was the CD *designed* to destroy firmware? In fact, how on earth can it DO that?
Bad design on the part of the mac.. that's how.
Let's not put the blame in the wrong place. Copy protected CDs are one thing.. but a mac going braindead because it can't work with the CD? Rediculous.
Yeah.. this is something that few would care about really. An amusement, notyhing more.
Like.. that old Information Society track that was just one side of a 300bps modem transmission. Most people would skip it, after all, it's not pleasant to listen too.. and a few diehards would rig up a 1:1 transformer (or forgo the transformer) and run this thing through a modem, and see what it actually said.
Stard sending small monetary donations to the artists you like, along with a letter explaining how you like digital music online, it's so convenient, etc.., but how you don't want to rip off the artists. Also explain that rather than buy the music in the store, where the record company keeps most of hte cash, you would rather just send them some directly. THey get more fromj you than they would through the record company, and you aren't participating in a business model you don't like.
At least they won't be able to say you are ripping off the artist. You are just ripping off the recording industry.
Without the MS monopoly on browsers, it would have had even LESS chance of success.
As much as I'd like to see something besides DNS used to locate websites... because I think there should be no more new TLD's, and the system should be left as-is, to force the world to come up with a better way... realnames wasn't that solution.
Most likely the carrier, but only because their insurance company insists on it. If they don't take standard measures, their insurance company will not pay for the damages.
It's not hard to tip over a 900 pound full height rack, especially in a truck, *especially* if it's at all top heavy.
WEll.. The drawings are Copyright the architect. The copies of the drawings given to the person who hired them state specifically what they are allowed to be used for, and that they may not be reproduced or used in any other construction project.
My point was that the things a contractor does on the way to delivering his product are not necessarily owned by the ones who hired him... as you say, the devil is in the details.
If they hired him to simply produce a result, then that's one thing. If they hired him to actually do so many hours of programming for them, that's another.
Are they paying for him to deliver a solution, or are they paying him specifically to develop code for them. There is a difference.
If they are paying the hourly cost of development, then it is absurd, even rude, to expect them to let you keep the copyright.
On the other hand, if they are simply paying you a flat fee for a solution, and it is up to you how you attain that solution, then it's another story. You can write the code and license it to them and keep it yourself.
For instance.. construction. Often when you hire someone to come in and renovate your building, they do up blueprints of the finished design.
Generally they own these prints, not you. Sure, you were paying them along the way, but that was for labor and a result, not everything in between.
Just the same, if you pay me to write you some software, you do not own everything I think about in the meantime by default.
The terms of who owns what IP has to be set out in the contract, otherwise it's far too ambiguous.
If a company comes to you with a deisgn and they just want someone to implement, odds are they aren't going to let you keep the copyright. On the other hand, if they are merely paying you to deliver a solution, then copyright can stay with you.
Before anyone whines too much about their poor speed limits.
I live in Costa Rica.
I have a cable modem.
I have a 128/32 connection. IT costs me about $80/month. The ISP uses NAT. At that, it's bad NAT.. I can't even do pptp over it.
And I'm happy to have it.
Sure, I could (and probably would) hack my com21 modem if I find a way, to try it... but only because I don't forsee any reprecussions. I doubt they would notice.
But really. Is hacking your cable modem legit? Well.. a) If you own it and b) The speed caps are not in your service contract.. then *maybe* there is some grey area in there for you. In general though.. be glad they simply cut you off and not prosecute you for theft of service.
would you compare bochs to the others? Virtual PC & VMWare are virtualizers.. not strict emulators. Bochs is a true emulator. There is a whopping huge difference when it comes to performance. (Bochs will be more accurate, but never come close to the performance of the others)
Look. Just because something happened does not mean it was the ONLY way it could have happened.
Yes, initially, linux distributions used a lot of gnu code. They still do.. but it makes up only a fractional portion of the whole distribution.
Nobody is trying to write him out of the history.. the thing is he tries too hard to crusade for the stupid name GNU/Linux. He didn't write Linux. He didnt'make the distribution. He's *always* had recognition for the huge contribution he makes to things.. he has a position of great respect. I have seen that go nowhere but DOWNHILL with all these antics. Granted, my opinion on the matter means jack shit.
If the GNU project had not existed, something else would have been used instead, probably the bsd tools.. they were also easily and freely available.
Again.. if they weren't a monopoly, it would be a non-issue. Could you imagine an embedded systems OS company refusing to reveal their APIs? I mean, the API *IS* the product.
The DNS system was not designed with the current market for domains in mind. It was designed to give us a technically elegant way to put a name to an ip address. It was not meant to be a universal lookup service for the WWW.
But it is. And we're stuck with it. People don't change that fast.
I personally believe the biggest mistake was bringing out more TLD's. What we really needed was to let the current domain pool run until no useful domains are left and let the world come up with a better way to organize it's data.
I support completely your right to filter out what you want. Absolutely. I also support the right of lists like spews to exist.
My problem is just that we *can't* pressure ICE/RACSA. There is no competition. There is no way to financially impact them. They don't WANT our money. They have as much business as they can handle already.
Believe me, if we had a choice, many businesses here would go with someone who does not support spam. We would gladly shop with our dollars, and put pressure on the company.
But with a government enforced monopoly that is *absolute*, there's basically fuck all we can do to pressure them.
It's your server, your rules. Feel free to block the entire country.
And my ISP is not RACSA. It's ICE. (ICE is the telco, RACSA is the domestic ISP., We get our bandwidth from ICE directly)
for an armchair activist like yourself to say this, but reality is quite a bit different.
You might think it's so simple, but I guarantee you have no idea what things are really like.
The ISP has no motivation to change; they are a monopoly. They get the business regardless of what they do or do not do. The ISP is the national carrier. You can't set up a second ISP, you can't get bandwidth from somewhere else.
OH! Wait! LEt me get this straight.
By your logic.... Why aren't France Telecom and alter.net on the list? After all, they sell us the bandwidth. Why? Because they are main carriers.
This is not like an ISP being blacklisted.. this is like an entire national carrier being blacklisted.
Is it UUNET's responsibility to filer spam? No, it's not. They may have some policies.. but you would not block UUNET because they sell bandwidth to ISPs who are spammers.
I say this because it isn't the first time 2 viruses have bonded together. I recall many moons ago when a couple other viruses got together. Viruses usually employ a mechanism to detect if a file is already infected, so they don't keep adding to the size of the file. One used a marker at the beginning of the file to decide if it was infected, one at the end. So the first virus infected the file, the second came along (modifying the beginning as per normal virus behavior, and adding it's marker to the end), then the first came along again and saw the file was not infected so infected it again. THen things stayed the same.
So it would show up as containing virus A, but you could not disinfect it properly, because it would just re-infect as soon as it was run. B wouldn't show up because B was actually a layer down.
On a side note.. the #1 thing that has reduced the number of viruses coming out of my office has been to ban the use of outlook/outlook express.
Again.. I don't accuse spews. Spam is a problem, and everyone is free to decide how to deal with it on their own.
I agree the system works. Unfortunately for anyone doing business in Costa Rica, there IS no competition. You have no choice. None whatsoever, and given the way things work, it's going to take quite a while to actually get changes made.
The other thing is..
This isn't just an ISP in the country.. it's the national (and only) telecom carrier. This is more like UUNET being blacklisted because on some level they sell bandwidth to spammers.
Here's a problem... with no easy way to deal with it.
Over the last few years, the Internet provider for Costa Rica has been targetted by anti-spam types as a spam hoster.
Now.. that's all well and good, but the end result is that
a) The entire country's IP range is on SPEWS b) Internet is a government run monopoly here. c) There is no direct way to be removed from SPEWS. You cannot contact them. You cannot explain your situation. (My situation is that we happen to have some IP addresses in this country, and have trouble reaching our customers because of it. We don't spam.)
Now.. I fully support the fact that the Internet is an anarchy, that each individual is free to decide how their network will or will not accept traffic from others, yada yada yada. On that I am firm.
But when it comes to an ISP.. we have a problem. An ISP that subscribes to this, sure, it's their choice, but it's awfully hard to explain to the client that they have to instruct their ISP to stop using this service. And the odds of the ISP stopping? Not likely.
The point is, in theory, it's all fair, in practice, it's a problem.
once they figure out how to force you legally to use their ink... printer prices will skyrocket too.
Is it just me.. or did it used to be the other way. They would come out with a new model of printer every year and redesign the ink cartridge... the effect being the old ink cartridges would get more and more expensive and harder to find.. forcing you to buy a new printer.
Slashdot Mirror
was the CD *designed* to destroy firmware? In fact, how on earth can it DO that?
Bad design on the part of the mac.. that's how.
Let's not put the blame in the wrong place. Copy protected CDs are one thing.. but a mac going braindead because it can't work with the CD? Rediculous.
Yeah.. this is something that few would care about really. An amusement, notyhing more.
Like.. that old Information Society track that was just one side of a 300bps modem transmission. Most people would skip it, after all, it's not pleasant to listen too.. and a few diehards would rig up a 1:1 transformer (or forgo the transformer) and run this thing through a modem, and see what it actually said.
My new theory on underground music.
Stard sending small monetary donations to the artists you like, along with a letter explaining how you like digital music online, it's so convenient, etc.., but how you don't want to rip off the artists. Also explain that rather than buy the music in the store, where the record company keeps most of hte cash, you would rather just send them some directly. THey get more fromj you than they would through the record company, and you aren't participating in a business model you don't like.
At least they won't be able to say you are ripping off the artist. You are just ripping off the recording industry.
Instead of a new tld..
how about a new record type for websites? A record that includes both an IP address and a port.
That would rock.
Without the MS monopoly on browsers, it would have had even LESS chance of success.
As much as I'd like to see something besides DNS used to locate websites... because I think there should be no more new TLD's, and the system should be left as-is, to force the world to come up with a better way... realnames wasn't that solution.
Most likely the carrier, but only because their insurance company insists on it.
If they don't take standard measures, their insurance company will not pay for the damages.
It's not hard to tip over a 900 pound full height rack, especially in a truck, *especially* if it's at all top heavy.
WEll..
The drawings are Copyright the architect. The copies of the drawings given to the person who hired them state specifically what they are allowed to be used for, and that they may not be reproduced or used in any other construction project.
My point was that the things a contractor does on the way to delivering his product are not necessarily owned by the ones who hired him... as you say, the devil is in the details.
If they hired him to simply produce a result, then that's one thing. If they hired him to actually do so many hours of programming for them, that's another.
Are they paying for him to deliver a solution, or are they paying him specifically to develop code for them. There is a difference.
If they are paying the hourly cost of development, then it is absurd, even rude, to expect them to let you keep the copyright.
On the other hand, if they are simply paying you a flat fee for a solution, and it is up to you how you attain that solution, then it's another story. You can write the code and license it to them and keep it yourself.
Really.
This is fairly common in contracting actually.
IN many kinds of contracting at that.
For instance.. construction. Often when you hire someone to come in and renovate your building, they do up blueprints of the finished design.
Generally they own these prints, not you. Sure, you were paying them along the way, but that was for labor and a result, not everything in between.
Just the same, if you pay me to write you some software, you do not own everything I think about in the meantime by default.
The terms of who owns what IP has to be set out in the contract, otherwise it's far too ambiguous.
If a company comes to you with a deisgn and they just want someone to implement, odds are they aren't going to let you keep the copyright. On the other hand, if they are merely paying you to deliver a solution, then copyright can stay with you.
It really boils down to what they want.
Before anyone whines too much about their poor speed limits.
I live in Costa Rica.
I have a cable modem.
I have a 128/32 connection. IT costs me about $80/month.
The ISP uses NAT.
At that, it's bad NAT.. I can't even do pptp over it.
And I'm happy to have it.
Sure, I could (and probably would) hack my com21 modem if I find a way, to try it... but only because I don't forsee any reprecussions. I doubt they would notice.
But really. Is hacking your cable modem legit?
Well..
a) If you own it and
b) The speed caps are not in your service contract.. then *maybe* there is some grey area in there for you.
In general though.. be glad they simply cut you off and not prosecute you for theft of service.
would you compare bochs to the others?
Virtual PC & VMWare are virtualizers.. not strict emulators.
Bochs is a true emulator.
There is a whopping huge difference when it comes to performance.
(Bochs will be more accurate, but never come close to the performance of the others)
Look. Just because something happened does not mean it was the ONLY way it could have happened.
Yes, initially, linux distributions used a lot of gnu code. They still do.. but it makes up only a fractional portion of the whole distribution.
Nobody is trying to write him out of the history.. the thing is he tries too hard to crusade for the stupid name GNU/Linux. He didn't write Linux. He didnt'make the distribution. He's *always* had recognition for the huge contribution he makes to things.. he has a position of great respect. I have seen that go nowhere but DOWNHILL with all these antics. Granted, my opinion on the matter means jack shit.
If the GNU project had not existed, something else would have been used instead, probably the bsd tools.. they were also easily and freely available.
GNU was an option. nothing more.
Again.. if they weren't a monopoly, it would be a non-issue. Could you imagine an embedded systems OS company refusing to reveal their APIs? I mean, the API *IS* the product.
20 feet is just a practical number I guess. Whether I can see detail past 20 feet isn't as important to daily functioning.
20/10 woudl not mean 'a tiny bit more detail'.. it would mean I can read things twice as far away as I can now.
Things that transmit in the 2.4Ghz ISM band have to follow the rules. It may be unlicensed, but it's not without rules.
Power levels would have to be within tolerance, as would stray EMI from the units, as would a lot of other things.
in the face....
But we'll never find an adequate solution. Why?
The DNS system was not designed with the current market for domains in mind. It was designed to give us a technically elegant way to put a name to an ip address. It was not meant to be a universal lookup service for the WWW.
But it is. And we're stuck with it. People don't change that fast.
I personally believe the biggest mistake was bringing out more TLD's. What we really needed was to let the current domain pool run until no useful domains are left and let the world come up with a better way to organize it's data.
Actually, I'm not, though it may be confused IP-wise with ICE.
I deal with ICE directly.. the national telco.
I am not a racsa customer.
IF you think spews turns this into a big lan.. you are sadly mistaken. It has an effect, yes, but only a minor one overall (currently)
Did you not read what I said?
I support completely your right to filter out what you want. Absolutely. I also support the right of lists like spews to exist.
My problem is just that we *can't* pressure ICE/RACSA. There is no competition. There is no way to financially impact them. They don't WANT our money. They have as much business as they can handle already.
Believe me, if we had a choice, many businesses here would go with someone who does not support spam. We would gladly shop with our dollars, and put pressure on the company.
But with a government enforced monopoly that is *absolute*, there's basically fuck all we can do to pressure them.
It's your server, your rules. Feel free to block the entire country.
And my ISP is not RACSA. It's ICE. (ICE is the telco, RACSA is the domestic ISP., We get our bandwidth from ICE directly)
for an armchair activist like yourself to say this, but reality is quite a bit different.
You might think it's so simple, but I guarantee you have no idea what things are really like.
The ISP has no motivation to change; they are a monopoly. They get the business regardless of what they do or do not do. The ISP is the national carrier. You can't set up a second ISP, you can't get bandwidth from somewhere else.
OH! Wait! LEt me get this straight.
By your logic....
Why aren't France Telecom and alter.net on the list? After all, they sell us the bandwidth. Why? Because they are main carriers.
This is not like an ISP being blacklisted.. this is like an entire national carrier being blacklisted.
SOrry, no. They are also a national carrier.
Is it UUNET's responsibility to filer spam? No, it's not. They may have some policies.. but you would not block UUNET because they sell bandwidth to ISPs who are spammers.
that Eudora is not user friendly or windows based?
We switched the whole company to Eudora for this very reason. It's good, yet somewhat obscure now and virus writers don't target it.
It's also much better at dealing with attachments, and doesn't corrupt mailboxes as often. It's easy to store years worth of mail in eudora.
Eudora.
Netscape communicator's mail client seems popular as well.
I say this because it isn't the first time 2 viruses have bonded together. I recall many moons ago when a couple other viruses got together.
Viruses usually employ a mechanism to detect if a file is already infected, so they don't keep adding to the size of the file. One used a marker at the beginning of the file to decide if it was infected, one at the end. So the first virus infected the file, the second came along (modifying the beginning as per normal virus behavior, and adding it's marker to the end), then the first came along again and saw the file was not infected so infected it again. THen things stayed the same.
So it would show up as containing virus A, but you could not disinfect it properly, because it would just re-infect as soon as it was run. B wouldn't show up because B was actually a layer down.
On a side note.. the #1 thing that has reduced the number of viruses coming out of my office has been to ban the use of outlook/outlook express.
Again.. I don't accuse spews. Spam is a problem, and everyone is free to decide how to deal with it on their own.
I agree the system works. Unfortunately for anyone doing business in Costa Rica, there IS no competition. You have no choice. None whatsoever, and given the way things work, it's going to take quite a while to actually get changes made.
The other thing is..
This isn't just an ISP in the country.. it's the national (and only) telecom carrier. This is more like UUNET being blacklisted because on some level they sell bandwidth to spammers.
Here's a problem... with no easy way to deal with it.
Over the last few years, the Internet provider for Costa Rica has been targetted by anti-spam types as a spam hoster.
Now.. that's all well and good, but the end result is that
a) The entire country's IP range is on SPEWS
b) Internet is a government run monopoly here.
c) There is no direct way to be removed from SPEWS. You cannot contact them. You cannot explain your situation. (My situation is that we happen to have some IP addresses in this country, and have trouble reaching our customers because of it. We don't spam.)
Now.. I fully support the fact that the Internet is an anarchy, that each individual is free to decide how their network will or will not accept traffic from others, yada yada yada. On that I am firm.
But when it comes to an ISP.. we have a problem. An ISP that subscribes to this, sure, it's their choice, but it's awfully hard to explain to the client that they have to instruct their ISP to stop using this service. And the odds of the ISP stopping? Not likely.
The point is, in theory, it's all fair, in practice, it's a problem.
once they figure out how to force you legally to use their ink... printer prices will skyrocket too.
Is it just me.. or did it used to be the other way. They would come out with a new model of printer every year and redesign the ink cartridge... the effect being the old ink cartridges would get more and more expensive and harder to find.. forcing you to buy a new printer.