It's not banner ads on the internet that are bad. In the case of your site, nobody disputes it. The difference between what you do and what AOL does is huge though. You do not charge me money to see your site.
AOL *does* charge money to use their service. Why should I have to pay to watch ads?
Yes, but the question is whether or not the code can be 'UN-GPLed'. Nobody disputes the author's right to redistribution under whatever terms he wants, as often as he wants.... but he cannot revoke his initial GPL on his code. Of course, he can simply take it off his project website.. though nothing would prevent anyone with GPL'd versions from continuing.
Right.. but this has nothing to do with open -vs- closed. Nothing is stopping a company from making 'Secure Linux' and rigorously applying compliance tests for each new release.
It has absolutely nothing to do with whether something is 'open' or not, it simply has to do with packaging.
They are mixing up the development model with the final product.
Can "Linux" be trusted? What do you mean by "Linux"?
If you mean a particular kernel version, as released by Linus... there you have it. Can you trust it? depends on your criteria. Do you *need* to trust it, or can you simply take a certain version and stick with it?
Linux is more about a process than the technology.. open source is about lots of developers working together in a scientific (as opposed to market driven) way to produce better code and better software.
Yeah.. but a single xml tag around the whole config file and their own proprietary binary data inside means that they really can use any of the tactics they used to, and nothing changes at all.
They use the word because it makes them sound 'friendly'.
Just nit picking.. but wouldn't 'interstate commerce' be commerce between different states, and 'intrastate commerce' be commerce solely within one state?
It was because England was taxing the colonies, but the colonies viewed this as one way. They were essentially self-sufficient.. why should they pay taxes to the motherland? This is far different than us paying taxes to collectively build schools, roads, and an army...
I agree.. they have done this.. it's awful. After reading further.. it seems what they are saying is this:
certain ISPs and other companie shave 'premier' agreemetns with NSI, in that they can register domains on behalf of their own clients *without paying nsi immediately*. (you or I can no longer do this.. we must pay immediately). By contractual obligation, these companies *MUST* pay NSI for domains registered, whether their own clients back out or not. So.. generally, at an ISP doing this in volume, many people (enough, anyway) will bail out and leave the ISP hanging with an obligation to pay NSI for the domain (as per contract) and no client to collect from. So, until the payment is resolved, the domain is *technically* registered.... NSI is saying that now, rather than simpliy *having* to pay NSI for the defaulted domain, they may choose to have NSI auction it off, whereby NSI will collect fees 'up to the amount owed' and then the rest would go to.. they don't say.. presumably, to the ISP in question. This actually does make sense in context..
Except.. you can't do this anymore. Netsol, and other registrants, according to icann guidelines, require immediate payment (ie: visa or prepaid account) in order to register a domain. You can't do this anymore.
I'm confused. Payment received from the auciton 'up to the full amount of the registration fee' will be kept by network solutions.. does that mean that excess money will be handed to the domain registrant?
They are saying that in order to be auctioned, someone must a) register a domain and b) Not pay for it after several notices.
In effect, netsol has performed a 'service' for them, and have yet to be paid.
I think it's sleazy, and the real answer should simply be to delete the domain immediately upon non-payment, and allow it to be re-registered by someone else, as technically, the contract is void.
Let me get this straight. Somehow, a domain that is not renewed is in a 'special' state that may be auctioned? Give me a break. If it isn't paid for, then it's not registered. If it's not registered, then nobody should be able to 'auction' it without registering it first. And I belive netsol should not be allowed to do this.
I dunno about you, but I do know basic. real basic.
And Visual Basic is not anywhere close to what real basic looks like. (not that I'm comparing them.. visual basic is far more powerful than basic). There is very little resemblance these days. Very little. So 'knowing' basic won't help you get anywhere in visual basic methinks.
The moratorium on Internet Taxes does *NOT* mean that any transactions over the internet are free of all taxes.
It simply means that there would be no federal taxes on internet transactions, and they would not be considered until the moratorium had ended. This is to ensure (and it's smart) that the internet can grow and become something without having taxes impede it. WHen it stabilizes, the government(s) will make a decision.
As for state taxes, it would be absolutely correct to assume that everything is as normal, just as if it was phone-in or mail-order, or people coming in in person. If it is an in-state sale, it doesn't matter if it's over the internet, or snail-mail, or phone, or in person.. you *must* pay sales tax. And if you thought otherwise, where is your accountant through all this?
Well... although this might sound like flamebait.. there is another way you perhaps would rather have it.
If government were to collect no taxes, (it has happened before), they would instead print more money as they needed it. THEY WOULD. The current US ecomonic system does not function this way, but in other countries, it has happened.
It's called taxation through inflation. So.. instead of collecting what they think they need directly from you, they just devalue what you have and add to their own wealth. It amounts to the same thing, only more sneaky.
So the real answer is not to abolish taxes, but to make it so that we know how and where our money is spent, and not let it get out of control.
My understanding of the moratorium is not so much that all purchases happening over the internet are exempt, but merely that no state may pass a law that specifically taxes 'internet' sales. If you are in a state that has sales tax, selling to others in that state, it doesn't matter how you sold the items... you do owe state sales tax. I don't see how anyone could think you don't have to pay just because it's on the net.
At every ISP I have worked at (chief sysadmin), the only way we would release a username was a) Police investigation (not necessarily a court order) b) When we had enough facts surrounding the case that we felt comfortable giving the information to the asking party. This is extremely *extremely* rare. Usually, it involved someone we actually knew, or someone running a neighboring ISP, and we were both trying to track down an abuser or something. In this case, we would share information. If joe Musician called up and asked us for this information, we would simply tell him that he needs a court order in order to do this.
Makes perfect sense to me.. I mean, when you do a file transfer, it happens peer-peer, so you do know who the other party is (or at least, their IP). In fact.. as soon as search results are returned, those results contain the IP address of the host holding the data, no?
So... the only thing anonymous about gnutella is that searches are anonymous until you actually download something.
But really.. the whole point of gnutella wasn't that it was 'anonymous', but that it is decentralized. There is simply no easy way to 'stop' people from using gnutella. we can switch ports easily.. it really doeos need randomized ports....
Now.. personally, I would think that putting up material to be downloaded in order to finger people would ammount to entrapment, as you are basically going somewhere where you *KNOW* that people are tempted to download software, and put up software they might want...
"economics" is not a natural things, it is an artificial thing that we impose upon ourselves in order to allow our society to function according to a certain ideology. Same with capitalism. It is just an ideology.
So.. when it comes to privacy, YES, we should regulate who can give what kind of info to whom. Commerce IS regulated, even in the goldl O'l US of A. Hey. what abou the Federal Reserve and it's interest rate changes? How dare they change this! (but hey.. it's not federal and not a reserve..)
What you can do with your knowledge? no.. but the law CAN and SHOULD guarantee consumers certain rights with regards to commerce, as it already does. Things like: personal information collected to complete a transaction shall not be sold or otherwise given away or used for any purpose other than to do the transaction in question unless specifically agreed to by the person giving such information.
In other words, businesses can amass whatever kinds of databases they want abou tyou.. they just have to ask you for your permission first.
It's not about the internet. It's about commerce and privacy.
Europe has laws that prevent your personal information (ie: what you bought with your visa and when, etc) from becoming a comoddity unto itself, bought and sold by companies. In other words, Visa is allowed to know this, but only so they can bill you. They can't sell it. Same for any other vendor.
This is important in online transactions moreso than with meatspace transactions because, in meatspace, in a great many cases, nobody needs to know your name or where you live to sell you something, wheras with online purchases, they indeed to in order to collect payment and/or deliver goods.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not banner ads on the internet that are bad. In the case of your site, nobody disputes it.
The difference between what you do and what AOL does is huge though.
You do not charge me money to see your site.
AOL *does* charge money to use their service.
Why should I have to pay to watch ads?
Yes, but the question is whether or not the code can be 'UN-GPLed'.
Nobody disputes the author's right to redistribution under whatever terms he wants, as often as he wants.... but he cannot revoke his initial GPL on his code.
Of course, he can simply take it off his project website.. though nothing would prevent anyone with GPL'd versions from continuing.
Compared to LSL (or was it SLS?) and MCC, slackware was much more solid.
Yes.. everything had to be done by hand.
So.. slackware was where you really learned what went where, and that anything can really go anywhere. You had to get really familiar with it.
Now, of course, once you know such things.. why on earth you would go back to slack is beyond me..
Right.. but this has nothing to do with open -vs- closed.
Nothing is stopping a company from making 'Secure Linux' and rigorously applying compliance tests for each new release.
It has absolutely nothing to do with whether something is 'open' or not, it simply has to do with packaging.
They are mixing up the development model with the final product.
Can "Linux" be trusted? What do you mean by "Linux"?
If you mean a particular kernel version, as released by Linus... there you have it. Can you trust it? depends on your criteria. Do you *need* to trust it, or can you simply take a certain version and stick with it?
Linux is more about a process than the technology.. open source is about lots of developers working together in a scientific (as opposed to market driven) way to produce better code and better software.
Yeah.. but a single xml tag around the whole config file and their own proprietary binary data inside means that they really can use any of the tactics they used to, and nothing changes at all.
They use the word because it makes them sound 'friendly'.
Just nit picking.. but wouldn't 'interstate commerce' be commerce between different states, and 'intrastate commerce' be commerce solely within one state?
(think.. intravenous injection... international.....)...
Uhh.. correct me if I'm wrong.. but if you
a) live in PA
b) buy jewelry in PA
but
c) have it shipped elsewhere so the store doesn't charge you tax...
isn't that what they call the federal crime of 'tax evasion', and isn't it punishible by prison time?
Nix.
It was not simply 'because of taxes'.
It was because England was taxing the colonies, but the colonies viewed this as one way. They were essentially self-sufficient.. why should they pay taxes to the motherland?
This is far different than us paying taxes to collectively build schools, roads, and an army...
I agree.. they have done this.. it's awful. After reading further.. it seems what they are saying is this:
.. they don't say.. presumably, to the ISP in question. ..
certain ISPs and other companie shave 'premier' agreemetns with NSI, in that they can register domains on behalf of their own clients *without paying nsi immediately*. (you or I can no longer do this.. we must pay immediately).
By contractual obligation, these companies *MUST* pay NSI for domains registered, whether their own clients back out or not. So.. generally, at an ISP doing this in volume, many people (enough, anyway) will bail out and leave the ISP hanging with an obligation to pay NSI for the domain (as per contract) and no client to collect from. So, until the payment is resolved, the domain is *technically* registered....
NSI is saying that now, rather than simpliy *having* to pay NSI for the defaulted domain, they may choose to have NSI auction it off, whereby NSI will collect fees 'up to the amount owed' and then the rest would go to
This actually does make sense in context
Except.. you can't do this anymore.
Netsol, and other registrants, according to icann guidelines, require immediate payment (ie: visa or prepaid account) in order to register a domain. You can't do this anymore.
I'm confused.
Payment received from the auciton 'up to the full amount of the registration fee' will be kept by network solutions.. does that mean that excess money will be handed to the domain registrant?
They are saying that in order to be auctioned, someone must
a) register a domain
and
b) Not pay for it after several notices.
In effect, netsol has performed a 'service' for them, and have yet to be paid.
I think it's sleazy, and the real answer should simply be to delete the domain immediately upon non-payment, and allow it to be re-registered by someone else, as technically, the contract is void.
Let me get this straight. Somehow, a domain that is not renewed is in a 'special' state that may be auctioned? Give me a break.
If it isn't paid for, then it's not registered. If it's not registered, then nobody should be able to 'auction' it without registering it first. And I belive netsol should not be allowed to do this.
To every commercial site, eh? who decided that?
Hmm. I run commercial sites.. and we aren't planning on 'requiring' this kind of information.. I wonder who they've been talking to..
I dunno about you, but I do know basic. real basic.
And Visual Basic is not anywhere close to what real basic looks like. (not that I'm comparing them.. visual basic is far more powerful than basic).
There is very little resemblance these days. Very little. So 'knowing' basic won't help you get anywhere in visual basic methinks.
So it's designed to run on a completely cross-platform VM, and they will openly license it to anyone, for free? Cool! Way to innovate!
SOmehow.. I doubt it..
The issue here is very simple.
The moratorium on Internet Taxes does *NOT* mean that any transactions over the internet are free of all taxes.
It simply means that there would be no federal taxes on internet transactions, and they would not be considered until the moratorium had ended. This is to ensure (and it's smart) that the internet can grow and become something without having taxes impede it. WHen it stabilizes, the government(s) will make a decision.
As for state taxes, it would be absolutely correct to assume that everything is as normal, just as if it was phone-in or mail-order, or people coming in in person.
If it is an in-state sale, it doesn't matter if it's over the internet, or snail-mail, or phone, or in person.. you *must* pay sales tax.
And if you thought otherwise, where is your accountant through all this?
Well... although this might sound like flamebait.. there is another way you perhaps would rather have it.
If government were to collect no taxes, (it has happened before), they would instead print more money as they needed it. THEY WOULD. The current US ecomonic system does not function this way, but in other countries, it has happened.
It's called taxation through inflation. So.. instead of collecting what they think they need directly from you, they just devalue what you have and add to their own wealth. It amounts to the same thing, only more sneaky.
So the real answer is not to abolish taxes, but to make it so that we know how and where our money is spent, and not let it get out of control.
My understanding of the moratorium is not so much that all purchases happening over the internet are exempt, but merely that no state may pass a law that specifically taxes 'internet' sales. If you are in a state that has sales tax, selling to others in that state, it doesn't matter how you sold the items... you do owe state sales tax. I don't see how anyone could think you don't have to pay just because it's on the net.
At every ISP I have worked at (chief sysadmin), the only way we would release a username was a) Police investigation (not necessarily a court order) b) When we had enough facts surrounding the case that we felt comfortable giving the information to the asking party. This is extremely *extremely* rare. Usually, it involved someone we actually knew, or someone running a neighboring ISP, and we were both trying to track down an abuser or something. In this case, we would share information. If joe Musician called up and asked us for this information, we would simply tell him that he needs a court order in order to do this.
Makes perfect sense to me.. I mean, when you do a file transfer, it happens peer-peer, so you do know who the other party is (or at least, their IP).
In fact.. as soon as search results are returned, those results contain the IP address of the host holding the data, no?
So... the only thing anonymous about gnutella is that searches are anonymous until you actually download something.
But really.. the whole point of gnutella wasn't that it was 'anonymous', but that it is decentralized. There is simply no easy way to 'stop' people from using gnutella. we can switch ports easily.. it really doeos need randomized ports....
Now.. personally, I would think that putting up material to be downloaded in order to finger people would ammount to entrapment, as you are basically going somewhere where you *KNOW* that people are tempted to download software, and put up software they might want...
I mean.. wow. No matter how big the film is.. it's not really a 'film' if it was on the web first. Hmm.
"economics" is not a natural things, it is an artificial thing that we impose upon ourselves in order to allow our society to function according to a certain ideology.
Same with capitalism. It is just an ideology.
So.. when it comes to privacy, YES, we should regulate who can give what kind of info to whom. Commerce IS regulated, even in the goldl O'l US of A. Hey. what abou the Federal Reserve and it's interest rate changes? How dare they change this!
(but hey.. it's not federal and not a reserve..)
What you can do with your knowledge? no.. but the law CAN and SHOULD guarantee consumers certain rights with regards to commerce, as it already does.
Things like: personal information collected to complete a transaction shall not be sold or otherwise given away or used for any purpose other than to do the transaction in question unless specifically agreed to by the person giving such information.
In other words, businesses can amass whatever kinds of databases they want abou tyou.. they just have to ask you for your permission first.
It's not about the internet. It's about commerce and privacy.
Europe has laws that prevent your personal information (ie: what you bought with your visa and when, etc) from becoming a comoddity unto itself, bought and sold by companies.
In other words, Visa is allowed to know this, but only so they can bill you. They can't sell it. Same for any other vendor.
This is important in online transactions moreso than with meatspace transactions because, in meatspace, in a great many cases, nobody needs to know your name or where you live to sell you something, wheras with online purchases, they indeed to in order to collect payment and/or deliver goods.
NOw.. what about a ppc version of halo? I bet they scrap it. Perhaps not, seeing as how it's done..but....
SO much for hoping for a port anywhere else.