Slashdot Mirror

How can the simulate the different gravity?
Considering that actual humans haven't even landed on Mars yet, I think it's a little early to think about how we'll actually live there. Remember what happened to 'By the year 2000, people will be living on the moon' - when was the last time humans went there? (BTW Read Ben Elton's 'Stark', that gives a very probable explanation why we haven't...)

Richy C.
--

Oh - it would be better if the virus could cope with as many different platforms as possible.

An ideal method for 'mass distribution' would be a crack to put it in a MS Website upgrade patch, then release a mini-virus targetting against MS system to 'encourage' people to download the infected patch file. Obviously, you'll probably need someone inside Microsoft, but...

The Register is also carrying the story (actually it started carrying it yesterday) and it gives some information about how the software patches the hardware.
Richy C.
--

Basically BT claims it filed a patent in 1976 (eventually granted in 1989) due to its work on the old Viewdata and Prestel systems it ran as part of the GPO.

You can actually view the patent on line (it is a US patent) as number 4,873,662 entitled 'Information handling system and terminal apparatus therefor' (phew!)

So, therefore, while somebody may be attempting to get into your systems, you can't legally break into theirs. There's nothing physically stopping you, but if you were to attack the wrong machine, or their attempt on you was an accident and you (in retaliation) bring down mission-critical systems - you'll get into a nice big legal mess (UK users can face an unlimited fine and 5 years imprisionment - bringing down a system would come under part 3 of the aforementioned Act - IANAL)

Remember - two wrongs do not make a right...

Just try and imagine the first posters!
If we get things fast enough and therefore go back in time, at least OOG THE CAVEMAN would feel at home :)
Richy C.
--

The phone line, however, is a slightly different beast at it is provided by Bell Atlantic as they are the 'telco' and Covad is the ISP. Bell Atlantic won't have any provision for connecting you to the internet (except if they have their own ISP division) and are just concerned with selling a high speed line to connect X to Y.

It seems as if Flashcom purchased your DSL system off their provider (Covad) who then purchased the physical line connecting you to them from Bell Atlantic. If it was just a problem with your ISP connection, then it could have been dealt with Flashcom - who would have referred major problems to Covad to see if it was their end.

Yep, it can be problematic, but that's the way companies work - all around the world (for example, Beebware Internet is a reseller of ConnectFree which is a VISP of Telinco. I deal with front-line support to Bebeware, but major problems get referred to ConnectFree who refer them to Telinco. I'm prevented to going direct to Telinco because of the contract I signed. It gets annoying for the companies as well sometimes) :(

The phone line, however, is a slightly different beast at it is provided by Bell Atlantic as they are the 'telco' and Covad is the ISP. Bell Atlantic won't have any provision for connecting you to the internet (except if they have their own ISP division) and are just concerned with selling a high speed line to connect X to Y.

It seems as if Flashcom purchased your DSL system off their provider (Covad) who then purchased the physical line connecting you to them from Bell Atlantic. If it was just a problem with your ISP connection, then it could have been dealt with Flashcom - who would have referred major problems to Covad to see if it was their end.

Yep, it can be problematic, but that's the way companies work - all around the world (for example, Beebware Internet is a reseller of ConnectFree which is a VISP of Telinco. I deal with front-line support to Bebeware, but major problems get referred to ConnectFree who refer them to Telinco. I'm prevented to going direct to Telinco because of the contract I signed. It gets annoying for the companies as well sometimes) :(

In the 'good old days', you could buy a TV and it'll still be working 15 years later - now you are lucky if it lasts 7 before something major goes wrong. My old BBC (circa 1983) micro still works - it was in daily constant use for over 10 years with 5 1/4" floppy drive. I have trouble firing up a 1995 PC with harddrive - sometimes it just won't even get past the BIOS boot.

All in the name of economy... *sigh*

On the same vein, the egyptians had the hierographic writings which have lasted over 3,000 years - any 'modern days' records going to last that long? Nope..

Discuss: Have we really progressed?

Which may result in a less-bloatful more reliable version of Windows that Microsoft managed to. Imagine a Linux machine running Microsoft Exploder under WINE better and more reliabily than Microsoft Windows can - it's not that hard to see that this is possible.

As the WINE team is comparitvely small compared to the collection Microserfs, plus they have less pressure on deadlines - this should result in a lot less bugs and mistakes than the 'original' version of Windows.

Also, since WINE appears to be open-source (I haven't examined it closely to confirm this BTW) it should be possible for it to be ported to other platforms easily.

Just imagine... DOS running WINE better than it runs Windows - packages being on shop shelves saying: 'Needs either WINE ME 2001 with 16Mb RAM or Microsoft Windows ME 2001 with 64Mb'. Bliss!

I personally think that under the circumstances it would be a good idea to open source the software behind it.

Yes, it'll just be a simple page fetcher followed by a case/if statement and then a whole load of 'global search and replace' calls, but it'll be nice to be able to base the code on something. After all, half the fun of the Dialectizer was being able to translate other peoples sites (and your own) into 'other tongues'.

If people were able to download the code and use it on their own website, it'll keep a hell of a lot of people happy.

I'm now worried about things like this affect BabelFish and AskJesus...

Liar! How dare you say I look like an Arrowpoint rep!

:)

$1million/year - is that just for Slashdot or all the Andover.net systems?

1,000,000 USD = 671,015 UKP = 1,121,428 EUR BTW

Is it me, or does anybody have this mental image of a machine trying every single possible URL (and I'm not just talking domain names, or even just index.html files) and filling them. And then going around see how many could be found in a search engine and then seeing how many linked to a search engine.

My mind boggles how IBM et al managed to find all the 'unlinked' sites to get their figures.

Unless of cause, they guessed...

Its processor core is based on the ARM9 series, but since it is asynchronous (ie it hasn't got 'clock cycles' like normal synchronous processors) it should go very very fast (simple processes will rush through without being delayed by slight harder/longer processes).

While I haven't had a chance to get my hands on one of these yet, the spec's I've seen (I can't remember if they are public or not) look good and the chips should be compatible with current ARM chips - as used in my RISC PC (BTW a RISC PC is used to run the 'Who Wants to Be A Millionare' shows!).

It is difficult to place an exact Mhz rating on these chips due to the way they work, but the current version (AMULET3i) runs at roughly 120Mhz - but they have started from the basics, without using much 'proven technology', so expect development to last a few more years - but the 120Mhz version should be out next month/late this month.

'Redmond, Washington'
"Good evening, Mr.Gates,","I'll be your server today"

How the hell did Slashdot get such appropriate advertising - especially where the penguin squashes down on the Redmond campus. :)

And don't forget the Best Buy Inc would have already paid Metallica's label for the CD.

Therefore if the CDs get stolen, only Best Buy Inc loose out - not Metallica.

and cleaned of old viruses weekly
Just don't say 'how old' the viruses have to be before they get taken off the list, you know somebody will be waiting to be putting in a virus that has been around since year X...
Richy C.
--

Actually, they'll have difficulty releasing him - he was never arrested. He was only asked to answer a few questions - mainly because the Phillipino laws don't cover virus writing.

I haven't received a copy and I didn't receive a copy of Melissia et al either. Does that mean that nobody has me in their address book?

I didn't think I was that much disliked, but then again it may be because the people I correspond with on a regular basis actually have a clue.

Personally, I think ISPs need to educate their customers more. When they sign up, ISPs should send information about 'Making Money Fast Schemes', 'Hoax Emails', and 'Opening Attachments' as a minimum.

Saying all that, I happly use a RISC OS machine (when I need Windoze - like to open an Excel spreadsheet - I emulate it in a 'closed off' partion), with Marcel. Okay, Marcel isn't the best mail reader there is, but I don't like HTML mail (it wastes bandwidth) anyway so.. It also doesn't allow auto-running of anything.

Anyway, back to laughing at my co-worker who is MCSE qualified - I'll leave you to guess how much of a panic he's in. Go around telling everybody about it, installing filters in Outlook etc. :)

It's a good idea, but I can't see how they can 'ensure that there are always at least a minimum number of copies of each article around the world'.
First of all, according to them, only libraries which subscribe to certain journals will have the articles - therefore if only 5 libraries subscribe only 5 copies will exist.
Secondly, conversly, what happens if 5,000 libraries subscribe? That'll be a lot of redundent storage - yeah, I know it is sorta what they are aiming for, but I'm guessing that these journals will need a bit of file space per issue.
Oh, and I just love the bit about 'java/linux based server system which is designed to run on cheap computers at libraries' - most library computers I've seen are still 1986 type modules (no GUI). The 'high-spec' machines in my city library (which has around 6 public 'dumb terminals', 8 staff 'dummies' and 3 public 'PCs') have a per-hour charge for usage.

Richy C.
--

> AOL/Time Warner has owned dmoz from the beginning.
Not quite true, when ODP started (just under 2 years ago) it was totally independent. After around 9 months, it was then sold to Netscape as it fitted in with their 'open software' system. AOL then brought Netscape in July last year.
For those of you who must know, dmoz stands for directory.mozilla.org - and, yes, you can reach dmoz.org via the full URL of directory.mozilla.org URL.
ODP is an TLA for 'Open Directory Project'.

Richy C.
--

> [Description of what was in all caps?]
Descriptions of the sites in your category

> I was an editor long before Netscape or AOL came into the picture.
Same here - since the Gnuhoo days (but only just - around three days later it changed to NewHoo).

> Your amended "editors guidlines" were never pointed out clearly, and I did follow the guidelines that I signed up under several years ago.
The editors guidelines have always existed and have always had a link from the editor dashboard. IIRC details of them were also sent out in the 'welcome email' (I can't confirm that as I haven't got access to my email box). The guidelines have always been 'no' against descriptions and titles in capitals - after all it is common sense.
'Signed up under several years ago' - ODP isn't even two years old yet BTW...

> If you want to act like this - fine - bureaucratic arrogance solves zip
I'm only stating facts that can be confirmed.

> Unfortunately, the open, cool thing ODP started out to be has become just another arm of a bureacratic hydra
Yes, it is 'another arm of a bureacratic hydra', but it is still 'cool' - as around 5,000 active editors will confirm. It has changed quite a bit from when it started, I agree, but for the better. Instead of quanity we are now aiming directly for quality - ODP is already bigger than Yahoo! and we want it to be much much better.

> But, hey, there's a ton of other search engines to choose from.
True, and quite a number of those are using ODP's content. Google, HotBot (who was using it before the Netscape purchase), Altavista and many more.

> On a personal note, if you AOL guys
I don't use AOL at all, I've never even tried a free trial, I don't work for them and if it wasn't for the fact they brought Netscape I still would have nothing to do with them. I have found that they are trying to keep Netscape (and therefore ODP) at an arms length and trying not to effect it at all. Saying that, they have paid for at least 2 server upgrades so... :)

> ad simply pointed out the fact that I hadn't followed your new "editors guidlines"
I can't comment on this case specifically as it was too long in the past to look at your editor profile and find out the reason. Profiles are deleted after around 3 months of inactivity.

> I would have been happy to comply
The point is that you should have been complying with the current guidelines anyway.

> (after I check Google and Yahoo! for the latest paramotor info)
Feel free, editors don't (or shouldn't) care if the data gets used by a million users or none at all. I personally have paid work for a rival directory (UK based), but I still do volunteer work on ODP as I enjoy it, it has a good community and is fun.
Google is using ODP data now BTW.

Examining the logs for that category, I noticed an editor 'jamesewing' (which I would guess the above poster was).

I've been unable to find out why the editor was removed, but last edit by that editor in that category was on the 7/Jun/1999 13:51:57 - three months AFTER the AOL purchase of Netscape (who 'brought' ODP many many months before).

Amendment: I've just viewed the edit logs of one of the sites, and a few reasons shoot out at me: Descripton was in ALL CAPS (a big no no in the entire internet, not just ODP) and had non-english sites in an 'English only' category (German sites should go in the World/ hierarchy). Same with a Swedish site.

Basically, this editor got thrown out for not following the editors guidelines.

Basically, staff agreed with meta-editors (who are editors who 'edit' editors - ie give them extra editing permissions, recommend them for 'promotion etc), editalls and editors, that if AOL/Netscape/Other were to either try and place adverts on the editing site (dmoz.org - we don't care if our 'downstream users' put adverts on their site or not), or stop issuing RDF dumps or similar then we would take a copy of the most recent RDF dumps that we have (and believe me, many many editors take regular copies for their own usage) and re-start the project somewhere else.

It's only taken less than 2 years for the ODP to grow to over 1.7million sites and with less than 1% of dead sites listed (they are all checked every couple of months) I personally think they are doing better than Yahoo!.

Okay, like all things ODP will have people that are 'critical' about what it is, but many many more people like it.

Basically, staff agreed with meta-editors (who are editors who 'edit' editors - ie give them extra editing permissions, recommend them for 'promotion etc), editalls and editors, that if AOL/Netscape/Other were to either try and place adverts on the editing site (dmoz.org - we don't care if our 'downstream users' put adverts on their site or not), or stop issuing RDF dumps or similar then we would take a copy of the most recent RDF dumps that we have (and believe me, many many editors take regular copies for their own usage) and re-start the project somewhere else.

It's only taken less than 2 years for the ODP to grow to over 1.7million sites and with less than 1% of dead sites listed (they are all checked every couple of months) I personally think they are doing better than Yahoo!.

Okay, like all things ODP will have people that are 'critical' about what it is, but many many more people like it.

Basically, staff agreed with meta-editors (who are editors who 'edit' editors - ie give them extra editing permissions, recommend them for 'promotion etc), editalls and editors, that if AOL/Netscape/Other were to either try and place adverts on the editing site (dmoz.org - we don't care if our 'downstream users' put adverts on their site or not), or stop issuing RDF dumps or similar then we would take a copy of the most recent RDF dumps that we have (and believe me, many many editors take regular copies for their own usage) and re-start the project somewhere else.

It's only taken less than 2 years for the ODP to grow to over 1.7million sites and with less than 1% of dead sites listed (they are all checked every couple of months) I personally think they are doing better than Yahoo!.

Okay, like all things ODP will have people that are 'critical' about what it is, but many many more people like it.

Basically, staff agreed with meta-editors (who are editors who 'edit' editors - ie give them extra editing permissions, recommend them for 'promotion etc), editalls and editors, that if AOL/Netscape/Other were to either try and place adverts on the editing site (dmoz.org - we don't care if our 'downstream users' put adverts on their site or not), or stop issuing RDF dumps or similar then we would take a copy of the most recent RDF dumps that we have (and believe me, many many editors take regular copies for their own usage) and re-start the project somewhere else.

It's only taken less than 2 years for the ODP to grow to over 1.7million sites and with less than 1% of dead sites listed (they are all checked every couple of months) I personally think they are doing better than Yahoo!.

Okay, like all things ODP will have people that are 'critical' about what it is, but many many more people like it.

Basically, staff agreed with meta-editors (who are editors who 'edit' editors - ie give them extra editing permissions, recommend them for 'promotion etc), editalls and editors, that if AOL/Netscape/Other were to either try and place adverts on the editing site (dmoz.org - we don't care if our 'downstream users' put adverts on their site or not), or stop issuing RDF dumps or similar then we would take a copy of the most recent RDF dumps that we have (and believe me, many many editors take regular copies for their own usage) and re-start the project somewhere else.

It's only taken less than 2 years for the ODP to grow to over 1.7million sites and with less than 1% of dead sites listed (they are all checked every couple of months) I personally think they are doing better than Yahoo!.

Okay, like all things ODP will have people that are 'critical' about what it is, but many many more people like it.

Basically, staff agreed with meta-editors (who are editors who 'edit' editors - ie give them extra editing permissions, recommend them for 'promotion etc), editalls and editors, that if AOL/Netscape/Other were to either try and place adverts on the editing site (dmoz.org - we don't care if our 'downstream users' put adverts on their site or not), or stop issuing RDF dumps or similar then we would take a copy of the most recent RDF dumps that we have (and believe me, many many editors take regular copies for their own usage) and re-start the project somewhere else.

It's only taken less than 2 years for the ODP to grow to over 1.7million sites and with less than 1% of dead sites listed (they are all checked every couple of months) I personally think they are doing better than Yahoo!.

Okay, like all things ODP will have people that are 'critical' about what it is, but many many more people like it.

Basically, staff agreed with meta-editors (who are editors who 'edit' editors - ie give them extra editing permissions, recommend them for 'promotion etc), editalls and editors, that if AOL/Netscape/Other were to either try and place adverts on the editing site (dmoz.org - we don't care if our 'downstream users' put adverts on their site or not), or stop issuing RDF dumps or similar then we would take a copy of the most recent RDF dumps that we have (and believe me, many many editors take regular copies for their own usage) and re-start the project somewhere else.

It's only taken less than 2 years for the ODP to grow to over 1.7million sites and with less than 1% of dead sites listed (they are all checked every couple of months) I personally think they are doing better than Yahoo!.

Okay, like all things ODP will have people that are 'critical' about what it is, but many many more people like it.

The actual content created by ODP editors (of which I am one) is 'open content' and can be downloaded and used by anybody. To my knowledge, over 200 sites are now using the data - Hotbot, Altavista and AOL are just some of the 'bigger names. There is actually nothing stopping Yahoo! or Microsoft using the ODP RDF dumps to put the content on their site as long as they follow the licencing conditions (which are basically just acknowledge the source).

The Open Directory Project started life just under 2 years ago as a project by a few people (skrenta, tolles and a couple of others) who just got fed up with Yahoo!'s dead links. So they started a 'Yahoo-like' directory (called 'Gnuhoo') and opened it to volunteer editors. The object of the Project was (and still is) to create the 'ultimate web directory' for use by anybody.

Since it started ODP has been through a number of names changes, from Gnuhoo it was forced to change its name because the people from GNU complained (the editing software isn't open source, only the content is), then it became NewHoo! but when Netscape brought the ODP it thought it best if the name was changed to stop Yahoo! complaining. Then it became 'directory.mozilla.org', but that was a bit of mouthful so it was shortened the the new URL of http://dmoz.org.

If you would like to use the ODP content on your website, there is a whole range of tools to enable you to use the content on your pages - some of them (like P.O.D.) don't even require you to download the huge RDF dumps.

I hope all this has been informative to people, but I stil fail to see the relevance to Slashdot.

The actual content created by ODP editors (of which I am one) is 'open content' and can be downloaded and used by anybody. To my knowledge, over 200 sites are now using the data - Hotbot, Altavista and AOL are just some of the 'bigger names. There is actually nothing stopping Yahoo! or Microsoft using the ODP RDF dumps to put the content on their site as long as they follow the licencing conditions (which are basically just acknowledge the source).

The Open Directory Project started life just under 2 years ago as a project by a few people (skrenta, tolles and a couple of others) who just got fed up with Yahoo!'s dead links. So they started a 'Yahoo-like' directory (called 'Gnuhoo') and opened it to volunteer editors. The object of the Project was (and still is) to create the 'ultimate web directory' for use by anybody.

Since it started ODP has been through a number of names changes, from Gnuhoo it was forced to change its name because the people from GNU complained (the editing software isn't open source, only the content is), then it became NewHoo! but when Netscape brought the ODP it thought it best if the name was changed to stop Yahoo! complaining. Then it became 'directory.mozilla.org', but that was a bit of mouthful so it was shortened the the new URL of http://dmoz.org.

If you would like to use the ODP content on your website, there is a whole range of tools to enable you to use the content on your pages - some of them (like P.O.D.) don't even require you to download the huge RDF dumps.

I hope all this has been informative to people, but I stil fail to see the relevance to Slashdot.

(note to moderators: mod the above up please).

I totally agree, even working in a media organisation I hate the way they've got to put a spin on these things.

I remember many a year ago when computer viruses first came out, the media made a lot of fuss about them infecting people. Now it's been turned on its head and people and infecting computers (okay, it's sim people but... :) ).

I'm now seriously considering buying 'Sims', but I just wonder if my PC emulator can cope. Ho hummm.

Does any actions on the beta system affect the live system data?

For example, if I were to try and be a troll (I'm waaay to intelligent to be a real troll :) ) would it knock my karma down.

Here's looking to the future of Slashdot and more news for nerds!

I also wonder which mobile phone companies will support the technology (remembering that they'll be paying big time for the bandwidth - one to and from the phone and then to and from the main telecoms network). Cost is also important.

I await with baited breath, but this is something I hope will take off.

Does this remind anyone else of 'Imperial Earth' by Arthur C. Clarke where there is a wide area radar array searching for signs of extra-terristral intelligence.

Unfortently, the search was unsuccessfully, only because it was looking in the wrong length of the radio spectrum (IIRC in the thousands of metres range)

Good idea - in theroy

"A feature length movie will take 8 to 10 hours to download over a 56k dialup connection" - which I'd guess the majority of people will have. What they are forgetting is that 56k is the MAXIMUM throughput and who can sustain a reliable connection for that length of time? I haven't heard of anybody yet!

"20 minutes to download on a DSL or Cable Modem connection" sounds a lot better - until you realise that this is 'pay-per-view', once you've spent so long downloading it you'll have to pay every single time you want to watch the movie. Something that I don't really see taking off.

They also speak of "The films will probably be available for viewing for one day, after which their files would become disabled" - does this sound like it will be multi-platform to you? Doesn't to me :(

(slightly informative, slightly off-topic - hope the moderators have fun :) ).

I know of an in-car MPEG Player, it's the EMPEG system. IIRC it runs Linux as well.

No keyboard included I note. Does have a keyboard adaptor however.
Richy C.
--

[joking?]Hmm, Microsofts Terraserver is slow, unresponsive and currently covers very little non-US ground.

Microsoft last year posted details of a bug where either the earth revolves the wrong way or the software shows it revolving the wrong way. And we are going to trust them to show us satellite images? [/joking?]

I can't actually see what Microsoft will get out of it - except maybe 'subscription charges' - I didn't see any mention of the images being free, did you?

And has anyone else noticed how MS have many many fingers in many similar pies ATM... hmm. Are they getting deals sorted incase they are split into 'Baby-Bills' - each 'section' will then have established products covering practically everything!

Exactly what I thinking!

Yes, consipricy theroists (and people who can spell :) ) may make it what they will, but not every site can stand the Slashdot effect. Especially if its running on Microsoft software.

Has anyone actually considered that Area51 is just a 'front' and all the alien stuff is happening somewhere else. Maybe even somewhere in Redmond.... Hmm. It's a theroy :)

Let's face it, Microsoft is backwards.
Richy C.
--

Now, let us just pause a moment and think here. What is the most popular webserver software - Apache. Is it open source or closed source? Ditto for Perl, sendmail/qmail, Linux/NetBSD, the DNS software etc.

If system administrators couldn't examine the code would they trust such mission-critical system on this software? They might not look at the code, but at least they've got the oppourtunity if they feel the need. It's all about choice.

This article does make very interesting reading and raises quite a few points. Initall reading would say it was on the 'open-source' side, but it left me with the feeling it was more on the 'closed-source' side.

Yes, open-source software will have hackers et al examining the code, and not many 'real users' may look at the code, but the article omitted to make the point that when the bugs are found they are very quickly fixed - unlike recent Microsoft bugs where they are still denying that these bugs exists. In open-source software they would have probably been confirmed upteen times and fixed (not just 'worked-around') by several different people.

It really just depends on your viewpoints I suppose and whose pocket you may or may not be in.

As a UK webmaster

I use Demon for some of my backbone operations and I fully supported them in the case - I actually thought that they would go through with it and win, and I was disappointed that they didn't.

All Demon did was allow USENET news to work in the way it was designed - a message posted gets circulated around the world. Given the volume of traffic in USENET is is unreasonable that they are meant to be aware of every single posting, but the case hinged on the fact that Godfrey informed Demon on possible libel.

At no point (as far as I know) did he attempt to prove to Demon that the article would libel him, but instead sued (I believe he has 'acquired' a reputation for this, but I'm unable to confirm this). And Demon buckled.

Many webmasters (like myself) will now be worried that their site may be closed down because of something they may or may not say in the future and many of us are now considering moving our sites out of the UK (especially if they run a 'public bulletin board' or forum, or maybe even an adult website [see http://www.beebware.com/dir/Adult/.

All in all, its very worrying for UK webmasters, UK Internet users and the UK internet in general.

As a UK webmaster

I use Demon for some of my backbone operations and I fully supported them in the case - I actually thought that they would go through with it and win, and I was disappointed that they didn't.

All Demon did was allow USENET news to work in the way it was designed - a message posted gets circulated around the world. Given the volume of traffic in USENET is is unreasonable that they are meant to be aware of every single posting, but the case hinged on the fact that Godfrey informed Demon on possible libel.

At no point (as far as I know) did he attempt to prove to Demon that the article would libel him, but instead sued (I believe he has 'acquired' a reputation for this, but I'm unable to confirm this). And Demon buckled.

Many webmasters (like myself) will now be worried that their site may be closed down because of something they may or may not say in the future and many of us are now considering moving our sites out of the UK (especially if they run a 'public bulletin board' or forum, or maybe even an adult website [see http://www.beebware.com/dir/Adult/.

All in all, its very worrying for UK webmasters, UK Internet users and the UK internet in general.

As a UK webmaster

I use Demon for some of my backbone operations and I fully supported them in the case - I actually thought that they would go through with it and win, and I was disappointed that they didn't.

All Demon did was allow USENET news to work in the way it was designed - a message posted gets circulated around the world. Given the volume of traffic in USENET is is unreasonable that they are meant to be aware of every single posting, but the case hinged on the fact that Godfrey informed Demon on possible libel.

At no point (as far as I know) did he attempt to prove to Demon that the article would libel him, but instead sued (I believe he has 'acquired' a reputation for this, but I'm unable to confirm this). And Demon buckled.

Many webmasters (like myself) will now be worried that their site may be closed down because of something they may or may not say in the future and many of us are now considering moving our sites out of the UK (especially if they run a 'public bulletin board' or forum, or maybe even an adult website [see http://www.beebware.com/dir/Adult/.

All in all, its very worrying for UK webmasters, UK Internet users and the UK internet in general.

As a UK webmaster

I use Demon for some of my backbone operations and I fully supported them in the case - I actually thought that they would go through with it and win, and I was disappointed that they didn't.

All Demon did was allow USENET news to work in the way it was designed - a message posted gets circulated around the world. Given the volume of traffic in USENET is is unreasonable that they are meant to be aware of every single posting, but the case hinged on the fact that Godfrey informed Demon on possible libel.

At no point (as far as I know) did he attempt to prove to Demon that the article would libel him, but instead sued (I believe he has 'acquired' a reputation for this, but I'm unable to confirm this). And Demon buckled.

Many webmasters (like myself) will now be worried that their site may be closed down because of something they may or may not say in the future and many of us are now considering moving our sites out of the UK (especially if they run a 'public bulletin board' or forum, or maybe even an adult website [see http://www.beebware.com/dir/Adult/.

All in all, its very worrying for UK webmasters, UK Internet users and the UK internet in general.

Since I submitted this article, I may as well fill everybody in

She also helped raise the media profile of the web and internet - I've lost track of the number of news articles about her and her site

Okay, her site isn't free (I'd hate to think how much she is paying per month in bandwidth charges), and she doesn't 'get her kit off' much - but that isn't the point of the site. It is to show an insight into her life and everything.

She has also recently sold her bed on Ebay for $2,760!

When you 'purchase' commerical software, you don't actually buy it. You buy a licence to USE the software and the software company is usual kind enough to provide you with a copy of the software with the licence.

If you don't want to use the licence (by following its terms and conditions etc) then you shouldn't use the software as the licence is the product you brought.

Slightly confusing, I know, but that's how it is.

In real life, however, who knows what you get up to in private.You aren't meant to transfer CDs to audio casettes, but many many many people do... That's why you often see the disclaimer 'copying of copyright materials is illegal' because the manufactours know it goes on, but they are just saying that the product isn't mean't to be used like that

I wonder what the legal position would be if DeCSS et al is relesed as 'it is just a disc fuller to help fill up your harddisc for testing purposes' and people then used it for 'other purposes' the authors would be liable for the misuse would they? I wouldn't have thought so...

Just my thoughts about the whole issue, remember that I'm not a lawyer :)