Profit from forcing MS to rethink the space limit and forcing ISPs to rethink their business model. I couldn't care less about online storage, but I'd love to be able to get a decent connection speed (particularly upstream) without having to spend three hours haggling on the phone with my ISP.
Why can't people stop voting based primarily on party? I'd be much more comfortable voting in someone who didn't hide behind a partisan curtain. (Then again, I suppose the country, probably the whole world, is full of people who blindly choose based on name recognition.)
I suppose the car analogy actually fits here. If I pay for something, I should be entitled to replace a scratched disc however I can, so long as it doesn't involve taking it from someone else. It's truly a sad state of affairs when merely replacing something (in almost literally unlimited supply) brands me a pirate.
And when they do, a good portion of the listeners will likely just go back to downloading via P2P networks or find a station that never paid license fees in the first place. A few will complain to someone who can do something about it, but a large corporation can pretty much buy victory (be it through paying convincing speakers to push their agenda or by paying the people they're trying to convince). Either way, a good lot of stations will probably shut down rather than paying such ridiculous fees, meaning that this idea will probably lose money. Let the music 'industry' choke itself and move on.
1. I'm certain MS has backups for that very reason. 2. If MS is right about the number of pirated copies, a fair amount of home users won't even bat an eye, AIM chatrooms will go silent, a few test servers will go off for a while, and a few highschool computer classes will be out for a day or two. 2. Before you try to shoot down that last point, Win2k is still filling a lot of the business slots due to its resource efficiency (and rightly so).
There are much more destructive attacks, like hijacking Windows Update and then DDOSing the DNS servers accross the US, essentially shutting down a section of the Internet for nearly a day. (I'm pretty sure someone mentioned that, but it is a good idea.)
Fixed. Seriously, why not? At most that site costs around $1,000 to run, obviously meaningless if they can afford to shill out $1,000,000 for the site in the first place. Probably less since it's not providing much content (such as UI mod downloads). Forcing people away from a familiar interface certainly won't increase ad revenue. On an added note, the talent calculator is quite useful.
That makes absolutely no sense. What good would updates for Windows do on a Linux distro? Also, I remember this being pointed out around 2004. It has nothing to do with the distro, you just have to be running WINE.
Shiny is bad. Touchscreens aren't always a good thing. I don't want to have to look at the screen while dialing/texting. For that matter, I don't want to end up obsessively cleaning the thing to keep it shiny and to keep the screen clean after all of that dialing/texting. Besides, I want a phone that can handle a reasonable amount of accidental drops. If I want a fashion accessory, I'll get a new jacket or some sunglasses, not a new phone.
With cable, you'd have to offer free trials to get people hooked on your content as well.
That's actually a rather interesting idea. With all of the people subscribing to digital cable and satellite services right now, it really shouldn't be to difficult to allow people to do that.
I never said anything about releasing it. I was talking about only using it in places where security is absolutely vital. How easy do you think it would be to make a virus for Windows if all you knew about Windows was that it's an operating system.
Call it what you will, but it's still ridiculous. Think about it this way: That essentially means that no site with an auction service can sell goods normally. This clearly falls in the 'obvious' category.
There are plenty of UNIX worms out there. Why stick to any publicly-available OS if there's such a perceived threat? It would be rather expensive to make an OS and the needed applications from scratch, but you can't attack something if you don't even know what it is. Besides, it looks like the US is putting some money into counter-attacking, so why not just use that money to make the other side's attacks do nothing at all (except frustrate the attackers)?
Granted, you're just trolling, but I really have to point out that everyone likes inexpensive goods. That's the whole point of trade - getting what you can for the least amount of money.
This leads me to wonder, if they don't have common-carrier status to data transmission, why hasn't anyone brought the big telcos up for allowing illegal material to go across on their data lines?
The same reason there isn't a giant crater where the servers running Youtube are. All an ISP (or any content provider) is obligated to do is comply with takedown notices (either by terminating an account or passing on the notice to get the user to stop seeding a torrent). It doesn't take more than a quick search on a torrent tracker or some other P2P program to find out whether or not something's being widely distributed and who's distributing it. This 'one size fits all' method will lead to nothing more than a long battle between ISPs and customers, likely becoming more expensive than terminating accounts and passing on takedown notices.
Follow suit with clean energy and preparation, or follow suit with nuclear attacks, throwing the world back several centuries in technological development?
And how long has Verizon been doing this now? Surely there has to be some law that prevents people from sitting on a patent for years after someone's infringed upon it 'in broad daylight'. Also, it would be really nice if people had to show that they had a product, or present yearly updates on their progress making whatever they have a patent on. It would be more work, but if people are being granted what amounts to a monopoly on something, perhaps it should be taken more seriously than this.
Slashdot Mirror
Profit from forcing MS to rethink the space limit and forcing ISPs to rethink their business model.
I couldn't care less about online storage, but I'd love to be able to get a decent connection speed (particularly upstream) without having to spend three hours haggling on the phone with my ISP.
Why can't people stop voting based primarily on party? I'd be much more comfortable voting in someone who didn't hide behind a partisan curtain. (Then again, I suppose the country, probably the whole world, is full of people who blindly choose based on name recognition.)
I suppose the car analogy actually fits here.
If I pay for something, I should be entitled to replace a scratched disc however I can, so long as it doesn't involve taking it from someone else. It's truly a sad state of affairs when merely replacing something (in almost literally unlimited supply) brands me a pirate.
And when they do, a good portion of the listeners will likely just go back to downloading via P2P networks or find a station that never paid license fees in the first place.
A few will complain to someone who can do something about it, but a large corporation can pretty much buy victory (be it through paying convincing speakers to push their agenda or by paying the people they're trying to convince).
Either way, a good lot of stations will probably shut down rather than paying such ridiculous fees, meaning that this idea will probably lose money. Let the music 'industry' choke itself and move on.
Jealousy? War and malware can be profitable. (Although, 'cyber warfare' seems like pointless, expensive ePeen flexing.)
If only more people thought like you.
Rarely do I chance to hear the words "The cable's out again. Call Congress."
Who's going to actually do anything about it if it's only for one day?
Of course, editing would kill the whole karma system unless there were something like a 'see original post' link on edited posts.
1. I'm certain MS has backups for that very reason.
2. If MS is right about the number of pirated copies, a fair amount of home users won't even bat an eye, AIM chatrooms will go silent, a few test servers will go off for a while, and a few highschool computer classes will be out for a day or two.
2. Before you try to shoot down that last point, Win2k is still filling a lot of the business slots due to its resource efficiency (and rightly so).
There are much more destructive attacks, like hijacking Windows Update and then DDOSing the DNS servers accross the US, essentially shutting down a section of the Internet for nearly a day. (I'm pretty sure someone mentioned that, but it is a good idea.)
Fixed.
Seriously, why not? At most that site costs around $1,000 to run, obviously meaningless if they can afford to shill out $1,000,000 for the site in the first place. Probably less since it's not providing much content (such as UI mod downloads). Forcing people away from a familiar interface certainly won't increase ad revenue.
On an added note, the talent calculator is quite useful.
Yes. But how many Linuxes can it run?
Depends. Are we talking about text, page scans, or the actual Library of Congress? What do you mean by 'it'?
Schools don't deserve to be able to squander money on glossy paint, but don't you think that students deserve current textbooks?
That makes absolutely no sense. What good would updates for Windows do on a Linux distro?
Also, I remember this being pointed out around 2004. It has nothing to do with the distro, you just have to be running WINE.
Shiny is bad. Touchscreens aren't always a good thing. I don't want to have to look at the screen while dialing/texting. For that matter, I don't want to end up obsessively cleaning the thing to keep it shiny and to keep the screen clean after all of that dialing/texting.
Besides, I want a phone that can handle a reasonable amount of accidental drops. If I want a fashion accessory, I'll get a new jacket or some sunglasses, not a new phone.
I never said anything about releasing it. I was talking about only using it in places where security is absolutely vital. How easy do you think it would be to make a virus for Windows if all you knew about Windows was that it's an operating system.
Call it what you will, but it's still ridiculous. Think about it this way: That essentially means that no site with an auction service can sell goods normally. This clearly falls in the 'obvious' category.
There are plenty of UNIX worms out there. Why stick to any publicly-available OS if there's such a perceived threat? It would be rather expensive to make an OS and the needed applications from scratch, but you can't attack something if you don't even know what it is.
Besides, it looks like the US is putting some money into counter-attacking, so why not just use that money to make the other side's attacks do nothing at all (except frustrate the attackers)?
Granted, you're just trolling, but I really have to point out that everyone likes inexpensive goods. That's the whole point of trade - getting what you can for the least amount of money.
The same reason there isn't a giant crater where the servers running Youtube are.
All an ISP (or any content provider) is obligated to do is comply with takedown notices (either by terminating an account or passing on the notice to get the user to stop seeding a torrent).
It doesn't take more than a quick search on a torrent tracker or some other P2P program to find out whether or not something's being widely distributed and who's distributing it. This 'one size fits all' method will lead to nothing more than a long battle between ISPs and customers, likely becoming more expensive than terminating accounts and passing on takedown notices.
...will be carving shit into poles.
Follow suit with clean energy and preparation, or follow suit with nuclear attacks, throwing the world back several centuries in technological development?
And how long has Verizon been doing this now? Surely there has to be some law that prevents people from sitting on a patent for years after someone's infringed upon it 'in broad daylight'.
Also, it would be really nice if people had to show that they had a product, or present yearly updates on their progress making whatever they have a patent on. It would be more work, but if people are being granted what amounts to a monopoly on something, perhaps it should be taken more seriously than this.