Slashdot Mirror

NOT NameCheap. You can only leave a message when you call them, and they NEVER called me back. They didn't answer ANY of my many support tickets, except with irrelevant replies. They are an eNom reseller, and eNom seems to me to have become abusive. Absolutely the worst I've seen, for many other reasons, too. For example, their system refused to allow me to renew my domains with them. NameCheap.com is an eNom.com reseller, and in my opinion eNom.com has become abusive.

I too want to find a good domain name registrar. I have had very bad experiences with GoDaddy.com, NameCheap.com, and DomainSite.com.

A big problem with trying a new registrar is that they hide how they do business until you have a domain with them. For example, DomainSite.com email forwarding uses an "aggressive" block list that cannot be disabled. DomainSite.com also throws away all Catchall email.

ICANN is a TERRIBLY badly managed organization, in my opinion.

I'm keeping a list of stories about GoDaddy on Slashdot, in order by date:
Go Daddy Usurps Network Solutions (2005-05-04)
GoDaddy Serves Blank Pages to Safari & Opera (2005-12-08)
GoDaddy.com Dumps Linux for Microsoft (2006-03-23)
GoDaddy Holds Domains Hostage (2006-06-17)
GoDaddy Caves To Irish Legal Threat (2006-09-16)
MySpace and GoDaddy Shut Down Security Site (2007-01-26)
That incident prompted this web site:
Exposing the Many Reasons Not to Trust GoDaddy with Your Domain Names. According to this March 11, 2008 story in Wired, GoDaddy shut down an entire web site of 250,000 pages because of one archived mailing list comment: GoDaddy Silences Police-Watchdog Site RateMyCop.com. See below for Slashdot's story about RateMyCop.com.
Alternative Registrars to GoDaddy? (2007-02-03)
GoDaddy Bobbles DST Changeover? (2007-03-11)
850K RegisterFly Domains Moved To GoDaddy (2007-05-29)
GoDaddy Silences RateMyCop.com (2008-03-12)
ICANN Moves Against GoDaddy Domain Lockdowns (2008-04-08)

Any error or stories not included?

GoDaddy's reputation is not just one of a negative stories. In my opinion, GoDaddy tries to confuse non-technical people by offering services they don't need that are presented as valuable.

Here are some of the opinions of Bob Parsons, the owner of GoDaddy. He is pro-violence: Close Gitmo? No way!!

Of all the tanks of WWII why not a US Sherman tank.
Sherman tank does have so many curves so it would make a pain to duplicate neatly:
http://www.military-collections.com/Planes%20of%20Fame%20photos/ShermanTank.jpg

Panzer does have more flat areas so it would be easier to make:
http://www.worldwar2aces.com/tiger-tank/tiger-tank-images/tiger-tank-25.jpg

However someone else beat him to building a drivable tank (sans the shooter) for his son last year:
http://blog.wired.com/geekdad/2007/04/driveable_scale.html
And this smaller verison of a Panzer in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_page_id=1965&in_article_id=485191

I built a 1:32 scale model tank in 1980 that shot BB's. Much fun when in high school and college.

Having never seen a Uwe Boll movie, can someone tell me what's so bad about him?

• -His movies are bad. Really, universally accepted as terrible.
• -He keeps getting handed video game franchises to make movies out of, which is problematic because video game fans hate to see their favorite franchises turned into crappy movies, but it has further reaching implications in that it states, essentially, that the movie industry has no respect for the video game industry since they keep letting this man make shitty movies (that lose money, no less)
• -His initial career was only made possible due to a loophole in German tax law which allowed him to spend other people's money on his bad movies since they could write off the loss for tax purposes. Once that loophole was closed, he decided to stop making expensive ($1M+) movies
• -He's quite arrogant and usually pretty angry (which you might be too if people kept shitting on your movies
• -He lured critcs out to a charity fight and then beat the snot out of them, sending one to the hospital

"Filed a challenge" IN NO WAY = "Filed a suit."

lrn2legalterminology.

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/news/2008/04/apple_vs_apple

By accepting his salary, the professor already has given up his rights to his lessons, since the institution has effectively "bought" his lessons/teaching by employing him and paying him for his work.

If you ask me, allowing professors to force students to shell out more cash so they can complete the course by buying materiels produced by the professor

But, if I sit in a class that I have already PAID for, then each student has the legal right to be in the class, the rights to the lecture, and the rights to copy the content for their own uses.

5) Since students have paid for the lesson, they have the right to now do as they please with the lesson's content.

2) Professor sells rights to University.

take money from students just so they can PASS the class

My second argument still wins though.

1) Correct, the 2001 advice is not yet available which is why the EFF quoted the newly released 2003 advice that cites it.
2,3) Thanks for the information.
4) That's the whole point - the reference implies that all domestic DoD activity is immune.
5) Please cite your source - as far as I know the Administration has not offered any legal defence of the wiretapping or data mining programs, and has even refused (in court) to confirm or deny the existence of the wiretapping program.
6) Again, please cite your source - the 2003 advice was overturned, but what about the 2001 advice?

Wow, life must really suck for the record labels. In addition to hating their customers, they hate their biggest retailer.

In other news(which I am surprised hasn't been submitted yet), Apple is suing NYC over the use of an apple in a marketing campaign. I was expecting to see a thousand posts about litiganous Apple being at it again, and another thousand posts about the need to defend one's trademarks. Apple must have half a dozen people whose job it is to find and fight these kinds of things. Win or lose, it doesn't matter. It's the fighting that counts. And what would be the consequences if they didn't?

Several years ago, right before the book can out, Wired Magazine (which we all know and love) featured a great story/ interview about "Kevin Lewis" (his name was changed in the article) and his story about being one of the MIT kids. It's a pretty good read, probably better than the movie. Follow the link below for the article.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.09/vegas.html

---

And not to forget the utterly amazing and interesting Mother Earth, Mother Board

This has been out there since 2007 http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/08/hands-on-with-microvisions-itty-bitty-projector/

And even in 2006. http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/06/70942

If you want an idea of why Slashdotters enjoy him, check out his (free to read) non-fiction piece In the Beginning was the Command Line.

Also check out Mother Earth, Mother Board, which is a fast-moving, gripping, action packed, 42000 word essay on... the history and practice of submarine cable laying. Really. It's awesome. Read it. (He used bits of it for the background in Cryptonomicon, so if you've read that you may find it a little familiar.)

Hackers created tons of posts on this epilepsy forum containing flashing animations, or links that led to web and java based scripts that took over the screen- filling it with animations that both affected photo-sensitive and pattern-sensitive epileptics. This is cruel http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/03/epilepsy

So do hackers: http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/03/epilepsy

Yeah, hate to tell you, most slashdotters *were* this kid. If you weren't, consider for a moment that you spent way too much time being popular and not nearly enough time burning your hands with soldering irons and reading Radio Shack's electronics books- go read wired instead.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.04/wired40_ceo.html

Seems to me that the new advancements in diamond manufacturing will pave the way for diamonds to be the next step.

Great articles on it...

http://www.geek.com/81ghz-diamond-semiconductor-created/
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html

Slew

Naaah, I think that this is not intentional. It's just the typically polish manner of doing things: let them drown in the chaos. Do you know that our former prime minister stated recently (http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/03/official-polish.html) that he opposes the idea of voting over internet because people use internet mostly to watch pornography while drinking beer and voting should be a serious issue? And our president doesn't want to sign a treaty that he himself has designed a few months ago? (details:http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1205847121.22/)

I mean, come on. Don't take them seriously. The person responsible for distributing the e-mails will be sacked (just in a few months).

Something else the same that should be pointed out: Microsoft sponsored the contest both times. It is important to know where the money is coming from (and who is writing the rules).

now requires a $1200 piece of graphics technology just to participate

You guys do realize that advertising is what keeps using the web free, right? Without ads, many of your favorite sites (to include /. ) wouldn't be able to function. If anything, google ads are pretty non-invasive and lead to a situation where those who make money make it and we get to use things for no cost. Read this:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_free

People can bitch all they want, but if they have the choice between getting a free lunch with coke ads splattered on everything or had to pay $1, they will still pick the free lunch.

Most importantly, Obama is anti-bubble sort.

I was amazed at the number of fanboi's that modded it off-topic, only to have it modded it back up, then back down again. Some apparently thought I had committed blasphemy.

"I was frustrated when I met with the [ACLU] report authors and they could not point to a single instance of a fusion center violating someone's civil rights or liberties," Harman said. "In fact, state and local laws and protections in place at many fusion centers are more rigorous than their federal counterparts."

Ahem: California's Anti-Terrorism Information Center admitted to spying on anti-war groups in 2003. And Denver's police department built their own secret spy files on Quakers and 200 other organizations.

It looks like there's already some scope creep. Does anyone else hear a voice in their head saying, "Slippery slope! What's happening to America!"

Mental note: Jane Harman D-CA. Must tell CA relatives about this when her seat is up for reelection.

Ok, so it's standard practice not to read TFA, so not including a link to the wired article in the summary would seem to save time.

However, if you'd like to read the article, I think this is it:

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/03/feds-tout-new-d.html

Sony will NOT be charging a fee.

Sony Drops $50 Fee to Remove Useless Bloatware

Oops.

Next time, do your research to make sure you have the latest info, mmmkay?

Palm was just being a typical business... If you read about Jeff Hawkins and the other initial inventors of the Palm Pilot, it's pretty apparent that the design innovation followed them around with the invention of the first couple of palm pilots. They got bored with the direction that USRobotics and then 3com took the device, so they spun off to form Handspring so they'd have the freedom to add what was missing (expansion modules, speed). And then they got reabsorbed by 3Com, spun off as Palm, and finally got bored and left to do other things in AI and augmented memory and stuff.

I guess some of the interesting tidbits was that they originally designed the Palm Pilot to compete with a pad a paper instead of a portable PC. Jeff would actually go around with a block of wood carved up into a dummy palm pilot and would whip it out and pretend to use it for what he wanted while he was designing the interface for a real one. This contributed to a lot of the usability apparent in the design. That's also part of the reason that color was never that big a deal for them... it wasn't strictly a priority for its success as a information-gathering PDA, and most of the color LCDs at the time were too power hungry and they favored long battery life more.

To be fair, 3Com / Palm contributed a lot of technical improvements on their watch... such as adding the color displays (probably part of the reason Handspring merged, since they were still doing greyscale displays at the time) and bluetooth and wifi. I'd say their major failing was that they simply couldn't get the OS port to Linux fully working.

Anyway, links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Hawkins
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/1999/10/32010

Over the years, I've used a: Handspring Visor, Palm Edge Visorphone, Palm Tungsten, Palm TX

Who says it's not exciting? When extreme numbers are involved (7 wins in a row, par example), even cycling becomes REALLY exciting :)

These guys may be the Lance Armstrongs of car racing... Except they are French, so they won't be as popular. And oh! the car doesn't have cancer although it has one less wheel that a 'regular' car does.

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/03/eco-marathon-08.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microjoule

Cheers!

http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/last-night-the.html
main photo- 660X415
click it (it's a link!) get popup.. with photo, 600X378

what was the point of that?

The first link matches the second link; if they really differed, perhaps that was where the spoilers were to be found.

1st link: http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/last-night-the.html

2nd link: http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/last-night-the.html

The first link matches the second link; if they really differed, perhaps that was where the spoilers were to be found.

1st link: http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/last-night-the.html

2nd link: http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/last-night-the.html

from Groklaw:

This posting comes to you through an anonymizing proxy. Not because I'm somewhere behind the Great Firewall of China or on the Microsoft campus in Redmond... but because Ibiblio's carrier (Cogent) has decided it does not want to peer with TeliaSonera anymore. So they blocked all traffic coming from or destined to TeliaSonera. When they found out that those pesky routers did what they were designed to do - route traffic around damaged nodes - they advertised some cheap routes and subsequently dropped traffic, thereby sealing the leaks. Leaving me, and many with me, without access to a substantial part of the internet. OK, everyone who can not reach Groklaw, please post here :-)

As I am actually posting here it is clear that there are ways around these commercial blockades, just as there are ways around political blockades [1]. Anonymizing proxy servers can be used by those hit by Cogent's last temper trantum until either Cogent and TeliaSonera make up or (preferrably) traffic is routed around Cogent.

If this type of behaviour is to be the future for the commercialised internet the need for services like those provided by Garden Networks or the Tor Project will grow. But the real question of course is whether this type of behaviour should be tolerated from a carrier. It essentially boils down to censorship, something which is not allowed in a common carrier as far as I know. If they had just refused to peer with TeliaSonera they would be in the right. Now that they actively attract and subsequently drop traffic they have crossed a line. If I were to be a Cogent customer I would seriously consider to move my business elsewhere or at least consider to relegate Cogent to the role of backup carrier. So Ibiblio, if you are reading this message from behind the wall...

[1]as predicted in many a cyberpunk novel the differences between politics and commerce continue to dwindle until they are all but indiscernible...

They're no match for the "the world's most formidable hacker posse"!!! Round 'em up ya'll! Oh bother, I'm so disenchanted with all this that I can't even make jokes any more. Just what we friggin' need, yet another l33t cyber-whatever group to keep us safe.

I told ya so's from the handful of people who own iPods but would prefer a subscription model. Personally, I'm concerned that the smaller artists will be screwed. I wonder if they'll divy up the money based on clout, or the music you actually listen to? I mean, with subscriptions, you're likely to download a lot of crap you'd never listen to just so it's handy when your friends want to listen to radio trash. You've got a 160 GB iPod, why not? More likely, you'll be listening to the obscure long tail stuff than any of that pop culture junk anyhow. So you download a larger portion of stuff you'll never listen to, and the musicians you actually listen to won't get paid as much. For instance, I like Pink Floyd. They're an old established band, lots of works. I'd download their entire collection, just in case I want to hear it sometime, but I doubt I'd listen to more than one or two songs a month. On the other hand, I've listened to Blond Redhead's song 23 111 times since I purchase it on 1/30/08 according to iTunes. Even if I downloaded the entire Blonde Redhead collection, they simply don't have nearly the number of tracks that Pink Floyd has. Does that then mean that Pink Floyd makes four times as much money as Blonde Redhead, yet I listened to Blonde Redhead 50 times more frequently? As it is now, the only Pink Floyd I have is from old cds I ripped. I don't plan on buying any more, even though there's quite a lot of it that I don't have. It's just so played out.

The music labels already don't care very much for Apple and its iPod + iTunes monopoly. They are losing control of paid distribution (never mind P2P) to their new gatekeeper and key master, Steve Jobs. The following quote is excerpted from an article posted earlier today, How Apple Got Everything Right By Doing Everything Wrong

But not everyone sees Apple's all-or-nothing approach in such benign terms. The music and film industries, in particular, worry that Jobs has become a gatekeeper for all digital content. Doug Morris, CEO of Universal Music, has accused iTunes of leaving labels powerless to negotiate with it. (Ironically, it was the labels themselves that insisted on the DRM that confines iTunes purchases to the iPod, and that they now protest.) "Apple has destroyed the music business," NBC Universal chief Jeff Zucker told an audience at Syracuse University. "If we don't take control on the video side, [they'll] do the same." At a media business conference held during the early days of the Hollywood writers' strike, Michael Eisner argued that Apple was the union's real enemy: "[The studios] make deals with Steve Jobs, who takes them to the cleaners. They make all these kinds of things, and who's making money? Apple!"

The labels have already locked themselves into Steve's golden iHandcuffs with DRM on the iPod + iTunes platform with fixed price songs so they will be very careful before they give over even more power to Apple to run their business, or what is left of it anyway. I do not see them agreeing to a monthly subscription for the entire iTunes catalogs, such a move would signal complete and utter desperation on the part of the music labels.

Read the entire article on one page... *

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-04/bz_apple?currentPage=all

So much better than flipping, flipping, flipping through pages and waiting for reloads. It's the print version, so you can use it that way too -- long article so print and read offline.

* = Assumes you plan on actually reading the article. ;-)

You may be interested in Wired's musings on Clarke. Great photo at the top of the article.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the visual acuity of Apple fanbois might be adversely affected.

Here you go

So obsessed with your paranoia about Clinton, that you can't see Bush's utter violation of the Fourteenth Amendment?

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2007/06/spy_room

U.K. Special Forces has been using something like this for a few years now:

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/01/72543

Their $3,000 WASP is a little cheaper than a $10,000,000 BAT ...

_f

If you aren't doing anything wrong, what have you to hide?

I am not sure which country you are in but over here in the US our next likely president (Barack Obama) would like to 'defer' manned space flight for 5 years to pay for additional education programs.

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/11/obama-pits-huma.html

]{

http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2005/01/66198 actually there have been cases of confirmed survival and immunity.