ICANN's contention seems to be that even if ordered to remove the record, its not technically possible for them. Only the registrar (TUCOWS in this case) could remove the registration.
Is this accurate? Don't the glue records get published through ICANN, and couldn't they remove them?
Of course I am in favor of Spamhaus and against SPAMers...I'm just curious if this is a legal ploy on ICANN's part to help Spamhaus (which I would applaud), or if its just ICANN telling the truth (which I would also applaud...I'm easy to please).
Also, if true, couldn't Spamhaus just move their registrar from TUCOWS (Canada?) to a registrar in a less US court friendly country where any order to remove the registration could be ignored?
As stated by numerous other posts, Spamhaus needs DNS records as the RBL works using DNS.
However, just because ICANN suspends a domain doesn't mean that its out of DNS. Anyone with a DNS server can still serve the records. Not all root servers are under ICANN control.
Many email servers have their own DNS server (if only for caching). I say, manually add the records in defiance of the SPAMers and their abuse of our legal system!
I couldn't read the link from the posted story - slashdot'd - but it looks like (according to him) this isn't the first time that he's been ripped off in a deal with News Corp
Seems to me like you are searching out the most expensive commercial OSS on the planet, then asking why wouldn't you just buy the MS product instead.
Why would you want the $10,000 version of Cygwin when you can download and use it for free? Likewise, there are plenty of reputable free Linux distributions out there, many suitable for use in embedded systems.
If you want a commercial Linux, why not look at Redhat? Its comparable in price to Windows. There are plenty of embedded applications.
Sure, almost anything can be traced and tapped. If it gets translated into electronic signal, transmitted sound, or printed word, someone could intercept it. But if its transmitted via vaporware there's nothing to intercept.
Its perfectly untraceable because it doesn't exist.
Seems to me, that if you want some more information about them riping off grandmas you should call their toll free number. Talk to a representitive and ask them why they want to fool those that can least afford it out of $300.
Spend some time on the phone with them. Its a free call for you. Sure, they may end up with a high phone bill this month, and may have to pay some overtime to their operators, but its worth it to get the real story straight from them.
Seems to me none of the first 4 points in the linked article is misleading. After that I gave up reading :
1) AFAIK, any released software that incorporates or even links against GPL software needs to be released as GPL.
2) OK, maybe its been tested in Germany, but in the US, the GPL has not been upheld in court by a judge. The sited case (Drew Technologies, Inc. v. Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.) was settled ; a verdict was not issued by a judge. I'm not saying that case isn't legally significant, but it can't be considered proof that the GPL is settled law - its not.
3) You have to give it away for free - thats the essence of the GPL. But you can charge for it too. How's this a misconception?
4)"liberty or death" - come on - is this really a common misconception? How many ppl have even heard of this? (and yes, of course most slashdot readers have, but are you really misconceived?)
Maybe scientists should get out more. First they sequence the Neanderthals DNA. Next, they'll be cloning one. Then the clone's start multiplying. Finally they take over the earth. Isn't this obvious to anyone else, or is it just me?
A prototype...yeah right. Come on, give this some thought...could this really work?
Their cameras would first have to see the lens of your camera. With some trivial protection they would have to have their camera lenses virtually anywhere you would take a picture. Then, they would have to diferenciate between your camera lens, and say for example the lens of your eyeglasses. Of course someone could just make a camera that looks like the human eye behind glasses.
I emailed support@vonage.com yesterday, and they confirmed that vonageipo.com is their site;this is not a scam.
However, they should never have sent out email with a link to a site other than their own.
-There's no way to verify through whois records that the site is legit -Best you could do is if the whois has a DNS server listed on vonage.com's domain -Their dns servers are not authoritative for the domain -It would not be hard to net scan for vonage SIP phone adaptors, then connect to them to leave voicemail faking out the CID to look as if it where from "system"
In today's world of phishing scams, shame on Vonage for not being vigilant. This just encourages users to fall for phishing ploys.
Whats really costing them is that they are obligated to buy back the shares because they don't have what they sold.
As they sold far in advance of the number of outstanding shares, their in a bind.
According to TFA, the shares all sold for about $4,750. They where initially trading at about $5,065. Multiply the difference by 610,000 shares, and you have a loss of about $190 Million.
Problem is that they have to settle by December 13th. The Tokyo Stock Exchange will not allow them to simply pay the differnce of $315 per share to the buyers.
The current share holders, understanding the situation, see annother big payday. They can ask for any price they want, Mizuho must purchase 610,000 shares by December 13th, and there's only about 15,000 shares outstanding.
They have to buy shares, distribute them to those that bought them through the error. Then, they have to buy those back, to give to other buyers. Then they have to repeat about 40times.
Seems to me that the Tokyo Stock Exchange should just rule that it was an error, and make Mizuho pay $315 for each share erroneously sold.
I find it very interesting that you assume I was deriding Ask Slashdot.
If you re-read my comment, I think you will find it did not characterise as good or bad the use of Ask Slashdot for a major business decision. All I was suggesting is that its a clue to the company's identity.
If you think it reflects well on the company to ask slashdot, then please use that information to posit a guess as to their identity.
Slashdot Mirror
Since when is tag a "contact sport" like football?
Why not ban recess altogether?
I know this is only one wacky school district, but do they have no common sense at all?
As noted above and in TFA, blocing external images doesn't help. Its an iframe reference not an image.
Even if you use Thunderbird, you still can't block this type of tracking.
ICANN's contention seems to be that even if ordered to remove the record, its not technically possible for them. Only the registrar (TUCOWS in this case) could remove the registration.
Is this accurate? Don't the glue records get published through ICANN, and couldn't they remove them?
Of course I am in favor of Spamhaus and against SPAMers...I'm just curious if this is a legal ploy on ICANN's part to help Spamhaus (which I would applaud), or if its just ICANN telling the truth (which I would also applaud...I'm easy to please).
Also, if true, couldn't Spamhaus just move their registrar from TUCOWS (Canada?) to a registrar in a less US court friendly country where any order to remove the registration could be ignored?
As stated by numerous other posts, Spamhaus needs DNS records as the RBL works using DNS.
However, just because ICANN suspends a domain doesn't mean that its out of DNS. Anyone with a DNS server can still serve the records. Not all root servers are under ICANN control.
Many email servers have their own DNS server (if only for caching). I say, manually add the records in defiance of the SPAMers and their abuse of our legal system!
If Google keeps YouTube as a separate corporation owned by Google, are they insulated from its liability?
If so, wouldn't that cap their losses at the 1.65B they are paying for YouTube?
I thought Star Trek was owned by Paramount...where does CBS come in?
I couldn't read the link from the posted story - slashdot'd - but it looks like (according to him) this isn't the first time that he's been ripped off in a deal with News Corp
a d-greenspan-and-why-is-he-so.html
see: http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2005/09/who-is-br
and
http://www.insiderstocksales.com/insidersales.htm (cool flash if your into that kind of stuff)
I've got a site ( http://www.testcompany.com/ ) that gets about 30,000 page veiws a month. Does that mean its worth $120K?
Nobody's offered me 1/100th of $120k...yet
Here's a mirror ( added by email :)
/ 2212.html
http://www.testcompany.com/archive/October2006-40
Seems to me like you are searching out the most expensive commercial OSS on the planet, then asking why wouldn't you just buy the MS product instead.
Why would you want the $10,000 version of Cygwin when you can download and use it for free? Likewise, there are plenty of reputable free Linux distributions out there, many suitable for use in embedded systems.
If you want a commercial Linux, why not look at Redhat? Its comparable in price to Windows. There are plenty of embedded applications.
Sure, almost anything can be traced and tapped. If it gets translated into electronic signal, transmitted sound, or printed word, someone could intercept it. But if its transmitted via vaporware there's nothing to intercept.
Its perfectly untraceable because it doesn't exist.
If you look on the Embroidery Protection Website, there's a phone number: 888-921-5732.
Seems to me, that if you want some more information about them riping off grandmas you should call their toll free number. Talk to a representitive and ask them why they want to fool those that can least afford it out of $300.
Spend some time on the phone with them. Its a free call for you. Sure, they may end up with a high phone bill this month, and may have to pay some overtime to their operators, but its worth it to get the real story straight from them.
Seems to me none of the first 4 points in the linked article is misleading. After that I gave up reading :
1) AFAIK, any released software that incorporates or even links against GPL software needs to be released as GPL.
2) OK, maybe its been tested in Germany, but in the US, the GPL has not been upheld in court by a judge. The sited case (Drew Technologies, Inc. v. Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.) was settled ; a verdict was not issued by a judge. I'm not saying that case isn't legally significant, but it can't be considered proof that the GPL is settled law - its not.
3) You have to give it away for free - thats the essence of the GPL. But you can charge for it too. How's this a misconception?
4)"liberty or death" - come on - is this really a common misconception? How many ppl have even heard of this? (and yes, of course most slashdot readers have, but are you really misconceived?)
Seems to me that a movie was hinted at in the 200th episode.
Would this be the first TV series spinoff from a movie to spin off a movie?
At 1.5 inches per year, after 1 billion years, it would be about 15,000 farther out from earth.
The moon is around 250,000 miles away from the earth currently (or about 30 times the earth's diameter).
Would annother 15k miles really make so much difference that it would move the center of gravity outside of the definition?
yup...that seems right...that means we've gone twice as far as Voyager in the same amount of time?
100 AU over 30 years. Seems to me I've gone almost as far in the same period of time.
Quick math :
-The earth travels (about) 3.14 AU / year
- 3.14 * 30 = 94.2 AU over 30 years
(note: I make math errors all the time. No doubt someone will correct this one if its wrong)
Why isn't voyager faster than the earth given it started off going as fast as the earth, and quickly accelerated from that point during takeoff?
Didn't I see this in a movie?
Maybe scientists should get out more. First they sequence the Neanderthals DNA. Next, they'll be cloning one. Then the clone's start multiplying. Finally they take over the earth. Isn't this obvious to anyone else, or is it just me?
A prototype...yeah right. Come on, give this some thought...could this really work?
Their cameras would first have to see the lens of your camera. With some trivial protection they would have to have their camera lenses virtually anywhere you would take a picture. Then, they would have to diferenciate between your camera lens, and say for example the lens of your eyeglasses. Of course someone could just make a camera that looks like the human eye behind glasses.
I emailed support@vonage.com yesterday, and they confirmed that vonageipo.com is their site;this is not a scam.
However, they should never have sent out email with a link to a site other than their own.
-There's no way to verify through whois records that the site is legit
-Best you could do is if the whois has a DNS server listed on vonage.com's domain
-Their dns servers are not authoritative for the domain
-It would not be hard to net scan for vonage SIP phone adaptors, then connect to them to leave voicemail faking out the CID to look as if it where from "system"
In today's world of phishing scams, shame on Vonage for not being vigilant. This just encourages users to fall for phishing ploys.
...affect to the fact how people perceive you...
Glass house in affect.
--Barry
Whats really costing them is that they are obligated to buy back the shares because they don't have what they sold.
As they sold far in advance of the number of outstanding shares, their in a bind.
According to TFA, the shares all sold for about $4,750. They where initially trading at about $5,065. Multiply the difference by 610,000 shares, and you have a loss of about $190 Million.
Problem is that they have to settle by December 13th. The Tokyo Stock Exchange will not allow them to simply pay the differnce of $315 per share to the buyers.
The current share holders, understanding the situation, see annother big payday. They can ask for any price they want, Mizuho must purchase 610,000 shares by December 13th, and there's only about 15,000 shares outstanding.
They have to buy shares, distribute them to those that bought them through the error. Then, they have to buy those back, to give to other buyers. Then they have to repeat about 40times.
Seems to me that the Tokyo Stock Exchange should just rule that it was an error, and make Mizuho pay $315 for each share erroneously sold.
Guess everyone posted the same answer at the same time :)
That's why your bank uses HTTPS with a server certificate. They assume that DNS is going to be owned by an attacker.
The lock in the browser confirms that the site in the URL is the one serving the page.
I find it very interesting that you assume I was deriding Ask Slashdot.
If you re-read my comment, I think you will find it did not characterise as good or bad the use of Ask Slashdot for a major business decision. All I was suggesting is that its a clue to the company's identity.
If you think it reflects well on the company to ask slashdot, then please use that information to posit a guess as to their identity.