Sorry, but I can't go searching people's home even if I can prove they have my stuff. A middleman would have to do it. Same thing here. If they can prove I2 has their content. Then some appropriate agent can attempt to check for them.
I'd have to not concur with that. The argument behind warez is that you are distributing the content w/o the orginal author's permission. If the author puts his work to be distributed, permission can easily be shown to have been implied.
MS got in trouble because they were 'forcing' (and I use that word very loosely) exclusive contracts with PC makers and whatnot to insure you'd see there IE and WMP first. Google isn't forcing anyone to use them first since you have to go through a browser you choose to get their and you had to be using someone elses email to be able to get a GMail invite. Now if Google ever got a browser that made a point of some how hiding every other search site out there THEN you might be on to something..
I get what you're saying. But doesnt these super high resolution images basically targetting people who plan to print them? The higher the res, supposedly the better the image when put on paper.[Assuming the printers are keeping up]
Please oh please ellaborate on that. If China was completely isolated, they'd be less likely to know they were being censored in the first place. So what are American corporations doing that prevents the people of China from overthrowing their government if that's what thye really want to do?
Ok either I'm missing the obvious here or all you "Google is now evil" zealots are. Like someone stated, Google isn't small or some rouge open source project. If Google was to make it so here in america, their links would bipass work/school/ censors (or whatever said place set up to prevent people from viewing what they deemed inappropriate) and display whatever it was someone searched for, wouldnt they be in a hell of a lot of trouble? What's the difference here? I'm sure the Chinese government could do some damage to google if they found out Google said "go f!ck urself and ur censorship" and set up to circumvent that giant Cisco firewall they spent a fortune on. Aren't even international laws about this? American companies can't just go breaking other countries laws and expect the U.S. to say oh ok thats fine.
I think most of you just want a reason to hate something. Take your pick: hate Google cause they follow the law and you don't like the law they followed, or wait a while and hate google because they took a page or 2 from MS's book and decided not to follow many laws at all.
And, even more importantly, these things will be ungodly easy to imitate, especially on Linux or a BSD where you could easily just, entirely in software, create a USB device and tell your system it is whatever you want it to be. (Yes, that's also possible on other systems, it's just really easy on an open system).
Oh man, say it isn't so! Did someone post, on the slashdot none the less, that that something is easier to cirumvent on Linux than Windows?! Got to be careful there cause in some circles, that could be seen as a plus in Windows favor.
Not even 9 am and the craziness begins. It'll be a good day.
I don't think peoples anticipation of DRM in the new beastie boys cd had much to do with their linux migration. If it did, I pity them.
And were you waiting for the most opportune story to make such a "Linux is superior" post? Seriously, no matter how you look at it, your post was out of place and by most means pointless. Well, at least one thing came out of this and that is becoming aware of where your alliance lies. I think its alot more pro-linux than anti-DRM, and no, the two are not inclusive of each other.
I dunno about the big ISPs he tested this on, but the ISP I work at would probably have taken it down as well.
He posted content written by someone over 120 years ago, and then complained to the ISP that it violated copyright. The part that's not in the Slashdot story is that he complained as a member of the fictional "John Stuart Mill Heritage Foundation." If I saw content posted and then received a complaint from someone who claimed to own the content I would most likely take it down.
I would however keep a copy of the content AND contact the customer as to the alleged violation. It's not up to me to prove or disprove whether or not a customer has legitimate access to publish content, it's up to the customer. We don't have time to research every complaint that comes in.
If we have to take down content and the customer can prove they have legitimate rights to post that content I'd be happy to hear it, and ultimately I'd copy the files back personally. It shouldn't be the ISP's job to police their network dolling out justice as they see fit.
We are happy to work with any customer about an issue like this, but we don't have the resources to investigate each incident.
So force the person making the complaint to do all the research and fact finding for you. Then your time is saved and you aren't giving in to the problem.
Giving in to the problem isn't exactly helping solve it any.
So everyone do your part to promote "innocent until proven guilty", and not vice versa, just a lil bit longer, k? Thanks.
I'm guessing a vending machine checks the picture to see if it matches at some key points or possibly the whole thing(obviously w/o checking every little hologram, etc). And the article conceded the main thing counterfeiters lacked was the special paper made. So.. unless we can special advance scanners or something that can check what paper is used on the money(which kinda seems to be a waste for vending machines) OR get a super sensitive scale to weigh it(which wouldnt work after much use of the bill or it starts to fade, etc), getting passed a vending machine isnt hard and preventing it is.
On the other hand, software like photoshop ONLY has to check for a general picture of the bills in question and if it remotely looks like the bill, don't accept it.
Quick summary: All graphic software needs to do is the equivalent to racial profiling(o look its green(or whatever color said currency needs to be) and has a face, bad!), while vending machines have to actually have some substance before it goes denying people service.
in Photoshop, it be a sight to behold. Or even better, embed one of these pics in a pdf file and EMAIL it to a friend. Ah yes good times for admins, systems, and users everywhere to enjoy!
No not really. SCOs victory woud only mean that they collect on UNIX royalties. That doesnt help MSs bottom line directly. Now if people decide to move to Windows because of this, well theres nothing the DoJ can do about that either.
Geezus people. Did we all forget that the Anti-trust judges can't do a damn thing unless SCO is shown to be doing something illegal? If SCO even has the slightest case, and it's showed that MS is helping them UPHOLD SCOs IP. Then please oh please tell me how MS will get punished for doing what can be viewed as not the best thing but the "right thing"?
If this was some form of extortion, then sure, send in the law!. But as long as SCO is still able to hold their place in court, MS is can continue to sitting pretty in the shadows.
Has anyone tried Rhapsody? If so is the selection and/or quality up to par? I've been considering it for a while now after seeing it running at best buy. 10-15 bucks a month to listen to unlimited songs, and.99 cents to burn a song onto cd(which from there could go on to whatever mp3 player you're using..). To me it seems like it gives the best of both worlds.
Linux is secure... out of the box. However without a skilled administrator, it's very easy to open up LOTS of holes. I think that linux is a great operating system for power users, but lets face it, the average desktop user or the new sys admin, doesn't belong on a powerful distro right now. Perhaps lindows, but not Red Hat Enterprise.
Windows is secure... if you patch it and set up the appropriate safeguards(one being leave IIS off) before you put it on the net. However without a skilled administrator, it's very esy to open up LOTS of holes. I think that Windows is a great operating system for power users, but lets face it, the average desktop user or the new sys admin, doesn't belong on a Windows box if he isnt a patch/firewall junkie. Perhaps 98 w/o an internet connection, but not 2k/xp.
I attend, Rochester Institute of Tech(RIT), which happens to be 10-15 mins from U of R, and our faculty has just been "discussing" the idea of dealing with Napster. I didn't think U of R would come out of nowhere and beat us to the punch like that. First they cap our bandwidth, then we get upstaged by some liberal school to the west!:(
Re:The replacement is already here
on
United Linux Dead
·
· Score: 1
Ok I'm apparently not "in the know" so I'll ask a question with probably an obvious answer:
Why market against Redhat? are they the MS of Linux?
Why exactly would you all NOT hire the upper management of people like Enron or Worldcom? From what I understand of the lawsuits, no matter how bad your financial situation might be, they make it look alot better, and have the persuasion(see people) skills to get the biggest financial institutions on the planet to help them stay afloat while really owing billions. You might not LIKE what it is they did. But these weren't rogue individuals trying to send companies into bankruptcy, they were smart people who as a team could do what they are paid to do(even in the worst case scenarios) like no one elses business. With the right direction/guidance, these employees could work wonders.
p.s. And I know they were NOT paid to defaud the company, but it should be obvious what i'm implying by "can do what they are paid to do"
Out sourcing programming projects overseas/abroad is one thing since its essentially a 'science' and if they were taught 'right', the end product should be up to spec.(Not that I'm condoning it) But these are higher up (which I'd perceive as management positions). Typically big US companies sent their guys abroad to manage the outsourced/ international divisions because we did things a certain way. Could bringing foreigners in these positions eventually bring about some sort of conflict if only because of how they were taught how to 'manage' (I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the East has a noticable difference in how they conduct busines than we do). If these 'upper' positions are nothing more than following ellaborate and strict orders sent by us, thats one thing, but if its a broad mission/plan I see the potential for serious issues/conflicts to arise about how they were/could be carried out.
Then again I could just be overanalyzing and IBM is just so big now, a few small groups who arent part of the core elite can't possibly make a difference.
of what it is they're programming, in the sense that do they know they are making a sensitive program for the NSA of the United States? If not then what could be the harm unless a backdoor gets thru unchecked? (I can only hope that some US officials or hired techies DO check this code for backdoors and the like.)
Slashdot Mirror
old news? "Oh god we can't inflate our earnings anymore." It'll be ok guys, just calm down with the options a bit...
Sorry, but I can't go searching people's home even if I can prove they have my stuff. A middleman would have to do it. Same thing here. If they can prove I2 has their content. Then some appropriate agent can attempt to check for them.
I'd have to not concur with that. The argument behind warez is that you are distributing the content w/o the orginal author's permission. If the author puts his work to be distributed, permission can easily be shown to have been implied.
Well I found the story useful so thanks. :)
Did you miss the part about 15 hours of battery life?
MS got in trouble because they were 'forcing' (and I use that word very loosely) exclusive contracts with PC makers and whatnot to insure you'd see there IE and WMP first. Google isn't forcing anyone to use them first since you have to go through a browser you choose to get their and you had to be using someone elses email to be able to get a GMail invite. Now if Google ever got a browser that made a point of some how hiding every other search site out there THEN you might be on to something..
I get what you're saying. But doesnt these super high resolution images basically targetting people who plan to print them? The higher the res, supposedly the better the image when put on paper.[Assuming the printers are keeping up]
Please oh please ellaborate on that. If China was completely isolated, they'd be less likely to know they were being censored in the first place. So what are American corporations doing that prevents the people of China from overthrowing their government if that's what thye really want to do?
Ok either I'm missing the obvious here or all you "Google is now evil" zealots are. Like someone stated, Google isn't small or some rouge open source project. If Google was to make it so here in america, their links would bipass work/school/ censors (or whatever said place set up to prevent people from viewing what they deemed inappropriate) and display whatever it was someone searched for, wouldnt they be in a hell of a lot of trouble? What's the difference here? I'm sure the Chinese government could do some damage to google if they found out Google said "go f!ck urself and ur censorship" and set up to circumvent that giant Cisco firewall they spent a fortune on.
Aren't even international laws about this? American companies can't just go breaking other countries laws and expect the U.S. to say oh ok thats fine.
I think most of you just want a reason to hate something. Take your pick: hate Google cause they follow the law and you don't like the law they followed, or wait a while and hate google because they took a page or 2 from MS's book and decided not to follow many laws at all.
And, even more importantly, these things will be ungodly easy to imitate, especially on Linux or a BSD where you could easily just, entirely in software, create a USB device and tell your system it is whatever you want it to be. (Yes, that's also possible on other systems, it's just really easy on an open system).
Oh man, say it isn't so! Did someone post, on the slashdot none the less, that that something is easier to cirumvent on Linux than Windows?! Got to be careful there cause in some circles, that could be seen as a plus in Windows favor.
Not even 9 am and the craziness begins. It'll be a good day.
I don't think peoples anticipation of DRM in the new beastie boys cd had much to do with their linux migration. If it did, I pity them.
And were you waiting for the most opportune story to make such a "Linux is superior" post? Seriously, no matter how you look at it, your post was out of place and by most means pointless. Well, at least one thing came out of this and that is becoming aware of where your alliance lies. I think its alot more pro-linux than anti-DRM, and no, the two are not inclusive of each other.
I dunno about the big ISPs he tested this on, but the ISP I work at would probably have taken it down as well.
He posted content written by someone over 120 years ago, and then complained to the ISP that it violated copyright. The part that's not in the Slashdot story is that he complained as a member of the fictional "John Stuart Mill Heritage Foundation." If I saw content posted and then received a complaint from someone who claimed to own the content I would most likely take it down.
I would however keep a copy of the content AND contact the customer as to the alleged violation. It's not up to me to prove or disprove whether or not a customer has legitimate access to publish content, it's up to the customer. We don't have time to research every complaint that comes in.
If we have to take down content and the customer can prove they have legitimate rights to post that content I'd be happy to hear it, and ultimately I'd copy the files back personally. It shouldn't be the ISP's job to police their network dolling out justice as they see fit.
We are happy to work with any customer about an issue like this, but we don't have the resources to investigate each incident.
So force the person making the complaint to do all the research and fact finding for you. Then your time is saved and you aren't giving in to the problem.
Giving in to the problem isn't exactly helping solve it any.
So everyone do your part to promote "innocent until proven guilty", and not vice versa, just a lil bit longer, k? Thanks.
How does it not make sense?
I'm guessing a vending machine checks the picture to see if it matches at some key points or possibly the whole thing(obviously w/o checking every little hologram, etc). And the article conceded the main thing counterfeiters lacked was the special paper made. So.. unless we can special advance scanners or something that can check what paper is used on the money(which kinda seems to be a waste for vending machines) OR get a super sensitive scale to weigh it(which wouldnt work after much use of the bill or it starts to fade, etc), getting passed a vending machine isnt hard and preventing it is.
On the other hand, software like photoshop ONLY has to check for a general picture of the bills in question and if it remotely looks like the bill, don't accept it.
Quick summary: All graphic software needs to do is the equivalent to racial profiling(o look its green(or whatever color said currency needs to be) and has a face, bad!), while vending machines have to actually have some substance before it goes denying people service.
in Photoshop, it be a sight to behold. Or even better, embed one of these pics in a pdf file and EMAIL it to a friend. Ah yes good times for admins, systems, and users everywhere to enjoy!
No not really. SCOs victory woud only mean that they collect on UNIX royalties. That doesnt help MSs bottom line directly. Now if people decide to move to Windows because of this, well theres nothing the DoJ can do about that either.
Geezus people. Did we all forget that the Anti-trust judges can't do a damn thing unless SCO is shown to be doing something illegal? If SCO even has the slightest case, and it's showed that MS is helping them UPHOLD SCOs IP. Then please oh please tell me how MS will get punished for doing what can be viewed as not the best thing but the "right thing"?
If this was some form of extortion, then sure, send in the law!. But as long as SCO is still able to hold their place in court, MS is can continue to sitting pretty in the shadows.
Like MS took over the database market when they released SQL server?
Oh wait, Oracle held on to that...
Has anyone tried Rhapsody? If so is the selection and/or quality up to par? I've been considering it for a while now after seeing it running at best buy. 10-15 bucks a month to listen to unlimited songs, and .99 cents to burn a song onto cd(which from there could go on to whatever mp3 player you're using..). To me it seems like it gives the best of both worlds.
Ok, I'm curious, and perusing the website doesnt help me too much. What do these guys have against /. ?
Linux is secure... out of the box. However without a skilled administrator, it's very easy to open up LOTS of holes. I think that linux is a great operating system for power users, but lets face it, the average desktop user or the new sys admin, doesn't belong on a powerful distro right now. Perhaps lindows, but not Red Hat Enterprise.
Windows is secure... if you patch it and set up the appropriate safeguards(one being leave IIS off) before you put it on the net. However without a skilled administrator, it's very esy to open up LOTS of holes. I think that Windows is a great operating system for power users, but lets face it, the average desktop user or the new sys admin, doesn't belong on a Windows box if he isnt a patch/firewall junkie. Perhaps 98 w/o an internet connection, but not 2k/xp.
My pt should be self explanatory.
I attend, Rochester Institute of Tech(RIT), which happens to be 10-15 mins from U of R, and our faculty has just been "discussing" the idea of dealing with Napster. I didn't think U of R would come out of nowhere and beat us to the punch like that. First they cap our bandwidth, then we get upstaged by some liberal school to the west! :(
Ok I'm apparently not "in the know" so I'll ask a question with probably an obvious answer:
Why market against Redhat? are they the MS of Linux?
Why exactly would you all NOT hire the upper management of people like Enron or Worldcom? From what I understand of the lawsuits, no matter how bad your financial situation might be, they make it look alot better, and have the persuasion(see people) skills to get the biggest financial institutions on the planet to help them stay afloat while really owing billions. You might not LIKE what it is they did. But these weren't rogue individuals trying to send companies into bankruptcy, they were smart people who as a team could do what they are paid to do(even in the worst case scenarios) like no one elses business. With the right direction/guidance, these employees could work wonders.
p.s. And I know they were NOT paid to defaud the company, but it should be obvious what i'm implying by "can do what they are paid to do"
Out sourcing programming projects overseas/abroad is one thing since its essentially a 'science' and if they were taught 'right', the end product should be up to spec.(Not that I'm condoning it) But these are higher up (which I'd perceive as management positions). Typically big US companies sent their guys abroad to manage the outsourced/ international divisions because we did things a certain way. Could bringing foreigners in these positions eventually bring about some sort of conflict if only because of how they were taught how to 'manage' (I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the East has a noticable difference in how they conduct busines than we do). If these 'upper' positions are nothing more than following ellaborate and strict orders sent by us, thats one thing, but if its a broad mission/plan I see the potential for serious issues/conflicts to arise about how they were/could be carried out.
Then again I could just be overanalyzing and IBM is just so big now, a few small groups who arent part of the core elite can't possibly make a difference.
of what it is they're programming, in the sense that do they know they are making a sensitive program for the NSA of the United States? If not then what could be the harm unless a backdoor gets thru unchecked? (I can only hope that some US officials or hired techies DO check this code for backdoors and the like.)