I think you mean Sgrena, not Calipari. I mean, you're absolutely correct in stating that Calipari is not a reliable witness, but that would be because he's, y'know, dead.
Hm; I'm running version 0.13 of MythTV, and it seems to do exactly what you're talking about. I go to "Schedule Recordings" in the TV section, browse the very slick Program Guide, select a show to record, and it presents me with a menu. The menu includes "Record only this showing", "Record this show anytime it shows on this channel" and "Record this show whenever it shows on any channel". No duplicates; only new episodes (unless you explicitly set it to record duplicates). I've only had it up and running for two weeks or so, and it's already recorded 10 unique episodes of south park with no intervention on my part (aside from the initial request to record the show whenever it shows).
My experience with MythTV has been quite pleasant; the folks working on the project have done a darn good job thus far.
Quick correction; if any lucky people got the confirmation of the product actually SHIPPING, then Amazon is required to honor the price. The product actually being sent to you is the key part here; not Amazon receiving your purchase notification, or even Amazon sending a confirmation that they received your purchase. Until the goods are out the door, they're under no obligation whatsoever; once the goods have shipped, though, Amazon has effectively agreed to the terms of the contract with you, and they're bound by whatever price was listed.
Side note, online retailers (at least in the US) are not allowed to draft your account for an item until that item has physically shipped. They can put a hold on the account while they confirm payment and shipping details, but they can't actually arrange for the EFT until the goods have been sent on their way.
> In the case of the smail, you get the stuff forwarded from your old address to the new address -- and that's perfectly fair because the sender paid to > get the letter or package to you. This is helped considerably by the fact that all the post offices are owned by the same company. BTW, this is probably > the only case I can think of in which a monopoly helps the consumer.
Minor clarification here; mail is only forwarded if YOU take the action to do it. The Post Office doesn't forward things automatically, you have to intervene and tell them to do so. Otherwise, mail just keeps on going to the old address. the Post Office doesn't give a damn whether you get your mail or not. The same is true with email accounts; YOU have the burden of telling people your email has changed. This woman changed email addresses, and failed to notify the people she had been in contact with at the Discovery channel of the change. Tough crap for her.
On another note...
> (Side question: does this mean she can sue the Discovery Channel for not trying to contact her some other ways?)
Good God, please tell me you're joking. Hell, let's sue EVERYONE! Sue the guy who sent the email, he didn't follow-up with a phone call! Sue the guy he works for, because he didn't track her down and cram the job offer down her throat!
I am in awe of how people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own lives. SHE HAD CANCELLED THE ACCOUNT. It was HER responsibility to contact the people she was in touch with and give them updated contact information.
Blizzard's most likely simply bothered by the fact that the existence of bnetd decreases the intrinsic value of Battle.Net. Perhaps they have/had some plans in the wings to move Battle.Net over to a for-pay service; if they only allow their games to talk to *their* community (Battle.Net), then they've got a clear, guaranteed way to at least make some money.
Bnetd sort of short-circuits this plan, as whoops, all of a sudden anyone can create a Battle.Net type server. As a result, any revenue-generating potential Battle.Net had is significantly decreased.
The DMCA/piracy argument is merely being used as the most politically expedient way for them to eliminate what they see as a threat to their earnings potential. If they'd come out with a 'hey, this *totally* wrecks the Big Plans we had for Battle.Net!' argument, they'd have been laughed right out of court. Much easier to transform it into a piracy-based argument, especially since that seems to be a hot political topic at the moment.
However, you CAN use bnetd to play other games which have been out for quite some time...like...say...Starcraft? Diablo? Just because a few people decided to pirate the Warcraft 3 beta doesn't mean that everyone who had a legitimate use for bnetd with copies of games that they had purchased should be penalized. Bnetd's sole purpose was not to allow people to pirate warcraft 3, it was to allow people to host their own multiplayer battle.net games without having to put up with the inefficiencies and poor performance of blizzard's servers.
More likely than not, Blizzard was trying to position Battle.Net into a situation where they would then be able to charge for anyone using it, and suddenly realized that this 'bnetd' thing could stomp all over that plan. Certainly would explain why they seem so frantic to exterminate it.
Actually, you are wrong, to a degree; libel and slander are two cases that most certainly are *not* protected by the First Amendment. Of course, in this case, it's just people relating their experiences in dealing with this guy's company; I don't think that counts as either, and what these people have said about the company should be legally protected. IANAL, of course.
I echo that sentiment, getting PCMCIA working in linux on my DELL i32k was a much more pleasant experience than trying to get it to work in NT.
Interestingly enough, NT never did manage to see my PCMCIA modem and my PCMCIA network card at the same time, i literally had to change a BIOS setting to get it to see one or the other. Under linux, i grabbed the PCMCIA packages, compiled, and voila...network card and modem;).
so, NT went the way of the dodo, at least on my machine...no big loss.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you mean Sgrena, not Calipari. I mean, you're absolutely correct in stating that Calipari is not a reliable witness, but that would be because he's, y'know, dead.
Hm; I'm running version 0.13 of MythTV, and it seems to do exactly what you're talking about. I go to "Schedule Recordings" in the TV section, browse the very slick Program Guide, select a show to record, and it presents me with a menu. The menu includes "Record only this showing", "Record this show anytime it shows on this channel" and "Record this show whenever it shows on any channel". No duplicates; only new episodes (unless you explicitly set it to record duplicates). I've only had it up and running for two weeks or so, and it's already recorded 10 unique episodes of south park with no intervention on my part (aside from the initial request to record the show whenever it shows).
My experience with MythTV has been quite pleasant; the folks working on the project have done a darn good job thus far.
Quick correction; if any lucky people got the confirmation of the product actually SHIPPING, then Amazon is required to honor the price. The product actually being sent to you is the key part here; not Amazon receiving your purchase notification, or even Amazon sending a confirmation that they received your purchase. Until the goods are out the door, they're under no obligation whatsoever; once the goods have shipped, though, Amazon has effectively agreed to the terms of the contract with you, and they're bound by whatever price was listed.
Side note, online retailers (at least in the US) are not allowed to draft your account for an item until that item has physically shipped. They can put a hold on the account while they confirm payment and shipping details, but they can't actually arrange for the EFT until the goods have been sent on their way.
> In the case of the smail, you get the stuff forwarded from your old address to the new address -- and that's perfectly fair because the sender paid to
> get the letter or package to you. This is helped considerably by the fact that all the post offices are owned by the same company. BTW, this is probably
> the only case I can think of in which a monopoly helps the consumer.
Minor clarification here; mail is only forwarded if YOU take the action to do it. The Post Office doesn't forward things automatically, you have to intervene and tell them to do so. Otherwise, mail just keeps on going to the old address. the Post Office doesn't give a damn whether you get your mail or not. The same is true with email accounts; YOU have the burden of telling people your email has changed. This woman changed email addresses, and failed to notify the people she had been in contact with at the Discovery channel of the change. Tough crap for her.
On another note...
> (Side question: does this mean she can sue the Discovery Channel for not trying to contact her some other ways?)
Good God, please tell me you're joking. Hell, let's sue EVERYONE! Sue the guy who sent the email, he didn't follow-up with a phone call! Sue the guy he works for, because he didn't track her down and cram the job offer down her throat!
I am in awe of how people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own lives. SHE HAD CANCELLED THE ACCOUNT. It was HER responsibility to contact the people she was in touch with and give them updated contact information.
Blizzard's most likely simply bothered by the fact that the existence of bnetd decreases the intrinsic value of Battle.Net. Perhaps they have/had some plans in the wings to move Battle.Net over to a for-pay service; if they only allow their games to talk to *their* community (Battle.Net), then they've got a clear, guaranteed way to at least make some money.
Bnetd sort of short-circuits this plan, as whoops, all of a sudden anyone can create a Battle.Net type server. As a result, any revenue-generating potential Battle.Net had is significantly decreased.
The DMCA/piracy argument is merely being used as the most politically expedient way for them to eliminate what they see as a threat to their earnings potential. If they'd come out with a 'hey, this *totally* wrecks the Big Plans we had for Battle.Net!' argument, they'd have been laughed right out of court. Much easier to transform it into a piracy-based argument, especially since that seems to be a hot political topic at the moment.
This is all speculation, of course.
However, you CAN use bnetd to play other games which have been out for quite some time...like...say...Starcraft? Diablo? Just because a few people decided to pirate the Warcraft 3 beta doesn't mean that everyone who had a legitimate use for bnetd with copies of games that they had purchased should be penalized. Bnetd's sole purpose was not to allow people to pirate warcraft 3, it was to allow people to host their own multiplayer battle.net games without having to put up with the inefficiencies and poor performance of blizzard's servers.
More likely than not, Blizzard was trying to position Battle.Net into a situation where they would then be able to charge for anyone using it, and suddenly realized that this 'bnetd' thing could stomp all over that plan. Certainly would explain why they seem so frantic to exterminate it.
Actually, you are wrong, to a degree; libel and slander are two cases that most certainly are *not* protected by the First Amendment. Of course, in this case, it's just people relating their experiences in dealing with this guy's company; I don't think that counts as either, and what these people have said about the company should be legally protected. IANAL, of course.
I echo that sentiment, getting PCMCIA working in linux on my DELL i32k was a much more pleasant experience than trying to get it to work in NT.
;).
Interestingly enough, NT never did manage to see my PCMCIA modem and my PCMCIA network card at the same time, i literally had to change a BIOS setting to get it to see one or the other. Under linux, i grabbed the PCMCIA packages, compiled, and voila...network card and modem
so, NT went the way of the dodo, at least on my machine...no big loss.