Who said the school sold them the addresses? All the article said was that they were "obtained legally". Neither scraping nor address-guessing are illegal, ergo they could have been collected through those "legal" (albeit intrusive) means.
Apropos of nothing... On a whim I checked out their "careers" page and discovered that they've been looking for an India-based Senior Software Engineer......since 13 January 2004. That's over a year and a half!
It probably doesn't mean anything, but I can't help but smirk. Must see a doctor about that someday.
As others have pointed out, C takes on liability. What do they get in return? Aside from ideological satisfaction and a sense of being 1337 (which may be enough), what would compel anyone to act as C?
Don't feel too bad: Your actions doubtlessly made a difference by raising the SEC's consciousness level "through the system". You deserve credit for taking the time to do so.
Sure, intelligent people can have differing opinions on what it means to be "open". And to be honest, I don't feel qualified to judge Apple's license. So maybe I spoke too soon... but in any case I'll let others have that argument.:)
Anyone remember The OpenPPC Project? This was something Ralph Giles and I started a few years ago, to follow up on a PPC-based reference board designed by IBM. Unfortunately a parts problem prevented it from ever being produced commercially, despite creation of a commercial company (Pop Computers) to manage the process.
Anyway... while the Apple Mini/OSX solution isn't the same thing philosophically, I'm fairly content that it solves most of the problems for which that project was created: It's Unix, it's cheap, it's PPC.
What it *isn't* is open-source in any real way. As someone who's now more influenced by practical than ideological concerns these days, I'm content.
Cherry OS pretty much sucks right now--it'll probably die on the vine anyway.
People buy things because of their belief they'll satisfy a want. There are plenty of people who want to run Mac OS X on their PC. They'll do a search for such a product, and come up with one "hit": CherryOS.
For every hundred people who find Maui-X's Web site this way -- and give them money based on the best information they have -- maybe one of them will also read Slashdot or some other forum where geeks say, "CherryOS sux0rs!"
Don't kid yourself: Geekdom is a laughably insignificant factor in how consumer technology decisions are made. Geek influence correlates to the geekiness of the product.
But the benefits CherryOS promises are NOT primarily geeky. Their tagline: "Experience Mac OS X on your PC". You don't need a CS degree to understand that.
I disagree. Every new commercialization has its own challenges, has to be met with new social inventions, and is a new "product" in and of itself. It's not just a matter of "offer it for sale and advertize the hell out of it". It's a process as complicated as programming -- and with an incalculably higher risk.
By your reasoning, there's no innovation in Linux, because 40 years ago someone wrote Space Wars.
AOL has a long history of suits against spammers. See this list of litigation they've filed.
Pity they often place themselves on the wrong side of legislative battles, though. They were a driving force behind the CAN-SPAM Act, which guarantees the right to send unsolicited, commercial, bulk email.
Technology industry pioneer (Genuity, mailorder.com) Rodney Joffe talked about filing a class-action suit against an SMS spammer way back in 2001 article 1 | article 2 -- search for "Joffe". Very similar.
I don't know whether he ever actually filed papers, or what became of it. Anyone?
I read the transcript. Regardless of whether you agree with him, Powell held his own with dignity and respect. Stern's used the "Big Lie" strategy: Repeat something enough, and it seems like truth. Fine for entertainment, appalling for matters of law. Top that with ad hominem attacks and stonewaling, and you get quite a performance.
...is, coincidentally, the fellow who runs the Vintage Computer Festival, just mentioned in Slashdot. That would be Sam Ismail, whose private data-recovery company is VintageTech.
I've been going to the Vintage Computer Festival for years, and it's always a great time.The nostalgia factor alone is worth the cost of admission, PLUS you're sure to learn something new every time you go. Sam Ismail always does a great job.
And when you're done playing with historical microcomputers at the VCF, walk down the hall to see the "heavy iron" that led to PCs at the Compter History Museum.
When electronic mail arrived, we didn't run around flumoxed because there was no word for it.
I lived through an interesting development in the invention of a word for "email".
In 1991, I was a volunteer at the World Esperanto Association. The day-to-day office language is, of course, Esperanto. (Good thing, too: Its staff is from a half-dozen different countries, with four or five different native languages.)
I was an advocate for bringing the office online, putzing around on FIDOnet mail exchanges and contacting the Netherlands UNIX User's Group to see about getting a direct link.
The office's General Director was a bit old-fashioned. Learning of my off-hours email explorations, he said, "Why do we need that? We already have a Telex machine!" But he soon saw the utility of email when Esperantists from around the world started contacting by email through me, the result of another Esperantist's co-advocate's urging.
He proposed that the word for email be "tomo", in honor of my first name, and that the verb be "tomi". ("Sendu tiun tomon al mia frato, mi petas.") I was tickled.
But of course his influence was limited to the office, and not always every part of it.;) So the current and permanent word is an analog of the English: the obvious "e-pos'to", an abbreviation of "elektronikan pos'ton".
The new law appears to be more protectionist than previous ones, which required either (a) opt-out by the recipient, (b) status as an ISP, or (c) evidence of fraud.
First off, let's assume that DNC lists work for phone and paper direct marketing. (We all know that they don't, but let's pretend.)
DNE lists *can't* work, for several reasons:
* There's not a one-to-one correlation between people and email addresses. Many (most?) people have several addresses: Even AOL members get up to eight. So do those people have to "unsubscribe" eight times? What about those of us who invent new email addresses for different uses? It's not unusual for someone to have dozens or even hundreds of addresses.
* Let's not forget role addresses: root, webmaster, postmaster, etc. Someone would have to put those on the DNE list.
* What about the poor schmuck who gets "fallback", i.e. [anything]@domain.com? That's the default in many systems.
* Some email addresses have several people connected to them -- for example, mailing lists. Who unsubscribes those?
* Some email addresses have *no* people connected to them -- for example, those controlling processes. Would anyone even know to add them to the DNE?
Some proposals have included a provision that allows one to add entire domains to a DNE list. These are somewhat better, but they have several problems with them. For one, it would trump the individual preferences of those using the domain.
But ultimately, the main problem is that *the burden shouldn't be on the recipient*. Unlike phone (a common carrier) or postal mailboxes (government property), email boxes are private property, requiring private funds. Access without permission is trespass.
BTW, see law.spamcon.org for a list of states with current antispam laws. I live in one with an opt-in law: California Business and Professions Code 17538.45.
Slashdot Mirror
Who said the school sold them the addresses? All the article said was that they were "obtained legally". Neither scraping nor address-guessing are illegal, ergo they could have been collected through those "legal" (albeit intrusive) means.
Apropos of nothing... On a whim I checked out their "careers" page and discovered that they've been looking for an India-based Senior Software Engineer... ...since 13 January 2004. That's over a year and a half!
It probably doesn't mean anything, but I can't help but smirk. Must see a doctor about that someday.
As others have pointed out, C takes on liability. What do they get in return? Aside from ideological satisfaction and a sense of being 1337 (which may be enough), what would compel anyone to act as C?
I remember hearing once that 80% of the U.S. lives within two hours of a coast. Don't remember the source, though.
Don't feel too bad: Your actions doubtlessly made a difference by raising the SEC's consciousness level "through the system". You deserve credit for taking the time to do so.
Sure, intelligent people can have differing opinions on what it means to be "open". And to be honest, I don't feel qualified to judge Apple's license. So maybe I spoke too soon... but in any case I'll let others have that argument. :)
Anyone remember The OpenPPC Project? This was something Ralph Giles and I started a few years ago, to follow up on a PPC-based reference board designed by IBM. Unfortunately a parts problem prevented it from ever being produced commercially, despite creation of a commercial company (Pop Computers) to manage the process.
Anyway... while the Apple Mini/OSX solution isn't the same thing philosophically, I'm fairly content that it solves most of the problems for which that project was created: It's Unix, it's cheap, it's PPC.
What it *isn't* is open-source in any real way. As someone who's now more influenced by practical than ideological concerns these days, I'm content.
Cherry OS pretty much sucks right now--it'll probably die on the vine anyway.
People buy things because of their belief they'll satisfy a want. There are plenty of people who want to run Mac OS X on their PC. They'll do a search for such a product, and come up with one "hit": CherryOS.
For every hundred people who find Maui-X's Web site this way -- and give them money based on the best information they have -- maybe one of them will also read Slashdot or some other forum where geeks say, "CherryOS sux0rs!"
Don't kid yourself: Geekdom is a laughably insignificant factor in how consumer technology decisions are made. Geek influence correlates to the geekiness of the product.
But the benefits CherryOS promises are NOT primarily geeky. Their tagline: "Experience Mac OS X on your PC". You don't need a CS degree to understand that.
I disagree. Every new commercialization has its own challenges, has to be met with new social inventions, and is a new "product" in and of itself. It's not just a matter of "offer it for sale and advertize the hell out of it". It's a process as complicated as programming -- and with an incalculably higher risk.
By your reasoning, there's no innovation in Linux, because 40 years ago someone wrote Space Wars.
Your name is apt: I can only assume this is a troll.
Got your house, car, and all other assets through civil forfeiture! And you can't come back to visit your family! Thanks for playing.
FYI, she's not overweight but rather very active
The two are not opposites.
Dumbass.
AOL has a long history of suits against spammers. See this list of litigation they've filed.
Pity they often place themselves on the wrong side of legislative battles, though. They were a driving force behind the CAN-SPAM Act, which guarantees the right to send unsolicited, commercial, bulk email.
Technology industry pioneer (Genuity, mailorder.com) Rodney Joffe talked about filing a class-action suit against an SMS spammer way back in 2001 article 1 | article 2 -- search for "Joffe". Very similar.
I don't know whether he ever actually filed papers, or what became of it. Anyone?
I read the transcript. Regardless of whether you agree with him, Powell held his own with dignity and respect. Stern's used the "Big Lie" strategy: Repeat something enough, and it seems like truth. Fine for entertainment, appalling for matters of law. Top that with ad hominem attacks and stonewaling, and you get quite a performance.
I'm disgusted, and hope he loses big.
...it's still better than Windown XP.
His name is Sanford Wallace. No "t".
...is, coincidentally, the fellow who runs the Vintage Computer Festival, just mentioned in Slashdot. That would be Sam Ismail, whose private data-recovery company is VintageTech.
I've been going to the Vintage Computer Festival for years, and it's always a great time.The nostalgia factor alone is worth the cost of admission, PLUS you're sure to learn something new every time you go. Sam Ismail always does a great job.
And when you're done playing with historical microcomputers at the VCF, walk down the hall to see the "heavy iron" that led to PCs at the Compter History Museum.
This show kicks ass. Don't miss it.
Ah, thanks for the correction. I'm not really involved in Esperantujo these days, and my language is iom fus'a. :)
The other advocate was Derk Ederveen, incidentally.
When electronic mail arrived, we didn't run around flumoxed because there was no word for it.
;) So the current and permanent word is an analog of the English: the obvious "e-pos'to", an abbreviation of "elektronikan pos'ton".
I lived through an interesting development in the invention of a word for "email".
In 1991, I was a volunteer at the World Esperanto Association. The day-to-day office language is, of course, Esperanto. (Good thing, too: Its staff is from a half-dozen different countries, with four or five different native languages.)
I was an advocate for bringing the office online, putzing around on FIDOnet mail exchanges and contacting the Netherlands UNIX User's Group to see about getting a direct link.
The office's General Director was a bit old-fashioned. Learning of my off-hours email explorations, he said, "Why do we need that? We already have a Telex machine!" But he soon saw the utility of email when Esperantists from around the world started contacting by email through me, the result of another Esperantist's co-advocate's urging.
He proposed that the word for email be "tomo", in honor of my first name, and that the verb be "tomi". ("Sendu tiun tomon al mia frato, mi petas.") I was tickled.
But of course his influence was limited to the office, and not always every part of it.
Off-topic, but fun!
Man, I wish you were *my* dad.
The ununpentium: Element number 114.9999659899937582.
Three laws have been in effect in California since 1998. They've not been widely used, but about a dozen cases that I know about have resulted in positive results for the prosecutors. You can follow current cases on the Suespammers discussion list, or read the archives.
The new law appears to be more protectionist than previous ones, which required either (a) opt-out by the recipient, (b) status as an ISP, or (c) evidence of fraud.
--Tom Geller
Founder, SpamCon Foundation
First off, let's assume that DNC lists work for phone and paper direct marketing. (We all know that they don't, but let's pretend.)
DNE lists *can't* work, for several reasons:
* There's not a one-to-one correlation between people and email addresses. Many (most?) people have several addresses: Even AOL members get up to eight. So do those people have to "unsubscribe" eight times? What about those of us who invent new email addresses for different uses? It's not unusual for someone to have dozens or even hundreds of addresses.
* Let's not forget role addresses: root, webmaster, postmaster, etc. Someone would have to put those on the DNE list.
* What about the poor schmuck who gets "fallback", i.e. [anything]@domain.com? That's the default in many systems.
* Some email addresses have several people connected to them -- for example, mailing lists. Who unsubscribes those?
* Some email addresses have *no* people connected to them -- for example, those controlling processes. Would anyone even know to add them to the DNE?
Some proposals have included a provision that allows one to add entire domains to a DNE list. These are somewhat better, but they have several problems with them. For one, it would trump the individual preferences of those using the domain.
But ultimately, the main problem is that *the burden shouldn't be on the recipient*. Unlike phone (a common carrier) or postal mailboxes (government property), email boxes are private property, requiring private funds. Access without permission is trespass.
BTW, see law.spamcon.org for a list of states with current antispam laws. I live in one with an opt-in law: California Business and Professions Code 17538.45.
--Tom Geller
Founder, SpamCon Foundation