Actually... bans on spam rarely went beyond the 2nd level provider. Major backbones were not in a position to ban spam, as far as I know. They charged by the byte, and were dealing with lots of money. To this day, you still can't complain to MCI because some 3rd level provider beneath them is spamming. They don't care.
Generally, first level providers care (your ISP), and second levels MIGHT care (large ISP)...
Hosting overseas, say, on an island that doesn't recognize US law may not help you at all.
If you live in the US, and you are the owner of a web site, it really doesn't matter where you host it. If you are making the stuff available to Americans, and you yourself are in America, you are accountable for your actions under american law. Perhaps the US courts can not force the overseas provider to yank the page, but they can force YOU to yank the page (or go to prison for violating a court order)
Think tax evasion. You start up an offshore company to keep your holdings. A very *VERY* important part of this process is making sure that the offshore company can *NOT* be tied back to you!
Recall, it's not the potato that does the powering.. the potato only acts as an electrolyte. It's the copper/zinc electrodes that are really used up, and their size (as well as how good the electrolyte is) determines how much current can be drawn.
So.. a piece of paper soaked in vinegar could work as well as a potato... if not much better.
This is very normal.. it's as good as anywhere else, and is a convenient place to put a boot rom. It doesn't have anything directly to do with the network card per-se, only that the card provides memory addressing and a socket for a rom.
If the motherboard had a boot rom socket, they could use that...
Actually, with the flywheel, you can simply power things through the flywheel, as opposed to 'switching'. (same as UPS theory). Especially given the theoretical longevity of the flywheel. Power the huge underground flywheel, and the flywheel powers your city. Feed power to flywheel disappears, flywheel keeps going until it expends all it's stored energy.
Unfortunately, it's not criminal... nobody who discovers something is obliged to share it. If your tax dolars fund the military, who funds research, who develops cold fusion for powering weapons (like subs and planes).. they aren't obliged to share it with you. Nope. Not at all. It would be against 'national security' to do so.
In the corporate world, this is what patents were supposed to be about... so people would be encouraged to share.
An old sci-fi book I found by accident... I can't even remember the author (though I did recognize it) or the name. (very useful information, I know..) One of the concepts in this book, however, was the idea of using a (sci-fi) kerr-newman black hole as an extremely massive flywheel. The (sci-fi) theory is that a kerr-neuman black hole is basically a very tiny black hole (event horizon of perhaps 200 meters or so.. something human manageable) that is electrically charged. It is also spinning, rapidly. Remember, a black hole this size STILL weighs an unimaginable ammount. So they built these huge shielding chambers, they'd put a black hole in side it (it's got an electric charge.. they can move them around using this...), and it sits in there and spins. Fast. By feeding energy into the chamber, they can spin it faster, and by tapping the Electric field (generator?) they can take power, causing it to slow. The deal was, though, that one of these jobs, even without replenishing hte power, could, once charged (and they were naturally charged when found) could hold enough energy to power cities (or planets) for years.
Coriolis Effect is not directly related to gyroscopic properties.
Coriolis Effect (not force) simply describes the behavior of objectsin freefall when the reference point is fixed to a spinning surface.
Say.. you were on one of those sci-fi 'spinning' space stations, standing on the inside of a ring, (you know... simulated gravity). It feels like gravity.. but if you were to jump up in the air, you would find the station would spin out from under your feet, and you would not land in the same place you jumped from. If you went to pour a drink cocktail-style, you'd find you have to angle things differently, as anything dropped will follow an arc away from the direction of spin, not straight down.
And gyroscopic forces simply need to be balanced. If you had two wheels on a typical demonstration gyroscope, spinning in opposite directions at the same rate, the gyroscopic effects completely disappear.
RFC does not *exactly* mean something is a standard. It's just that, usually, software is derived from the RFC (or vice-versa) and it becomes an unofficial standard. Take IPv4. You could read the rfc that specifies IPv4 and find several things that are not implemented, and will never be implemented in the Internet today (or any private IP network, for that matter). Some fields that were never really used in IPv4 (TOS, for one..) are now being used in an unrelated manner to do QOS... it's great, it's innovative, i'ts a re-use...
And lots of rfc's are never used for anything....
So rather, we can summarize how things work in the world today by referencing a bunch of rfc's.
Changing the kerberos spec by producing a new RFC... nothing stops MS from saying that they have implemented kerberos. Still.. why not fix it.
I tend to disagree. A breakup as suggested WILL set things right.
Sure, the OS company can extend standards all they want. So can the apps company. But they can't do it together. If the OS company wants new features in the OS, to tie in with applications, it *MUST* publish them publicly. If the APPS company wants to make a new version of office.. they are doing it solely because they think people will buy a new office suite.
Remember, at the heart of all of MS's dominating power is the fact that they leverage their OS and their Apps against each other wherever convenient. ie: Subtle breaks in compatability to force poeple to upgrade. Keep office on one platform in order to keep people from moving to another platform. So.. people use windows because of office.. and office because everyone uses office.
Spend your money on the damn content. We don't NEED more tld's. We don't even NEED more 2lds..... get working on new directory services for the web, start enforcing DNS registration policies, get.com,.net, and.org back to what they are supposed to be, and everyone else, get your ass back to work on CONTENT and FUNCTION. How will having a cool domain suddenly make the content of your site worth something? It won't..
What do you mean, 'corrup' the root servers? How did the guy from alternic do this? Did he actually have access to modify zones in the root servers? You simply cannot do this, it's not possible. As for this guy... if he wants to create his own tld.. that's just fine. It has no effect unless the root servers dig it... and they don't.
When Joe Smith goes to the store to buy a DVD, he's buying a movie. He sees these laws as 'fair'. His percetion is that, as long as he can watch his movies freely, he doesn't care.
When I go to buy a DVD, as I am more informed, I know that I am buying a plastic disc with digitally encoded & encrypted media on it. I know the basiscs of the laser mechanism that reads the disc, and I know how the data is encrypted. In other words, the 'creative work' that *I* am purchasing is very different than what Joe Smith is purchasing. I am not 'circumventing' a mechanism. I am just disassembling a work that I already purchased the right to 'use'.
Same disc, but different things to different people.
Just some thoughts on implied contracts. I was thinking about why software/music/blah blah is so confusing.. why isn't this legal ground already covered.. and here's why.
When Joe Smith walks into a store and buys a pack of twinkies, he grabs the twinkies off the shelf, pays the clerk, and eats his twinkies. There is an implied contract here, namely, the transfer of ownership of the twinkies to Joe, in exchange for money. We don't put it in writing, we don't attach 'terms of use' to the twinkies.. it's just assumed that, after the purchase, joe owns the pack of twinkies.
When Joe Smith walks into the same store and buys computer software, or a CD, or a DVD, he does the exact same thing. He takes it to the counter, gives them money, and walks away. The implied contract, again, is that Joe now *OWNS* the stuff he just bought.
Oh.. but wait.. there are OTHER things joe wasn't aware of. He wasn't aware that his software will force him to agree to a legally binding (debatable) agreement when he runs it.. so he may *own* the media, but he doesn't own the bits....
Oh. And running the bits on the DVD through some kind of algorithm and coming up with a decrypted movie to store on his HD? That's not legal, Joe.. even though it *IS* your DVD, and you *DO* own it..
The problem, folks, is that people don't understand the issues around what they are buying. They don't understand when they buy software that they aren't really buying it.. that they are just purchasing a license to use it... oh, but the store treats it as merchandise. They aren't a licensing agent of any sort... deceptive, no? The software industry DOES have their cake and eat it too.
Hey. Pirating movies is *ILLEGAL* already. So is pirating music. So. Tough. We can buffer these existing laws with other laws, just to make it seem scarier (sort of like, getting caught for armed robery, but also getting charged with assault with a deadly weapon (steak knife), posession of stolen goods (the twinkies you stole), illegal use of an automobile (getaway car), illegal posession of a steak knife, entering a business with intent to rob the store, and resisting arrest (running when the cops show up, oh, and posession of criminal equipment (the otherwise legal radio scanner you were using to listen to cop frequencies. It's totally legal, until you use it in conjunction with a crime)
Kiddie porn, piracy, soliciting minors for sex, all these things are already illegal.
A previous poster posted a really good note about how existing laws are fine, and about how AOL should spend their money to help enforce todays laws, rather than simply create newer ones.
Something that may be good to remember... Copyright is *not* an inalienable, natural right. It is an artificial right, granted by a government FOR THE BENEFIT OF SOCIETY AS A WHOLE.
Protecting a good authors work helps society, as that author can go ahead and produce more work.
This applies to patent, as well as other IP laws. Remember, laws like this are for THE BETTERMENT OF SOCIETY, *NOT* FOR THE BETTERMENT OF A COMPANY'S BANK ACCOUNT.
Remember. They will tell us it is 'illegal' for us to copy their DVD's, or to decode them.. let's remember who granted them those protections in the first place. Don't let this get any more out of hand than it already is.
This article got me thinking about how I got into linux in the first place. I mean, no matter how I look at it, and without getting into open-source ideology/licencing wars.... bsd and it's derivatives are great. FreeBSD is great. NetBSD is great, and was far more cross platform than linux (still is I bet).
So.. what got me into linux in the first place? I'll tell you what.
The problem, I think, with the 'free' BSD implementations, was that, although it was available, it wasn't really there for people outside of it's own little circle. Nobody was 'spreading the wealth'. Or at least, nobody that I came into contact with. Linux, on the other had, seemed to be growing and spreading by people who were getting their first glimpse of unix. I got into it around.96 or so, sometime in mid 1992 I believe...though I'm not sure. I never heard of BSD until much later.
The current method is really... there is no method. Shortest path is desirable, but not always the case. An individual router or group of routers will use various protocols to determine 'best' interface for a given packet to take (which is not always shortest)
There is no real discovery of which path is currently the fastest
Yes. Embedding. However.. It still doesn't run aotmatically, even in the preview window. As it was sent, it required a MOUSE CLICK to open the attachment.
How am I "wrong" I simply, possibly rhetorically, asked 'how often do people get shot in a holdup', implying.. 'not very often'. REALLY not very often. Like.. hardly ever..
Well.. 1) Who is the domain registered TO? (not the contacts; the actual registrant) 2) Who are the contacts?
If at least one of these are you, you should have no problems modifying the registration. If the contacts are generic role accounts at youre previous employer (so you can't modify them) and the domain is registered to some BS company you made up.. you might have trouble.
I had that thought the other day.. that ultimately, shareholders are responsible for what a company does. The problem is.. they aren't. They vote, once a year, for the board of directors, and that ends their responsibilities. The way the market is structured, shareholders cannot actively and democratically run a company. That's not how it's designed.
The real problem is money. If you take a publicly traded company, the board of directors MUST maximize shareholder value. That's their purpose for existing. That's the reason the company exists in the first place. People don't invest in order to create jobs, or change the world.. they invest to turn money in to more money.
The problem, folks, is that we have no way to properly measure economic prosperity. A booming ecomony is one *potential* sign of a healthy country.. it is one aspect of human civilization. A booming economy should not be the desired result when running a country; it is simply an indicator of other things.
The problem is that the acquisition of wealth has become an end unto itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually... bans on spam rarely went beyond the 2nd level provider. Major backbones were not in a position to ban spam, as far as I know. They charged by the byte, and were dealing with lots of money. To this day, you still can't complain to MCI because some 3rd level provider beneath them is spamming. They don't care.
Generally, first level providers care (your ISP), and second levels MIGHT care (large ISP)...
Hosting overseas, say, on an island that doesn't recognize US law may not help you at all.
If you live in the US, and you are the owner of a web site, it really doesn't matter where you host it. If you are making the stuff available to Americans, and you yourself are in America, you are accountable for your actions under american law. Perhaps the US courts can not force the overseas provider to yank the page, but they can force YOU to yank the page (or go to prison for violating a court order)
Think tax evasion. You start up an offshore company to keep your holdings. A very *VERY* important part of this process is making sure that the offshore company can *NOT* be tied back to you!
Recall, it's not the potato that does the powering.. the potato only acts as an electrolyte.
It's the copper/zinc electrodes that are really used up, and their size (as well as how good the electrolyte is) determines how much current can be drawn.
So.. a piece of paper soaked in vinegar could work as well as a potato... if not much better.
This is very normal.. it's as good as anywhere else, and is a convenient place to put a boot rom.
It doesn't have anything directly to do with the network card per-se, only that the card provides memory addressing and a socket for a rom.
If the motherboard had a boot rom socket, they could use that...
Actually, with the flywheel, you can simply power things through the flywheel, as opposed to 'switching'. (same as UPS theory). Especially given the theoretical longevity of the flywheel. Power the huge underground flywheel, and the flywheel powers your city. Feed power to flywheel disappears, flywheel keeps going until it expends all it's stored energy.
Gyroscopic effects can be neutralized simply by running two identical flywheels in opposite directions.
Unfortunately, it's not criminal... nobody who discovers something is obliged to share it.
If your tax dolars fund the military, who funds research, who develops cold fusion for powering weapons (like subs and planes).. they aren't obliged to share it with you. Nope. Not at all. It would be against 'national security' to do so.
In the corporate world, this is what patents were supposed to be about... so people would be encouraged to share.
An old sci-fi book I found by accident... I can't even remember the author (though I did recognize it) or the name. (very useful information, I know..)
One of the concepts in this book, however, was the idea of using a (sci-fi) kerr-newman black hole as an extremely massive flywheel. The (sci-fi) theory is that a kerr-neuman black hole is basically a very tiny black hole (event horizon of perhaps 200 meters or so.. something human manageable) that is electrically charged. It is also spinning, rapidly. Remember, a black hole this size STILL weighs an unimaginable ammount.
So they built these huge shielding chambers, they'd put a black hole in side it (it's got an electric charge.. they can move them around using this...), and it sits in there and spins. Fast. By feeding energy into the chamber, they can spin it faster, and by tapping the Electric field (generator?) they can take power, causing it to slow. The deal was, though, that one of these jobs, even without replenishing hte power, could, once charged (and they were naturally charged when found) could hold enough energy to power cities (or planets) for years.
Coriolis Effect is not directly related to gyroscopic properties.
Coriolis Effect (not force) simply describes the behavior of objectsin freefall when the reference point is fixed to a spinning surface.
Say.. you were on one of those sci-fi 'spinning' space stations, standing on the inside of a ring, (you know... simulated gravity). It feels like gravity.. but if you were to jump up in the air, you would find the station would spin out from under your feet, and you would not land in the same place you jumped from. If you went to pour a drink cocktail-style, you'd find you have to angle things differently, as anything dropped will follow an arc away from the direction of spin, not straight down.
And gyroscopic forces simply need to be balanced. If you had two wheels on a typical demonstration gyroscope, spinning in opposite directions at the same rate, the gyroscopic effects completely disappear.
RFC does not *exactly* mean something is a standard.
It's just that, usually, software is derived from the RFC (or vice-versa) and it becomes an unofficial standard. Take IPv4. You could read the rfc that specifies IPv4 and find several things that are not implemented, and will never be implemented in the Internet today (or any private IP network, for that matter). Some fields that were never really used in IPv4 (TOS, for one..) are now being used in an unrelated manner to do QOS... it's great, it's innovative, i'ts a re-use...
And lots of rfc's are never used for anything....
So rather, we can summarize how things work in the world today by referencing a bunch of rfc's.
Changing the kerberos spec by producing a new RFC... nothing stops MS from saying that they have implemented kerberos. Still.. why not fix it.
I tend to disagree. A breakup as suggested WILL set things right.
Sure, the OS company can extend standards all they want. So can the apps company. But they can't do it together. If the OS company wants new features in the OS, to tie in with applications, it *MUST* publish them publicly. If the APPS company wants to make a new version of office.. they are doing it solely because they think people will buy a new office suite.
Remember, at the heart of all of MS's dominating power is the fact that they leverage their OS and their Apps against each other wherever convenient. ie: Subtle breaks in compatability to force poeple to upgrade. Keep office on one platform in order to keep people from moving to another platform.
So.. people use windows because of office.. and office because everyone uses office.
That will all change if they split up.
Spend your money on the damn content. We don't NEED more tld's. We don't even NEED more 2lds..... .com, .net, and .org back to what they are supposed to be, and everyone else, get your ass back to work on CONTENT and FUNCTION.
get working on new directory services for the web, start enforcing DNS registration policies, get
How will having a cool domain suddenly make the content of your site worth something? It won't..
What do you mean, 'corrup' the root servers? How did the guy from alternic do this? Did he actually have access to modify zones in the root servers? You simply cannot do this, it's not possible. As for this guy... if he wants to create his own tld.. that's just fine. It has no effect unless the root servers dig it... and they don't.
When Joe Smith goes to the store to buy a DVD, he's buying a movie. He sees these laws as 'fair'. His percetion is that, as long as he can watch his movies freely, he doesn't care.
When I go to buy a DVD, as I am more informed, I know that I am buying a plastic disc with digitally encoded & encrypted media on it. I know the basiscs of the laser mechanism that reads the disc, and I know how the data is encrypted. In other words, the 'creative work' that *I* am purchasing is very different than what Joe Smith is purchasing. I am not 'circumventing' a mechanism. I am just disassembling a work that I already purchased the right to 'use'.
Same disc, but different things to different people.
Just some thoughts on implied contracts. I was thinking about why software/music/blah blah is so confusing.. why isn't this legal ground already covered.. and here's why.
When Joe Smith walks into a store and buys a pack of twinkies, he grabs the twinkies off the shelf, pays the clerk, and eats his twinkies. There is an implied contract here, namely, the transfer of ownership of the twinkies to Joe, in exchange for money. We don't put it in writing, we don't attach 'terms of use' to the twinkies.. it's just assumed that, after the purchase, joe owns the pack of twinkies.
When Joe Smith walks into the same store and buys computer software, or a CD, or a DVD, he does the exact same thing. He takes it to the counter, gives them money, and walks away. The implied contract, again, is that Joe now *OWNS* the stuff he just bought.
Oh.. but wait.. there are OTHER things joe wasn't aware of. He wasn't aware that his software will force him to agree to a legally binding (debatable) agreement when he runs it.. so he may *own* the media, but he doesn't own the bits....
Oh. And running the bits on the DVD through some kind of algorithm and coming up with a decrypted movie to store on his HD? That's not legal, Joe.. even though it *IS* your DVD, and you *DO* own it..
The problem, folks, is that people don't understand the issues around what they are buying. They don't understand when they buy software that they aren't really buying it.. that they are just purchasing a license to use it... oh, but the store treats it as merchandise. They aren't a licensing agent of any sort... deceptive, no? The software industry DOES have their cake and eat it too.
Hey. Pirating movies is *ILLEGAL* already. So is pirating music. So. Tough. We can buffer these existing laws with other laws, just to make it seem scarier (sort of like, getting caught for armed robery, but also getting charged with assault with a deadly weapon (steak knife), posession of stolen goods (the twinkies you stole), illegal use of an automobile (getaway car), illegal posession of a steak knife, entering a business with intent to rob the store, and resisting arrest (running when the cops show up, oh, and posession of criminal equipment (the otherwise legal radio scanner you were using to listen to cop frequencies. It's totally legal, until you use it in conjunction with a crime)
Kiddie porn, piracy, soliciting minors for sex, all these things are already illegal.
A previous poster posted a really good note about how existing laws are fine, and about how AOL should spend their money to help enforce todays laws, rather than simply create newer ones.
Something that may be good to remember...
Copyright is *not* an inalienable, natural right. It is an artificial right, granted by a government FOR THE BENEFIT OF SOCIETY AS A WHOLE.
Protecting a good authors work helps society, as that author can go ahead and produce more work.
This applies to patent, as well as other IP laws. Remember, laws like this are for THE BETTERMENT OF SOCIETY, *NOT* FOR THE BETTERMENT OF A COMPANY'S BANK ACCOUNT.
Remember. They will tell us it is 'illegal' for us to copy their DVD's, or to decode them.. let's remember who granted them those protections in the first place. Don't let this get any more out of hand than it already is.
This article got me thinking about how I got into linux in the first place. I mean, no matter how I look at it, and without getting into open-source ideology/licencing wars.... bsd and it's derivatives are great. FreeBSD is great. NetBSD is great, and was far more cross platform than linux (still is I bet).
.96 or so, sometime in mid 1992 I believe...though I'm not sure. I never heard of BSD until much later.
So.. what got me into linux in the first place? I'll tell you what.
The problem, I think, with the 'free' BSD implementations, was that, although it was available, it wasn't really there for people outside of it's own little circle. Nobody was 'spreading the wealth'. Or at least, nobody that I came into contact with. Linux, on the other had, seemed to be growing and spreading by people who were getting their first glimpse of unix. I got into it around
The current method is really... there is no method. Shortest path is desirable, but not always the case.
An individual router or group of routers will use various protocols to determine 'best' interface for a given packet to take (which is not always shortest)
There is no real discovery of which path is currently the fastest
Yes. Embedding. However..
It still doesn't run aotmatically, even in the preview window. As it was sent, it required a MOUSE CLICK to open the attachment.
How am I "wrong" I simply, possibly rhetorically, asked 'how often do people get shot in a holdup', implying.. 'not very often'.
REALLY not very often. Like.. hardly ever..
NSI and NetSol... are one and the same though.....
Well..
1) Who is the domain registered TO? (not the contacts; the actual registrant)
2) Who are the contacts?
If at least one of these are you, you should have no problems modifying the registration.
If the contacts are generic role accounts at youre previous employer (so you can't modify them) and the domain is registered to some BS company you made up.. you might have trouble.
I had that thought the other day.. that ultimately, shareholders are responsible for what a company does. The problem is.. they aren't. They vote, once a year, for the board of directors, and that ends their responsibilities. The way the market is structured, shareholders cannot actively and democratically run a company. That's not how it's designed.
The real problem is money. If you take a publicly traded company, the board of directors MUST maximize shareholder value. That's their purpose for existing. That's the reason the company exists in the first place. People don't invest in order to create jobs, or change the world.. they invest to turn money in to more money.
The problem, folks, is that we have no way to properly measure economic prosperity. A booming ecomony is one *potential* sign of a healthy country.. it is one aspect of human civilization. A booming economy should not be the desired result when running a country; it is simply an indicator of other things.
The problem is that the acquisition of wealth has become an end unto itself.
No way.
The moon may be small, but it's not THAT small.. it's still REALLY GODDAMN MASSIVE.
ARM has lots of market share. LOTS.
You are assuming that the main market for this type of chip is the home PC. This is absolutely not the case.