Boston's Big Dig involves digging a 2-mile-long tunnel at a cost of at least $17 billion, or $8.5 billion per mile.
Of course, people drive through Boston and the tunnel was in high demand because of traffic congestion. I don't see much demand for a tunnel in the middle of the arctic (OK OK north Pacific) ocean.
Jamie woke up this morning and said "Bah! They blocked Peacefire! Damn! Well I'm an author on Slashdot, so I'll use that to make millions of people hate them! And maybe other news organizations will pick up the story and more people will hate them! How dare they pick on Peacefire! I'll even use that in my argument!..."
I'm not saying the point is wrong, but it's not like Jamie and Peacefire have never seen each other before. I guess Slashdot doesn't have much in regards to editorial guidelines.
The point of the article is that fair use is being given the runaround here, not allowing text to be copied etc., and that they have work to do, since the way it stands, it doesn't allow *anything* to read it aloud. It doesn't say specifically what can and can't read it. It merely says it cannot be read aloud.
It seems they have a "Worthless" category as well. So that means they can just decide that, say, the "end of the internet" page, or Slashdot, or CNN, or any Time Warner website is Worthless since it's of inferior quality to their own (assuming, of course, that they're owned by a rival company). Can't there be some legal remedy for this, despite how the information itself was obtained?
Here's a question though: what about open source software? Would this also include the GPL and its non-warranty of OSS? Can I hold Linus responsible if my kernel crashes, etc? This has the potential of being very dangerous for OS developers.
Secondly, what qualifies as software at all? Drivers? Libraries? Scripts? All of the above? These are questions that must be answered.
The rats+cancer study is very often quoted by people afraid of radio waves, but unfortunately while very shocking, the study's results couldn't be repeated. It's possible there was something wrong with the experimentation process or that it was just a fluke. People believing that this proves anything either way have too much faith in scientists.
Of course if the government needs to take frequencies from someone, the first source will be the Amateur microwave bands followed by Radio Astronomy bands. The amateur bands are underused for the spectrum they're taking up, and the government can easily turn them over to a business if they want to.
Any physics folks here have any idea about the potential? They claim it has a lot.
Yeah, it's called Morse Code. Frankly I don't see how turning it into pulses serves any advantage, unless they use some sort of TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access) system where people can use the same frequency as long as they send at different times. No matter how small the pulse time, though, a certain amount of actual information has to be sent, and that can increase the number of users on a single frequency by maybe 5 or 10 at most.
Hey, with encrypted keys and security through obscurity, nobody will EVER be able to crack the Content Scrambling System!
And if that somehow fails, there's always SDMI!
Well it seems to me some fairly obvious points are missing here. First of all, flames are all about egos. It starts when someone's ego is tarnished by another's, it continues because of a virtual pissing contest where each side wants to come out being right, and it doesn't end because neither side wants to swallow his/her pride.
Secondly, flamers don't consider themselves such. Despite making comments about a particular person as opposed to this issue, when confronted with any specific post, they claim they're not the one that's flaming. The other side "started it with [x] post". It is a lot like road rage in that people feel the need to put down others in order to maintain their sense of superiority.
It has nothing to do with free speech any more than spamming does, and it isn't any more necessary than murder is.
It's not the name of the bill that bothers me, but more the description. It probably caught them off guard, but I would have expected intelligent political leaders to spot the difference between a hoax and something that defies common sense.
On the other hand, who cares? It's just funny. Blame the guy who wrote the question for not verifying his/her facts.
Note that with the cable service, it's still a flat rate, but there's merely a punishment for abusing the system. It's like getting a ticket for speeding. Someone who transfers 1GB still pays the same as someone who barely uses the service.
I still believe that the internet should be provided free, not at $20 a month, or 8cents a minute, or whatever the current rate may be.
And when you can find a web provider who's going to provide service for free and take a loss out of the goodness of their heart (and not go out of business like most dotcoms), let us know.
Yes, actually. My cable provider (thankfully not @Home yet) charges $0.02/MB over the 6GB limit. But essentially it's still a flat rate of $30/month.
Re:Why not create something like the DNS system?
on
The Gnutella Paradox
·
· Score: 3
The problem with a DNS-like system is simple: sue NSI. Force them to bring down their servers. Now what do you have? Do the same for the operators of all the rest of the root servers. Now you have no root servers. Network is down.
I always knew there were two astrophysicists who needed voice boxes. There's Stephen Hawking the popular one and the little known porn star Stephen Hawkins
Shouldn't Slashdot be giving me a $10 gift certificate at Radio Shack? Or maybe O'Reilly or Copyleft? Isn't my personal information worth at least that much?
Geez, talk about hypocrisy. I'd take DigitalConvergence's treatment of victim's over Slashdot's any day!
Jakob Nielsen took on mobile devices and phone combos in his latest alertbox article. He says a numeric keypad is Bad(tm) whereas the Palm interface is Good(tm).
I'm sure you understand the irony of your statement. How the software reportedly works is that you need the software to decrypt the message, and the sender (read: not you) has the power to destroy the message after a certain time. So I'm sure the program has also disabled cut & paste.
Does anyone else see the similarity with this and the Content Scrambling System used on DVDs? It's about making sure people use proprietary software so that the software can then control the content.
The problem (according to them) isn't with the content not being secure, but with the server logs showing that an email took place. Apparently that in itself is reason enough for people to use proprietary software.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, people drive through Boston and the tunnel was in high demand because of traffic congestion. I don't see much demand for a tunnel in the middle of the arctic (OK OK north Pacific) ocean.
Cool!
I'm not saying the point is wrong, but it's not like Jamie and Peacefire have never seen each other before. I guess Slashdot doesn't have much in regards to editorial guidelines.
Sad.
The point of the article is that fair use is being given the runaround here, not allowing text to be copied etc., and that they have work to do, since the way it stands, it doesn't allow *anything* to read it aloud. It doesn't say specifically what can and can't read it. It merely says it cannot be read aloud.
It seems they have a "Worthless" category as well. So that means they can just decide that, say, the "end of the internet" page, or Slashdot, or CNN, or any Time Warner website is Worthless since it's of inferior quality to their own (assuming, of course, that they're owned by a rival company). Can't there be some legal remedy for this, despite how the information itself was obtained?
Secondly, what qualifies as software at all? Drivers? Libraries? Scripts? All of the above? These are questions that must be answered.
The rats+cancer study is very often quoted by people afraid of radio waves, but unfortunately while very shocking, the study's results couldn't be repeated. It's possible there was something wrong with the experimentation process or that it was just a fluke. People believing that this proves anything either way have too much faith in scientists.
Of course if the government needs to take frequencies from someone, the first source will be the Amateur microwave bands followed by Radio Astronomy bands. The amateur bands are underused for the spectrum they're taking up, and the government can easily turn them over to a business if they want to.
Yeah, it's called Morse Code. Frankly I don't see how turning it into pulses serves any advantage, unless they use some sort of TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access) system where people can use the same frequency as long as they send at different times. No matter how small the pulse time, though, a certain amount of actual information has to be sent, and that can increase the number of users on a single frequency by maybe 5 or 10 at most.
Hey, with encrypted keys and security through obscurity, nobody will EVER be able to crack the Content Scrambling System! And if that somehow fails, there's always SDMI!
It's obvious that I'm right about this and the previous post has to be moderateed up.
Secondly, flamers don't consider themselves such. Despite making comments about a particular person as opposed to this issue, when confronted with any specific post, they claim they're not the one that's flaming. The other side "started it with [x] post". It is a lot like road rage in that people feel the need to put down others in order to maintain their sense of superiority.
It has nothing to do with free speech any more than spamming does, and it isn't any more necessary than murder is.
On the other hand, who cares? It's just funny. Blame the guy who wrote the question for not verifying his/her facts.
Note that with the cable service, it's still a flat rate, but there's merely a punishment for abusing the system. It's like getting a ticket for speeding. Someone who transfers 1GB still pays the same as someone who barely uses the service.
And when you can find a web provider who's going to provide service for free and take a loss out of the goodness of their heart (and not go out of business like most dotcoms), let us know.
Same reason I don't use CueCat. There are things (like domain names and internet access) that you should pay for even if you could get for free.
Yes, actually. My cable provider (thankfully not @Home yet) charges $0.02/MB over the 6GB limit. But essentially it's still a flat rate of $30/month.
The problem with a DNS-like system is simple: sue NSI. Force them to bring down their servers. Now what do you have? Do the same for the operators of all the rest of the root servers. Now you have no root servers. Network is down.
I always knew there were two astrophysicists who needed voice boxes. There's Stephen Hawking the popular one and the little known porn star Stephen Hawkins
Geez, talk about hypocrisy. I'd take DigitalConvergence's treatment of victim's over Slashdot's any day!
Jakob Nielsen took on mobile devices and phone combos in his latest alertbox article. He says a numeric keypad is Bad(tm) whereas the Palm interface is Good(tm).
Because this is proprietary software. Anything that is controlled by proprietary software is "obviously" secure.
But they'll setup this server instead. Would it really be that hard to setup a competing program that's just a mail server?
I'm sure you understand the irony of your statement. How the software reportedly works is that you need the software to decrypt the message, and the sender (read: not you) has the power to destroy the message after a certain time. So I'm sure the program has also disabled cut & paste. Does anyone else see the similarity with this and the Content Scrambling System used on DVDs? It's about making sure people use proprietary software so that the software can then control the content.
The problem (according to them) isn't with the content not being secure, but with the server logs showing that an email took place. Apparently that in itself is reason enough for people to use proprietary software.