Yellow Beard - some monty python folks, cheech and chong, medalaine(sp?) kahn etc.
Little shop of horrors - the original black and white, the musical was made from this, them the second movie. Jack Nicholson had a bit part before he made it big.:-)
Attack of the killer tomatoes;-) And the soundtrack would be great to have a copy of.
long answer, the charitable contributions are based on your cost for what you contribute. It is not based on the value of your time. If you drove to the salvation army and dropped off clothes you can deduct(if you itemize) the mileage cost and the fair market value of the clothes if you purchased them at retail. If you drive to a non-profit and code for 24 hours you can only deduct the mileage.
Actually I would would not say "MS and Adobe empower the BSA to investigate and recoup software piracy costs". They are using the BSA to squeeze money out of any of their CUSTOMERS who can't PROVE they have licenses for every piece of software running on every PC in the office. In any large organization there will probably be some unlicensed software installed on some machine. But there are always many more copies of legal software that don't have proof of purchase. It would require more organization and resources than most companies have to spare to maintain accurate records and paperwork of everything ever purchased.
The thing is that speakeasy has to provide DSL through covad and a baby bell.
I have heard that verizon is offering DSL at below what they consider their cost internally. Very hard to compete with that price structure when you have to pay the same company for use of their lines to provide service. If Covad didn't have equipment in the new CO, Speakeasy may not have had any way to provide you better than 128k sdsl (144k idsl) due to the distance from your original CO.
Their price for low speed idsl and sdsl around the same as the adsl circuit.
Chuck p.s. don't be surprised if the bells prices go up after they drive their competition out of business.
I would be surprised if any company would not assume you wanted to discontinue service if you tell them you phone line was disconnected. The end result you describe sounds like they were very reasonable. I am sure their billing system automatically applies the termination fee. At least they were able to get a human to understand you plan and adjust your account. It could be that covad (or which ever third party they provided DSL through) still passed a termination fee on to them.
That is surprising. I have never heard anything but good things about speakeasy. I have had several friends and clients hooked up with dsl through them. Never had any problems that were not quickly resolved. The way they handled the nimbda/code red event was much better than all the baby bells that used it as an excuse to filter port 80. I would like to hear the history of your problem. If you post with names, dates and ticket numbers I would not be surprised if they looked into the issue.
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell?
on
Fresco M1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Funny, I had no problem when I was running X under linux with twm on a 386 with 8 MB ram.
One thing that is often overlooked is the cost of tracking licenses/license keys and proof of purchase. If you use Free Software you can install the package on any machine without worrying about finding the contact information and purchase order.
Also there is much less overhead in the initial acquisition of the software initially. With Free Software I have often been investigating a project in the afternoon and had a working prototype for Management evaluation in the morning. These could be projects it would take weeks to get the PO signed, price negotiated and media delivered.
All of this without exposure to BSA forced audits.
Repost of parent that was AC(useful info at link):
Fear mongering and scare tactics?
Considering they tried to ban the VCR, and when that didn't work, institute a "modest" fee of $50 per blank tape, is this really fear mongering?
To get some accurate info on drm, go to http://www.nyfairuse.org, and to see a NY group that has been proactively fighting drm and other attacks on fair use [nylxs.com], linux and other issues, go to www.nylxs.com
That gives me a great idea on how to put this in the proper perspective. How about we get together and offer to buy the studios tickets in every multimillion dollar lottery with the "potential" to win 100s of millions of dollars!
That should offset their current concerns of potential lost revenue.
If you find this distasteful, make sure you keep copies (hard copies) of all internal emails and documents pertaining to this issue.
That will probably protect you and make the case a slam dunk if it ever goes to trial.
Send your boss an email objecting to the shaky legal ground and save his response where he asks you to go ahead with it. If you get fired for making noise look into the whistleblowers statutes.
From what I recall of my economics 101 class anti trust laws are not anti free market. One of the parts of the definition of a "free market" are low barriers to entry.
Anti trust laws are designed to restore this condition and prevent monopolies from maintaining barriers to entry for new competition.
Just because some company wants something to be illegal to preserve their profits doesn't mean it should be.
Just because a tool can be used to commit a crime doesn't mean it should be outlawed. (classic example, hammer can be used to kill someone, should it be outlawed?)
The main problem I see with the DMCA is it is designed to prevent the flow of information and the production of tools that MAY be used to commit a crime. The act of commiting the crime was already illegal.
The crime is making duplicates of copyright material and SELLING them for a profit. Prosecute the offenders when the crime happens.
Taking away the tools to make duplicates gives these companies the control of when/where/how we use/view/listen to the material we bought legally.
I for one do not want to transition to a pay per use society. The whole original justification for copyright restriction was to encourage companies to produce more and better products by granting them limited exclusive rights on first sale of their material. The idea was not to guarantee a recurring revenue stream without producing new/better products.
Eventually you should have oneworldhosting.com stop serving out your DNS information but it is only a problem for their customers if they are providing stale data.
You records at your new provider are using stale data. (maybe doing a zone transfer from your old providers master) Get your entire DNS zone from your new provider and that will help.
How do you update your DNS records at the new provider?
Confirm with them that they are not doing a zone transfer from your old provider.
Make sure any changes you make with them include a new serial number for the zone file.
I am betting that you are looking in the wrong place. You probably copied the old DNS records to the new servers at NS1.TOMORROW2.NET, NS2 etc.
The whois records are pointing to NS1.TOMORROW2.NET, NS2.TOMORROW2.NET, NS3...,NS4...
Given that, there is no way ns2.owh.com is being used by the clients to look up your domain.
ONEWORLDHOSTING.COM is probably just re-using your old IP address and your new DNS servers still have the old records.
You new provider may be to inept to figure out what the problem is. A lawyer would be a waste of time and money. It is not a problem with your old provider it is a problem with your DNS records or your new provider.
BTW, the DNS SOA record on NS1.TOMORROW2.NET has ns1.ocdns.com listed. I can't do a zone transfer of your domain but I would not be surprised if your DNS records were setup to do a zone transfer from ONEWORLDHOSTING.COM and your new provider can't figure this out.
Get your records fixed at your new provider and you should have no problem.
The following query shows that data is being retrieved from your new providers servers and it has the old IP address.
$ host -a www.anarchsforlife.org
Trying "www.anarchsforlife.org."
;; ->>HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 26950
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 4
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;www.anarchsforlife.org. IN ANY
;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN A 64.177.5.173
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN NS NS3.TOMORROW2.NET.
anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN NS NS4.TOMORROW2.NET.
anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN NS NS1.TOMORROW2.NET.
anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN NS NS2.TOMORROW2.NET.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
NS1.TOMORROW2.NET. 171672 IN A 128.241.194.20
NS2.TOMORROW2.NET. 171672 IN A 128.241.194.21
NS3.TOMORROW2.NET. 171672 IN A 130.94.173.110
NS4.TOMORROW2.NET. 171672 IN A 130.94.173.111
Slashdot Mirror
Yellow Beard - some monty python folks, cheech and chong, medalaine(sp?) kahn etc.
:-)
;-) And the soundtrack would be great to have a copy of.
Little shop of horrors - the original black and white, the musical was made from this, them the second movie. Jack Nicholson had a bit part before he made it big.
Attack of the killer tomatoes
short answer, no.
long answer, the charitable contributions are based on your cost for what you contribute.
It is not based on the value of your time. If you drove to the salvation army and dropped off clothes you can deduct(if you itemize) the mileage cost and the fair market value of the clothes if you purchased them at retail.
If you drive to a non-profit and code for 24 hours you can only deduct the mileage.
Is a EULA a signed contract that will hold up in a court of law? No!
They are not even honoring the refund if you do not accept the terms.
EULAs are not law. Stop believing everything they want you to believe.
UCITA clouds the issue a bit but that was only passed in two stupid states.
Actually I would would not say "MS and Adobe empower the BSA to investigate and recoup software piracy costs". They are using the BSA to squeeze money out of any of their CUSTOMERS who can't PROVE they have licenses for every piece of software running on every PC in the office. In any large organization there will probably be some unlicensed software installed on some machine. But there are always many more copies of legal software that don't have proof of purchase. It would require more organization and resources than most companies have to spare to maintain accurate records and paperwork of everything ever purchased.
regardless of what it says in the license it should not be binding unless they have a signed contract.
The stupid UCITA laws in maryland and virginia cloud this issue a bit.
The thing is that speakeasy has to provide DSL through covad and a baby bell.
I have heard that verizon is offering DSL at below what they consider their cost internally. Very hard to compete with that price structure when you have to pay the same company for use of their lines to provide service. If Covad didn't have equipment in the new CO, Speakeasy may not have had any way to provide you better than 128k sdsl (144k idsl) due to the distance from your original CO.
Their price for low speed idsl and sdsl around the same as the adsl circuit.
Chuck
p.s. don't be surprised if the bells prices go up after they drive their competition out of business.
I would be surprised if any company would not assume you wanted to discontinue service if you tell them you phone line was disconnected.
The end result you describe sounds like they were very reasonable. I am sure their billing system automatically applies the termination fee. At least they were able to get a human to understand you plan and adjust your account. It could be that covad (or which ever third party they provided DSL through) still passed a termination fee on to them.
Chuck
That is surprising. I have never heard anything but good things about speakeasy.
I have had several friends and clients hooked up with dsl through them. Never had any problems that were not quickly resolved. The way they handled the nimbda/code red event was much better than all the baby bells that used it as an excuse to filter port 80. I would like to hear the history of your problem. If you post with names, dates and ticket numbers I would not be surprised if they looked into the issue.
Funny, I had no problem when I was running X under linux with twm on a 386 with 8 MB ram.
One thing that is often overlooked is the cost of tracking licenses/license keys and proof of purchase. If you use Free Software you can install the package on any machine without worrying about finding the contact information and purchase order.
Also there is much less overhead in the initial acquisition of the software initially. With Free Software I have often been investigating a project in the afternoon and had a working prototype for Management evaluation in the morning. These could be projects it would take weeks to get the PO signed, price negotiated and media delivered.
All of this without exposure to BSA forced audits.
Or maybe, I'll take two of whatever they are smoking.
Actually I think that was fax.com not efax.com.
fax.com is in the sole business of junk faxing.
Repost of parent that was AC(useful info at link):
Fear mongering and scare tactics?
Considering they tried to ban the VCR, and when that didn't work, institute a "modest" fee of $50 per blank tape, is this really fear mongering?
To get some accurate info on drm, go to http://www.nyfairuse.org, and to see a NY group that has been proactively fighting drm and other attacks on fair use [nylxs.com], linux and other issues, go to www.nylxs.com
UCITA only passed in two states.
The EULA is not a binding contract.
Sounds like a job for EFF!
That gives me a great idea on how to put this in the proper perspective. How about we get together and offer to buy the studios tickets in every multimillion dollar lottery with the "potential" to win 100s of millions of dollars!
That should offset their current concerns of potential lost revenue.
Chuck
just because they print it on the CD doesn't make it legally binding.
IANAL, but
If you find this distasteful, make sure you keep copies (hard copies) of all internal emails and documents pertaining to this issue.
That will probably protect you and make the case a slam dunk if it ever goes to trial.
Send your boss an email objecting to the shaky legal ground and save his response where he asks you to go ahead with it. If you get fired for making noise look into the whistleblowers statutes.
Chuck
From what I recall of my economics 101 class anti trust laws are not anti free market. One of the parts of the definition of a "free market" are low barriers to entry.
Anti trust laws are designed to restore this condition and prevent monopolies from maintaining barriers to entry for new competition.
ok, justify it to me.
Just because some company wants something to be illegal to preserve their profits doesn't mean it should be.
Just because a tool can be used to commit a crime doesn't mean it should be outlawed.
(classic example, hammer can be used to kill someone, should it be outlawed?)
The main problem I see with the DMCA is it is designed to prevent the flow of information and the production of tools that MAY be used to commit a crime. The act of commiting the crime was already illegal.
The crime is making duplicates of copyright material and SELLING them for a profit. Prosecute the offenders when the crime happens.
Taking away the tools to make duplicates gives these companies the control of when/where/how we use/view/listen to the material we bought legally.
I for one do not want to transition to a pay per use society. The whole original justification for copyright restriction was to encourage companies to produce more and better products by granting them limited exclusive rights on first sale of their material. The idea was not to guarantee a recurring revenue stream without producing new/better products.
Chuck
http://motion.technolust.cx/
"Motion uses a video4linux device and detects changes in the image. If a change is detected a snapshot will be taken. "
I think mgetty/vgetty is standard for most linux distros. It supports sharing the serial port easily.
Eventually you should have oneworldhosting.com stop serving out your DNS information but it is only a problem for their customers if they are providing stale data.
You records at your new provider are using stale data. (maybe doing a zone transfer from your old providers master) Get your entire DNS zone from your new provider and that will help.
How do you update your DNS records at the new provider?
Confirm with them that they are not doing a zone transfer from your old provider.
Make sure any changes you make with them include a new serial number for the zone file.
Chuck
as near as I can tell he is not using his old provider to host DNS. The whois records point to his new provider.
Chuck
I am betting that you are looking in the wrong place. You probably copied the old DNS records to the new servers at NS1.TOMORROW2.NET, NS2 etc.
The whois records are pointing to NS1.TOMORROW2.NET, NS2.TOMORROW2.NET, NS3...,NS4...
Given that, there is no way ns2.owh.com is being used by the clients to look up your domain.
ONEWORLDHOSTING.COM is probably just re-using your old IP address and your new DNS servers still have the old records.
You new provider may be to inept to figure out what the problem is. A lawyer would be a waste of time and money. It is not a problem with your old provider it is a problem with your DNS records or your new provider.
BTW, the DNS SOA record on NS1.TOMORROW2.NET has ns1.ocdns.com listed. I can't do a zone transfer of your domain but I would not be surprised if your DNS records were setup to do a zone transfer from ONEWORLDHOSTING.COM and your new provider can't figure this out.
Get your records fixed at your new provider and you should have no problem.
The following query shows that data is being retrieved from your new providers servers and it has the old IP address.
$ host -a www.anarchsforlife.org
Trying "www.anarchsforlife.org."
;; ->>HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 26950
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 4
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;www.anarchsforlife.org. IN ANY
;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN A 64.177.5.173
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN NS NS3.TOMORROW2.NET.
anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN NS NS4.TOMORROW2.NET.
anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN NS NS1.TOMORROW2.NET.
anarchsforlife.org. 171572 IN NS NS2.TOMORROW2.NET.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
NS1.TOMORROW2.NET. 171672 IN A 128.241.194.20
NS2.TOMORROW2.NET. 171672 IN A 128.241.194.21
NS3.TOMORROW2.NET. 171672 IN A 130.94.173.110
NS4.TOMORROW2.NET. 171672 IN A 130.94.173.111
Received 205 bytes from 209.9.172.254#53 in 64 ms
Chuck