"At best, the network-management restrictions proposed by Free Press and others would inflict wasteful costs on broadband providers in the form of expensive and needless capacity upgrades -- costs that would ultimately be passed through to end users, raise broadband prices across the board, and force ordinary broadband consumers to subsidize the bandwidth-hogging activities of a few."
So if the customer actually uses what they have paid for they should be charged more!
They are basically saying "Please let us prevent customers from using what we sold them, we don't want to deliver the goods but will take their money"
I don't see it as an attack. It sounds like Opera didn't respond to Mozilla's notification at all. In addition, it's not Mozilla's obligation to make sure that Opera's secure, and it is their obligation to be open with the community to the extent that they can be while still being secure. Sometimes waiting to disclose can bite you in the end like it did with php a few months back. Add to that the bullshit excuse that you can't evaluate a security risk in one day and I think that Opera's just lashing out because they're embarrassed that they have a security flaw. I say well done Mozilla
They are looking out for the end users of both system even when they are only obligated to look after their own.
Opera needs to stop winging and be thankful they had the flaw pointed out to them.
Do they think the ISPs will voluntarily give up a 30% plus chunk of their revenue stream? In Australia our broadband isn't very fast I know people who have 2-3 ADSL lines for downloading that's ALOT of money the ISPs are going to miss out on.
I don't see how its possible for them to identify down loaders we will all just block the Australian ip range since almost all decent seeds are overseas due to Australia's crappy board band.
The thing is though, it's not even the viruses for me. I have been running XP and previous versions of Windows for years and years, and I haven't had a virus since Blaster. Most of the time I don't even bother running an antivirus program or a firewall and my system is still clean. If you have a little bit of common sense your chance of being infected is very low. Id almost forgotten that malware even existed.
It doesn't take much to secure a system these days other than common sense which is unfortunately a depleted resource these days.
theft implies denial of use. if you don't deny use, it's not theft.
the doesn't mean that copyright infringement is morally right, but it does mean copyright infringement isn't theft. since its not hurting anybody I fail to see how it can be immoral I'm even supplying my own bandwidth.
But now I see that he, too, is a copyright monger, he just wants the copyrights for himself rather than for the label. Or maybe he just wants to be paid for his work. I'm no fan of the RIAA, and have downloaded my fair share of torrents, but I wouldn't hold it against someone for wanting to stop the theft of their product. If they get all ignorant-Metallicaish about it, that's another thing, but do we really chastise people for wanting to stop the theft of their work? But piracy isn't theft.
So, from the perspective of liability, IMO the webmaster is responsible for exercising due diligence in creating a robots.txt that would have prevented booby thumbnails from turning up on google when little johnny was searching for legos (spelled 'big titty chicks', but he really meant legos... his mom swears). I agree this is just another case of people not takeing responsibility for their actions. They could use robots.txt or worksomething out with google and yahoo such as an additional command for the robots.txt
"Adult: yes" or "Adult: no"
This is just a publicity stunt to say "Hey look we are trying to protect your children" in stead of actually doing something productive.
Well, its not an "end-all" solution however it solves the immediate problem. However chances are in 10-15 years we won't even be using Torrents we will have moved on to another form of P2P. and in 50-100 years time
We'll be colocating servers to the moon and reverting back to good old http
Its not expensive at all its called progress and it requires investment.
We got rid of AMPS in Australia long ago and our biggest carrier (95% population coverage) is now getting rid of its CDMA network in favor of a newer system.
I've been to third world countries that have excellent GSM coverage.
Remember, people who really want to get at your stuff will do so no matter how smart you think your security is. Locks are just for keeping honest people away. Sorry but thats just absurd.
There are hundreds and thousands of case's where security has stopped crimminals in their tracks. Most people cant get past a $30 lock.
No, it wasn't. I don't want privacy and anonymity. I don't trust people, so I won't support technology that allows them to operate from the shadows with impunity. As far as I'm concerned, if you use it, you're guilty. Not sure if a read that correctly.
But you don't trust people so you DONT want privacy or anonymity from them.
I don't trust people so I WANT this technology that allows people to protect themselves.
As far as your concerned people are guilty until they can prove their innocence?!
More Apple advertising?... could you keep me informed about the SATA drives that Dell is offering too?
The iPhone invention/launch was news-worthy because it was a new "innovative" product, its network transfering speed and/or type is a service feature, something you'l find out when you go to buy an iPhone. Why was it news worthy?
the iPhone offers nothing new or special apart from a touchscreen and that makes me less likely to buy it.
Some of the callers even go out of their way to tell me that since they are politicians, charitable organizations or what have you, they are exempt. just the people I DON'T want calling me.
Slashdot Mirror
~Dan
"At best, the network-management restrictions proposed by Free Press and others would inflict wasteful costs on broadband providers in the form of expensive and needless capacity upgrades -- costs that would ultimately be passed through to end users, raise broadband prices across the board, and force ordinary broadband consumers to subsidize the bandwidth-hogging activities of a few."
So if the customer actually uses what they have paid for they should be charged more!
They are basically saying "Please let us prevent customers from using what we sold them, we don't want to deliver the goods but will take their money"
This is Fraud
~Dan
They are looking out for the end users of both system even when they are only obligated to look after their own.
Opera needs to stop winging and be thankful they had the flaw pointed out to them.
~Dan
Is there no Privacy act in the UK?
Im surprised this is even legal.
TO the end of commercialised music all this copyright laws do is cause troule, hinder freedom of speech and privacy.
Just look at the stories on slashdot alot of the bullshit is a result of the music industry its time for it to go.
that's ALOT of money the ISPs are going to miss out on.
I don't see how its possible for them to identify down loaders we will all just block the Australian ip range since almost all decent seeds are overseas due to Australia's crappy board band.
~Dan
It doesn't take much to secure a system these days other than common sense which is unfortunately a depleted resource these days.
~Dan
For me it would be the downfall of the entire music industy.
~Dan
the doesn't mean that copyright infringement is morally right, but it does mean copyright infringement isn't theft. since its not hurting anybody I fail to see how it can be immoral I'm even supplying my own bandwidth.
~Dan
Anyone who steps in the way of progress should be punished I wish the piratebay could counter sue these idiots.
~Dan
This is just a moneygrab.
Bittorrent is inherently more secure than lime wire,
and a hell of ALOT more secure than idiots losing laptops.
~Dan
In that case
/"
"User-agent: *
Disallow:
In robots.txt problem solved.
They could use robots.txt or worksomething out with google and yahoo such as an additional command for the robots.txt
"Adult: yes" or "Adult: no"
This is just a publicity stunt to say "Hey look we are trying to protect your children" in stead of actually doing something productive.
~Dan
We'll be colocating servers to the moon and reverting back to good old http
~Dan
That aside what is the battery life like for a bluetooth controller?
I wouldent expect it to be as good as infared.
"There is one big advantage to an analog phone"
Yes you wont be mugged for your phone!
~Dan
Its not expensive at all
its called progress and it requires investment.
We got rid of AMPS in Australia long ago and our biggest carrier (95% population coverage) is now getting rid of its CDMA network in favor of a newer system.
I've been to third world countries that have excellent GSM coverage.
~Dan
Honestly, how much of your time do you spend in jury duty? Is that really your biggest concern over losing the analog cell phone network?
I didn't realise the United States was so stone age with technology.I haven't seen an analogue phone since the 90s
There are hundreds and thousands of case's where security has stopped crimminals in their tracks. Most people cant get past a $30 lock.
~Dan
But you don't trust people so you DONT want privacy or anonymity from them.
I don't trust people so I WANT this technology that allows people to protect themselves.
As far as your concerned people are guilty until they can prove their innocence?!
~Dan
The iPhone invention/launch was news-worthy because it was a new "innovative" product, its network transfering speed and/or type is a service feature, something you'l find out when you go to buy an iPhone. Why was it news worthy?
the iPhone offers nothing new or special apart from a touchscreen and that makes me less likely to buy it.
~Dan
Comcast are no longer a "common carrier"
bring on the RIAA lawsuits.
~Dan
Privacy and Freedom of speech do conflict with each other from time to time.
But,
Can you really have true freedom of speech without anonymity?
~Dan