There's no reason except for the artificial scarcity of upstream bandwith created by asymmetric "consumer" connections that a T1 couldn't cost $60 per month. But the telcos aren't about to cannibalize their overpriced T1 business, so they restrict "consumer" connections artificially.
And the thing is, I agree with you. It's still unrealistic to ask for T1 quality service for $60 a month, until something changes to break the telco price fixing.
Oh, I had never heard a trojan called a "spybot" before. I guess people really shouldn't shorten the name of the spybot remover program, that's like making an antivirus program and calling it "A-Virus".
If you were the one responsible for cleaning up the CSFBDirect web site, thanks. It worked in Opera for a while even. They've managed to break it again though.
I wonder who sits around and thinks things like "Hey, lets make every URL malformed Javascript, rather than simple and reliable HREFs!"
I'm aware of this, the software I write gets used by about a hundred people max, some of our exployees, and a few of our customers. I agree with your observation that many people inaccurately think the job of "programmer" starts and ends at "software companies".
My point was that the potential is there, especially for retail software programmers. We're very much like engineers, because we design things that get used by (relative) lots of people.
There are lots of people doing things they shouldn't do, such as selling appliance type things with embedded Linux, and not complying with the GPL in so far as making the source properly available. This happens a lot, and it usually takes someone complaining to the Linux news outlets before they comply.
There's also a couple more obvious major GPL violations that come up from time to time.
Then there's the grey areas. Is taking GPL PHP code that generates HTML/Javascript code, modifying it, and putting it up on your web site considered "distribution"? It is outputting snippets of HTML/JS code that are contained within the GPLed program. The HTML/Javascript code could be considered executable, as much as any other interperted language. This is one of the things the FSF might clarify in newer versions of the GPL, because it's really not something that is clear at all right now.
Anyway, apparently this watermark requires obfuscating the code, in which case it's incompatible with the GPL anyway. The GPL requires distribution of source in the "preferred form for modification", specifically to address code obfuscation.
You both probably know this, but unless you have a specific need to run 2.6, or you want to get involved in reporting bugs and such (or you just feel a compelling need to live on the edge), it's probably best to stay with 2.4 for now.
if our democracy is under seige from moneyed interests.
What do you mean "if"?
It's a constant battle, one that has always been fought, and will always be fought. Back when, the moneyed interest was the church, under the guise of "God", these days, it's a oligarchy, the church, the large international corporations, and the government willing to cater to them in pursuit of ever more power.
That would effectively make affiliate programs illegal, if enforced all the way up the chain.
One article I read, the journalist traced mortgage spam through like 3 or 4 levels of affiliates back to a major lender. Who should get punished in a case like that? The program sponsers all claimed to have anti-spam poilicies and terminated the account of the spammer right away, but mortgage spam is still out there.
I'm not making any argument that file swapping of restricted music doesn't violate copyright law, it almost surely does.
The argument I'm making is that the copyright cartels are hiding behind copyright law, to protect their outdated business models.
You were the one that talked about "compensating the artist". If you truely care about compensating artists, you will do whatever you can to drive the copyright cartels into bankruptcy, even if that involves breaking a few laws.
Inevitably, those who usher in change do things that are illegal. Very few major social changes happen completely within the system. When the public, and the leaders, can no longer rationally defend an intolerable law, that is selectively enforced because so many are breaking it, that's when change happens.
Good luck. The "women's liberation" movement has mostly resulted in unrealistic expectations in women that they should go out and work, and that they are somehow a failure if they follow traditional gender roles. It's hard to find a woman today who hasn't been corrupted by this propaganda.
They aren't suing for money. You know, every law suit isn't for money. They are seeking an injunction to get a government administrative agency to follow the law.
This will cost NASA very little. They probably have full time lawyers they would have paid anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Or the Libertarian of Congress... Ron Paul. :)
36.5 days of interest at 5%
Heh, someone could turn that into a very lucrative business model.
Throw in some communal showers and bathrooms, make each room the size of a small dorm room....
A geek hostel. It'd be great.
There's no reason except for the artificial scarcity of upstream bandwith created by asymmetric "consumer" connections that a T1 couldn't cost $60 per month. But the telcos aren't about to cannibalize their overpriced T1 business, so they restrict "consumer" connections artificially.
And the thing is, I agree with you. It's still unrealistic to ask for T1 quality service for $60 a month, until something changes to break the telco price fixing.
Hi,
I want something that's exactly like a T1, except I only want to pay $60 a month. TIA.
Oh, I had never heard a trojan called a "spybot" before. I guess people really shouldn't shorten the name of the spybot remover program, that's like making an antivirus program and calling it "A-Virus".
"Hey Bob, have you got a Virus on your computer?"
"Nah, Bill remember, I have A Virus!"
I thought spybot was a trojan. Is there really a legit program AND a trojan named spybot?
Didn't the AV companies think about that before naming spybot (the trojan)?
If you were the one responsible for cleaning up the CSFBDirect web site, thanks. It worked in Opera for a while even. They've managed to break it again though.
I wonder who sits around and thinks things like "Hey, lets make every URL malformed Javascript, rather than simple and reliable HREFs!"
What gives you the idea that the ease of doing a job is somehow related to salary?
The inverse seems to usually be the case.
Rise of the Triad had power-downs.
I'm aware of this, the software I write gets used by about a hundred people max, some of our exployees, and a few of our customers. I agree with your observation that many people inaccurately think the job of "programmer" starts and ends at "software companies".
My point was that the potential is there, especially for retail software programmers. We're very much like engineers, because we design things that get used by (relative) lots of people.
It depends on what you mean by GPL violation.
There are lots of people doing things they shouldn't do, such as selling appliance type things with embedded Linux, and not complying with the GPL in so far as making the source properly available. This happens a lot, and it usually takes someone complaining to the Linux news outlets before they comply.
There's also a couple more obvious major GPL violations that come up from time to time.
Then there's the grey areas. Is taking GPL PHP code that generates HTML/Javascript code, modifying it, and putting it up on your web site considered "distribution"? It is outputting snippets of HTML/JS code that are contained within the GPLed program. The HTML/Javascript code could be considered executable, as much as any other interperted language. This is one of the things the FSF might clarify in newer versions of the GPL, because it's really not something that is clear at all right now.
Anyway, apparently this watermark requires obfuscating the code, in which case it's incompatible with the GPL anyway. The GPL requires distribution of source in the "preferred form for modification", specifically to address code obfuscation.
A good teacher might teach 1000 students in their lifetime.
A good dentist might have 1000 patients over his lifetime.
A good programmer might write something that millions of people use every day.
See the difference?
You both probably know this, but unless you have a specific need to run 2.6, or you want to get involved in reporting bugs and such (or you just feel a compelling need to live on the edge), it's probably best to stay with 2.4 for now.
if our democracy is under seige from moneyed interests.
What do you mean "if"?
It's a constant battle, one that has always been fought, and will always be fought. Back when, the moneyed interest was the church, under the guise of "God", these days, it's a oligarchy, the church, the large international corporations, and the government willing to cater to them in pursuit of ever more power.
That would effectively make affiliate programs illegal, if enforced all the way up the chain.
One article I read, the journalist traced mortgage spam through like 3 or 4 levels of affiliates back to a major lender. Who should get punished in a case like that? The program sponsers all claimed to have anti-spam poilicies and terminated the account of the spammer right away, but mortgage spam is still out there.
2,200 people? That's a huge sample. It only takes a couple dozen to be statistically significant.
Except that this isn't a chapter 7 liquidation, it's chapter 11.
They'll try to stay in business, and a judge will decide how they should pay back their creditors.
Why don't you all run spamassassin?
I know your custom filters have blocked my Bugtraq subscription many many times in the past.
Ever drop a lit cigarette into gasoline? It's pretty anticlimatic.
I'm not making any argument that file swapping of restricted music doesn't violate copyright law, it almost surely does.
The argument I'm making is that the copyright cartels are hiding behind copyright law, to protect their outdated business models.
You were the one that talked about "compensating the artist". If you truely care about compensating artists, you will do whatever you can to drive the copyright cartels into bankruptcy, even if that involves breaking a few laws.
Inevitably, those who usher in change do things that are illegal. Very few major social changes happen completely within the system. When the public, and the leaders, can no longer rationally defend an intolerable law, that is selectively enforced because so many are breaking it, that's when change happens.
Good luck. The "women's liberation" movement has mostly resulted in unrealistic expectations in women that they should go out and work, and that they are somehow a failure if they follow traditional gender roles. It's hard to find a woman today who hasn't been corrupted by this propaganda.
They aren't suing for money. You know, every law suit isn't for money. They are seeking an injunction to get a government administrative agency to follow the law.
This will cost NASA very little. They probably have full time lawyers they would have paid anyway.
Then why can't I send a dollar or two to each artist I like, and then download all their music in whatever form I want? Isn't the net effect the same?
How exactly does buying a CD "compensate the artists" either?