Try looking at this from another step back. I get my internet through a universtity, which in turn has a connection in the state. About six months ago, our connection went all to heck, because someone was DOSing another university, that has the same provider in the state. Needless to say, we put pressure on our provider to fix the situation, and they did by dropping the school that was causing the problem until the attacks stopped (it work, kind of. Had to try it several times, before the DOSers gave up).
An ISP is a business, they have to look out for themselves. Part of this is looking out for other customers. If an attack is aimed at one person, that causes the loss of service of 50 others, if dropping that one person fixes it, maybe it's the right choice.
Of course, if I were dropped in such a manner, I'd find a new ISP myself, but the ISP really has little choice in the matter.
Honestly, yeah I bet they're going to blink a few times as they read that note.
But, it's forced now, and likely the MS lawyer legions will be called into action. I think it's great that/. is making a stand here, I just hope that they don't end up as sacrifice.
Well, logically there will be some form of order imposed on the internet eventually. Really its a matter of who will choose the laws to enforce, and how will it be enforced.
The Internet is a global system, and the closest thing to a global government is the UN, I guess, but the UN is quite busy doing what it does right now.
I suspect, due to the fact that the US seems to have the biggest problems with how the internet runs, and the fact that they are willing to spend money, that the US will be one of the major factors involved.
Now, what extent of things that will be 'policed' is another question altogether.
I think the concept is, it's supposed to be a "favor for a favor." He helped MS out, by doing them a favor, wouldn't have been the end of MS if he didn't do it, but it did make their life a little easier. Now he's asking them to back off on the Kerberous issue.
Sort of... Partially, it depends on the ability of the minor to understand what they are getting into (4-5 year olds likely would be considered too young to understand what they're getting into), but minors get a chance to back out of agreements when they turn 18. As far as how 'electronic signatures' and minors go, I have no idea how well they'll hold up in a court.
Slashdot Mirror
Try looking at this from another step back. I get my internet through a universtity, which in turn has a connection in the state. About six months ago, our connection went all to heck, because someone was DOSing another university, that has the same provider in the state. Needless to say, we put pressure on our provider to fix the situation, and they did by dropping the school that was causing the problem until the attacks stopped (it work, kind of. Had to try it several times, before the DOSers gave up).
An ISP is a business, they have to look out for themselves. Part of this is looking out for other customers. If an attack is aimed at one person, that causes the loss of service of 50 others, if dropping that one person fixes it, maybe it's the right choice.
Of course, if I were dropped in such a manner, I'd find a new ISP myself, but the ISP really has little choice in the matter.
Honestly, yeah I bet they're going to blink a few times as they read that note.
/. is making a stand here, I just hope that they don't end up as sacrifice.
But, it's forced now, and likely the MS lawyer legions will be called into action. I think it's great that
Well, logically there will be some form of order imposed on the internet eventually. Really its a matter of who will choose the laws to enforce, and how will it be enforced.
The Internet is a global system, and the closest thing to a global government is the UN, I guess, but the UN is quite busy doing what it does right now.
I suspect, due to the fact that the US seems to have the biggest problems with how the internet runs, and the fact that they are willing to spend money, that the US will be one of the major factors involved.
Now, what extent of things that will be 'policed' is another question altogether.
I think the concept is, it's supposed to be a "favor for a favor." He helped MS out, by doing them a favor, wouldn't have been the end of MS if he didn't do it, but it did make their life a little easier. Now he's asking them to back off on the Kerberous issue.
Sort of... Partially, it depends on the ability of the minor to understand what they are getting into (4-5 year olds likely would be considered too young to understand what they're getting into), but minors get a chance to back out of agreements when they turn 18. As far as how 'electronic signatures' and minors go, I have no idea how well they'll hold up in a court.