica.com/

(above link doesn't display properly, copy & paste it into your broswer --> http://web.archive.org/web/19970106064603/http://w ww.compamerica.com )

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/acc.html

and here's his website where he still claims outrageous bullshit..
http://compamerica.com/about_us.htm

How professional their site looked in 2003 *cough http://web.archive.org/web/20030403045220/http://a tomchip.com/

(The Internet Archive has it, though...)