*lead me to believe the average user (not average linux geek) would be totally and completely confused and would call the help desk every time they got one of these replies.*
I would have to agree with Anonymous Coward to say that as a self-declared "average user" I would be completely confused. And aren't the average users who we should be targeting anti-spam technology to? I mean, your average computer genius can figure out how to get rid of spam on their own I would think, making the "user friendly" aspect of any anti-spam technology a key factor if the object is to get rid of spam for the masses!
I guess this goes back to the idea that if you can control the information going to and from people, you can control the people themselves. It is really a statement of where the internet is today in terms of importance around the world. I would like to see if anyone from this country manages to make an "underground" makeshift connection to the internet.
Also, does any one else find it interesting that the group forming together to protest for the rights of the monks is on facebook?
It doesn't seem to me that there would even be a case for this lawsuit. Defamation, as far as I know, is only a valid claim if the defendant knowingly spread untrue information. As long as the critics based their arguments in truth, they should be fine. It just makes The Video Professor look they are trying to move attention away from the validity of the critics' claims. Though, it would be interesting to read these "anonymous" critics to see if they really are in violation of trademark laws! Why are these critics kept anonymous anyway?
Slashdot Mirror
In order to get where you are going, it is good to know where you have been. Plain and simple.
*lead me to believe the average user (not average linux geek) would be totally and completely confused and would call the help desk every time they got one of these replies.* I would have to agree with Anonymous Coward to say that as a self-declared "average user" I would be completely confused. And aren't the average users who we should be targeting anti-spam technology to? I mean, your average computer genius can figure out how to get rid of spam on their own I would think, making the "user friendly" aspect of any anti-spam technology a key factor if the object is to get rid of spam for the masses!
I guess this goes back to the idea that if you can control the information going to and from people, you can control the people themselves. It is really a statement of where the internet is today in terms of importance around the world. I would like to see if anyone from this country manages to make an "underground" makeshift connection to the internet. Also, does any one else find it interesting that the group forming together to protest for the rights of the monks is on facebook?
It doesn't seem to me that there would even be a case for this lawsuit. Defamation, as far as I know, is only a valid claim if the defendant knowingly spread untrue information. As long as the critics based their arguments in truth, they should be fine. It just makes The Video Professor look they are trying to move attention away from the validity of the critics' claims. Though, it would be interesting to read these "anonymous" critics to see if they really are in violation of trademark laws! Why are these critics kept anonymous anyway?