So where did you stand when laws wanted to blame the ISP for porn, or copyright violations by their users? Firmly against it. As I said, I do support free speech, but I shouldn't have to be forced to contribute to speech I don't agree with.
But the ISPs aren't the innocent I'm talking about? Yes and no. For instance, the ISP for bestbeast continues to allow the site to host on it's networks. That's fine, as long as BestBeast doesn't spam. When they do spam (and they don't do anything about it), then the ISP is tacsitly approving the use of force to promote speech to people that find that speech offensive. It's one thing to blast out mail to people that are into sex with anaminals, it's another to repeatedly do it to people that find that disgusting, don't want to see it, listen to it, and in fact never indicated they were interested in it. After all, and at least for now, I can hit mute or change channels on ads I don't want to see. BestBeast's ISP failure to take action against the site for spamming is the same as media companies taking over a televison to prevent mute or channel changing during an ad.
Question for you: How would you feel if BestBeast keep e-mailing your kids, even after an opt-out? Why should your kids see this if they never opted in?
If a murderer was hiding in a neighbourhood, would you kill one innocent neighbour per hour until the neighbours got together and rooted him out? I see your point, and I can to some degree concede it. However, the cases are not exactly parallel. A better analogy would be a case where the LANDLORD was preventing the police from investing, and the police rousted out the neighbors to ask questions. This is what collateral damage to the ISP customers forces. The customers don't want to pay the "rent", 'cause the cops are been a bloody nuisance due to the landlords inaction or action.
All internet traffic uses the property of others. We designed the internet on an "I pay for my end, you pay for your end and we don't sweath the packets" basis. Granted, and thank goodness too.
Why not fight spam without tearing that down, without declaring that communication is property abuse. I'd be delighted to do that, and that would be the most rational way to go about it, if we didn't have a few bad apples spoiling the bunch.
How can you have a free society if communication is property abuse? It isn't, as long as I agree to your communication. If I agree to hear you, no problem.
A good example is the communication I received from a brick-and-morter retail electronics store. (I can't get more specific than that.)
For three months, every week, I got an e-mail from this store listing the specials there. I never asked for these e-mails, they used my e-mail address I gave because the salesman said it would be used only for safty bullitens and recall notices. Each time for a month, I clicked the "unsubscribe" button. I kept getting it. On the 5th e-mail, I e-mailed them to the postmaster account, with the unsubscribe notices. Two weeks, two more e-mail specials. I sent a registered letter. More time passes, more e-mails. I called, sent faxes, more e-mail, nothing. Only when I got the home phone number for the president of the company and told him I would call him each time I got another e-mail did it stop. (I also sent e-mail to every person's account I could find.) I called, e-mailed, faxed, and sent registered letters to their ISP too. They never responded at all, aside from automated responses.
I shouldn't have to do that, should I?
It's not spam if:
I agree to accept the e-mail contact, and they disclose exactly what e-mail I can expect.
My address isn't traded to onthers to send me things unrelated to what I agree to accept.
They stop the first time I ask. Don't start unless I ask.
They don't contact me about pottery when I signed up for model railroads.
I don't that the above is unreasonable. A web page about pottery doesn't bother me, but an e-mail about it would, when I didn't ask for it. And it would surely result in wrath if it kept being shoved at me when I ask it to stop.
I've viewed your pages, and I respect the contributions you have made. I even respect the views you express here, though I don't agree with them in all points. I think that e-mail is wonderful, and I think that in a world of people willing to live and let live, your point would be the best course. However, we live in a world distored by greed and selfish motives, and in that world, spam is a problem. It steals time, effort, resources, and the ability to communicate with others by increasing the signal to noise ratio. Sure, it's easy to hit delete on one message, but what about 1,400 a day? That's the figure I've seen if every business in the US sent just one e-mail a year to each person. And that isn't something most of use could deal with.
...sharing movies illegally (is there really any other way?).
Yep. If I purchased the DVD, and want to be able to access it from my computer in the work shop from my computer in the living room, that's legal as far as I know. Except for the trival problem of circumventing the "encryption" on the DVD, that is. That isn't legal, though it should be.
I wonder if it would be legal for me to just pipe the baseband around. Oops. DVD doen't have a base band output. Well, I guess I could capture it off of the VGA out put. Opps. Guess not. Well I could... aw, screw it. I don't want to watch anything that badly. I just won't bother buying any more DVD's or going to movies.
What amazes me about the spam fight is how much it has led people to promote the idea of punishing the innocent in order to get at the guilty.
My take on this is that it is the fault of the ISP that won't take action against spammers. If all it took to stop spam was to inform the ISP of the violation, then there wouldn't be a need for RBL's.
The most common justification is the canard that it's not about speech it's about property.
Then can I use your computing resources for things you don't want me to do? Can I dump the contents of the pig sty in your car because I don't want to pay someone to haul it away? You see, the issue is exactly property. If some one wants to sell herbal Viagra, fine. Don't use my computer to do it. Is that unreasonable? Does that mean I don't support free speach?
Yikes. We are willing to let murderers go to make sure we don't punish the innocent.
There isn't anything innocent about spamming. You are doing it to make a buck or are too lazy or ignorant to secure your server. Unlike murder, spam sources can be traced back to someone. Real life crimes can't, always. At least, not beyond a reasonable doubt. Notable exceptions aside.
On the internet there is no speech without the use of other people's property,
I never visit the www.bestbeast.com web page, and I don't care to. Ipso facto it doesn't use my property to engage in speech. On the other hand, splattering their spam all over my e-mail account (100 at last count) DOES use my property, and it pisses me off.
There are other, better methods that don't generate false positives or generate extremely few. I've written extensively on them.
a bad idea? If MS's claims are true, how much of the rug are we talking about having pulled out from under Linux? How long until someone figures a cool, neat trick to have the same ends but different means?
What about the SEGA finding, where the court fount that if the hardware required the software to do something, then the hardware manufacturer didn't have a kick comming when a aftermarket software house released a game that did what the hardware required, even though the software company didn't license the code from the hardware manufacturer?
People forget that DAT's started out as a DRM for audio. Anyone remember listening to Digital Audio on tape? Not many, huh? Most people didn't like the DRM and it wasn't adopted widely.
The problem here is the same as it's alway been. Fair use is largely the intent of the person making the copy. Until technology can read minds (fate forfend!) there won't be a DRM that won't abridge fair use in some way. As long as DRM abriges fair use, popular adoption of DRM technology won't happen willingly. This is an attempt to ram it down on an unwilling consumer population.
That said, the backlash that might build will depend largely on how intrusive Joe Six-Pack is going to find this new DRM technology. The second J.S.P. gets pissed off about it is the second elected officials are going to feel the heat. When they feel the heat, no amount of payola from ??AA is going to save it. MS is walking a fine line between control of content and pissing off J.S.P.
Until Joe Six Pack starts screaming not much is going to change. Unfortunatly, this might be after the Fritz chip is in most consumer electronics, and it will be too late to do much about it.
Don't forget that J.S.P. doesn't give a fart in the wind for the best technology. If he did, we'd have Betamax insted of V.H.S. We'd still have a Tucker auto, and not (fill in your most hated car). Zip and Jazz drives would be moldering in the dump, and we'd be using optical disks.
Is this new technology from MS a Open Source Killer? That's going to depend on someone making MoBo's available without the Fritz chip. Sure, those systems won't be able to run XP, but there are an awful lot of people out there running systems that don't run MS products. I can't quite see (at this point, maybe in the future?) a MoBo that flat won't allow a non-DRM OS to run, just that it won't run in the "Fritz here, you can control this system" mode.
That being the case, then I don't see Plaidium being quite the Open Source killer it is being painted. Not to say that it won't hurt Open Source, but it may not kill it. That's for the next evoloution of DRM. Which might be why MS is sending a sacrifice to Linux Expo. Calm down the Open Source zelots enough to get Fritz installed, don't use all of it's control capibillities until you reach market saturation, THEN whack those commie programmers when it's too late for them to save themselves. GAMEOVER.
Personally, I'm pretty uncomfortable with this call by Apple. Sure, a company needs to keep competitive secrets. That's up to the company to enforce. If they can't keep their work force from blabing information, seems like an internal matter to me.
On the flip side, how far is it from keeping "rumor mongers" out to keeping out people that report things Apple doesn't like? For instance, how the platform actually preforms?
Depending on how Apple's move impacts the willingness of independent reviewers to freely discuss Apple products, we may have to seriously consider future acquisitions.
I normally just pass this type of stuff by without comment, but I really have to say you are off base on this one.
Much as I hate censorship, there are legitimate reasons to block access/record the attempt. Like at a middle school. Or High School. Or primary school. Or work. But not the public library.
Now, my personal view is that I'd rather my kids go see some porn rather than, say, Mission Impossible or Die Hard. But have you seen some of the porn these days? See B###### RAPED AND THEIR TENDER PINK P###### TORN TO BLEEDING MEAT. That is somewhat upsetting to me.
Face it. There are some sick puppies out there, and I don't want my kids meeting up with them.
Now, as far as filtering at work: Listen, I pay you to work, not putz around on porn sites. No, I don't care if you are on break or not, bandwidth isn't free and others need it to do what I pay them to do. If you have a problem with that, then the door is right behind you, don't let it slam you in the a## on the way out.
This isn't about freedom to do your own thing. This is about getting the job done or school work. You want to surf porn, go right ahead. At home you fool. At home.
Transguide in San Antonio (and presumabilly in other cities) is doing some of this now. I don't think they sell alternate routing, but the X minutes to I10 signs are kept up to date by looking at cell traffic.
Sure, you can't use all 10G on ONE machine. Even a server can't use all that speed. Even using many NICs. (Buss congestion, ya know.) That isn't the point here. The point is that instead of having to segment a lot of traffic off to a vlan or other workaround, that traffic can be supported on one lan. This reduces equipment, interconnections, configuration, and alot of other headaches. In short, you can reduce the total points of failure.
And remember, Intel isn't the only hardware platform out there. While I don't know of a hardware platform that can make fully support the speeds needed, there are some that can support better than 4000 Kbps now.
..to even pretend to understand this. But this much I know: I'll be keeping those old technology wheels on my car for a while longer. I wonder how long it will be before I can't get any one to work on my car, while they sniff and look down their nose, complaining (whining) "That's OLD technology. Upgrade to anti-grav!"
The problem with VHS degradation over time has nothing to do with the data format on the tape. The problem is with the medium itself: flexible magnetic storage.
Maybe I'm taking this out of context, but the format of the tape is exactly the point. With analog encoding on VHS, the s/n ratio declines as the tape streaches and the signal is corrupted. With digital encoding and CRC's, if a frame is too far out of whack you get nothing. Until then, the video is clean and you don't notice signal problems as you would with analog encoding.
It's a bit like the cell phone technology vs. digial cell phones. The older stuff cracks and pops and fades, while the digital sounds fine right up until the signal strenght is too low to trip the AGC on the tower receiver. Then it looses the channel and it looses the call.
I remember something called OnTrack, a backup system used on an old S100 bus computer. It used VHS video to make backups. You have an "interleave" factor, which was basically how many times the same frame was written to tape. The first frame misses? Don't worry, a copy will be along in a few seconds. I wonder if they are doing that in the new tape format.
And by the bye, the studios can encode all they want, but if it's mag tape, it won't be long before professional copyright violators have duplication machines for it. It will only foil the people that don't want to take the time to make their copies. And yes, it is fair use to make them as long as you don't sell them. IANAL.
Remember, fair use is a state of mind, and technology can't read our minds (thank God!). If someone says they can protect content but preserve fair use, it's not true. Period.
The channel logo in the lower right hand corner pisses me off to no end. The Science Channel is the worst. I've quit watching it when I go to someone else's house. (I don't pay to watch TV as a protest to Jack and Hillery).
Can't stand the CNN bull sh*t taking up 3/4 of the screen while the talking head gasses on about drivel.
Most of the "news" is lies or spin anyway.
What isn't lies or spin is just inaccurate anyway.
Nothing of value is free, but some values can not be expressed in terms of monitary value. Love is great. Love sucks. Both are expressions of the value of love, measured in something other than dollars.
This concept is what escapes Jack and Hillery. Being nothing more than mindless robots for the music and movie industry, they are not required to know that some things are beyond price, but not beyond value. What is the Mona Lisa worth? Would any one sell it if they knew that the purchaser was going to burn it? Fair use rights are on the auction block. A priceless right gone forever is worthless, in terms of dollars, but valued beyond the greed of Midas for J&H.
We have to have the remote hammer to pop out of the monitor to whack the end user. This is a must for any admin that works with more than 300 people. Hammer trigger from e-mail, pager, SMS, or telephone number.
Power mains must be connected to the user's chair, see above for trigger.
The MUA must forward all p0rn to the admin account. Likewise with credit card info.
The MUA must know when the user is about to do something to tick off the admin, like sending a "me too" to everyone in the office, or replying to a confidential e-mail to the whole office and prevent the user from reproducing. X-rays are fine for impromptu sterlizations. The side effect of loosing all your body hair is no problem, as it alerts others to a stupid co-worker.
The MUA must alert the admin when a coworker he has got the hots for changes her home phone number. Just to be fair, if the the admin is female, the reverse applies.
The MUA must analyze the admins e-mail and throw a bucket of cold water if (s)he attempts to send a really stupid e-mail.
Also, the MUA must be able to launch nuclear missles at spammers automatically. After that, it should refer the e-mail to the admin to see if a stronger response is warranted. Better yet, the MUA should employ a time machine to go back and choke the spamming creep when the spammer is still a baby, then use X-rays on the parents as above.
The MUA should have a hypnotic effect on the object of the Admins desire and cause that person to preform disgusting oral acts on the Admins body each time a new e-mail arrives. (HOORAY FOR KELZ!)
For the PHB, he should (by the same hypnotic effect) do a "Full Monty" when the big cheese walks in. Twice.
The MUA should be able to cause back dated confirmation messages from HR approving a 51 week paid vacation upon pressing a special key combination, unless it's the PHB pressing the keys, then it should cause an e-mail to be sent to HR from the PHB's account turning in notice.
Sorry, if you had a day like mine, you'd need a laugh about now...
What were the major porting problems the 390? Do many people use it? How has management accepted Linux in the 390 world?
Credit card billing is a bad idea
on
Disconnecting
·
· Score: 2
I never use my credit cards for monthy bills because I'm a control freak. Call me unreasonable, but I want to control when, where, and how much of my money flows out of my bank.
I use an online service to pay bills. I connect, veryify the cert on the ssl site, enter my account and password, then check off the vendors I want to pay, plug in the amount. For the bills that are the same every month (Car, House, Insurance, and so on) I schedule a payment automatically. When/if I don't want to pay them, it's a simple click.
I would never allow any business to bill me automatically for services (aside from the bank I'm using, no way out of that!). It's in their interest to bill me no matter what. It's in my interest to pay my bills when the service meets my expectations.
Moral of this story: Never leave your wallet where someone else can reach in. It never works out in your interest.
Well, it seems that someone is datamining over at Sony. Hmmm. Maybe that could be used againt them? When someone in the intelligence field (read spys) know they are being bugged, they don't remove the bug, or let the evesdroppers know they know about the bug. Instead, they feed information to it. Specific informaion.
That they want the Bad Guy to know.
Doesn't mean it's true...
I've had FlowGo blocked for almost a year. I still bounce mail from them to the tune of several dozen a day. Perhaps it's time for an RBL nomination? SPEWS, anyone?
Don't like RIAA or MPAA, then QUIT PAYING/LISTENING/WATCHING THEIR CHIT, or at least pay EPIC, EFF, and GeekPAC some bucks to offset the profit you are stuffing into Jack and Hillery's pockets. I haven't paid to go to a movie, buy a CD, or paid AOL/TIME/WARNER/CNN/DISCOVERY this year, nor will I for the rest of the year.
I'm in protest mode, and RIAA/MPAA/Sony/Warner/MGM et al can kiss my rosy red behind as long as they keep acting like spoiled children. Frankly, I don't miss the drivel so far. I listen to CD's I purchased in the past, swap CD's, books (and electronic books) & movies with friends & family, and all other legal things I can do to not PAY them. 'Course, Turner Broadcasting CEO Jamie Kellner is a mite shy on common freaking sense, but that's no more than to be expected from IP control freaks.
Look, put up or shut up. Do something that hits IP profiteers in the pocket book, vote, and give money to those that are fighting for your rights, or shut up and drop it; you'll get what all cowards get sooner or later.
Slashdot Mirror
My guess is that RIAA didn't have to do squat. Now you know why letting large media conglomerates own everything in sight is a Bad Idea(tm).
Firmly against it. As I said, I do support free speech, but I shouldn't have to be forced to contribute to speech I don't agree with.
But the ISPs aren't the innocent I'm talking about?
Yes and no. For instance, the ISP for bestbeast continues to allow the site to host on it's networks. That's fine, as long as BestBeast doesn't spam. When they do spam (and they don't do anything about it), then the ISP is tacsitly approving the use of force to promote speech to people that find that speech offensive. It's one thing to blast out mail to people that are into sex with anaminals, it's another to repeatedly do it to people that find that disgusting, don't want to see it, listen to it, and in fact never indicated they were interested in it. After all, and at least for now, I can hit mute or change channels on ads I don't want to see. BestBeast's ISP failure to take action against the site for spamming is the same as media companies taking over a televison to prevent mute or channel changing during an ad.
Question for you: How would you feel if BestBeast keep e-mailing your kids, even after an opt-out? Why should your kids see this if they never opted in?
If a murderer was hiding in a neighbourhood, would you kill one innocent neighbour per hour until the neighbours got together and rooted him out?
I see your point, and I can to some degree concede it. However, the cases are not exactly parallel. A better analogy would be a case where the LANDLORD was preventing the police from investing, and the police rousted out the neighbors to ask questions. This is what collateral damage to the ISP customers forces. The customers don't want to pay the "rent", 'cause the cops are been a bloody nuisance due to the landlords inaction or action.
All internet traffic uses the property of others. We designed the internet on an "I pay for my end, you pay for your end and we don't sweath the packets" basis.
Granted, and thank goodness too.
Why not fight spam without tearing that down, without declaring that communication is property abuse.
I'd be delighted to do that, and that would be the most rational way to go about it, if we didn't have a few bad apples spoiling the bunch.
How can you have a free society if communication is property abuse?
It isn't, as long as I agree to your communication. If I agree to hear you, no problem.
A good example is the communication I received from a brick-and-morter retail electronics store. (I can't get more specific than that.)
For three months, every week, I got an e-mail from this store listing the specials there. I never asked for these e-mails, they used my e-mail address I gave because the salesman said it would be used only for safty bullitens and recall notices.
Each time for a month, I clicked the "unsubscribe" button. I kept getting it. On the 5th e-mail, I e-mailed them to the postmaster account, with the unsubscribe notices. Two weeks, two more e-mail specials. I sent a registered letter. More time passes, more e-mails. I called, sent faxes, more e-mail, nothing. Only when I got the home phone number for the president of the company and told him I would call him each time I got another e-mail did it stop. (I also sent e-mail to every person's account I could find.) I called, e-mailed, faxed, and sent registered letters to their ISP too. They never responded at all, aside from automated responses.
I shouldn't have to do that, should I?
It's not spam if:
I agree to accept the e-mail contact, and they disclose exactly what e-mail I can expect.
My address isn't traded to onthers to send me things unrelated to what I agree to accept.
They stop the first time I ask. Don't start unless I ask.
They don't contact me about pottery when I signed up for model railroads.
I don't that the above is unreasonable. A web page about pottery doesn't bother me, but an e-mail about it would, when I didn't ask for it. And it would surely result in wrath if it kept being shoved at me when I ask it to stop.
I've viewed your pages, and I respect the contributions you have made. I even respect the views you express here, though I don't agree with them in all points. I think that e-mail is wonderful, and I think that in a world of people willing to live and let live, your point would be the best course. However, we live in a world distored by greed and selfish motives, and in that world, spam is a problem. It steals time, effort, resources, and the ability to communicate with others by increasing the signal to noise ratio. Sure, it's easy to hit delete on one message, but what about 1,400 a day? That's the figure I've seen if every business in the US sent just one e-mail a year to each person. And that isn't something most of use could deal with.
Yep. If I purchased the DVD, and want to be able to access it from my computer in the work shop from my computer in the living room, that's legal as far as I know. Except for the trival problem of circumventing the "encryption" on the DVD, that is. That isn't legal, though it should be.
I wonder if it would be legal for me to just pipe the baseband around. Oops. DVD doen't have a base band output. Well, I guess I could capture it off of the VGA out put. Opps. Guess not. Well I could... aw, screw it. I don't want to watch anything that badly. I just won't bother buying any more DVD's or going to movies.
IANAL, YMMV, Do this at your own risk.
My take on this is that it is the fault of the ISP that won't take action against spammers. If all it took to stop spam was to inform the ISP of the violation, then there wouldn't be a need for RBL's.
The most common justification is the canard that it's not about speech it's about property.
Then can I use your computing resources for things you don't want me to do? Can I dump the contents of the pig sty in your car because I don't want to pay someone to haul it away? You see, the issue is exactly property. If some one wants to sell herbal Viagra, fine. Don't use my computer to do it. Is that unreasonable? Does that mean I don't support free speach?
Yikes. We are willing to let murderers go to make sure we don't punish the innocent.
There isn't anything innocent about spamming. You are doing it to make a buck or are too lazy or ignorant to secure your server. Unlike murder, spam sources can be traced back to someone. Real life crimes can't, always. At least, not beyond a reasonable doubt. Notable exceptions aside.
On the internet there is no speech without the use of other people's property,
I never visit the www.bestbeast.com web page, and I don't care to. Ipso facto it doesn't use my property to engage in speech. On the other hand, splattering their spam all over my e-mail account (100 at last count) DOES use my property, and it pisses me off.
There are other, better methods that don't generate false positives or generate extremely few. I've written extensively on them.
So where are the links to this?
What about the SEGA finding, where the court fount that if the hardware required the software to do something, then the hardware manufacturer didn't have a kick comming when a aftermarket software house released a game that did what the hardware required, even though the software company didn't license the code from the hardware manufacturer?
The problem here is the same as it's alway been. Fair use is largely the intent of the person making the copy. Until technology can read minds (fate forfend!) there won't be a DRM that won't abridge fair use in some way. As long as DRM abriges fair use, popular adoption of DRM technology won't happen willingly. This is an attempt to ram it down on an unwilling consumer population.
That said, the backlash that might build will depend largely on how intrusive Joe Six-Pack is going to find this new DRM technology. The second J.S.P. gets pissed off about it is the second elected officials are going to feel the heat. When they feel the heat, no amount of payola from ??AA is going to save it. MS is walking a fine line between control of content and pissing off J.S.P.
Until Joe Six Pack starts screaming not much is going to change. Unfortunatly, this might be after the Fritz chip is in most consumer electronics, and it will be too late to do much about it.
Don't forget that J.S.P. doesn't give a fart in the wind for the best technology. If he did, we'd have Betamax insted of V.H.S. We'd still have a Tucker auto, and not (fill in your most hated car). Zip and Jazz drives would be moldering in the dump, and we'd be using optical disks.
Is this new technology from MS a Open Source Killer? That's going to depend on someone making MoBo's available without the Fritz chip. Sure, those systems won't be able to run XP, but there are an awful lot of people out there running systems that don't run MS products. I can't quite see (at this point, maybe in the future?) a MoBo that flat won't allow a non-DRM OS to run, just that it won't run in the "Fritz here, you can control this system" mode.
That being the case, then I don't see Plaidium being quite the Open Source killer it is being painted. Not to say that it won't hurt Open Source, but it may not kill it. That's for the next evoloution of DRM. Which might be why MS is sending a sacrifice to Linux Expo. Calm down the Open Source zelots enough to get Fritz installed, don't use all of it's control capibillities until you reach market saturation, THEN whack those commie programmers when it's too late for them to save themselves. GAMEOVER.
On the flip side, how far is it from keeping "rumor mongers" out to keeping out people that report things Apple doesn't like? For instance, how the platform actually preforms?
Depending on how Apple's move impacts the willingness of independent reviewers to freely discuss Apple products, we may have to seriously consider future acquisitions.
I thought Cisco charged for SSH on the routers?
Much as I hate censorship, there are legitimate reasons to block access/record the attempt. Like at a middle school. Or High School. Or primary school. Or work. But not the public library.
Now, my personal view is that I'd rather my kids go see some porn rather than, say, Mission Impossible or Die Hard. But have you seen some of the porn these days? See B###### RAPED AND THEIR TENDER PINK P###### TORN TO BLEEDING MEAT. That is somewhat upsetting to me.
Face it. There are some sick puppies out there, and I don't want my kids meeting up with them.
Now, as far as filtering at work: Listen, I pay you to work, not putz around on porn sites. No, I don't care if you are on break or not, bandwidth isn't free and others need it to do what I pay them to do. If you have a problem with that, then the door is right behind you, don't let it slam you in the a## on the way out.
This isn't about freedom to do your own thing. This is about getting the job done or school work. You want to surf porn, go right ahead. At home you fool. At home.
Transguide in San Antonio (and presumabilly in other cities) is doing some of this now. I don't think they sell alternate routing, but the X minutes to I10 signs are kept up to date by looking at cell traffic.
And remember, Intel isn't the only hardware platform out there. While I don't know of a hardware platform that can make fully support the speeds needed, there are some that can support better than 4000 Kbps now.
..to even pretend to understand this. But this much I know: I'll be keeping those old technology wheels on my car for a while longer. I wonder how long it will be before I can't get any one to work on my car, while they sniff and look down their nose, complaining (whining) "That's OLD technology. Upgrade to anti-grav!"
Maybe I'm taking this out of context, but the format of the tape is exactly the point. With analog encoding on VHS, the s/n ratio declines as the tape streaches and the signal is corrupted. With digital encoding and CRC's, if a frame is too far out of whack you get nothing. Until then, the video is clean and you don't notice signal problems as you would with analog encoding.
It's a bit like the cell phone technology vs. digial cell phones. The older stuff cracks and pops and fades, while the digital sounds fine right up until the signal strenght is too low to trip the AGC on the tower receiver. Then it looses the channel and it looses the call.
I remember something called OnTrack, a backup system used on an old S100 bus computer. It used VHS video to make backups. You have an "interleave" factor, which was basically how many times the same frame was written to tape. The first frame misses? Don't worry, a copy will be along in a few seconds. I wonder if they are doing that in the new tape format.
And by the bye, the studios can encode all they want, but if it's mag tape, it won't be long before professional copyright violators have duplication machines for it. It will only foil the people that don't want to take the time to make their copies. And yes, it is fair use to make them as long as you don't sell them. IANAL.
Remember, fair use is a state of mind, and technology can't read our minds (thank God!). If someone says they can protect content but preserve fair use, it's not true. Period.
Yep, I am. Thank you for pointing it out, I'd have lived the rest of my life never knowing if you hadn't told me.
I can't stand the ads
the ads are better than the "content"
pure drivel drives off the plain old drivel
The channel logo in the lower right hand corner pisses me off to no end. The Science Channel is the worst. I've quit watching it when I go to someone else's house. (I don't pay to watch TV as a protest to Jack and Hillery).
Can't stand the CNN bull sh*t taking up 3/4 of the screen while the talking head gasses on about drivel.
Most of the "news" is lies or spin anyway.
What isn't lies or spin is just inaccurate anyway.
Phew! I feel better now.
What about LOVE?
Love is not free, it's just your nerves that pay.
Nothing of value is free, but some values can not be expressed in terms of monitary value. Love is great. Love sucks. Both are expressions of the value of love, measured in something other than dollars.
This concept is what escapes Jack and Hillery. Being nothing more than mindless robots for the music and movie industry, they are not required to know that some things are beyond price, but not beyond value. What is the Mona Lisa worth? Would any one sell it if they knew that the purchaser was going to burn it? Fair use rights are on the auction block. A priceless right gone forever is worthless, in terms of dollars, but valued beyond the greed of Midas for J&H.
Wasn't it Heinlein that wrote "mankind will not be mature until it can accept a valueable gift, and treasure it."
Or a care package every month.
We have to have the remote hammer to pop out of the monitor to whack the end user. This is a must for any admin that works with more than 300 people. Hammer trigger from e-mail, pager, SMS, or telephone number.
Power mains must be connected to the user's chair, see above for trigger.
The MUA must forward all p0rn to the admin account. Likewise with credit card info.
The MUA must know when the user is about to do something to tick off the admin, like sending a "me too" to everyone in the office, or replying to a confidential e-mail to the whole office and prevent the user from reproducing. X-rays are fine for impromptu sterlizations. The side effect of loosing all your body hair is no problem, as it alerts others to a stupid co-worker.
The MUA must alert the admin when a coworker he has got the hots for changes her home phone number. Just to be fair, if the the admin is female, the reverse applies.
The MUA must analyze the admins e-mail and throw a bucket of cold water if (s)he attempts to send a really stupid e-mail.
Also, the MUA must be able to launch nuclear missles at spammers automatically. After that, it should refer the e-mail to the admin to see if a stronger response is warranted. Better yet, the MUA should employ a time machine to go back and choke the spamming creep when the spammer is still a baby, then use X-rays on the parents as above.
The MUA should have a hypnotic effect on the object of the Admins desire and cause that person to preform disgusting oral acts on the Admins body each time a new e-mail arrives. (HOORAY FOR KELZ!)
For the PHB, he should (by the same hypnotic effect) do a "Full Monty" when the big cheese walks in. Twice.
The MUA should be able to cause back dated confirmation messages from HR approving a 51 week paid vacation upon pressing a special key combination, unless it's the PHB pressing the keys, then it should cause an e-mail to be sent to HR from the PHB's account turning in notice.
Sorry, if you had a day like mine, you'd need a laugh about now...
What were the major porting problems the 390? Do many people use it? How has management accepted Linux in the 390 world?
I use an online service to pay bills. I connect, veryify the cert on the ssl site, enter my account and password, then check off the vendors I want to pay, plug in the amount. For the bills that are the same every month (Car, House, Insurance, and so on) I schedule a payment automatically. When/if I don't want to pay them, it's a simple click.
I would never allow any business to bill me automatically for services (aside from the bank I'm using, no way out of that!). It's in their interest to bill me no matter what. It's in my interest to pay my bills when the service meets my expectations.
Moral of this story: Never leave your wallet where someone else can reach in. It never works out in your interest.
Well, it seems that someone is datamining over at Sony. Hmmm. Maybe that could be used againt them? When someone in the intelligence field (read spys) know they are being bugged, they don't remove the bug, or let the evesdroppers know they know about the bug.
Instead, they feed information to it.
Specific informaion.
That they want the Bad Guy to know.
Doesn't mean it's true...
I've had FlowGo blocked for almost a year. I still bounce mail from them to the tune of several dozen a day. Perhaps it's time for an RBL nomination? SPEWS, anyone?
I kind of doubt anyone will sign these bozos up. I mean really, even Level 3 'prolly won't touch 'em now.
And yes, my office DOES block all Level 3 IP space. Every last bit of it.
Don't like RIAA or MPAA, then QUIT PAYING/LISTENING/WATCHING THEIR CHIT, or at least pay EPIC, EFF, and GeekPAC some bucks to offset the profit you are stuffing into Jack and Hillery's pockets. I haven't paid to go to a movie, buy a CD, or paid AOL/TIME/WARNER/CNN/DISCOVERY this year, nor will I for the rest of the year.
I'm in protest mode, and RIAA/MPAA/Sony/Warner/MGM et al can kiss my rosy red behind as long as they keep acting like spoiled children. Frankly, I don't miss the drivel so far. I listen to CD's I purchased in the past, swap CD's, books (and electronic books) & movies with friends & family, and all other legal things I can do to not PAY them. 'Course, Turner Broadcasting CEO Jamie Kellner is a mite shy on common freaking sense, but that's no more than to be expected from IP control freaks.
Look, put up or shut up. Do something that hits IP profiteers in the pocket book, vote, and give money to those that are fighting for your rights, or shut up and drop it; you'll get what all cowards get sooner or later.