Kif: "Sir." *whispers* "There aren't that many human beings."
A thought occurs. There aren't that many humans.
Lrrr: "We're willing to wait a few weeks while you shore up the numbers."
Hmm. Nine hundred and ninety three billion babies in a few weeks. We'll need an army of super virile men scoring 'round the clock! I'll do my part. Kif, clear my schedule!
Don't worry, electricity costs will be paid back. If you find the proper website address and submit the proper proof of expenses incurred in their patented obscure format.
In unrelated news, a $3.25 per month "Router Electricity Payback Tax" will be added to all bills as is a $2.57 per month "Obscure Format Development Tax."
I set up my wife's grandmother's router. Then, she had the ISP come to "fix" their cable modem. They removed her router from the setup, claiming that it wasn't needed, and hooked her Windows computer right up to the Internet (through their cable modem). Needless to say, she encountered "problems" and I had to set it up again. I can't help but think that having your own cable modem would mean that a tech wouldn't touch it and wouldn't wind up mucking a home setup.
It's hard enough keeping our family members running a secure setup. We don't need cable ISP techs who "know what they are doing" telling our relatives that these security precautions aren't needed.
So now you, the customer, are going to be higher premiums for any online services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc.
Not to mention that you, the user, will get capped by Comcast and the other monopoly ISPs so that using any online video service will cost you overage fees. This will effectively make online video services more expensive and thus drive people to Comcast's own video offerings.
At least, I fail to see how they can be honest about that
The problem lies in thinking they'd be honest about anything. The cable ISPs are monopolies or duopolies in most areas so they know they have the power to do whatever they want to do. Add in their size and lobbying muscle, and you have a group of companies who feel they can do anything they want with no repercussions.
In my area, I have Time Warner Cable (soon to be Comcast) and that's it. No FIOS or any other high speed, wired broadband. So if I don't like what TWC/Comcast does, what are my options beyond going without Internet service (not an option given that I'm a web developer).
Exactly. How long until a Grandpa Random User is charged a huge overage fee because "they" downloaded a fifty HD movies via torrents - when the downloads were actually Public WiFi users? Or, more insidious, Joe User is charged a small overage fee for just barely going over the cap when the real reason for the overage was one or two Public WiFi downloads being marked under the subscriber's account?
As long as you still get the speed you are paying for why should you care if someone else is using your wifi anymore than you care if your neighbor is also a comcast subscriber.
Because someone might attach to your Wi-fi and share something in a manner that infringes copyright. Then, the MPAA/RIAA will come after you.
Note, I completely agree that targeting people based on IP address is idiotic, but you would be the person who would either need to spend the time/money to fight this lawsuit or would need to settle with them (likely agreeing that you did the crime) to make it go away.
On the upside, it could add more dents into the "this IP address proves it was that person" claims of the MPAA/RIAA, but who would want to volunteer for this expense? Or, more accurately, who would want Comcast to volunteer them for this expense unless they go through technological measures to opt out?
The only solution to this is to shut down the agency.
And any politician that did this would immediately be tarred as doing something that hurts America and helps The Terrorists. Since politicians are a spineless lot, always worried about being cast in a negative light, they will shy away from any real reform. Instead they will back "slap on the wrist" or "finger wagging" reform that looks to the public like real reform, but in reality does nothing.
I actually like the tablet on the WiiU. With many games, it means that I can play a game while my wife watches TV. I can even take the tablet into another room (depending on distance/being able to communicate with the base unit) and play in there. The only downside is that it is one tablet per console. It would be great if you could buy additional tablets and connect them to the WiiU. Then you could play a multi-player game and let people have their own screen instead of splitting the TV's screen into multiple sections.
My ninth grade science teacher had a boa constrictor and decided to show us a feeding one day. He put the snake on one side of a walled off area and a mouse on the other side. The mouse calmly walked up to the snake and sniffed its nose. One blink later (literally, it was that fast), the snake was coiled around the mouse with its mouth over the mouse's head. The mouse tried struggling for a few seconds but quickly went limp.
I honestly don't think there would be enough time for regret if a boa wrapped around you like that. Your mind would be too clouded by panic, pain, and oxygen deprivation to even allow something like regret to enter.
The problem I have with the "fast lanes" are that most ISPs are monopolies or duopolies in their areas. They already have little incentive to innovate. After all, what are you going to do? Go without Internet? Of course not, so keep those monthly checks coming for as much as the ISPs demand.
Given the monopoly/duopoly fact, what is preventing ISPs from turning "fast lane/faster lane" into "slow, congested lane/fast, big money lane"? What's preventing them from ignoring any speed increases to the normal traffic that doesn't pay them for special treatment while they make sure that the companies that pay them get super-high speed access? And will there be exclusive deals? If Amazon signs up with Time Warner Cable in my area as the exclusive Internet video provider (besides TWC's offerings and by doing so paying much more than normal "fast lane" access, of course), what would this mean if I wanted to use Netflix? Would I need to move to a different town just to use Netflix?
The answer is that nothing is preventing them from doing this. If it makes them money, they'll do it. Speeding up the normal Internet won't make them money so that will be left to languish. If ISPs get their way, any website worth visiting will need to pay every ISP fast-lane acess fees. This would make operating your own website prohibitively expensive so only the big companies would be able to do it. And thus, corporate status quo will be maintained.
Please ignore my previous post. I had multiple Slashdot windows open and posted this in the wrong article. (This is what happens when you mix exhaustion and posting.)
I just got a new laptop replacing one with a majorly glitchy screen. (The old laptop's screen image jumps all over the place and gives me a headache. Probably a bad cable in the laptop's monitor since external monitors work and it wasn't the cable's connection to the laptop itself.) The first thing I did when I booted it up was to load Internet Explorer and install ClassicShell as many people here recommended. (The second thing I did was to install a better browser than IE.)
It's a little bit of both. Gerrymandering helps out, but if the big donations went to their opponent, the opponent could spend more on their election campaign and get enough votes to kick the incumbent out of office. However, with just the big donations, the people in a district might be more evenly split between Democrat and Republican and thus be more likely to change sides depending on who is running. (For the simplicity, I'm ignoring third parties here which most people - for better or worse - tend to skip over as they vote D/R. That's a different issue entirely.) In addition, the big donations, nice trips, and promises of cushy jobs when they "retire" from Congress help get the lobbyist legislation pushed through.
Recently, there was an article that described blue eyes as the result of a genetic mutation. So I'm the world's most boring mutant: Blue Eyed Guy. I have the powers of having blue eyes. All the time. I thought being a mutant would be more exciting than this.
I've long wished that the "GOP crazies" would split off from the Republican party and form their own party so we could ignore them and the Republicans could be a viable voting option again. Now, though, I think it would be easier if the "old-school, sane GOP" split off from the Republican party. Let the Republican party sink into history and make this new party a major political force. Would it be perfect? Of course not. But I'd be a lot more willing to vote Republican without the pro-religion, anti-science, pro-big-business, anti-little-guy, anti-progress attitude that the "GOP crazies" seem to want to enforce.
For elected officials, we have a much simpler and more direct way of getting rid of them: we vote for someone else.
Unfortunately, the politicians in power can redraw the voting district lines to help prevent the opposing party from being able to overtake the incumbents.
Not that the major opposing party is much better. All too often voting (for one of the major parties, putting third party candidates aside for the moment) seems like a choice between bad and worse.
Or when they introduce legislation that has been completely written by the lobbyists who donate big sums of money to their campaign, treat them to "fact finding trips" to luxury resorts, and the like. Because nothing says "of the people, by the people" like having a giant corporation treat some Senators to a trip on a yacht so that they can push for a bill that the giant corporation has completely written to become law.
The patent examiners are approving patents figuring that the courts will sort it all out. And the courts just assume by default that the patent examiners did their job and reviewed the patent. The end result is patents that shouldn't have been granted being held up in court or requiring lengthy, expensive litigation to get invalidated. I completely agree that there needs to be some accountability in these patent applications. If one of your patent applications is overturned by the courts, you go on probation for two years. If, while on probation, another patent you approved is overturned, you are fired. Furthermore, if you go on probation three times, you are fired. Maybe this would make the patent examiners think a bit more before approving patents.
Let's assume that the government would be breaking the law by NSLing the signing keys. (As opposed to the law being so mucked up that such an action is entirely legal.)
1) What lawyer is going to be able to fight this battle against the US Government and win? Let me narrow that list down a bit. What lawyer that the TrueCrypt developers would hire would be able to fight this battle against the US Government and win?
2) Would the TrueCrypt developers even be allowed to see a trial or would they be arrested on "unrelated" charges and sent to prison? Or worse. (There is plenty that a power hungry governmental agency can do to someone that says "no" to them that makes "being arrested on unrelated charges" preferable.)
Last time I checked lawyers were rather ineffective at patching vulnerabilities, doing root cause analysis, or improving your organization's security posture and/or practices.
They're very effective. To paraphrase Futurama:
Documentary Narrator: Fortunately, our most expensive lawyers sued the security researchers and shut them up. Of course, the security holes are still there, we just sue anyone who talks about them. Thus solving the problem once and for all. Suzie: But... Documentary Narrator: Once and for all!
Sadly, too many companies don't see this as a joke, but as a valid security vulnerability response strategy.
It might not infringe, but if he filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against you - presumably in a district where you would need to travel a great distance to attend the court sessions - for selling "I love pi." shirts, would you spend the time and money to fight the lawsuit or just stop selling the shirts?
Most people would just stop selling the shirts as the revenue from the shirts would be less than the cost of fighting the lawsuit.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. We need to kill a few trillion people.
Kif: "Sir." *whispers* "There aren't that many human beings."
A thought occurs. There aren't that many humans.
Lrrr: "We're willing to wait a few weeks while you shore up the numbers."
Hmm. Nine hundred and ninety three billion babies in a few weeks. We'll need an army of super virile men scoring 'round the clock! I'll do my part. Kif, clear my schedule!
Don't worry, electricity costs will be paid back. If you find the proper website address and submit the proper proof of expenses incurred in their patented obscure format.
In unrelated news, a $3.25 per month "Router Electricity Payback Tax" will be added to all bills as is a $2.57 per month "Obscure Format Development Tax."
I set up my wife's grandmother's router. Then, she had the ISP come to "fix" their cable modem. They removed her router from the setup, claiming that it wasn't needed, and hooked her Windows computer right up to the Internet (through their cable modem). Needless to say, she encountered "problems" and I had to set it up again. I can't help but think that having your own cable modem would mean that a tech wouldn't touch it and wouldn't wind up mucking a home setup.
It's hard enough keeping our family members running a secure setup. We don't need cable ISP techs who "know what they are doing" telling our relatives that these security precautions aren't needed.
Not to mention that you, the user, will get capped by Comcast and the other monopoly ISPs so that using any online video service will cost you overage fees. This will effectively make online video services more expensive and thus drive people to Comcast's own video offerings.
The problem lies in thinking they'd be honest about anything. The cable ISPs are monopolies or duopolies in most areas so they know they have the power to do whatever they want to do. Add in their size and lobbying muscle, and you have a group of companies who feel they can do anything they want with no repercussions.
In my area, I have Time Warner Cable (soon to be Comcast) and that's it. No FIOS or any other high speed, wired broadband. So if I don't like what TWC/Comcast does, what are my options beyond going without Internet service (not an option given that I'm a web developer).
Exactly. How long until a Grandpa Random User is charged a huge overage fee because "they" downloaded a fifty HD movies via torrents - when the downloads were actually Public WiFi users? Or, more insidious, Joe User is charged a small overage fee for just barely going over the cap when the real reason for the overage was one or two Public WiFi downloads being marked under the subscriber's account?
Because someone might attach to your Wi-fi and share something in a manner that infringes copyright. Then, the MPAA/RIAA will come after you.
Note, I completely agree that targeting people based on IP address is idiotic, but you would be the person who would either need to spend the time/money to fight this lawsuit or would need to settle with them (likely agreeing that you did the crime) to make it go away.
On the upside, it could add more dents into the "this IP address proves it was that person" claims of the MPAA/RIAA, but who would want to volunteer for this expense? Or, more accurately, who would want Comcast to volunteer them for this expense unless they go through technological measures to opt out?
And any politician that did this would immediately be tarred as doing something that hurts America and helps The Terrorists. Since politicians are a spineless lot, always worried about being cast in a negative light, they will shy away from any real reform. Instead they will back "slap on the wrist" or "finger wagging" reform that looks to the public like real reform, but in reality does nothing.
Actually, Mario Kart 8 for the WiiU was just released at the end of May. (It obviously wouldn't factor into those WiiU sales figures, though.)
I actually like the tablet on the WiiU. With many games, it means that I can play a game while my wife watches TV. I can even take the tablet into another room (depending on distance/being able to communicate with the base unit) and play in there. The only downside is that it is one tablet per console. It would be great if you could buy additional tablets and connect them to the WiiU. Then you could play a multi-player game and let people have their own screen instead of splitting the TV's screen into multiple sections.
My ninth grade science teacher had a boa constrictor and decided to show us a feeding one day. He put the snake on one side of a walled off area and a mouse on the other side. The mouse calmly walked up to the snake and sniffed its nose. One blink later (literally, it was that fast), the snake was coiled around the mouse with its mouth over the mouse's head. The mouse tried struggling for a few seconds but quickly went limp.
I honestly don't think there would be enough time for regret if a boa wrapped around you like that. Your mind would be too clouded by panic, pain, and oxygen deprivation to even allow something like regret to enter.
The problem I have with the "fast lanes" are that most ISPs are monopolies or duopolies in their areas. They already have little incentive to innovate. After all, what are you going to do? Go without Internet? Of course not, so keep those monthly checks coming for as much as the ISPs demand.
Given the monopoly/duopoly fact, what is preventing ISPs from turning "fast lane/faster lane" into "slow, congested lane/fast, big money lane"? What's preventing them from ignoring any speed increases to the normal traffic that doesn't pay them for special treatment while they make sure that the companies that pay them get super-high speed access? And will there be exclusive deals? If Amazon signs up with Time Warner Cable in my area as the exclusive Internet video provider (besides TWC's offerings and by doing so paying much more than normal "fast lane" access, of course), what would this mean if I wanted to use Netflix? Would I need to move to a different town just to use Netflix?
The answer is that nothing is preventing them from doing this. If it makes them money, they'll do it. Speeding up the normal Internet won't make them money so that will be left to languish. If ISPs get their way, any website worth visiting will need to pay every ISP fast-lane acess fees. This would make operating your own website prohibitively expensive so only the big companies would be able to do it. And thus, corporate status quo will be maintained.
Please ignore my previous post. I had multiple Slashdot windows open and posted this in the wrong article. (This is what happens when you mix exhaustion and posting.)
The best discoveries in science come when someone looks at something and says "that's not right..."
I just got a new laptop replacing one with a majorly glitchy screen. (The old laptop's screen image jumps all over the place and gives me a headache. Probably a bad cable in the laptop's monitor since external monitors work and it wasn't the cable's connection to the laptop itself.) The first thing I did when I booted it up was to load Internet Explorer and install ClassicShell as many people here recommended. (The second thing I did was to install a better browser than IE.)
It's a little bit of both. Gerrymandering helps out, but if the big donations went to their opponent, the opponent could spend more on their election campaign and get enough votes to kick the incumbent out of office. However, with just the big donations, the people in a district might be more evenly split between Democrat and Republican and thus be more likely to change sides depending on who is running. (For the simplicity, I'm ignoring third parties here which most people - for better or worse - tend to skip over as they vote D/R. That's a different issue entirely.) In addition, the big donations, nice trips, and promises of cushy jobs when they "retire" from Congress help get the lobbyist legislation pushed through.
Recently, there was an article that described blue eyes as the result of a genetic mutation. So I'm the world's most boring mutant: Blue Eyed Guy. I have the powers of having blue eyes. All the time. I thought being a mutant would be more exciting than this.
I've long wished that the "GOP crazies" would split off from the Republican party and form their own party so we could ignore them and the Republicans could be a viable voting option again. Now, though, I think it would be easier if the "old-school, sane GOP" split off from the Republican party. Let the Republican party sink into history and make this new party a major political force. Would it be perfect? Of course not. But I'd be a lot more willing to vote Republican without the pro-religion, anti-science, pro-big-business, anti-little-guy, anti-progress attitude that the "GOP crazies" seem to want to enforce.
Unfortunately, the politicians in power can redraw the voting district lines to help prevent the opposing party from being able to overtake the incumbents.
Not that the major opposing party is much better. All too often voting (for one of the major parties, putting third party candidates aside for the moment) seems like a choice between bad and worse.
Or when they introduce legislation that has been completely written by the lobbyists who donate big sums of money to their campaign, treat them to "fact finding trips" to luxury resorts, and the like. Because nothing says "of the people, by the people" like having a giant corporation treat some Senators to a trip on a yacht so that they can push for a bill that the giant corporation has completely written to become law.
The patent examiners are approving patents figuring that the courts will sort it all out. And the courts just assume by default that the patent examiners did their job and reviewed the patent. The end result is patents that shouldn't have been granted being held up in court or requiring lengthy, expensive litigation to get invalidated. I completely agree that there needs to be some accountability in these patent applications. If one of your patent applications is overturned by the courts, you go on probation for two years. If, while on probation, another patent you approved is overturned, you are fired. Furthermore, if you go on probation three times, you are fired. Maybe this would make the patent examiners think a bit more before approving patents.
Let's assume that the government would be breaking the law by NSLing the signing keys. (As opposed to the law being so mucked up that such an action is entirely legal.)
1) What lawyer is going to be able to fight this battle against the US Government and win? Let me narrow that list down a bit. What lawyer that the TrueCrypt developers would hire would be able to fight this battle against the US Government and win?
2) Would the TrueCrypt developers even be allowed to see a trial or would they be arrested on "unrelated" charges and sent to prison? Or worse. (There is plenty that a power hungry governmental agency can do to someone that says "no" to them that makes "being arrested on unrelated charges" preferable.)
They're very effective. To paraphrase Futurama:
Documentary Narrator: Fortunately, our most expensive lawyers sued the security researchers and shut them up. Of course, the security holes are still there, we just sue anyone who talks about them. Thus solving the problem once and for all.
Suzie: But...
Documentary Narrator: Once and for all!
Sadly, too many companies don't see this as a joke, but as a valid security vulnerability response strategy.
It might not infringe, but if he filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against you - presumably in a district where you would need to travel a great distance to attend the court sessions - for selling "I love pi." shirts, would you spend the time and money to fight the lawsuit or just stop selling the shirts?
Most people would just stop selling the shirts as the revenue from the shirts would be less than the cost of fighting the lawsuit.