Copyright becomes meaningless when any discussion of it nearly requires a verbatim copy, necessitating copying in its entirety. It would be useless for me to copyright "That's Hot," just as an example, mostly because enforcement would be nearly impossible. Trademark could apply, of course.
Besides, "an aggressively phrased series of questions daring the reader to reproduce the author's message, along with a full copyright statement" is 10 characters longer.
No you get 3 of your friends together, click random links, run around the car, and sit in each others' chairs, and then you get whatever the other person clicked on. That way it's still random, but you EXPECTED random.
Wait, you'll need a car for this. OK, so you get 3 of your friends, and a car.
OK, you'll need 3 friends as well. So 3 friends, a car, and the internet.
As I remember it, Sims tends to be more brightly colored, with a higher contrast among people and objects. UT and COD typically have people hiding in shadows, so you have to learn to pay attention to low-contrast details. This is a horrible conclusion and the authors should be shot.
Unless the authors actually made this conclusion and it's the summary that's wrong, not that that ever happens.
Again, what OS version are you talking about? I have XP, and this is what I'm used to in 32-bit Windows through XP. Backspace does not go back in history it goes to parent.
I don't have Vista, nor Windows 7, and would like to clarify what the hell people are talking about. Did they change this function or not?
Visit c:\ Type in D:\Qt in the "Address" bar of Explorer Backspace key Now I'm in D:\ ALT+left goes to D:\QT ALT+left again goes to C:\
Are you talking about how windows 7 works? I can't tell if you and the other reply are flat out wrong or just not clear about what you're saying. If they changed how this works for Vista/7 I just might have to rage.
I do not used the mouse in Explorer, only the keyboard. I refuse to use the mouse because it's very easy to accidentally drag when you meant to just select, leading to moving/copying files and folders which needs to be cleaned up. I've done this enough times that I refuse to use the mouse in Explorer.
This is what I'm used to, up through XP anyway. Did they change this in Vista just to piss off long time users?
ALT-LEFT is the "Back" button just like in IE
ALT-RIGHT is the "forward" (or "undo back button") again like IE
ALT-UP doesn't do anything.
BACKSPACE goes to the parent folder of where you currently are, regardless, and adds a new entry in the history so that ALT-LEFT brings you to the child folder you were just in.
I regularly have two different PARTITIONS in the explorer history, so that I can CTRL+X, ALT-RIGHT, CTRL-V and move files from the temp drive to where they should be on my permanent partition. No need to open two windows, since ALT-RIGHT is easier to use between CTRL-X and CTRL-V than SHIFT-TAB is. Reaching for the TAB button makes my fingers leave the X/V keys, where ALT-RIGHT/LEFT can be done with my left thumb crossing under, and my spare hand resting on arrow keys the whole time.
Likewise when I'm done, I'll go to the permanent drive and then go up to the parent folder with BACKSPACE, and choose a new folder for the destination. Get back to the temp folder with two ALT-LEFTs. Now I use CTRL+X, ALT-RIGHT, ALT-RIGHT, CTRL-V and files go to the new partition, different folder.
I realize that it probably seems I have mental problems given the amount of thought I gave to this. But this is just the habit I have developed using MS OS for 15 years.
I'd like to mod you up, but instead I'll add support. the last time I posted my list of complaints about Windows I got 4 "tl;dr" replies. So good to see someone else seeing it my way.
There are a lot of little things that MS just does not do well, typically the little details. Like when you hit ^H to replace in Excel 2003. The dialog comes up with whatever you already filled in, which is good. Focus is on the SECOND box, the Replace With. If you just did a Replace All, what are the chances you want to replace the thing you just replaced? It no longer exists. Even if you didn't Replace All, what are the chances you're going to replace something with one thing, stop halfway, and start replacing with another thing? how many times do people do that?
Yes, this is a small complaint. But when my workflow require me to load a workbook, search and replace 4 different fields, and submit it for processing, this annoys the piss out of me. ^C ALT+TAB (or CTRL+TAB depending on the source) F2 ^H then every single time I have to use SHIFT+TAB to switch to the "Search for" field.
Why would you do such a thing? Repeat this for all of the interfaces in all of their OS tools, Office tools, web browsers... there are hundreds of little quirks that, when added together, result in CRAPWARE.
I will say, allowing Space Bar or letters to activate UI items is one of the things I actually want them to remove. Mostly because windows tend to pop up while typing. Hitting SPACE at the wrong time can result in agreeing to some very nasty things, without even being aware. It's a problem with their window management logic which needs to be fixed, and in many cases app writers also need to have "don't do anything" as the default button, but as long as they are taking steps to fix it, good. Of course in this case, it's not likely that the CAD menu will pop up unexpectedly (unless you have cats)... so another example of MS doing something that makes NO SENSE, "fixing" the things that aren't really problems.
You signed up for slashdot before I did, that makes you a better person.
And I should have known, there's only one movie about zombies in the world, right? All the others I've seen weren't actually about zombies, it was marmoset husbandry but I was just too high.
No wait both of those are bullshit. My original recommendation still stands. You'd think someone with a lower slashdot ID would know these things but apparently it's taking you longer than the rest of us. We'll help you get there, champ, and you'll be using the internet just like the rest of us. Here's a dollar, go buy yourself an ice cream cone.
Re:OS/2 STILL multitasks better than Windoze
on
10 OSes We Left Behind
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No joke. I can't understand why intensive disk I/O, with the CPU spiking under 5%, causes windows applications to respond as if a high-priority thread were calculating PI in the background. SMS updates + on-access virus scanning make the whole OS very nearly unusable. Even though it doesn't use almost any real CPU time, if I set the priority to BELOW NORMAL everything running at NORMAL priority is immediately responsive again.
Is the OS swapping out executable code in deference to having a large data cache? That's the only case I can think of where IO should affect application performance - if it's already loaded, it should be executing while IO for another process happens in the background. Or maybe it's registry data that's swapped out. Either way, I cannot understand why my dual-core CPU at 2% usage doesn't respond to something that the user is doing.
I copy a large data file from one partition to another and Windows tells me my virtual memory is low. You're caching a huge file just in case I might want to load it again?
The worst part is when something spikes the CPU, and CTRL+ALT+DEL takes a minute or two to bring up the task manager.
Funny. But they will probably be able to show that the files came from the copyright owner.
If you reverse-mount Warner's website URLs and find a cache of recordings, you would be able to claim good faith belief that the copyright owner was making them available. You can easily claim typo or mouse misfire or keyboard malfunction led you to find them, and not reverse mounting.
With immediate effect, magnussoft Deutschland GmbH has stopped the distribution of magnussoft Zeta 1.21 and magnussoft Zeta 1.5. According to the statement of Access Co. Ltd., neither yellowTAB GmbH nor magnussoft Deutschland GmbH are authorized to distribute Zeta.
Can you at least include the movie name so I don't have to click to find out what you're talking about? Lots of reasons not to, only one good reason to, and that's because you think it's somehow awesome to make references more subtle by hiding the details behind a URL. There's a reason anchor elements can display text instead of just the URL. Welcome to the internet, you'll figure it out soon enough, champ.
Nope you're the idiot. Having said that... In cases like this where there is divided opinion, it makes sense to go with what would be clearer for your audience. This is not a linguistic site, math and science terminology is much more appropriate. Using something that is correct but not natural for the audience leaves you in the same position as using the language incorrectly. In the end, communication is hampered.
The link you posted says "Times has now been used in such constrictions for about 300 years, and there is no evidence to suggest that it has ever been misunderstood." It uses this as the basis for recommending the usage in question. Obviously that is incorrect. GP and myself have obviously had issue with this, and have evidence that it has been misunderstood, invalidating that whole argument. Further, it says that using math to understand language is illogical. That makes sense, but it's not what we're doing. Using math to understand math terms used in language can hardly be called illogical. As far as I can tell, this usage is a bastardization of the legitimate "times as much" usage, probably by the same people who want to "learn" you something. The fact that many people use something incorrectly does not make it proper usage, or even defensible.
"Times more" is clearly a more ambiguous usage, but it seems to me it is fairly closely coupled with "times less", and the one being ambiguous should cast doubt on the other. Someone who wants to be understood should reject both usages.
Next time, read and think about what you're using to support your argument instead of finding the first search that appears to support your opinion.
You'll end up using Google one way or another. Google Analytics, Adsense, or other advertising. Or the default search bar on a browser. Or a google map someone sends you for directions, or embedded in a real estate page. You can't avoid it, and at some point they will put enough of a picture together, with their Phorm-like data mining.
Not using Google is not an option, even if you try to avoid it. Disable JavaScript and third-party cookies, never search for anything... you could TRY not using them but won't get you very far.
Right, that's what I'm saying. Developers, being copyright owners, would sue TomTom for copyright violation. Copyright law being well established (GPL being a rather new twist, however), TomTom would probably attempt to meet the demands of the copyright owners instead of risking the loss of the code, which means following the terms of the GPL. That would force TomTom into compliance, whichever way they choose to go, and the most obvious choice is to fight back against Microsoft. As you say, Laches would be a lot easier path than defending against the copyright owners.
Several assumptions going on here, but they are as valid as the assumption that the copyright owners wouldn't want to sue. Keep in mind I have little idea what I'm talking about, just questioning assumptions and offering alternatives. And I'd love for someone to just stand up, point at Microsoft, and say "STFU" within my lifetime.
I don't see why those folks would want to sue TomTom. In general the kernel team isn't interested in suing to enforce the GPL, and the only person to bring such a suit, Harald Welte of gpl-violations.org, isn't involved with this code.
In general I would agree, but MS has been wielding this fairly heavily lately, and I wouldn't be surprised for someone to decide it's time call their bluff. This seems to be the perfect setup.
Why wouldn't they want to sue? Lots of people would love to see the Microsoft patent get invalidated, of those lots of people are confident it will be. If that number out of the original population is greater than 25%, there's a 1 in four, or real, chance one of those guys wants to sue, on principle if not on principal. I'm sure they would likewise get financial help from others to fight just like TomTom would, just different sources.
Sue TomTom and let them decide to take their chances with copyright law or open source law, one being rather established and one rather less so. End result is the same, only TomTom does it involuntarily.
The short version: Fines are more like "Please don't do that again, we'd rather not have to deal with things like this." Jail time is more like "Yeah we can't have people doing that." Given their relative impact to society, would you agree that victimless crimes should be punished less severely?
The long version: Speeding is not a victimless crime, at least not if you're going fast enough to warrant a ticket. 5-10 over isn't bad, but I've not seen anyone ticketed for 5-10 unless it was a super busy day. Even if the driver can handle the speed, to the other drivers on the road it would be unexpected and possibly dangerous to see someone pop up behind or beside you all of a sudden, "out of nowhere". And then there are the ones who can't handle the speed, getting an adrenaline rush that works just like a drug. Speeding is just as victimless as drunk driving - it doesn't hurt anyone, until it does.
Drug use can be victimless, but in the case of meth or similar, the side effects of meth labs and the destruction the drug causes is far worse than any benefit to letting people control their own bodies. If they are using drugs like that, they obviously can't control their own body and to allow it would be a win in principal, but a loss in practice. Some drugs aren't that bad of course.
The GP point was that there is a sliding scale of sensitivity, but if you think about such a scale obviously there isn't a one-to-one ratio of false positives to false negatives. But it's still true that sometimes we don't get it right. In that case, would you rather have an innocent-but-convicted person serve jail time for something they didn't do, or pay a fine and get on with life? I would prefer the fine. On the other side, non-"victimless" crimes typically carry a higher burden of proof than a single officer's testimony, making a trial into a more thorough investigation of the facts, making it less likely (compared to simple drug possession or speeding) that someone will be convicted in error. Regardless of how it works out in practice, in general I feel better about giving jail time as the punishment instead of a fine in this case.
then InternetOpenURL, then... does it read something? Or write something? Nope, it calls InternetCloseHandle and disregards the return values (other than error checking) - so no stray pointers anywhere. That's the only WININET functionality I see.
It does write to: "Norton_PIFTS %d-%d-%d %dh%dm%ds.log" with the numbers filled in using the current date.
It also calls CoCreateInstance with the following CLSID: 17580E5F 7B07 11D2 BF 1F 0, A0, 24, D7, 34, 44 17580E5F-7B07-11D2-BF1F-00A024D73444
Which apparently is "Symantec.luProductReg" hosted by: %ProgramFiles%\Symantec\LiveUpdate\ProductRegCom_2_7.DLL"
so that COM object might do some internets stuff as well. It's clearly the Live Update product registration. I would sy it's harmless, but why delete so many posts?
Slashdot Mirror
Well there's already two there, if you count castles which fell into the swamp. Best of luck on that third go-round, I hear it's the charm.
Good thing they didn't pull the same trick with "Portable OpenOffice.org" - I'd have to turn off SafeSearch to even find it.
Copyright becomes meaningless when any discussion of it nearly requires a verbatim copy, necessitating copying in its entirety. It would be useless for me to copyright "That's Hot," just as an example, mostly because enforcement would be nearly impossible. Trademark could apply, of course.
Besides, "an aggressively phrased series of questions daring the reader to reproduce the author's message, along with a full copyright statement" is 10 characters longer.
No you get 3 of your friends together, click random links, run around the car, and sit in each others' chairs, and then you get whatever the other person clicked on. That way it's still random, but you EXPECTED random.
Wait, you'll need a car for this. OK, so you get 3 of your friends, and a car.
OK, you'll need 3 friends as well. So 3 friends, a car, and the internet.
As I remember it, Sims tends to be more brightly colored, with a higher contrast among people and objects. UT and COD typically have people hiding in shadows, so you have to learn to pay attention to low-contrast details. This is a horrible conclusion and the authors should be shot.
Unless the authors actually made this conclusion and it's the summary that's wrong, not that that ever happens.
Again, what OS version are you talking about? I have XP, and this is what I'm used to in 32-bit Windows through XP. Backspace does not go back in history it goes to parent.
I don't have Vista, nor Windows 7, and would like to clarify what the hell people are talking about. Did they change this function or not?
Visit c:\
Type in D:\Qt in the "Address" bar of Explorer
Backspace key
Now I'm in D:\
ALT+left goes to D:\QT
ALT+left again goes to C:\
Are you talking about how windows 7 works? I can't tell if you and the other reply are flat out wrong or just not clear about what you're saying. If they changed how this works for Vista/7 I just might have to rage.
I do not used the mouse in Explorer, only the keyboard. I refuse to use the mouse because it's very easy to accidentally drag when you meant to just select, leading to moving/copying files and folders which needs to be cleaned up. I've done this enough times that I refuse to use the mouse in Explorer.
This is what I'm used to, up through XP anyway. Did they change this in Vista just to piss off long time users?
I regularly have two different PARTITIONS in the explorer history, so that I can CTRL+X, ALT-RIGHT, CTRL-V and move files from the temp drive to where they should be on my permanent partition. No need to open two windows, since ALT-RIGHT is easier to use between CTRL-X and CTRL-V than SHIFT-TAB is. Reaching for the TAB button makes my fingers leave the X/V keys, where ALT-RIGHT/LEFT can be done with my left thumb crossing under, and my spare hand resting on arrow keys the whole time.
Likewise when I'm done, I'll go to the permanent drive and then go up to the parent folder with BACKSPACE, and choose a new folder for the destination. Get back to the temp folder with two ALT-LEFTs. Now I use CTRL+X, ALT-RIGHT, ALT-RIGHT, CTRL-V and files go to the new partition, different folder.
I realize that it probably seems I have mental problems given the amount of thought I gave to this. But this is just the habit I have developed using MS OS for 15 years.
I'd like to mod you up, but instead I'll add support. the last time I posted my list of complaints about Windows I got 4 "tl;dr" replies. So good to see someone else seeing it my way.
There are a lot of little things that MS just does not do well, typically the little details. Like when you hit ^H to replace in Excel 2003. The dialog comes up with whatever you already filled in, which is good. Focus is on the SECOND box, the Replace With. If you just did a Replace All, what are the chances you want to replace the thing you just replaced? It no longer exists. Even if you didn't Replace All, what are the chances you're going to replace something with one thing, stop halfway, and start replacing with another thing? how many times do people do that?
Yes, this is a small complaint. But when my workflow require me to load a workbook, search and replace 4 different fields, and submit it for processing, this annoys the piss out of me.
^C ALT+TAB (or CTRL+TAB depending on the source) F2 ^H then every single time I have to use SHIFT+TAB to switch to the "Search for" field.
Why would you do such a thing? Repeat this for all of the interfaces in all of their OS tools, Office tools, web browsers... there are hundreds of little quirks that, when added together, result in CRAPWARE.
I will say, allowing Space Bar or letters to activate UI items is one of the things I actually want them to remove. Mostly because windows tend to pop up while typing. Hitting SPACE at the wrong time can result in agreeing to some very nasty things, without even being aware. It's a problem with their window management logic which needs to be fixed, and in many cases app writers also need to have "don't do anything" as the default button, but as long as they are taking steps to fix it, good. Of course in this case, it's not likely that the CAD menu will pop up unexpectedly (unless you have cats)... so another example of MS doing something that makes NO SENSE, "fixing" the things that aren't really problems.
You signed up for slashdot before I did, that makes you a better person.
And I should have known, there's only one movie about zombies in the world, right? All the others I've seen weren't actually about zombies, it was marmoset husbandry but I was just too high.
No wait both of those are bullshit. My original recommendation still stands. You'd think someone with a lower slashdot ID would know these things but apparently it's taking you longer than the rest of us. We'll help you get there, champ, and you'll be using the internet just like the rest of us. Here's a dollar, go buy yourself an ice cream cone.
No joke. I can't understand why intensive disk I/O, with the CPU spiking under 5%, causes windows applications to respond as if a high-priority thread were calculating PI in the background. SMS updates + on-access virus scanning make the whole OS very nearly unusable. Even though it doesn't use almost any real CPU time, if I set the priority to BELOW NORMAL everything running at NORMAL priority is immediately responsive again.
Is the OS swapping out executable code in deference to having a large data cache? That's the only case I can think of where IO should affect application performance - if it's already loaded, it should be executing while IO for another process happens in the background. Or maybe it's registry data that's swapped out. Either way, I cannot understand why my dual-core CPU at 2% usage doesn't respond to something that the user is doing.
I copy a large data file from one partition to another and Windows tells me my virtual memory is low. You're caching a huge file just in case I might want to load it again?
The worst part is when something spikes the CPU, and CTRL+ALT+DEL takes a minute or two to bring up the task manager.
Funny. But they will probably be able to show that the files came from the copyright owner.
If you reverse-mount Warner's website URLs and find a cache of recordings, you would be able to claim good faith belief that the copyright owner was making them available. You can easily claim typo or mouse misfire or keyboard malfunction led you to find them, and not reverse mounting.
Looks dead to me, a year ago they posted this:
http://www.bitsofnews.com/content/view/5498/44/
Slashdot, where the readers are master switchers and the editors are master baiters.
Can you at least include the movie name so I don't have to click to find out what you're talking about? Lots of reasons not to, only one good reason to, and that's because you think it's somehow awesome to make references more subtle by hiding the details behind a URL. There's a reason anchor elements can display text instead of just the URL. Welcome to the internet, you'll figure it out soon enough, champ.
Wasn't Betamax the better of the two, and VHS only won because of porn? How does that analogy make any sense?
Nope you're the idiot. Having said that... In cases like this where there is divided opinion, it makes sense to go with what would be clearer for your audience. This is not a linguistic site, math and science terminology is much more appropriate. Using something that is correct but not natural for the audience leaves you in the same position as using the language incorrectly. In the end, communication is hampered.
The link you posted says "Times has now been used in such constrictions for about 300 years, and there is no evidence to suggest that it has ever been misunderstood." It uses this as the basis for recommending the usage in question. Obviously that is incorrect. GP and myself have obviously had issue with this, and have evidence that it has been misunderstood, invalidating that whole argument. Further, it says that using math to understand language is illogical. That makes sense, but it's not what we're doing. Using math to understand math terms used in language can hardly be called illogical. As far as I can tell, this usage is a bastardization of the legitimate "times as much" usage, probably by the same people who want to "learn" you something. The fact that many people use something incorrectly does not make it proper usage, or even defensible.
"Times more" is clearly a more ambiguous usage, but it seems to me it is fairly closely coupled with "times less", and the one being ambiguous should cast doubt on the other. Someone who wants to be understood should reject both usages.
Next time, read and think about what you're using to support your argument instead of finding the first search that appears to support your opinion.
You'll end up using Google one way or another. Google Analytics, Adsense, or other advertising. Or the default search bar on a browser. Or a google map someone sends you for directions, or embedded in a real estate page. You can't avoid it, and at some point they will put enough of a picture together, with their Phorm-like data mining.
Not using Google is not an option, even if you try to avoid it. Disable JavaScript and third-party cookies, never search for anything... you could TRY not using them but won't get you very far.
Actually that's not irony, it's disturbingly what I would expect.
Right, that's what I'm saying. Developers, being copyright owners, would sue TomTom for copyright violation. Copyright law being well established (GPL being a rather new twist, however), TomTom would probably attempt to meet the demands of the copyright owners instead of risking the loss of the code, which means following the terms of the GPL. That would force TomTom into compliance, whichever way they choose to go, and the most obvious choice is to fight back against Microsoft. As you say, Laches would be a lot easier path than defending against the copyright owners.
Several assumptions going on here, but they are as valid as the assumption that the copyright owners wouldn't want to sue. Keep in mind I have little idea what I'm talking about, just questioning assumptions and offering alternatives. And I'd love for someone to just stand up, point at Microsoft, and say "STFU" within my lifetime.
In general I would agree, but MS has been wielding this fairly heavily lately, and I wouldn't be surprised for someone to decide it's time call their bluff. This seems to be the perfect setup.
I think he meant "Goddamn, brother Jimbob, you sure rode me around and called me Betty!"
Why wouldn't they want to sue? Lots of people would love to see the Microsoft patent get invalidated, of those lots of people are confident it will be. If that number out of the original population is greater than 25%, there's a 1 in four, or real, chance one of those guys wants to sue, on principle if not on principal. I'm sure they would likewise get financial help from others to fight just like TomTom would, just different sources.
Sue TomTom and let them decide to take their chances with copyright law or open source law, one being rather established and one rather less so. End result is the same, only TomTom does it involuntarily.
Don't forget the adjunct school where Capitalists think themselves Earthlings. There's even an opposing thought called a Narcanon.
I'd patent covering yourself in purple dye instead, that seems more likely to address the situation when someone beets them.
The short version:
Fines are more like "Please don't do that again, we'd rather not have to deal with things like this." Jail time is more like "Yeah we can't have people doing that." Given their relative impact to society, would you agree that victimless crimes should be punished less severely?
The long version:
Speeding is not a victimless crime, at least not if you're going fast enough to warrant a ticket. 5-10 over isn't bad, but I've not seen anyone ticketed for 5-10 unless it was a super busy day. Even if the driver can handle the speed, to the other drivers on the road it would be unexpected and possibly dangerous to see someone pop up behind or beside you all of a sudden, "out of nowhere". And then there are the ones who can't handle the speed, getting an adrenaline rush that works just like a drug. Speeding is just as victimless as drunk driving - it doesn't hurt anyone, until it does.
Drug use can be victimless, but in the case of meth or similar, the side effects of meth labs and the destruction the drug causes is far worse than any benefit to letting people control their own bodies. If they are using drugs like that, they obviously can't control their own body and to allow it would be a win in principal, but a loss in practice. Some drugs aren't that bad of course.
The GP point was that there is a sliding scale of sensitivity, but if you think about such a scale obviously there isn't a one-to-one ratio of false positives to false negatives. But it's still true that sometimes we don't get it right. In that case, would you rather have an innocent-but-convicted person serve jail time for something they didn't do, or pay a fine and get on with life? I would prefer the fine. On the other side, non-"victimless" crimes typically carry a higher burden of proof than a single officer's testimony, making a trial into a more thorough investigation of the facts, making it less likely (compared to simple drug possession or speeding) that someone will be convicted in error. Regardless of how it works out in practice, in general I feel better about giving jail time as the punishment instead of a fine in this case.
Based on static disasm, it calls:
HINTERNET InternetOpen(
__in LPCTSTR lpszAgent = "PATCH021809DB",
__in DWORD dwAccessType = 0,
__in LPCTSTR lpszProxyName = NULL,
__in LPCTSTR lpszProxyBypass = NULL,
__in DWORD dwFlags = 0
);
then InternetOpenURL, then... does it read something? Or write something? Nope, it calls InternetCloseHandle and disregards the return values (other than error checking) - so no stray pointers anywhere. That's the only WININET functionality I see.
It does write to: "Norton_PIFTS %d-%d-%d %dh%dm%ds.log" with the numbers filled in using the current date.
It also calls CoCreateInstance with the following CLSID:
17580E5F 7B07 11D2 BF 1F 0, A0, 24, D7, 34, 44
17580E5F-7B07-11D2-BF1F-00A024D73444
Which apparently is "Symantec.luProductReg" hosted by:
%ProgramFiles%\Symantec\LiveUpdate\ProductRegCom_2_7.DLL"
so that COM object might do some internets stuff as well. It's clearly the Live Update product registration. I would sy it's harmless, but why delete so many posts?