Whoa whoa whoa--it wasn't all that long ago that I read a story about retail game stores who refused to carry games which don't have DRM. If true, that means that the game stores are at least as culpable as the producers.
We could design other protocols to contain routing information, or simply embed them in https, and allow forwarding based on domain names - which are never going to run out any time soon.
...
Massive hack? Maybe. But a hell of a lot cheaper than implementing IPv6.
At this point, it just moves the cost around. Now there's a cost associated with upgrading software to support the new protocols. Most of the software out there is already capable of using IPv6, and tunneling (again, already widely available) will ease the transition for software and consumer hardware which does not.
And in the end, you're just addressing the symptoms rather than the problem. The only good that delaying the inevitable does is that maybe the equipment upgrades necessary to upgrade the larger portion of the Internet to IPv6 will be cheaper in the future (for example, built into the cost of replacing an already dead router.)
Maybe the guy had a bias? Here's another bias for you.
I'm 30 years old. Most of the music I like is from the 70s and 80s (the former is before I was really cognizant of music, and the for the latter, I didn't listen to music much as my family tended not to listen to music.) I tend to think that these are the best years for processed music. Having heard some raw recordings of old greats, I think that the 50s and 60s were the best years for raw vocal talent.
So here's the bias: no one plays crappy oldies anymore or crappy "classic rock" anymore. The wheat was separated from the chaff over time, and now all that's played on the radio from that era are the really standout stuff. Compare that to today's music, where the good stuff is still hidden amongst all of the crap--it's all played because the time, the consumer, and the producers haven't figured out which ones are really hits. I don't think that even 15 years is enough to really distill a time period's music into the good stuff.
Modifying gravity doesn't appear to consistently explain all the gravitational behavior we observe. The other alternative is modifying the source of gravity, i.e. there's something out there we can't see for some reason. And that does account for the gravitational behavior we observe.
I think that if the OP were capable of (or wanted to) run his own mail server, s/he would do so. These days, it's almost not worth it, though. Dealing with spam is such a pain, and it costs a lot to have high availability (which most professional hosting will provide.) The only reason to run your own mail server is legacy (I inherited a domain and system for a small number of users, and I don't want to kick them off, but I want to keep my e-mail address) or paranoia (you don't want anyone having access to your stored e-mail but you.)
DIY is fun for the hobbyist, but not for the person who wants to get real work done.
I have an HDTV. If I connect my HD devices through the component inputs, I get a nice message telling me that HD playback is restricted. If I take my devices over to a friend's house (whose TV has HDMI but not HDCP), I get the same message.
I think the main thing is that there's not a critical mass of people who own non-HDCP sets and who notice the quality difference, or care when that message pops up. Lots of people have been trained to basically ignore such messages (Do you want to Continue? (Y/N)) and there's a placebo effect with buying high-end equipment--to lots people, it looks good, even if there's no quality difference. Just look at all of the people who buy into Monster cables.
No, I think that like most things in this world, money is the reason that Bluray isn't taking off. DVDs are cheap and perfectly adequate. Bluray discs are expensive, require a new player, require a new TV to really enjoy (salesmen around here tell people that, at least), and all of that adds up. Toss in the credit bubble, where people can't afford to spend as capriciously, and you've got a recipe for unnecessary tech not selling well.
Don't buy into their bullshit. You now own a copy. If we start agreeing that it's a license (I don't see licenses on my DVDs) we'll lose the battle over any consumer rights for purchased copyrighted material.
I would argue that such a newsletter doesn't belong on the e-mail medium in the first place. The newsletter should be hosted on the web somewhere where people can download it.
I generally think that adhering to the RFCs is a good idea. That said, RFCs are not set in stone, nor is there any "rule" that says that they must be followed. Greylisting uses side-effects of RFC adherence to function, but the general rule of accepting things as liberally as possible should still apply. With greylisting, it doesn't.
Also, keep in mind that the older SMTP RFC didn't specify that clients must retry when temporary errors are returned. These servers may be adhering to the older RFC. Who's to say that they must adhere to the newer one?
That's a interesting point. If the signing keys were managed by a third party, and we could blacklist self-signed keys, then such a system might work out. That said, I don't know many non-techies that would want to pay yearly for a signing key just to send e-mail. Worse, you'd certainly see spammers getting multiple keys under fake names, so I'm not sure that this would do much at all.
Ah, but luckily, you probably don't need to white list yourself. If you do send yourself e-mail frequently, you could pretty easily require that mail from yourself be cryptographically signed. Unless your key gets hijacked, you're safe.
That's interesting, and something I hadn't heard much of before now. In fact, I can't recall ever hearing about someone receiving spam spoofed from someone they know except when the someone's computer was compromised. And digital signatures won't help, in that case (what, you think that the person isn't going to check, "Save the password to my digital signature?"
I don't think there's a solution to the spam problem--at least, not with e-mail as we know it. Any time you need to accept pseudo-anonymous connections from untrusted computers, and for as long as those connections are extremely inexpensive, you're going to get unwanted connections.
It's because your average grandma doesn't know how to install and configure Windows and any of the software they may want on their computer after a reinstall, and your average software company doesn't want to pay for 4 hours on the phone explaining the process. It takes a lot less time to say, "Insert the disc labelled 'restore', then reboot your computer. Call us back in four hours if it doesn't work." The company pays less, the customer doesn't have to follow difficult (to them) and tedious steps, and it makes reinstalling Windows a breeze. Considering how often this is necessary, I'd say that it's a perfectly reasonable thing for a company to do to make it as easy as possible.
The parent was suggesting creating a list of files which should be on the disc, and then comparing that to the list of files which are on the disc. That's not hard. That can be done in any file format you like. It has absolutely nothing to do with how Windows itself tends to package or arrange files.
It shouldn't be too difficult, either. Creating the master list would be time consuming, but once that's done, the rest is trivially scripted. Anything not on the master list should be scrutinized.
I don't get it. Why is this "XML Magic" bad? That flag is clearly documented. Open source wouldn't have prevented this problem any more than just reading the documentation would have. It's even likely that this person knew about that flag and just forgot about it.
I think the idea is that if I wouldn't (or couldn't) pay for the item anyway, it's not unreasonable to copy it because the artist isn't out anything.
I can use an extreme case to illustrate this. Suppose there were a computer game which sells for $50,000. Very few people could afford this. A person with the above philosophy would find nothing morally wrong with copying the game, as he's not really depriving the author of any money. There's no way he'd buy the game legally.
There are various flaws with this line of thinking. First of all, most media market strategies rely on selling the media at a certain price initially, and then dropping the price over time. It's entirely possible that a hypothetical person might never be willing to pay $50 for game, so they pirate it, rationalizing it using the above method. Later on, the game drops to $20. The person might have been willing to pay $20, but now that they've already played the game, they probably won't.
Another flaw has to do with value. If everyone ascribed to this way of thinking, the value of games would plummet. Developers would not be able to invest such time and money into creating the games, and the gaming market would suffer--and this is the exact situation which Copyright purports to prevent.
Questions and answers can be rated, so that helps. As your rank increases (by posing good questions and helpful answers) your abilities on the site increase, up to the point where you virtually become a moderator. The algorithm for determining this may need some tweaking--right now, you need 6000 points to achieve the highest rank, and you get 10 points for a being modded up (losing 2 for being modded down.) If it's anything like other moderation systems, a bunch of people will get together to mod each others questions and answers up enough to become Stack Overflow gods.
I've used laptops as my primary machine for at least 7 years, and I'm the same way. It's plugged in most of the time, and I primarily like it for its portability (I'm not tied to a desk--just to any given outlet.)
I question the sanity of sticking SLI/RAID0 configurations with enormous screens in a notebook formfactor. You're essentially giving up on the idea of portability, particularly given that the battery in one of those things can't even keep the machine running for an hour.
You still get portability. You just don't get to be unplugged. A notebook like this means that you can sit on your couch and play games, or move into your bedroom, or take your computer with you on vacation and play some, etc. Lugging around your desktop is probably not an option in many cases.
Slashdot Mirror
Troll was probably inappropriate, but you were being pretty inflammatory by calling people assholes.
Whoa whoa whoa--it wasn't all that long ago that I read a story about retail game stores who refused to carry games which don't have DRM. If true, that means that the game stores are at least as culpable as the producers.
We could design other protocols to contain routing information, or simply embed them in https, and allow forwarding based on domain names - which are never going to run out any time soon.
...
Massive hack? Maybe. But a hell of a lot cheaper than implementing IPv6.
At this point, it just moves the cost around. Now there's a cost associated with upgrading software to support the new protocols. Most of the software out there is already capable of using IPv6, and tunneling (again, already widely available) will ease the transition for software and consumer hardware which does not.
And in the end, you're just addressing the symptoms rather than the problem. The only good that delaying the inevitable does is that maybe the equipment upgrades necessary to upgrade the larger portion of the Internet to IPv6 will be cheaper in the future (for example, built into the cost of replacing an already dead router.)
Maybe the guy had a bias? Here's another bias for you.
I'm 30 years old. Most of the music I like is from the 70s and 80s (the former is before I was really cognizant of music, and the for the latter, I didn't listen to music much as my family tended not to listen to music.) I tend to think that these are the best years for processed music. Having heard some raw recordings of old greats, I think that the 50s and 60s were the best years for raw vocal talent.
So here's the bias: no one plays crappy oldies anymore or crappy "classic rock" anymore. The wheat was separated from the chaff over time, and now all that's played on the radio from that era are the really standout stuff. Compare that to today's music, where the good stuff is still hidden amongst all of the crap--it's all played because the time, the consumer, and the producers haven't figured out which ones are really hits. I don't think that even 15 years is enough to really distill a time period's music into the good stuff.
Modifying gravity doesn't appear to consistently explain all the gravitational behavior we observe. The other alternative is modifying the source of gravity, i.e. there's something out there we can't see for some reason. And that does account for the gravitational behavior we observe.
Right. Hence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_falling
I think that if the OP were capable of (or wanted to) run his own mail server, s/he would do so. These days, it's almost not worth it, though. Dealing with spam is such a pain, and it costs a lot to have high availability (which most professional hosting will provide.) The only reason to run your own mail server is legacy (I inherited a domain and system for a small number of users, and I don't want to kick them off, but I want to keep my e-mail address) or paranoia (you don't want anyone having access to your stored e-mail but you.)
DIY is fun for the hobbyist, but not for the person who wants to get real work done.
Hey, I happen to have a Hi-Def HDTV, thankyouverymuch.
Right here.
I have an HDTV. If I connect my HD devices through the component inputs, I get a nice message telling me that HD playback is restricted. If I take my devices over to a friend's house (whose TV has HDMI but not HDCP), I get the same message.
I think the main thing is that there's not a critical mass of people who own non-HDCP sets and who notice the quality difference, or care when that message pops up. Lots of people have been trained to basically ignore such messages (Do you want to Continue? (Y/N)) and there's a placebo effect with buying high-end equipment--to lots people, it looks good, even if there's no quality difference. Just look at all of the people who buy into Monster cables.
No, I think that like most things in this world, money is the reason that Bluray isn't taking off. DVDs are cheap and perfectly adequate. Bluray discs are expensive, require a new player, require a new TV to really enjoy (salesmen around here tell people that, at least), and all of that adds up. Toss in the credit bubble, where people can't afford to spend as capriciously, and you've got a recipe for unnecessary tech not selling well.
I never knew a single person who hooked up their DVD player using RF. And I knew a lot of non-geeks, non-technophiles with DVD players.
Don't buy into their bullshit. You now own a copy. If we start agreeing that it's a license (I don't see licenses on my DVDs) we'll lose the battle over any consumer rights for purchased copyrighted material.
It's basically irrelevant. Both fees are taken into consideration by the seller, and the minimum bid is adjusted accordingly.
I would argue that such a newsletter doesn't belong on the e-mail medium in the first place. The newsletter should be hosted on the web somewhere where people can download it.
"Rules"
I generally think that adhering to the RFCs is a good idea. That said, RFCs are not set in stone, nor is there any "rule" that says that they must be followed. Greylisting uses side-effects of RFC adherence to function, but the general rule of accepting things as liberally as possible should still apply. With greylisting, it doesn't.
Also, keep in mind that the older SMTP RFC didn't specify that clients must retry when temporary errors are returned. These servers may be adhering to the older RFC. Who's to say that they must adhere to the newer one?
That's a interesting point. If the signing keys were managed by a third party, and we could blacklist self-signed keys, then such a system might work out. That said, I don't know many non-techies that would want to pay yearly for a signing key just to send e-mail. Worse, you'd certainly see spammers getting multiple keys under fake names, so I'm not sure that this would do much at all.
Ah, but luckily, you probably don't need to white list yourself. If you do send yourself e-mail frequently, you could pretty easily require that mail from yourself be cryptographically signed. Unless your key gets hijacked, you're safe.
That's interesting, and something I hadn't heard much of before now. In fact, I can't recall ever hearing about someone receiving spam spoofed from someone they know except when the someone's computer was compromised. And digital signatures won't help, in that case (what, you think that the person isn't going to check, "Save the password to my digital signature?"
I don't think there's a solution to the spam problem--at least, not with e-mail as we know it. Any time you need to accept pseudo-anonymous connections from untrusted computers, and for as long as those connections are extremely inexpensive, you're going to get unwanted connections.
It's because your average grandma doesn't know how to install and configure Windows and any of the software they may want on their computer after a reinstall, and your average software company doesn't want to pay for 4 hours on the phone explaining the process. It takes a lot less time to say, "Insert the disc labelled 'restore', then reboot your computer. Call us back in four hours if it doesn't work." The company pays less, the customer doesn't have to follow difficult (to them) and tedious steps, and it makes reinstalling Windows a breeze. Considering how often this is necessary, I'd say that it's a perfectly reasonable thing for a company to do to make it as easy as possible.
The parent was suggesting creating a list of files which should be on the disc, and then comparing that to the list of files which are on the disc. That's not hard. That can be done in any file format you like. It has absolutely nothing to do with how Windows itself tends to package or arrange files.
It shouldn't be too difficult, either. Creating the master list would be time consuming, but once that's done, the rest is trivially scripted. Anything not on the master list should be scrutinized.
I don't get it. Why is this "XML Magic" bad? That flag is clearly documented. Open source wouldn't have prevented this problem any more than just reading the documentation would have. It's even likely that this person knew about that flag and just forgot about it.
I think the idea is that if I wouldn't (or couldn't) pay for the item anyway, it's not unreasonable to copy it because the artist isn't out anything.
I can use an extreme case to illustrate this. Suppose there were a computer game which sells for $50,000. Very few people could afford this. A person with the above philosophy would find nothing morally wrong with copying the game, as he's not really depriving the author of any money. There's no way he'd buy the game legally.
There are various flaws with this line of thinking. First of all, most media market strategies rely on selling the media at a certain price initially, and then dropping the price over time. It's entirely possible that a hypothetical person might never be willing to pay $50 for game, so they pirate it, rationalizing it using the above method. Later on, the game drops to $20. The person might have been willing to pay $20, but now that they've already played the game, they probably won't.
Another flaw has to do with value. If everyone ascribed to this way of thinking, the value of games would plummet. Developers would not be able to invest such time and money into creating the games, and the gaming market would suffer--and this is the exact situation which Copyright purports to prevent.
I clicked on that link expecting text, but I got a video instead. Do you have anything along similar lines, but in a readable format?
Truly, the Seinfeld ads were the MS Bob of marketing.
Questions and answers can be rated, so that helps. As your rank increases (by posing good questions and helpful answers) your abilities on the site increase, up to the point where you virtually become a moderator. The algorithm for determining this may need some tweaking--right now, you need 6000 points to achieve the highest rank, and you get 10 points for a being modded up (losing 2 for being modded down.) If it's anything like other moderation systems, a bunch of people will get together to mod each others questions and answers up enough to become Stack Overflow gods.
I've used laptops as my primary machine for at least 7 years, and I'm the same way. It's plugged in most of the time, and I primarily like it for its portability (I'm not tied to a desk--just to any given outlet.)
I question the sanity of sticking SLI/RAID0 configurations with enormous screens in a notebook formfactor. You're essentially giving up on the idea of portability, particularly given that the battery in one of those things can't even keep the machine running for an hour.
You still get portability. You just don't get to be unplugged. A notebook like this means that you can sit on your couch and play games, or move into your bedroom, or take your computer with you on vacation and play some, etc. Lugging around your desktop is probably not an option in many cases.