Maybe if we could shitcan them on the spot, then the bad ones won't bother running.
Biggest reason they are corrupt as they are right now is that they have no reason to fear the voters. All they have to do is lie through their teeth during campaign season, then once they're safely in office and the only ones who can get rid of them are their fellow politicians, the wolves can safely take off their wool cloaks.
It's a civil matter known as breach of contract, the solution for which is getting sued.
Now if you were forging a mac address in an attempt to masquerade as another subscriber, or hacked the service to get free internet or evade a service termination, that would be different and probably *would* qualify as criminal.
Breaking TOS and having your service yoinked is like going shopping at a grocery store and getting thrown out by security for swearing, or like getting an eviction notice from your landlord because you didn't pay your rent or because you broke the door. It's not the same as shoplifting or burglary.
The only time a TOS violation should be criminal is if what you're doing amounts to trespassing.
So basically, surviving a DDoS is nothing more than a brute force battle of attrition where the goal is to have more resources than the other guy can take down.
Have your product be proprietary for a finite period of time, and once a particular version is EOL'ed or otherwise ceases to be commercially viable, open source it and let the public go nuts over it.
You only need to keep your leading edge keen in the market.
All copyrights, patents, and trademarks are used for these days is for Big Business as weapons to skewer and brain-bash people they don't like, be it competition, criticism, or anyone else that doesn't subscribe to whatever dogma is mandated by the company's bottom line. It seems that the fastest way to ruin is to piss off a corporation.
The stunt that UMG pulled against the Mega Upload video is proof of that, as is the Geohot and Scrolls lawsuits. Both of which by the way were won by big companies with a lot of weight to throw around squashing the little guys with their legal muscles and intimidating them into giving up without a fight.
Considering that TBP is getting sponsors in record numbers (no pun intended) for its ad banner program I think it's quite clear by now that only abusive companies really have any interest in strengthening IP laws.
Tying is when you have enough clout in one market that you can use it to muscle another market by requiring people to buy your crapware to get the good stuff.
Suppose you had a monopoly on bread sales and you want to expand in the vegetable market by pushing your tomatoes. You just bundle your tomatoes by piggy backing it on your bread by saying that customers don't get bread unless they buy your tomatoes.
In this case, cable networks have a lot of crappy stuff they want to shovel down our throats, and they know the only way they can get away with it is by forcing you to take it with the good stuff that you DO want. Also the reason why you have to buy whole CDs with 9 crappy songs to get the good one.
It's evil in the sense that it reduces choice for the consumer.
In fact it's evil enough that in some cases it's considered an illegal tying contract, where someone uses their dominance in one market to muscle in on another market by forcing their products in both to be bought together.
The reason there isn't such a party is because that party would never be given the time of day when it came to getting air time on the media which happens to be owned by the same corporate elite that are buying off politicians that are already elected.
The media is owned by the same corporate gangs that are shoveling money into the pockets of our congress critters and they're not going to let anyone who might shut down their gravy train to even make it to the primaries.
Viable candidates don't get elected by pissing off the corporate sponsors that feed them the precious air time they need to campaign.
When drug companies force you to sign NDAs to conduct studies, what they're really doing is putting a failsafe in so that if the study goes bad they can sit on it and not let the bad news get out.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not just that the bad ones make it, it's that the good ones don't.
Those "reasons" have a lot to do with the corporate run media among others making sure not to let anyone in that would derail the gravy train.
The corporate and government sectors are BOTH corrupt as hell.
Enough so that whenever they actually manage to agree on something, it's probably something bad for us small folks.
Rather how ex wives never like each other unless they both hate the husband.
Maybe if we could shitcan them on the spot, then the bad ones won't bother running.
Biggest reason they are corrupt as they are right now is that they have no reason to fear the voters. All they have to do is lie through their teeth during campaign season, then once they're safely in office and the only ones who can get rid of them are their fellow politicians, the wolves can safely take off their wool cloaks.
Violating terms of use is not a criminal offense.
It's a civil matter known as breach of contract, the solution for which is getting sued.
Now if you were forging a mac address in an attempt to masquerade as another subscriber, or hacked the service to get free internet or evade a service termination, that would be different and probably *would* qualify as criminal.
Breaking TOS and having your service yoinked is like going shopping at a grocery store and getting thrown out by security for swearing, or like getting an eviction notice from your landlord because you didn't pay your rent or because you broke the door. It's not the same as shoplifting or burglary.
The only time a TOS violation should be criminal is if what you're doing amounts to trespassing.
Not to mention the blatantly anti-open-source nature of their app store TOS agreement.
I guess it's expensive to be unpopular.
I agree. It seems like your hosting was using the attack as an excuse to try shoving an upsell down your throat.
Any transaction that allows someone else to take advantage of your own misfortune should be viewed skeptically.
So basically, surviving a DDoS is nothing more than a brute force battle of attrition where the goal is to have more resources than the other guy can take down.
Most likely, failure to challenge, protest, or send a counter-notice is deemed an admission of fault.
Full open source is always best for the community at large.
If commercial considerations prevent it though, it's still better than nothing at all.
I guess it was just
*shades*
Too much of a gamble
Try sunsetting your proprietaryness.
Have your product be proprietary for a finite period of time, and once a particular version is EOL'ed or otherwise ceases to be commercially viable, open source it and let the public go nuts over it.
You only need to keep your leading edge keen in the market.
All copyrights, patents, and trademarks are used for these days is for Big Business as weapons to skewer and brain-bash people they don't like, be it competition, criticism, or anyone else that doesn't subscribe to whatever dogma is mandated by the company's bottom line. It seems that the fastest way to ruin is to piss off a corporation.
The stunt that UMG pulled against the Mega Upload video is proof of that, as is the Geohot and Scrolls lawsuits. Both of which by the way were won by big companies with a lot of weight to throw around squashing the little guys with their legal muscles and intimidating them into giving up without a fight.
Considering that TBP is getting sponsors in record numbers (no pun intended) for its ad banner program I think it's quite clear by now that only abusive companies really have any interest in strengthening IP laws.
And any president who would dare to veto it would be quickly impeached.
Not to mention sabotage one's enemies.
Don't be deluded into thinking that the media is all carrots for the powerful. If need be, it will use sticks too.
Only if you take me to dinner at Taco Bell on the way to the cryoprison.
In some cases bundling things can be illegal.
Tying is when you have enough clout in one market that you can use it to muscle another market by requiring people to buy your crapware to get the good stuff.
Suppose you had a monopoly on bread sales and you want to expand in the vegetable market by pushing your tomatoes. You just bundle your tomatoes by piggy backing it on your bread by saying that customers don't get bread unless they buy your tomatoes.
In this case, cable networks have a lot of crappy stuff they want to shovel down our throats, and they know the only way they can get away with it is by forcing you to take it with the good stuff that you DO want. Also the reason why you have to buy whole CDs with 9 crappy songs to get the good one.
It's evil in the sense that it reduces choice for the consumer.
In fact it's evil enough that in some cases it's considered an illegal tying contract, where someone uses their dominance in one market to muscle in on another market by forcing their products in both to be bought together.
It's profitable if it lets them charge more for the bundle than they could just for the good channels.
Depends on how they got the car.
If you loaned it to them knowing what they had planned you might be charged as an accessory to the murder.
Even if you avoid criminal liability, you might be on the hook for damages if you negligently allowed them access.
The reason there isn't such a party is because that party would never be given the time of day when it came to getting air time on the media which happens to be owned by the same corporate elite that are buying off politicians that are already elected.
Not if your only choices are Kodos and Kang.
The media is owned by the same corporate gangs that are shoveling money into the pockets of our congress critters and they're not going to let anyone who might shut down their gravy train to even make it to the primaries.
Viable candidates don't get elected by pissing off the corporate sponsors that feed them the precious air time they need to campaign.
When drug companies force you to sign NDAs to conduct studies, what they're really doing is putting a failsafe in so that if the study goes bad they can sit on it and not let the bad news get out.
Is that before or after you've smelted it for the copper?
Since you keep putting words in my mouth I'm going to stop responding.