Well DS9 did it too. They brought in Worf as a regular character in order to make it more attractive the TNG fans
Two key differences. First, he was, as you note, a regular character. It wasn't just a guest appearance.
Second, it made sense in terms of the story. One of the things DS9 did much better than both earlier and later ST series is flesh out other races (yes, other ST series had important aliens, but they were isolated...only DS9 made it so the whole alien race was important--compare, for example, the Ferengi on DS9 and TNG). The Klingons were an important part of the ongoing story. Even if there had been no Worf from TNG, it would have made sense for them to invent the character for DS9.
I think, the form-factor is great. However, that said they would make a lousy server. It has a very slow, laptop HDD not at all optimized for use 7/24
What about servers with light load? The thing that is very interesting about this Mac Mini colocation deal is that the monthly cost is comparable to shared hosting plans. Sure, you wouldn't want to stick 300 virtual hosts on a Mac Mini...but how about taking one site from a virtual host and putting it on a dedicated Mini? That looks quite attractive for those of us who would like more control than we get on shared hosting, but don't have high load sites.
I personally fail to see any reason to change mid-stride like this anyways. Was the old opt-in copyright law in some way broken?
It was broken in the sense that it was incompatible with the law of pretty much every other country in the world. The change was done to make US law compatible with the Berne Convention, so the US could join.
Using PGP/GPG requires much more than remembering just a passphrase. You have to deal with key generation, you have to find and import other people's keys, if you aren't using one of the few email clients with support built in you have to use awkward plugins and manually specify that you want encryption. You have to remember how to deal with attachments.
PGP/GPG is far too complicated to be encryption for the masses, which is what this new one seems to be trying to be. This requires automating all of that.
At least if it is a new Mac...just reinstall from the system software disc, and select the option to include X11. It's on the disc and the installer knows about it...it simply isn't included in the default install that Apple does.
Actually, if Apple has a hidden agenda here, it is to make future rumors less likely to be believed. Consider what will happen a year from now, before the next January MacWorld, as the usual rumors fly. If a rumor seems pretty creditable, but Apple does not sue the rumor sites, a lot of people will think "well...if that rumor were accurate, Apple would be suing".
What he is saying is, you can't alter the permissions of the hosts file on windows, but with the Unix permission system, you could make the permissions be 644, owner root, and no regular user (or compromised program running AS a regular user) could alter that file
So instead you simply modify the library path to include a directory that is writable, and drop a compromised resolver library in there.
What I can't understand from this is WHY Blizzard would be opposed to this? If a mini-economy were to open up around your game, isn't that a good thing?
No, it's not a good thing, because in a game like this, you want the economy of the game to be as separate as possible from the real-world economy. It's a fantasy world, and it diminishes the fantasy if your ability to succeed in the game world depends on how much discretionary income you have in the real world.
The problem was that MelbourneIT transferred the domain *without* any approval from the domain *owner*
But if the domain is locked, then that is not supposed to be possible. To transfer a domain from registrar X to registrar Y, registrar Y basically has to ask registrar X to do it. For a domain that has been locked, X is supposed to say "no" and refuse the transfer.
So, what has been described so far is very puzzling. I can't see how it could be MelbourneIT's fault...but they are accepting blame, so something very strange apparently happened.
I'm confused. They were the receiving registrar of the transfer. However, it was the other registrar, that the domain was transfered from, that seems to me more at fault. Most registrars allow customers to "lock" a domain, which means that it cannot be transferred without the customer notifying the current registrar. Panix says they locked the domain. If that is so, then it should not have been transferable without their permission, no matter what loopholes were in Melbourne's system.
How are they going to prove he "distributed" the movie if he is only serving chunks out piecemeal to various clients?
I mean, can they track other users, to see how many full downloads were obtained only from this guy?
Your notion that you have to distribute the entire movie to violate copyright is interesting. It has no connection with reality, but it is interesting.:-)
That is a script that goes to all the directories I care about (/root,/etc,/srv/www,/usr/local/share, and my home directory), and basically does this for each drive.
cd $DIR
rsync -avz --progress --delete . $MNT/$DIR
where $MNT is where the USB drive mounts.
4. Unmount the drive and unplug it.
This is quick (a few minutes) and easy, and since rsync reads the files from the last backup to figure out what needs to be copied, it should catch it if I develop a bad sector on the USB drive.
I left it out in the above, but the backup script also, before doing the rsyncs, lists my crontab into a file, so that gets backed up.
Why would you want TV out for an HTPC? You'd want DVI--which the Mini has.
For the rest of your points, wireless and bluetooth are BTO options for the Mini, or you can do either via USB. Your audio points would also be addressed by USB.
And isn't the target market for this computer people who already own a Windows machine and would like to switch over?
I think it is even more specific than that...it is the Windows users who own an iPod and are asking themselves "why can't my computer work as easily and well as my iPod, and why can't my other software work as well as iTunes?".
How is whether or not a robot should excrete an ethical question? I can see it being an engineering question, or a question of aesthetics, or of etiquette...but ethics?
What we've seen where I work, with our antivirus/antispyware product is that if we miss something that AdAware of Spybot finds, then poeple say we are ineffective, and if we find something that they miss, people say we are generating false positives in order to frighten people into buying. (And then, when the thing we found that Spybot or AdAware missed actually causes problems, they say we put it there and start saying we pushing spyware).
A lot of people, especially on the popular antispyware forums, have simply decided that Spybot and AdAware are the best that there can possibly be, and anything that differs from them in bad.
Isn't that the point of an office suite? To have everything you would need. If you don't want bloated go use vi,vim,joe,nano,pico,or abiword, or and mutt,pine,so forth
Yup. Here's my view of, say, MS Word compared to other word processors: it has a couple of features that are much much better than anything the others have, and has a zillion useless things that I could do without.
The thing is, even though most people would agree with me on that...they would pick a different "couple of features" as the ones that it does better than everything else.
Having extra things that I can ignore is not a deal breaker, whereas not having those two or three things I find great is a deal breaker.
I remember that Apple has a dead pixel policy many years ago for the early powerbooks that also would not replace units with only a few dead pixels on the LCD displays. Some 133t individuals figured out how to patch the SCSI/HD driver with some code to fake some (more) bad pixels
That's great for laptops, but wouldn't work for separate LCD montiors, since the service people will be hooking it to their system to check. I wonder if you could use static electricity to zap and kill individual pixels, so as to take a monitor with annoying dead pixels, but not enough to reach your manufacturers return limit, and add a few?
Slashdot Mirror
Two key differences. First, he was, as you note, a regular character. It wasn't just a guest appearance.
Second, it made sense in terms of the story. One of the things DS9 did much better than both earlier and later ST series is flesh out other races (yes, other ST series had important aliens, but they were isolated...only DS9 made it so the whole alien race was important--compare, for example, the Ferengi on DS9 and TNG). The Klingons were an important part of the ongoing story. Even if there had been no Worf from TNG, it would have made sense for them to invent the character for DS9.
What about it? Most colocation plans are 100 mbit/second or under (usually well under).
What about servers with light load? The thing that is very interesting about this Mac Mini colocation deal is that the monthly cost is comparable to shared hosting plans. Sure, you wouldn't want to stick 300 virtual hosts on a Mac Mini...but how about taking one site from a virtual host and putting it on a dedicated Mini? That looks quite attractive for those of us who would like more control than we get on shared hosting, but don't have high load sites.
It was broken in the sense that it was incompatible with the law of pretty much every other country in the world. The change was done to make US law compatible with the Berne Convention, so the US could join.
If we prefer non-proprietary stuff, then why do so many of us use MP3, and so few of us use Ogg Vorbis?
Experimentally, we (for pretty much every value of "we" that includes a significant number of people) prefer MP3.
Using PGP/GPG requires much more than remembering just a passphrase. You have to deal with key generation, you have to find and import other people's keys, if you aren't using one of the few email clients with support built in you have to use awkward plugins and manually specify that you want encryption. You have to remember how to deal with attachments.
PGP/GPG is far too complicated to be encryption for the masses, which is what this new one seems to be trying to be. This requires automating all of that.
RTFA. They aren't using a new cryptosystem.
What's wrong with reading the freaking links in the story, which explain this?
Yet pretty much every standard that specifies how lines are terminated specifies CRLF. Some examples: FTP, POP, IMAP, HTTP, NNTP.
CRLF is the world standard for line termination.
My 1.5 GHz PowerBook gets a bit pokey in iDVD, both in laying out the DVD, and in encoding the video when burning.
At least if it is a new Mac...just reinstall from the system software disc, and select the option to include X11. It's on the disc and the installer knows about it...it simply isn't included in the default install that Apple does.
Actually, if Apple has a hidden agenda here, it is to make future rumors less likely to be believed. Consider what will happen a year from now, before the next January MacWorld, as the usual rumors fly. If a rumor seems pretty creditable, but Apple does not sue the rumor sites, a lot of people will think "well...if that rumor were accurate, Apple would be suing".
So instead you simply modify the library path to include a directory that is writable, and drop a compromised resolver library in there.
No, it's not a good thing, because in a game like this, you want the economy of the game to be as separate as possible from the real-world economy. It's a fantasy world, and it diminishes the fantasy if your ability to succeed in the game world depends on how much discretionary income you have in the real world.
But if the domain is locked, then that is not supposed to be possible. To transfer a domain from registrar X to registrar Y, registrar Y basically has to ask registrar X to do it. For a domain that has been locked, X is supposed to say "no" and refuse the transfer.
So, what has been described so far is very puzzling. I can't see how it could be MelbourneIT's fault...but they are accepting blame, so something very strange apparently happened.
The first link in the Netcraft story linked to by the Slashdot article says that. For your convenience, here it is.
I'm confused. They were the receiving registrar of the transfer. However, it was the other registrar, that the domain was transfered from, that seems to me more at fault. Most registrars allow customers to "lock" a domain, which means that it cannot be transferred without the customer notifying the current registrar. Panix says they locked the domain. If that is so, then it should not have been transferable without their permission, no matter what loopholes were in Melbourne's system.
I mean, can they track other users, to see how many full downloads were obtained only from this guy?
Your notion that you have to distribute the entire movie to violate copyright is interesting. It has no connection with reality, but it is interesting. :-)
1. Reach over and plug in USB 120 gig drive.
2. Become root, and go to /root.
3. Type "./backup.sh".
That is a script that goes to all the directories I care about (/root, /etc, /srv/www, /usr/local/share, and my home directory), and basically does this for each drive.
cd $DIR rsync -avz --progress --delete . $MNT/$DIR
where $MNT is where the USB drive mounts.
4. Unmount the drive and unplug it.
This is quick (a few minutes) and easy, and since rsync reads the files from the last backup to figure out what needs to be copied, it should catch it if I develop a bad sector on the USB drive.
I left it out in the above, but the backup script also, before doing the rsyncs, lists my crontab into a file, so that gets backed up.
Why would you want TV out for an HTPC? You'd want DVI--which the Mini has.
For the rest of your points, wireless and bluetooth are BTO options for the Mini, or you can do either via USB. Your audio points would also be addressed by USB.
I think it is even more specific than that...it is the Windows users who own an iPod and are asking themselves "why can't my computer work as easily and well as my iPod, and why can't my other software work as well as iTunes?".
How is whether or not a robot should excrete an ethical question? I can see it being an engineering question, or a question of aesthetics, or of etiquette...but ethics?
A lot of people, especially on the popular antispyware forums, have simply decided that Spybot and AdAware are the best that there can possibly be, and anything that differs from them in bad.
Yup. Here's my view of, say, MS Word compared to other word processors: it has a couple of features that are much much better than anything the others have, and has a zillion useless things that I could do without.
The thing is, even though most people would agree with me on that...they would pick a different "couple of features" as the ones that it does better than everything else.
Having extra things that I can ignore is not a deal breaker, whereas not having those two or three things I find great is a deal breaker.
That's great for laptops, but wouldn't work for separate LCD montiors, since the service people will be hooking it to their system to check. I wonder if you could use static electricity to zap and kill individual pixels, so as to take a monitor with annoying dead pixels, but not enough to reach your manufacturers return limit, and add a few?