They're putting the encryption on the DIGITAL connection. Analog connections will NOT be deliberately obsoleted. My HDTV is connected via analog; is yours?
But what are you going to do in a few years (2006-2007 IIRC) when TV stations will be forced to go all-digital?
Every other working stiff doesn't expect to get paid for work they did 20 years ago
Which is exactly why I have a problem with long copyright periods. In a fair system, if you want to keep getting paid for your creativity, you should have to keep creating. And I don't buy any of the BS about descendents deserving profits (a common excuse for life+20 type periods). If you are Thomas Edison's son, good for you, but earn your own damn money.
Spam is "spam" until registrations, licenses, warranty agreements, etc, require a valid email address and/or an opt-in to that company's "news". Then it becomes legit. i get plenty of unsolicited email from companies legitly possessing my addy, even email with opt-out links. if every company i interact with sends me just one of these, that's still a lot of undesirable, often image- and HTML-laden emails to have show up.
IMO that still constitutes spamming. I get so many of these that I have the following system set up: Whenever a company legitly wants my email address, I give them a custom forwarding address at my domain. Since these addresses all forward to my real email addresses, these companies are free to contact me if they need to. But if they decide to spam me, I set their forwarding address to automatically bounce any future messages sent to it. You have a valid reason to contact me, fine. You spam me, you give up the ability to contact me.
This would ultimately be futile. All it really takes is one machine on the network that has a connection to the public internet, and bang -- the whole network is on the public internet. And it is possible that there would be a lot of people that would be willing to do this. An analogy would be DeCSS mirrors...stopping them or shutting them all down is more or less futile because there will always be more people willing to do it in the name of "stopping the man."
So I don't think it would be hard for AI to get a PhD
It would be pathetically easy, even today. All you would have to do is give the AI bot some basic communication skills and have it get in touch with the "U N I V E R S I T YD I P L O M A S" people. There you have it -- an AI bot with a PhD from a prestigious nonaccredited university!
Whenever I receive an email from a spammer with one of those "click here to remove your email" links, I paste it into the browser, feeding in uce@ftc.gov as the email instead. Since those forms just feed into the spammer's "sucker" lists, it saves me the trouble of having to forward the email to them - the spammers just do it for me. Hitting up uce@ftc.gov 19 times a day - lets see how quickly they're put outta business:)
Most spammers with half a brain (not that they all have this...) either use programs that automatically filter out *.gov addresses, or even manually filter out the addresses themselves. Especially the more obviously bad-to-spam ones like uce@ftc.gov.
Most systems ship with a CD-R now (and if you don't get one, that's just silliness anymore), so why not just burn the recovery partition to CDs?
Better yet, why not just give customers the damn OS CD? Seriously, though, if I am paying for a license to use Windows, then I had damn well better be able to install it, reinstall it, change it, add drivers to it, etc. as I see fit. In other words, if I am paying for a license to use Windows, then I expect to be able to use Windows.
At this juncture I would like to disclose that, from the time of commencement of this case until approximately June 1999, I was employed as an attorney by counsel for the defendant in this matter. However, I was exclusively involved in representing other clients in unrelated matters. I never performed any legal services for the defendant, nor was I ever exposed to any non-public information about the defendant, whether relating to this litigation or otherwise
Are you sure it wasn't a real bounce generated by someone sending out porn spam with your email address forged as the return address? I have unfortunately had that happen to me before.
Then would they care to explain what they have been doing with the $40.00 a month I have been paying for cable
For the 10000th time...
Your cable bill is paying the cable company's costs. It is not paying the network's costs. The network produces the content, the cable company delivers it to you. These are two separate companies. You are reimbursing one with cash, the other with your acceptance of commercials.
I would cut a deal with Tivo/Replay to put my ads in their devices. There is a lot of ad-ready real estate in those devices' interfaces... pause screens, config screens, choose-your-recording screens
While I understand the need to have either some form of advertising revenue or pay-per-view, having ads built into a PVR like this would suck. It would be like all the sports shows are today...instead of the Pause Screen, you would now have the Bank of America Pause Screen. No thanks.
Why is Intuit pushing us to store tax and financial information on their site? Why does Microsoft want to give us an authentication token that's good for retrieving our information "anywhere, anytime."
For now, they're giving you the option more for your convenience than anything. If you multiboot, or even if you lose your Quicken data in a hard drive crash (this has happened to me before), there will be an offsite backup of it that you can access.
Not to say that it won't turn into something bad, though. As most of us here probably do, I prefer backing up my own data instead of letting the software company do it for me. I am a big proponent of privacy, and I see a definite potential for abuse of these "convenient" features later on. But that doesn't mean they're doing anything bad with it just yet.
Anytime someone enters a legal agreement it is their duty to make sure they know what their agreement actually is.
But are EULAs really legal agreements?
No laws are clear on it, and it hasn't been tested in court yet. But the widespread suspicion is that a court would rule that an EULA is NOT a legal agreement.
'You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version of the Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation Computer.'
I already refuse to upgrade to WinXP because of all its WPA junk. This is just one more reason why I won't be making that upgrade.
I urge the Department of Justice to carefully go over every last word of the proposed antitrust settlement against Microsoft, keeping in close mind that Microsoft's many political contributions do *not* entitle it to get off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
Your comment applies well to other DMCA things, e.g. DeCSS. But, unfortunate as it is, what more can you expect in the way of consumer rights with a law that was all but purchased by corporations in the first place?
It is illegal to break into peoples homes, but I still lock my door...
Reverse engineering and breaking in are two VERY different things. Sure, breaking in is illegal, but there is an age-old engineering principle that states that it is acceptable to reverse-engineer something as long as it isn't patented.
It's no different then ABC advertising ABC shows, or ABC advertising Disney, for that matter - how come nobody bitches about that?
ABC and Disney are more or less in the same business, i.e. entertainment on demand. They don't own unrelated companies, much less huge ones, that get 'free' advertising as a perk. Even then, I still see significant antitrust issues with big companies (which once were separate) being able to advertise at next to nothing like this. ABC/Disney is borderline at best, CNN/AOLTW is way over the line.
Not that the FTC pays attention to antitrust issues or public interests any more...
I understand commercials are a necessary evil that we have become acoustomed to, but why can't I have the option to pay a little bit extra for no commercials. Here's how I think the ideal situation would work...
Because, as nice as it would be, it would be a huge pain in the ass for the cable companies, TV networks, etc. to coordinate among each other. Remember, the commercials aren't paying your cable company's expenses -- they're paying the stations' and networks' expenses. And in most cases, cable companies and networks are not run by the same company (except for FTC antitrust screwups like AOLTW*). Sure, it *could* be done, but the operating costs would be outrageously high. And guess who would end up paying those costs? That's right. You.
* Going a little bit OT here, but does anybody else think that AOL being able to run free ads on such high-profile stations as CNN is a huuuuuuuuuge anti-trust problem? Remember, they own the network. They can run whatever they want on it and not have to be charged a cent. And anybody who watches CNN at all will know that they run lots and lots of AOL ads.
Mathematica can do symbolic mathematics, Matlab doesn't.
Actually, Matlab can do symbolic math. It's kind of a pain though, IMO. It's been a while since I've worked with Matlab, but IIRC the syntax is something close to:
Since the addresses were never used anywhere other than the DMA list, it became obvious that either the DMA was spamming from that list, or they were making it available to spammers
Unless the DMA itself is sending out the spam (not likely), they have to make the list available to spammers. How else would the list work?
Slashdot Mirror
Viacom (I think they own Fox, but I could be wrong)
Rupert Murdoch owns Fox. That's still a really friggin huge corporation though.
They're putting the encryption on the DIGITAL connection. Analog connections will NOT be deliberately obsoleted. My HDTV is connected via analog; is yours?
But what are you going to do in a few years (2006-2007 IIRC) when TV stations will be forced to go all-digital?
Redmond, WA 98052
What is it about Redmond that makes businesses up there be so unfriendly to consumers? (*ahem* Microsoft)
Every other working stiff doesn't expect to get paid for work they did 20 years ago
Which is exactly why I have a problem with long copyright periods. In a fair system, if you want to keep getting paid for your creativity, you should have to keep creating. And I don't buy any of the BS about descendents deserving profits (a common excuse for life+20 type periods). If you are Thomas Edison's son, good for you, but earn your own damn money.
Spam is "spam" until registrations, licenses, warranty agreements, etc, require a valid email address and/or an opt-in to that company's "news". Then it becomes legit. i get plenty of unsolicited email from companies legitly possessing my addy, even email with opt-out links. if every company i interact with sends me just one of these, that's still a lot of undesirable, often image- and HTML-laden emails to have show up.
IMO that still constitutes spamming. I get so many of these that I have the following system set up: Whenever a company legitly wants my email address, I give them a custom forwarding address at my domain. Since these addresses all forward to my real email addresses, these companies are free to contact me if they need to. But if they decide to spam me, I set their forwarding address to automatically bounce any future messages sent to it. You have a valid reason to contact me, fine. You spam me, you give up the ability to contact me.
This would ultimately be futile. All it really takes is one machine on the network that has a connection to the public internet, and bang -- the whole network is on the public internet. And it is possible that there would be a lot of people that would be willing to do this. An analogy would be DeCSS mirrors...stopping them or shutting them all down is more or less futile because there will always be more people willing to do it in the name of "stopping the man."
So I don't think it would be hard for AI to get a PhD
It would be pathetically easy, even today. All you would have to do is give the AI bot some basic communication skills and have it get in touch with the "U N I V E R S I T YD I P L O M A S" people. There you have it -- an AI bot with a PhD from a prestigious nonaccredited university!
Whenever I receive an email from a spammer with one of those "click here to remove your email" links, I paste it into the browser, feeding in uce@ftc.gov as the email instead. Since those forms just feed into the spammer's "sucker" lists, it saves me the trouble of having to forward the email to them - the spammers just do it for me. Hitting up uce@ftc.gov 19 times a day - lets see how quickly they're put outta business :)
Most spammers with half a brain (not that they all have this...) either use programs that automatically filter out *.gov addresses, or even manually filter out the addresses themselves. Especially the more obviously bad-to-spam ones like uce@ftc.gov.
Most systems ship with a CD-R now (and if you don't get one, that's just silliness anymore), so why not just burn the recovery partition to CDs?
Better yet, why not just give customers the damn OS CD? Seriously, though, if I am paying for a license to use Windows, then I had damn well better be able to install it, reinstall it, change it, add drivers to it, etc. as I see fit. In other words, if I am paying for a license to use Windows, then I expect to be able to use Windows.
At this juncture I would like to disclose that, from the time of commencement of this case until approximately June 1999, I was employed as an attorney by counsel for the defendant in this matter. However, I was exclusively involved in representing other clients in unrelated matters. I never performed any legal services for the defendant, nor was I ever exposed to any non-public information about the defendant, whether relating to this litigation or otherwise
Can you say "conflict of interest"?
Are you sure it wasn't a real bounce generated by someone sending out porn spam with your email address forged as the return address? I have unfortunately had that happen to me before.
FTC and JD Holding Hearings on IP
Maybe the FTC finally realized that they were *drinking* JD when they came up with some of the current IP restrictions that are in place...
Then would they care to explain what they have been doing with the $40.00 a month I have been paying for cable
For the 10000th time...
Your cable bill is paying the cable company's costs. It is not paying the network's costs. The network produces the content, the cable company delivers it to you. These are two separate companies. You are reimbursing one with cash, the other with your acceptance of commercials.
I would cut a deal with Tivo/Replay to put my ads in their devices. There is a lot of ad-ready real estate in those devices' interfaces... pause screens, config screens, choose-your-recording screens
While I understand the need to have either some form of advertising revenue or pay-per-view, having ads built into a PVR like this would suck. It would be like all the sports shows are today...instead of the Pause Screen, you would now have the Bank of America Pause Screen. No thanks.
Where are the 200GB drives?
Here.
Why is Intuit pushing us to store tax and financial information on their site? Why does Microsoft want to give us an authentication token that's good for retrieving our information "anywhere, anytime."
For now, they're giving you the option more for your convenience than anything. If you multiboot, or even if you lose your Quicken data in a hard drive crash (this has happened to me before), there will be an offsite backup of it that you can access.
Not to say that it won't turn into something bad, though. As most of us here probably do, I prefer backing up my own data instead of letting the software company do it for me. I am a big proponent of privacy, and I see a definite potential for abuse of these "convenient" features later on. But that doesn't mean they're doing anything bad with it just yet.
Anytime someone enters a legal agreement it is their duty to make sure they know what their agreement actually is.
But are EULAs really legal agreements?
No laws are clear on it, and it hasn't been tested in court yet. But the widespread suspicion is that a court would rule that an EULA is NOT a legal agreement.
'You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version of the Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation Computer.'
I already refuse to upgrade to WinXP because of all its WPA junk. This is just one more reason why I won't be making that upgrade.
I urge the Department of Justice to carefully go over every last word of the proposed antitrust settlement against Microsoft, keeping in close mind that Microsoft's many political contributions do *not* entitle it to get off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
Your comment applies well to other DMCA things, e.g. DeCSS. But, unfortunate as it is, what more can you expect in the way of consumer rights with a law that was all but purchased by corporations in the first place?
It is illegal to break into peoples homes, but I still lock my door...
Reverse engineering and breaking in are two VERY different things. Sure, breaking in is illegal, but there is an age-old engineering principle that states that it is acceptable to reverse-engineer something as long as it isn't patented.
It's no different then ABC advertising ABC shows, or ABC advertising Disney, for that matter - how come nobody bitches about that?
ABC and Disney are more or less in the same business, i.e. entertainment on demand. They don't own unrelated companies, much less huge ones, that get 'free' advertising as a perk. Even then, I still see significant antitrust issues with big companies (which once were separate) being able to advertise at next to nothing like this. ABC/Disney is borderline at best, CNN/AOLTW is way over the line.
Not that the FTC pays attention to antitrust issues or public interests any more...
I understand commercials are a necessary evil that we have become acoustomed to, but why can't I have the option to pay a little bit extra for no commercials. Here's how I think the ideal situation would work...
Because, as nice as it would be, it would be a huge pain in the ass for the cable companies, TV networks, etc. to coordinate among each other. Remember, the commercials aren't paying your cable company's expenses -- they're paying the stations' and networks' expenses. And in most cases, cable companies and networks are not run by the same company (except for FTC antitrust screwups like AOLTW*). Sure, it *could* be done, but the operating costs would be outrageously high. And guess who would end up paying those costs? That's right. You.
* Going a little bit OT here, but does anybody else think that AOL being able to run free ads on such high-profile stations as CNN is a huuuuuuuuuge anti-trust problem? Remember, they own the network. They can run whatever they want on it and not have to be charged a cent. And anybody who watches CNN at all will know that they run lots and lots of AOL ads.
Mathematica can do symbolic mathematics, Matlab doesn't.
Actually, Matlab can do symbolic math. It's kind of a pain though, IMO. It's been a while since I've worked with Matlab, but IIRC the syntax is something close to:
Y=sym('x^2+3x-4=0');
solve(Y,x);
Since the addresses were never used anywhere other than the DMA list, it became obvious that either the DMA was spamming from that list, or they were making it available to spammers
Unless the DMA itself is sending out the spam (not likely), they have to make the list available to spammers. How else would the list work?
LILO passes kernel parameters via an 'append' line, so the syntax would be
append=" mem=nopentium"
Make sure you aren't appending anything else. If you are, just add the mem=nopentium at the end of your existing append line.