The kids in my area seem to be constantly on their phones. Apparently in England, parents typically buy a pre-pay phone and let the kids buy the vouchers. This can be as cheap as 2p per minute (3 cents or so) at weekends.
Re:Click-wrap license agreement problem - solved
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
I plead insanity. And that I was only 9 when I installed the software. I also claim that Microsoft in including an installation program are guilty of aiding me in this crime.
I got modded as funny for linking to the Dilbert Zone:)
Isn't this a contradiction?
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
From the Adobe link
When you purchase software, you purchase a license to use the application.
So are they trying to say "When you purchase the software you don't purchase the software"? The other interpretation is that you purchase both the software an a licence, and can therefore legally transfer ownership of one or the other.
Re:You've only got yourselves to blame
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
Your arguement sets an extremely dangerous precedent. "So many people copy software that you all must suffer this to prevent it"
Except for one small problem... This doesn't affect pirates. They can still copy anything that comes on a CD. Not all software can be sold already installed.
It just strikes me as slighlty anomolous to have increasing granularity left to right. Especially since usenet works the opposite way round, and so do directory trees.
I'd have thought people could set up an entire business catching spammers. ISP's spend a lot of money blocking spam. If there were enough people working full time the problem could probably be reduced quite drastically.
Horay, these people are great because they're stopping Doubleclick from spying on us using a patent for an obvious technique thus making them evil, which they must be because they want to do what doubleclick do, and Doubleclick are evil and now they have to pay to use their evil technique which makes these guys god$&*....... TOO MANY LEVELS OF RECURSION. CORE DUMPED
They really need to get those AA guns replaced to deal with this sort of threat. Apparently those platforms were quite succesful during the Second World War.
What "noise" is there in a big load of network packets wanting to be delivered?
I'd guess there's things floating around like packets for unavailable servers, duplicate ACKS, broken packets from buggy routers and corrupted packets. TCP handles this quite well from the point of view of the server/client relationship, but not so well for optimal routing.
A major problem with this is that it costs too much to serve a niche market (Such as Linux users who want to set up their own non-profit servers). Rather than a choice, we get a handful of competitors offering identical services, unless you're a business when you get offered something thats too expensive for most users.
Some skeptics of Netpliance have speculated that these refurbished machines are a cheap way to conduct R&D through easily bought community members,
No kidding. Who cares though? This is the same sort of thing as corporations sponsoring university research projects. As long as both sides are happy why complain?
Odds are these things will be strapped down tight executing x86 code for the entire life of the part.
Damn good for Java code though. A lot of custom software is written in Java because it can allow fast delivery times. This could allow this on a server where price/performance is more of an issue(**).
Someone might even see a market for an arbitrarily compatible machine. The first machine ever to see Linux, Windows, AmigaOS, BeOS PPC, Atari's TOS, RiscOS and Irix on a single CPU.
(**)With a corresponding loss of softwarwe quality. I never said it was a good thing.
Do you really have to prove that the libellous comment was false? That could be hard to do. If I accused someone of being a murderer, and claimed that the only reason he ever got away with it is because he only killed illegal immigrants and destroyed their bodies, they would have a hard time proving that my comments were false.
Libel in print has been written by someone, and approved by a different independent person. In most situations, both of these people are being payed by a third party. Print is regarded by people as being accurate. This means there is a duty to the person who owns the publication and to the readers to make sure it is as accurate as possible.
On the web, anyone can publish anything. They only need to know how to write. People are much less likely to take it seriously. If I spread untrue rumours about someone, then that would be illegal slander, but it would not be considered as extreme a crime as if it appeared on the front page of a newspaper.
This may or may not be important. It should certainly be considered.
Do not click on a "This is more informative" link in a post entitled "More information" if you have Javascript enabled. It links to a script that posts a copy as you!
A little personal information helps for demographics too. An example (From Tesco) they discovered that on Fridays, men are more likely to buy nappies. They decided to put beer near nappies. They also found once or twice that sometime people on one side of the road visit much more often than people on the other side of the road on certain very busy roads, with a different supermarket in the opposite direction.
Slashdot Mirror
The kids in my area seem to be constantly on their phones. Apparently in England, parents typically buy a pre-pay phone and let the kids buy the vouchers. This can be as cheap as 2p per minute (3 cents or so) at weekends.
I plead insanity. And that I was only 9 when I installed the software. I also claim that Microsoft in including an installation program are guilty of aiding me in this crime.
I got modded as funny for linking to the Dilbert Zone:)
From the Adobe link
When you purchase software, you purchase a license to use the application.
So are they trying to say "When you purchase the software you don't purchase the software"? The other interpretation is that you purchase both the software an a licence, and can therefore legally transfer ownership of one or the other.
Your arguement sets an extremely dangerous precedent. "So many people copy software that you all must suffer this to prevent it"
Except for one small problem... This doesn't affect pirates. They can still copy anything that comes on a CD. Not all software can be sold already installed.
How about reversing the system?
It just strikes me as slighlty anomolous to have increasing granularity left to right. Especially since usenet works the opposite way round, and so do directory trees.
I'd have thought people could set up an entire business catching spammers. ISP's spend a lot of money blocking spam. If there were enough people working full time the problem could probably be reduced quite drastically.
Yesterday's Dilbert Strip seems highly appropriate to this story.
Horay, these people are great because they're stopping Doubleclick from spying on us using a patent for an obvious technique thus making them evil, which they must be because they want to do what doubleclick do, and Doubleclick are evil and now they have to pay to use their evil technique which makes these guys god$&*....... TOO MANY LEVELS OF RECURSION. CORE DUMPED
They really need to get those AA guns replaced to deal with this sort of threat. Apparently those platforms were quite succesful during the Second World War.
and as it's an artificial structure, the Royal Navy could presumably claim ownership
As far as I understand the law, if a vessel is abandoned in international waters then anyone can claim salvage rights.
Hard to say. Looking at the evidence, there's a mixture for and against it being honest.
The email address is root@127.0.0.1 which helpfully prevents us from getting any extra information.
The data there looks like too much work for anyone to come up with just for revenge.
The story is very vague on how he "hacked my way in to the spammer's computer"
There's probably enough information for a criminal conviction
Rodona seems to be using the same computer for playing games and running a business. Unusual, but not unheard of.
What "noise" is there in a big load of network packets wanting to be delivered?
I'd guess there's things floating around like packets for unavailable servers, duplicate ACKS, broken packets from buggy routers and corrupted packets. TCP handles this quite well from the point of view of the server/client relationship, but not so well for optimal routing.
Because of objections from the brain's previous owner
I guess they keep (kept?) it that way so it tastes fresh a little longer.
You guess right.
If someone wants to see your source, license it to them.
Or just include it with the binary. Its still copyrighted, so nobody can redistribute it legally unless you let them.
Are regional bells restricted from expanding out of their own areas? I would have thought that the Bells would be competing with each other.
A major problem with this is that it costs too much to serve a niche market (Such as Linux users who want to set up their own non-profit servers). Rather than a choice, we get a handful of competitors offering identical services, unless you're a business when you get offered something thats too expensive for most users.
Some skeptics of Netpliance have speculated that these refurbished machines are a cheap way to conduct R&D through easily bought community members,
No kidding. Who cares though? This is the same sort of thing as corporations sponsoring university research projects. As long as both sides are happy why complain?
Odds are these things will be strapped down tight executing x86 code for the entire life of the part.
Damn good for Java code though. A lot of custom software is written in Java because it can allow fast delivery times. This could allow this on a server where price/performance is more of an issue(**).
Someone might even see a market for an arbitrarily compatible machine. The first machine ever to see Linux, Windows, AmigaOS, BeOS PPC, Atari's TOS, RiscOS and Irix on a single CPU.
(**)With a corresponding loss of softwarwe quality. I never said it was a good thing.
Do you really have to prove that the libellous comment was false? That could be hard to do. If I accused someone of being a murderer, and claimed that the only reason he ever got away with it is because he only killed illegal immigrants and destroyed their bodies, they would have a hard time proving that my comments were false.
Libel in print has been written by someone, and approved by a different independent person. In most situations, both of these people are being payed by a third party. Print is regarded by people as being accurate. This means there is a duty to the person who owns the publication and to the readers to make sure it is as accurate as possible.
On the web, anyone can publish anything. They only need to know how to write. People are much less likely to take it seriously. If I spread untrue rumours about someone, then that would be illegal slander, but it would not be considered as extreme a crime as if it appeared on the front page of a newspaper.
This may or may not be important. It should certainly be considered.
Okay. Just felt it was better to play safe and warn people since they didn't learn over the course of the last 3 stories.
Do not click on a "This is more informative" link in a post entitled "More information" if you have Javascript enabled. It links to a script that posts a copy as you!
A little personal information helps for demographics too. An example (From Tesco) they discovered that on Fridays, men are more likely to buy nappies. They decided to put beer near nappies. They also found once or twice that sometime people on one side of the road visit much more often than people on the other side of the road on certain very busy roads, with a different supermarket in the opposite direction.