Most every study Ive read about the development of the brain in babys states that the brain does not finish developing the ability to get meaningful data from vision for two weeks or so after birth.
The brain knows there is light, but doesnt yet know how to focus those images or even form images in the mind at two days.
I wish I had some links to these but I have no idea where I read the articles in question.
There could be a number of other explanations for her 'early memorys' and in fact they may not be memorys at all.
To the consious mind, there is no difference between a memory of an event, and the actual event being percieved by the senses. Durring normal waking state memorys are inhibited by the brain by hormones specifically so we dont confuse our senses with a memory. However durring REM sleep (and im sure other stages the brain can be in) tose hormones are themselfs inhibited, which is why we dreams seem so real. In essence, they are.
When a person becomes consious in the REM state (What is called lucid dreaming) you become free to use your imagination to create a memory of something going on or happening to you, and as the memory inhibitors are being inhibited, it seems like reality for all intents and purposes.
When the brain gets 'crossed' so to speak, and one is in REM state but still being able to percieve the senses and communicate with the outside world, your perception of reality changes almost totally.
What would be interesting is if she had some sort of cross between a hypnotic state of consiousness, and a lucid REM state, where she literally Could turn on and off the senses and resouces of her body to only percieve the parts of the world she wanted, which left more time to focus on the specific details she wanted to (IE no vision but very good sound perception as you desrcibed)
Maybe that was her way of interpreting 'two days from when she had consiousness' which would have been over the two week period.. But i dont believe it was literally when she was two.
Vision doesnt come until two weeks, and its believed consiousness and self awareness still another month or so after that.
The only law in place that prevents something is copyright, which prevents me giving out copys of your software to others without your permission and whatnot.
If i use your software to generate output, i can do whatever i please with that output.
Copyright does not apply to things such as networks or the Internet specifically, so it doesnt even have that.
The Internet is a specific thing (granted it changes all the time, but it is still a cluster of computers)
As to the parents parents subject i was replying to, this is like Ford creating a car, selling it to you, and later saying that you can only use it in certain ways.
Oh wow, doesnt that sound familiar? Slashdot users bitch left and right when a company sells an item (copyright not withstanding) and then later try to say what you can and cant do with it.
The internet is no more under copyright than a cuecat from radioshack or an iopener.
> I don't hate your differences as much as trying > revisionist history, so shut the hell up.
When the subject is "we created it so we get to say what is done with it" and the fact is they created it and sold it off, they have no say so, no matter what you say.
If you create anything, and fucking SELL IT, you lose the right to say what can and cant be done with it in any nation in the world.
> The internet was created by the United > States Department of Defense.
Actually that is not true. The government created a network called Arpanet, which they deemed not quite what they were looking for, and so they sold it off. Upon selling it to comercial interests, it was called the Internet.
So no, the government only created the network that was to become the Internet. What they actually created was the Arpanet.
The point is, they gave it away. They sold it to comercial companys and at that moment sold their right to have any say so what so ever about what was to happen to it.
If they cared so much for it, they should have kept it to themselfs or ran it themselfs, in which case the Internet would not exist, we would be using the Arpanet.
I was looking over their website. I can see why your description got carried away and almost comercial sounding.. From what Ive read they look great!
Unfortunatly they do not cover the areacodes I am in (Aparently only two citys in Ohio, nether of which are mine)
I emailed to ask if they had plans to support my areacode soon or not, so hopefully Ill get a good reply from that soon.
Do you know of any other companys that provide this same service? I would love to use something like this to replace my landline, but needs to have POPs in atleast my areacode heh others for family and friends are just a perk.
Ok.. I herby submit three complaints (once today, once they day before, and once they day before that) that they user by the nick of "papasui" has voilated the DMCA. Please terminate his service:)
Oh, you mean staff gets special concideration? funny that
> Yes, but the enforceability of NDA's was not the > subject of the parent posts, it was the fact this > information is insignificant so the court case is > not worth the bad PR it will bring to Apple
To people like us that info may be insignificant, but maybe (or from the fact they are suing, most likely) apple thinks it must have some worth for this.
For all we know, apple could have contacted the person and the person insulted the lawyers that called and said he would fight it all the way, and its just a prick waving contest:)
The parent i replied to first seemed to be questioning the enforcability of an NDA based on the worth of that information. My appologies if that was not the case.
> Well so any information that is not publicly known > in a corporation is a trade secret? Using that > mentality Apple can sue if an employee discloses > whether or not Steve Jobs wears boxers or briefs.
Actually, if you sign an NDA stating you will not tell anyone about Steve Jobs underwear choice, and you are told what he wears, and you tell someone, then yes they can legally sue you and will win.
That is the point of an NDA. You sign a legally binding contract stating you will not disclose information outlined in the contract. You break it, you get sued.
Dosent matter what the information is, as long as the NDA states not to release it, it is covered and legally binding.
Its pretty funny they are selling you a service, to prevent certain people from calling you who are just paying them for a service (caller ID blocking) who are only paying for that service because you are paying them for a service (caller ID) in the first place.
Its pretty funny they are selling you a service, to prevent certain people from calling you who are just paying them for a service (callerid blocking) who are only paying for that service because you are paying them for a service (caller ID) in the first place.
What I did is setup a forward on my machine so page-@domain forwards to my SMS address.
I only give out the page-name address to people.
This way i have full control via procmail on the filtering of who can and cant send to it and have it forwarded.
Granted someone smart can realize its my phone number @whatever.carier.com (easy to find out the email gateway too) but it stops most idiots that would only know to use what i give them.
Its also nicer as if i change phones or numbers, the address for my 'pager' never changes.
What would be really nice is for the SMS gateway to have a setting so mail addressed TO the 'correct' adderss was denied, but mail addressed to my page-name adderss is allowed. Then I have 100% control over who pages me.
Its also nice to have copys CC'd to my real email, so i do have access to full headers, and can archive them not on the phone.
Just my $0.02
Re:Should there be a GNU-Google?
on
Google vs. Evil
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
You can buy a rackmount machine with the google software on it from google.
They market these to companys for search engines just for their site, but obviously you could configure it however you please.
http://www.google.com/appliance/index.html (Or click Search Solutions link on their main page)
Granted this isnt just the software, but it proves there is no need to rely on googles configuration or hardware if you dont want to.
Something to look into atleast:)
Re:I will evaluate this from a lover's perspective
on
Google vs. Evil
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Seems this is the first serious reply to your post so far.. So hope it is taken with more seriousness than the previous ones.
While i aggree in part with your post, there are things that just seem wrong from the way you projected your opinions.
Porn can be bad if it is used as a teacher. Porn itself is not bad.
For example, porn as a teacher is bad for, among other reasons:
* It teaches that women arnt beautiful unless they have D +breast and/or implants, and that they need to shave their public hair to be attractive.
Both of those are quailitys i personally hate, and feel a woman should do to her body what SHE wants, not what she feels everyone else wants.
* It teaches that sex is over once the man has an oragasm, and that female oragams isnt importaint at all.
* It teaches that foreplay is only used as preperation for intercourse, not as a source of pleasure or as a equal part of love making.
* It teaches that you must be limited in the sexual acts you can do, namley only the things done in porn, and nothing else is OK.
So if a person learns about sex from porn, and nothing else, of _course_ they will be a horible lover.
Being a good lover requires learning about your partner, what they like, what they dont like, and responding to their needs while at the same time they are doing the same to you.
My question to you is, did you try to teach your wife yourself how to be a good lover as well?
If not, then its no wonder she is how she is, and you have no room to complain about it. TEACH HER!
If so, then I would question your teaching methods, your communication with her, or possibly her love (Read: concern) about you.
I have met women who were horible lovers, but I did my best to teach them otherwise, and in most cases did so very well.
But dont blame porn for teaching poor love making anymore than you should blame the internet or TV for being a poor babysitter. That isnt what they are for at all. But that doesnt mean they dont have good uses and still have a place in the world.
Re:With all due respect
on
Google vs. Evil
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
That is the nice thing about freedom. Goodgles CEO can decide what they want to do and not do, and you get to decide if you aggree or not and use them or someone else.
The KKK websites are most likely run in a way that would favour linking to sites about similar topics and refuse to link to pages not about the topics they want and deem 'right'.
That is their choice.
Just like its my choice to not go to their website ever.
Take away googles freedom to make this choice, and you have also taken away your freedom to choose _not_ to view sites such as the KKK's or anyone elses.
But i see the argument a little different. The main point you argue is true.
The fact however is, there IS a demand. The problem is the demand isnt for what is being offered. The demand is for fast and cheap. The offers are slow and cheap, or fast and expensive.
I run an ISP, so have plenty of experence in this area.
Everyone that talks about dark fiber already being in place... There are a few things you dont understand about that.
a) the fiber runs are between their POPs and locations only.
b) there is no easy way to get that fiber to the end user
c) Even if that fiber ran to your home, the cost of the hardware is still a couple times that of the cost of a DSL/cable bridge.
So really fiber itself is useless in regards to getting broadband to the customer.
But lets assume you can even wire up all the homes onto your own network. To be an ISP, you need that network bridged to the internet. Even ISPs have ISPs of sorts. Generally not at a tier level at this point, but the major backbones all link together, and this requires lines to connect them. Again, the dark fiber doesnt run between two different companys anymore than it does between one company and the end customers home. Still of no use there.
What does the ISP connect to the net with? If one chose wireless for the ISPs connection, well ill be the first to say the wont be in business for more than a month.
DSL/cable? That is almost a joke. It would be comparible to me getting a single dialup account somewhere, and providing 24 dialup lines that connect to the net over that one dialup to my ISP. Technically yes that will work. In reality no customer would ever stand for that type of service. The same goes for any other provider.
As an ISP you *need* a connection to your peer networks that is garenteed not to fail, and is fast enough to meet your needs.
What service other than the phone company currently provides that? none. So your back to T1's and T3's and the like.
As for you calling bullshit about 10% of the customers sucking up 90% of the bandwidth because if it was true they would do something about it...
Why do you think slashdot runs so many storys bitching about cable company caps, and people uncapping their modems?
Its because they ARE trying to limit what can be used, and even if they arnt doing it in the best way, or even the most obviously correct way, the fact of the matter is someone at somepoint said 'We need to limit our customers, so find a way to do that' and it was done. Just because it was done poorly has no bearing on their intent, which was to limit customers speeds. And again, people post to slashdot bitching about just these types of controls.
But the main point is, we pay for multiple T1's and that is a large cost of our business. We do not pay for bandwidth. The T1's we have we can blast at 100% 24/7 and it would be fine because that is the line we are paying for. The fact is a T1 or T3 is only so much (limited) bandwidth that needs to be shared correctly.
Its not a matter of 10% of the users using all of that bandwidth, its a matter of 100% of that bandwidth isnt enough to support all of those customers in the first place, no matter how it is distributed.
To follow, that is one of the reasons the broadband companys have so few customers. They dont know the best way to limit services, but they are ALL doing the same thing.
"AOL/TW roadrunner caps me at 3 mbit, im boycotting!" and the like are common statements seen on slashdot.
Well no shit. If they dont have the customers to pay for more bandwidth then their only option is to limit the bandwidth available to the few customers they do have. But doing so causes them to lose more customers, which in turn causes the limits to shrink even more so.
Its a spiral that ends with bankruptsy.
Only part of the blame is to lay on the broadband companys for not managing bandwidth and costs correctly. But part of the blame lays on the would-be customers that expect too much, and failing delivery cancel services.
The problem with creating a network capable of handling the bandwidth a customer would need, and charging them accordnigly, is planning cost of scaling. Its not easy. Plan to big and you pay way too much for unused resources. Plan too small and customer complain you cant meet demand. Either way your really screwed.
Also keep in mind the above problems are on the ISP to net side. This isnt at all to mention the ISP to customer end which has a whole ton of different problems with it too, the main of which is the monopoly on the phone network, and the fact its actually illegal to run your own wires/fiber/whatever in almost all cases.
My first post only addressed the later issue really, but I hope this one clears up the former issue as well.
I think your comment hits the problem on the head...
> Geeks, eBay'ers, etc. need to be connected, and > ISPs, telcos, etc. don't seem to be able to provide > fairly cheap, reliable service.
You cant have everything for nothing. You want expensive services for cheap? No one can do it.
As long as T1's and T3's cost the price they do, _someone_ has to bear that. The customer complains it shouldnt be them it should be the ISP. But why is that exactly?
The only reason in the past for an ISP to do this is to get a T1 and share it with say a number of dialup ports.
Unless you want your DSL/Cable to be 64k or less each way, the numbers dont make finantual sence to the ISPs to not raise prices to charge accordingly.
You want a megabit down? That costs an ISP $1500/month. You people want that for $40/month and not have it shared with 40 or more other people, yet there is no other way to break even, let alone make money.
<rant> I would love to have that too, but I would also love free art, obtainable medicines for those that need it, not charged to use the airwaves around me, to be able to travel into space, and to be able to modify my own DNA at my whim, and a large number of other things. As of yet, none of this is happening even though it is all very possible and we are just as capable of doing right now.
<bigger rant> As long as governments allow the raping of the people by providing one company with a monopoly, and outlawing all competition, all we can do is fight them to give us our USA back. But too many people dont care and are fine with it, so nothing will change except for the worse. </rant></rant>
That is the problem that needs fixing.
Now on to phase two.. Ideas. Got any? I sure dont:(
A) Why do the servers require it? Well, its their servers. If they want to say you must kill a dog before connecting and if you dont you are banned, that is their call.
b) Ident is useful to the server admin. If i let users use my system, and i know my own ident server is reliable, i know which user did something by remote and local logs.
If someone else claims to have ident info, i can match the exact TCP connection in their logs with mine, and thus gain exact timestamps (as most people dont sync to the same clocks) as well as if it occoured at all or not, thus weather to believe anything else they claim or not.
Granetd one can do the same thing with a logging firewall, but again, its the admins choice on how to run a system.
Go to any named-based web hosting provider and try to get to any customer website by IP. They only have ONE ip address for their machine. The only way the server knows which site to spit out is by, you guessed it, the domain.
The web isnt the only named based type of server out there either, it is just the most popular.
IP shortage isnt the reason ARIN incourages named-based over IP-based services.. its reliance on domains they are pushing.
When you post to usenet, or any public board, even though you still retain your copyright, the act of placing the post in the public grants implied permission to have the post in the public.
Granted email normally is not a public medium, but email sent to millions at random with no descresion as to where it is sent is pretty close to "the public"
I dont know if that would fly but its worth a shot.
If it doesnt, then I would counter that my email address is a copyrighted work and as long as they did not give the spammer permission to obtain the copy (in their email list) they are just as guilty as you are.
I do know if a person sends me an email directly, and they do not say specifically in the email that it is confidential, I am allowed to post it IE on my website. By sending it to me I have been given an implied licence to use that email myself.
The problem here is the spam collecting website is most likely not the one the email was sent to, so they cant use that reasoning.
One could also say they told the spammers in a reply to not send any further emails or you will publish them publically, and by doing so they grant you permission to do so. If the spammer has forged from headers, its not your problem the email never made it there. Well, technically i guess it is, but id hope a judge would see the spammer as commiting fraud instead of trying to pin it on you.
In the end you can always go over and beat the spammers skull in with a crowbar (Hey, what do you expect from slashdot legal advice}:)
I did not have to apply any patches or do anything outside of follow the normal install directions to get it this way.
Looks ligit to me.
Besides, if the university student store was selling pirated copys, I would just turn around and sue them to get reembursed for whatever MS wants from me, plus more for my troubles.
States this on the front of the CD with the university name it was purchased from.
MS has nothing to hold aginst me even if it IS pirated, they would need to shut down the state university for it, as they have sold this same software to alot of their students under the guise it is what the CD is lableled.
It is labeled 'not for resale, for purchase by staff faculty and students of the university only.'
In addition (which personally i thought was stupid at the point I had to type it in) the product key is printed on the top of the CD label.. yea had to take it out of the drive durring install to read it off.. but surprisingly the system didnt complain.
I checked on microsofts site at the time, as someone told me you were only licenced to use the software while actually enrolled at the school. I dont have the URL any longer, but you can search MS's site yourself if you need to check. They do specifically state you are allowed to use the software even after you are out of college.
I probably should have printed that out just incase, but at this point I would be willing to pay full price for XP pro, as that is how much I like it.
Funny thing about it (im sure ill be flamed a troll for this) the major reasons you pointed out being aginst XP are basically wrong reasons to avoid XP.
DRM. Ok, I use XP and I do not use windows media player. I prefer WinAMP on that platform. I also use TMpgEnc to rip DVDs to MPEG and watch them from the file that way using an mpeg player that happened to come with my ATI graphics card. I do know there are other non windows media players out there as well, even an open source one if I am not mistaken.
Solves all your DRM problems right there.
Product activation, I still dont know what all the fuss is about. Ive never activated or registered my copy of XP with MS or anyone. The only thing I had to do was type in that annoying product key from the front of my CD case, which has been required since windows 95, possibly before.
I have also upgraded the CPU, motherboard, memory, video card (so im a radeon junkie, what can i say) and about the only things that Havent changed are the sound card and my raid controller and its disks. I have never had XP bitch at it for anything beyond drivers, which is a different story all together, and again any previous version of windows would have the same driver issues as well.
XP is just as insecure as any other default install of any other windows versions since 3.x (and only then because on the default install there was no TCP stack, that had to be added to get its bugs.)
I would understand if you said you wanted to avoid windows for its bugs, but that detail is far from unique to XP.
At a university discount I got my copy of XP for $5, and get to continue using it after school, and I personally for one am very happy with the price there.
Windows may still not be worth $1 to you, but atleast get some good reasons for hating it and tell us those instead of listing incorrect points like you have.
Actually they not only log each channel change, but power on/off, and the volume/mute changes done through your converter (Of course not the volume/mute done through a TV)
All of this data is sent back along the cable feed to their log server in real time.
A simple call to tech support with a problem will prove this, as when they ask you do to something such as change a channel, they will tell YOU when you did it or if you didnt do it right.
In addition, they can also feed commands into your converter to change its channel, power settings, etc.
Each converter has a serial number on it that is tied to a household/billing account. If you ever call and report your name they log that with which converter at the time you called about as well, so if you only call for one and your buddy calls for another, they can narrow it down to who has which converter as well (Thou they dont really use that particular data, its more of a note than anything.)
A simple notch filter on the cable line can block these signals, but dont expect any help from tech support if you do that. They will tell you they arnt getting a reply from your converter and something must be wrong with the connection to it, most likely dispatching a technition to fix the problem locally.
Officially they claim to only use these logs for trouble shooting, but its also been proven they use them to watch for cable pirates. If you continuously change to channels you dont get and Watch those channels for any amount of time, yet you dont pay for them or havent orderd the pay per view show, it sets off flags that alerts them.
This is why 'test boxes' that are just descramblers also include these notch filters. As far as the cable co can see from one of those, the converter isnt even hooked up to their network.
Slashdot Mirror
Most every study Ive read about the development of the brain in babys states that the brain does not finish developing the ability to get meaningful data from vision for two weeks or so after birth.
The brain knows there is light, but doesnt yet know how to focus those images or even form images in the mind at two days.
I wish I had some links to these but I have no idea where I read the articles in question.
There could be a number of other explanations for her 'early memorys' and in fact they may not be memorys at all.
To the consious mind, there is no difference between a memory of an event, and the actual event being percieved by the senses.
Durring normal waking state memorys are inhibited by the brain by hormones specifically so we dont confuse our senses with a memory.
However durring REM sleep (and im sure other stages the brain can be in) tose hormones are themselfs inhibited, which is why we dreams seem so real.
In essence, they are.
When a person becomes consious in the REM state (What is called lucid dreaming) you become free to use your imagination to create a memory of something going on or happening to you, and as the memory inhibitors are being inhibited, it seems like reality for all intents and purposes.
When the brain gets 'crossed' so to speak, and one is in REM state but still being able to percieve the senses and communicate with the outside world, your perception of reality changes almost totally.
What would be interesting is if she had some sort of cross between a hypnotic state of consiousness, and a lucid REM state, where she literally Could turn on and off the senses and resouces of her body to only percieve the parts of the world she wanted, which left more time to focus on the specific details she wanted to (IE no vision but very good sound perception as you desrcibed)
Maybe that was her way of interpreting 'two days from when she had consiousness' which would have been over the two week period.. But i dont believe it was literally when she was two.
Vision doesnt come until two weeks, and its believed consiousness and self awareness still another month or so after that.
> Doese this apply to software?
Yes.
The only law in place that prevents something is copyright, which prevents me giving out copys of your software to others without your permission and whatnot.
If i use your software to generate output, i can do whatever i please with that output.
Copyright does not apply to things such as networks or the Internet specifically, so it doesnt even have that.
The Internet is a specific thing (granted it changes all the time, but it is still a cluster of computers)
As to the parents parents subject i was replying to, this is like Ford creating a car, selling it to you, and later saying that you can only use it in certain ways.
Oh wow, doesnt that sound familiar?
Slashdot users bitch left and right when a company sells an item (copyright not withstanding) and then later try to say what you can and cant do with it.
The internet is no more under copyright than a cuecat from radioshack or an iopener.
> I don't hate your differences as much as trying
> revisionist history, so shut the hell up.
When the subject is "we created it so we get to say what is done with it" and the fact is they created it and sold it off, they have no say so, no matter what you say.
If you create anything, and fucking SELL IT, you lose the right to say what can and cant be done with it in any nation in the world.
Try joining the rules of our planet for a change
> The internet was created by the United
> States Department of Defense.
Actually that is not true.
The government created a network called Arpanet, which they deemed not quite what they were looking for, and so they sold it off. Upon selling it to comercial interests, it was called the Internet.
So no, the government only created the network that was to become the Internet. What they actually created was the Arpanet.
The point is, they gave it away.
They sold it to comercial companys and at that moment sold their right to have any say so what so ever about what was to happen to it.
If they cared so much for it, they should have kept it to themselfs or ran it themselfs, in which case the Internet would not exist, we would be using the Arpanet.
I was looking over their website. I can see why your description got carried away and almost comercial sounding.. From what Ive read they look great!
Unfortunatly they do not cover the areacodes I am in (Aparently only two citys in Ohio, nether of which are mine)
I emailed to ask if they had plans to support my areacode soon or not, so hopefully Ill get a good reply from that soon.
Do you know of any other companys that provide this same service?
I would love to use something like this to replace my landline, but needs to have POPs in atleast my areacode heh others for family and friends are just a perk.
Thanks
Ok.. I herby submit three complaints (once today, once they day before, and once they day before that) that they user by the nick of "papasui" has voilated the DMCA. Please terminate his service :)
Oh, you mean staff gets special concideration? funny that
> Yes, but the enforceability of NDA's was not the
:)
> subject of the parent posts, it was the fact this
> information is insignificant so the court case is
> not worth the bad PR it will bring to Apple
To people like us that info may be insignificant, but maybe (or from the fact they are suing, most likely) apple thinks it must have some worth for this.
For all we know, apple could have contacted the person and the person insulted the lawyers that called and said he would fight it all the way, and its just a prick waving contest
The parent i replied to first seemed to be questioning the enforcability of an NDA based on the worth of that information.
My appologies if that was not the case.
> Well so any information that is not publicly known
> in a corporation is a trade secret? Using that
> mentality Apple can sue if an employee discloses
> whether or not Steve Jobs wears boxers or briefs.
Actually, if you sign an NDA stating you will not tell anyone about Steve Jobs underwear choice, and you are told what he wears, and you tell someone, then yes they can legally sue you and will win.
That is the point of an NDA.
You sign a legally binding contract stating you will not disclose information outlined in the contract.
You break it, you get sued.
Dosent matter what the information is, as long as the NDA states not to release it, it is covered and legally binding.
(From a previous post i made)
:)
Its pretty funny they are selling you a service, to prevent certain people from calling you who are just paying them for a service (caller ID blocking) who are only paying for that service because you are paying them for a service (caller ID) in the first place.
Ahh what a racket
Its pretty funny they are selling you a service, to prevent certain people from calling you who are just paying them for a service (callerid blocking) who are only paying for that service because you are paying them for a service (caller ID) in the first place.
:)
Ahh what a racket
What I did is setup a forward on my machine so page-@domain forwards to my SMS address.
I only give out the page-name address to people.
This way i have full control via procmail on the filtering of who can and cant send to it and have it forwarded.
Granted someone smart can realize its my phone number @whatever.carier.com (easy to find out the email gateway too) but it stops most idiots that would only know to use what i give them.
Its also nicer as if i change phones or numbers, the address for my 'pager' never changes.
What would be really nice is for the SMS gateway to have a setting so mail addressed TO the 'correct' adderss was denied, but mail addressed to my page-name adderss is allowed.
Then I have 100% control over who pages me.
Its also nice to have copys CC'd to my real email, so i do have access to full headers, and can archive them not on the phone.
Just my $0.02
You can buy a rackmount machine with the google software on it from google.
:)
They market these to companys for search engines just for their site, but obviously you could configure it however you please.
http://www.google.com/appliance/index.html
(Or click Search Solutions link on their main page)
Granted this isnt just the software, but it proves there is no need to rely on googles configuration or hardware if you dont want to.
Something to look into atleast
Seems this is the first serious reply to your post so far.. So hope it is taken with more seriousness than the previous ones.
While i aggree in part with your post, there are things that just seem wrong from the way you projected your opinions.
Porn can be bad if it is used as a teacher.
Porn itself is not bad.
For example, porn as a teacher is bad for, among other reasons:
* It teaches that women arnt beautiful unless they have D +breast and/or implants, and that they need to shave their public hair to be attractive.
Both of those are quailitys i personally hate, and feel a woman should do to her body what SHE wants, not what she feels everyone else wants.
* It teaches that sex is over once the man has an oragasm, and that female oragams isnt importaint at all.
* It teaches that foreplay is only used as preperation for intercourse, not as a source of pleasure or as a equal part of love making.
* It teaches that you must be limited in the sexual acts you can do, namley only the things done in porn, and nothing else is OK.
So if a person learns about sex from porn, and nothing else, of _course_ they will be a horible lover.
Being a good lover requires learning about your partner, what they like, what they dont like, and responding to their needs while at the same time they are doing the same to you.
My question to you is, did you try to teach your wife yourself how to be a good lover as well?
If not, then its no wonder she is how she is, and you have no room to complain about it. TEACH HER!
If so, then I would question your teaching methods, your communication with her, or possibly her love (Read: concern) about you.
I have met women who were horible lovers, but I did my best to teach them otherwise, and in most cases did so very well.
But dont blame porn for teaching poor love making anymore than you should blame the internet or TV for being a poor babysitter.
That isnt what they are for at all. But that doesnt mean they dont have good uses and still have a place in the world.
That is the nice thing about freedom.
Goodgles CEO can decide what they want to do and not do, and you get to decide if you aggree or not and use them or someone else.
The KKK websites are most likely run in a way that would favour linking to sites about similar topics and refuse to link to pages not about the topics they want and deem 'right'.
That is their choice.
Just like its my choice to not go to their website ever.
Take away googles freedom to make this choice, and you have also taken away your freedom to choose _not_ to view sites such as the KKK's or anyone elses.
That isnt something I want.
But i see the argument a little different. The main point you argue is true.
The fact however is, there IS a demand.
The problem is the demand isnt for what is being offered.
The demand is for fast and cheap.
The offers are slow and cheap, or fast and expensive.
I run an ISP, so have plenty of experence in this area.
Everyone that talks about dark fiber already being in place... There are a few things you dont understand about that.
a) the fiber runs are between their POPs and locations only.
b) there is no easy way to get that fiber to the end user
c) Even if that fiber ran to your home, the cost of the hardware is still a couple times that of the cost of a DSL/cable bridge.
So really fiber itself is useless in regards to getting broadband to the customer.
But lets assume you can even wire up all the homes onto your own network.
To be an ISP, you need that network bridged to the internet. Even ISPs have ISPs of sorts. Generally not at a tier level at this point, but the major backbones all link together, and this requires lines to connect them.
Again, the dark fiber doesnt run between two different companys anymore than it does between one company and the end customers home. Still of no use there.
What does the ISP connect to the net with?
If one chose wireless for the ISPs connection, well ill be the first to say the wont be in business for more than a month.
DSL/cable? That is almost a joke.
It would be comparible to me getting a single dialup account somewhere, and providing 24 dialup lines that connect to the net over that one dialup to my ISP.
Technically yes that will work.
In reality no customer would ever stand for that type of service. The same goes for any other provider.
As an ISP you *need* a connection to your peer networks that is garenteed not to fail, and is fast enough to meet your needs.
What service other than the phone company currently provides that? none.
So your back to T1's and T3's and the like.
As for you calling bullshit about 10% of the customers sucking up 90% of the bandwidth because if it was true they would do something about it...
Why do you think slashdot runs so many storys bitching about cable company caps, and people uncapping their modems?
Its because they ARE trying to limit what can be used, and even if they arnt doing it in the best way, or even the most obviously correct way, the fact of the matter is someone at somepoint said 'We need to limit our customers, so find a way to do that' and it was done.
Just because it was done poorly has no bearing on their intent, which was to limit customers speeds.
And again, people post to slashdot bitching about just these types of controls.
But the main point is, we pay for multiple T1's and that is a large cost of our business. We do not pay for bandwidth. The T1's we have we can blast at 100% 24/7 and it would be fine because that is the line we are paying for.
The fact is a T1 or T3 is only so much (limited) bandwidth that needs to be shared correctly.
Its not a matter of 10% of the users using all of that bandwidth, its a matter of 100% of that bandwidth isnt enough to support all of those customers in the first place, no matter how it is distributed.
To follow, that is one of the reasons the broadband companys have so few customers. They dont know the best way to limit services, but they are ALL doing the same thing.
"AOL/TW roadrunner caps me at 3 mbit, im boycotting!" and the like are common statements seen on slashdot.
Well no shit. If they dont have the customers to pay for more bandwidth then their only option is to limit the bandwidth available to the few customers they do have.
But doing so causes them to lose more customers, which in turn causes the limits to shrink even more so.
Its a spiral that ends with bankruptsy.
Only part of the blame is to lay on the broadband companys for not managing bandwidth and costs correctly.
But part of the blame lays on the would-be customers that expect too much, and failing delivery cancel services.
The problem with creating a network capable of handling the bandwidth a customer would need, and charging them accordnigly, is planning cost of scaling. Its not easy. Plan to big and you pay way too much for unused resources. Plan too small and customer complain you cant meet demand.
Either way your really screwed.
Also keep in mind the above problems are on the ISP to net side. This isnt at all to mention the ISP to customer end which has a whole ton of different problems with it too, the main of which is the monopoly on the phone network, and the fact its actually illegal to run your own wires/fiber/whatever in almost all cases.
My first post only addressed the later issue really, but I hope this one clears up the former issue as well.
I think your comment hits the problem on the head...
:(
> Geeks, eBay'ers, etc. need to be connected, and
> ISPs, telcos, etc. don't seem to be able to provide
> fairly cheap, reliable service.
You cant have everything for nothing.
You want expensive services for cheap? No one can do it.
As long as T1's and T3's cost the price they do, _someone_ has to bear that. The customer complains it shouldnt be them it should be the ISP. But why is that exactly?
The only reason in the past for an ISP to do this is to get a T1 and share it with say a number of dialup ports.
Unless you want your DSL/Cable to be 64k or less each way, the numbers dont make finantual sence to the ISPs to not raise prices to charge accordingly.
You want a megabit down? That costs an ISP $1500/month. You people want that for $40/month and not have it shared with 40 or more other people, yet there is no other way to break even, let alone make money.
<rant>
I would love to have that too, but I would also love free art, obtainable medicines for those that need it, not charged to use the airwaves around me, to be able to travel into space, and to be able to modify my own DNA at my whim, and a large number of other things.
As of yet, none of this is happening even though it is all very possible and we are just as capable of doing right now.
<bigger rant>
As long as governments allow the raping of the people by providing one company with a monopoly, and outlawing all competition, all we can do is fight them to give us our USA back. But too many people dont care and are fine with it, so nothing will change except for the worse.
</rant></rant>
That is the problem that needs fixing.
Now on to phase two.. Ideas. Got any? I sure dont
with two answers.
A) Why do the servers require it?
Well, its their servers. If they want to say you must kill a dog before connecting and if you dont you are banned, that is their call.
b) Ident is useful to the server admin.
If i let users use my system, and i know my own ident server is reliable, i know which user did something by remote and local logs.
If someone else claims to have ident info, i can match the exact TCP connection in their logs with mine, and thus gain exact timestamps (as most people dont sync to the same clocks) as well as if it occoured at all or not, thus weather to believe anything else they claim or not.
Granetd one can do the same thing with a logging firewall, but again, its the admins choice on how to run a system.
Actually to a small degree you are incorrect.
Go to any named-based web hosting provider and try to get to any customer website by IP.
They only have ONE ip address for their machine. The only way the server knows which site to spit out is by, you guessed it, the domain.
The web isnt the only named based type of server out there either, it is just the most popular.
IP shortage isnt the reason ARIN incourages named-based over IP-based services.. its reliance on domains they are pushing.
New purpose in life.
1) Create and patent gene.
2) Introduce gene into DNA of patent lawyers world-wide for the next 60 years.
3) ???
4) Profit!
> But that's my point. Everybody is griping
:)
> about the "prices" but the prices --
> I suspect -- aren't the issue.
We are griping over the non issue prices because walmart is suing with the non issue DMCA
When you post to usenet, or any public board, even though you still retain your copyright, the act of placing the post in the public grants implied permission to have the post in the public.
:)
Granted email normally is not a public medium, but email sent to millions at random with no descresion as to where it is sent is pretty close to "the public"
I dont know if that would fly but its worth a shot.
If it doesnt, then I would counter that my email address is a copyrighted work and as long as they did not give the spammer permission to obtain the copy (in their email list) they are just as guilty as you are.
I do know if a person sends me an email directly, and they do not say specifically in the email that it is confidential, I am allowed to post it IE on my website.
By sending it to me I have been given an implied licence to use that email myself.
The problem here is the spam collecting website is most likely not the one the email was sent to, so they cant use that reasoning.
One could also say they told the spammers in a reply to not send any further emails or you will publish them publically, and by doing so they grant you permission to do so.
If the spammer has forged from headers, its not your problem the email never made it there.
Well, technically i guess it is, but id hope a judge would see the spammer as commiting fraud instead of trying to pin it on you.
In the end you can always go over and beat the spammers skull in with a crowbar
(Hey, what do you expect from slashdot legal advice}
Dunno what to say then.
It looks ligit.
When it boots it indeed says Win XP Pro.
I did not have to apply any patches or do anything outside of follow the normal install directions to get it this way.
Looks ligit to me.
Besides, if the university student store was selling pirated copys, I would just turn around and sue them to get reembursed for whatever MS wants from me, plus more for my troubles.
Either way, all is good!
Nope, its a university priced copy of XP pro.
States this on the front of the CD with the university name it was purchased from.
MS has nothing to hold aginst me even if it IS pirated, they would need to shut down the state university for it, as they have sold this same software to alot of their students under the guise it is what the CD is lableled.
It is labeled 'not for resale, for purchase by staff faculty and students of the university only.'
In addition (which personally i thought was stupid at the point I had to type it in) the product key is printed on the top of the CD label.. yea had to take it out of the drive durring install to read it off.. but surprisingly the system didnt complain.
I checked on microsofts site at the time, as someone told me you were only licenced to use the software while actually enrolled at the school.
I dont have the URL any longer, but you can search MS's site yourself if you need to check.
They do specifically state you are allowed to use the software even after you are out of college.
I probably should have printed that out just incase, but at this point I would be willing to pay full price for XP pro, as that is how much I like it.
Funny thing about it (im sure ill be flamed a troll for this) the major reasons you pointed out being aginst XP are basically wrong reasons to avoid XP.
DRM. Ok, I use XP and I do not use windows media player. I prefer WinAMP on that platform.
I also use TMpgEnc to rip DVDs to MPEG and watch them from the file that way using an mpeg player that happened to come with my ATI graphics card.
I do know there are other non windows media players out there as well, even an open source one if I am not mistaken.
Solves all your DRM problems right there.
Product activation, I still dont know what all the fuss is about. Ive never activated or registered my copy of XP with MS or anyone. The only thing I had to do was type in that annoying product key from the front of my CD case, which has been required since windows 95, possibly before.
I have also upgraded the CPU, motherboard, memory, video card (so im a radeon junkie, what can i say) and about the only things that Havent changed are the sound card and my raid controller and its disks.
I have never had XP bitch at it for anything beyond drivers, which is a different story all together, and again any previous version of windows would have the same driver issues as well.
XP is just as insecure as any other default install of any other windows versions since 3.x (and only then because on the default install there was no TCP stack, that had to be added to get its bugs.)
I would understand if you said you wanted to avoid windows for its bugs, but that detail is far from unique to XP.
At a university discount I got my copy of XP for $5, and get to continue using it after school, and I personally for one am very happy with the price there.
Windows may still not be worth $1 to you, but atleast get some good reasons for hating it and tell us those instead of listing incorrect points like you have.
Actually they not only log each channel change, but power on/off, and the volume/mute changes done through your converter (Of course not the volume/mute done through a TV)
All of this data is sent back along the cable feed to their log server in real time.
A simple call to tech support with a problem will prove this, as when they ask you do to something such as change a channel, they will tell YOU when you did it or if you didnt do it right.
In addition, they can also feed commands into your converter to change its channel, power settings, etc.
Each converter has a serial number on it that is tied to a household/billing account.
If you ever call and report your name they log that with which converter at the time you called about as well, so if you only call for one and your buddy calls for another, they can narrow it down to who has which converter as well (Thou they dont really use that particular data, its more of a note than anything.)
A simple notch filter on the cable line can block these signals, but dont expect any help from tech support if you do that. They will tell you they arnt getting a reply from your converter and something must be wrong with the connection to it, most likely dispatching a technition to fix the problem locally.
Officially they claim to only use these logs for trouble shooting, but its also been proven they use them to watch for cable pirates.
If you continuously change to channels you dont get and Watch those channels for any amount of time, yet you dont pay for them or havent orderd the pay per view show, it sets off flags that alerts them.
This is why 'test boxes' that are just descramblers also include these notch filters.
As far as the cable co can see from one of those, the converter isnt even hooked up to their network.