Well...wouldnt the criminal activity (violation of antitrust statues) need to be directly relevant to the RICO suit? The woman may be hard pressed to say prove the harm caused by the RIAA lawsuit was due to the antitrust violation.
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. -- The ``bold agenda for space exploration'' that the Bush administration has been crafting since August is expected to be long on rhetoric, but short on new goals and money.
Internal NASA documents obtained by The Orlando Sentinel, and interviews with those close to the policy-making process, indicate the new vision being drafted for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration looks a lot like the old one.
No final decisions have been reached. However, closed-door meetings of administration officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, appear to be developing plans committed to the status quo, with no major new programs or specific destinations, no timetables and, most importantly, no significant spending increases...
Consumers should be allowed to settle their increased tax bill by handing over their settlement voucher to the California government, in exchange for a guarantee that the voucher would be used to purchase computer technology equipment and other educational resources for state schools. Perhaps also the California government should be awarded any unclaimed consumer vouchers after a certain (short) settlement period.
First off...there is a better, more in depth News.com story available which clears some things up.
Second...two thirds of the unclaimed money will go directly to California schools (1/2 in cash, 1/2 in MS software and cash grants).
Your though sounds kind of interesting, but wouldn't it really boil down to a voluntary California tax via Microsoft? Of course, California residents never had to wait for a Microsoft settlement to be nice to the school system, they always could have donated cash, or their tax return monies to the Cali school system. I really doubt that many if any has ever done that. Yea it sounds like a novel thing for consumers to do, but I have a sneaking feeling the people who will actually try to cash in on the settlement will be companies and small businesses who may have bough tens to hundreds of Microsoft products during the suit time period. Most consumers will either 1) not be bothered to file a claim to get their $5-30 bux back, 2) never file a claim because they have no idea about the settlement.
...when
Excite@Home served AT&T's Internet customers, less than 1 percent of subscribers consumed 30 percent of the network's capacity.
"We tended to call them the Net hogs,"...
Hrmm...Last time I checked E@H is now nonexistant, and Comcast has since throttled their service to 1500/128kbps. E@H service was significantly higher on both the download and upload limits.
Please...If you are trying to justify any current/future service moves use data which reflect the service that you are providing, not data that is 6 months out of date from a company which is not in business anymore.
If bandwidth and "bandwidth hogs" are such a problem then why is AT&T raising their upload cap from 128kbps to 256, making sure there are consistent caps across their network? Please explain that one to us Mr. CEO.
A program that will cap my CS ping at 10ms. A program that gets rid of my horrible packet loss. A program that gives me reliable service without downtime every other day. A program that will uncap my 1GB/mo limit on usenet download A program that gives me customer service who knows what they are talking about. A program that gets rid of my horrible Comcast service and gets my old (more reliable, lower priced, higher bandwidth, more featured) Mediaone service.
Cure Cancer with UD? Think again.
If you didn't see the story last week here it is (http://www.theinquirer.net/15020202.htm)
"THE INTEL/UD cancer project is about to close, but there is confusion as to whether this is due to a shortage of funds or because the work has been completed. According to Andy Prince, Director of Corporate Communications at UD, the cancer programme is about to be terminated because its goals have been met.
Said Prince: "Absolutely. We have actually exceeded our goals as far as the cancer project goes. According to the contract, we agreed to analyze 250M molecules against 8 proteins. We are close to finishing 3.5B molecules against 12 proteins and will be announcing the close of the project soon - not a premature close, but the actual end of the project. "
Our web host decided to take the
server down for what has turned out to
be a couple of day upgrade. We
have put up up our site on a mirror in
the meantime. You can check out
the main Team Lamb Chop page here:
tlc.hagabard.com
and you can check out our benchmarking
pages here: tlc.hagabard.com/bench/index.htm
I put up a news item over at www.arstechnica.com that explains how they obtained that information. The information was not obtained using a hack...it really was only some script kiddies at work compiling the user_info.sah information that the S@H servers sent back to them
One of our team members ordered one early yesterday from their website, they told him 6-8 weeks for delivery. The price may be high, but some people just do not want to build machines to crunch SETI....and there *has* been many people on our teams that have built new machines for the sole purpose to crunch SETI. This could be a decent alternative. and with the rollout of version 3.0 the times to crunch a WU on those cards looks like it may come down a bit:). I am not sure how to combine the two/. teams. If you could convince every member from one team to leave and join the other that could happen...otherwise I am not sure if there is an alternative, except for getting help from some of the SETI crew. Hey we need some kind of competition! Or all the/. people could leave the/. teams and join the Ars team;) hehehehehe
Hehehehe The wheels roll pretty quickly I see...That part of the FAQ was changed since last night. That clause wasnt in there until today. Maybe this was the original case with the card, but wasn't clearly pointed out. The way the site had it originally, it sounded like the card came preflashed with the SETI client in the ROM. If the Card is now as advertised, it looks like it would abide by the S@H licensing agreement.
From the S@H Webpage: "Restrictions:...Distribution of this software is prohibited." Because the client has the linux client flashed into ROM it appears that this card violates this restriction. The restriction could have been easily gotten around by requiring the user to download the client and then flash it into ROM themselves. I don't know if they have an "agreement" with the SETI guys or not....nor do I know if the SETI guys would sort of prosecute them. (Could they? dunno.)
Most likely by the time the card would be shipped (I heard 6-8 weeks) Version 3.0 of the client would be out and the client preinstalled on the card would be obsolete.
well...there has been a discussion about this on alt.sci.seti, and I dont think there is any SETI@Home approval for this. The main thing which may violate the licensing agreement is this clause: "Restrictions: Distribution of this software is prohibited." Since they have the linux preflashed into the ROM of the card, therefore they would be violating the agreement (unless they already have the go ahead by S@H which i doubt). They probably could have gotten away with this by just having software which would flash the client into ROM (the user would have to d/l the client). Because of this they may get in trouble with their card -zAmboni www.teamlambchop.com
well I cant even claim to be the source of the news on the Ars site either:P. I got the info from the alt.sci.seti newsgroup, and the thread there was actually a couple of days old. but I do have a preview of the version 3.0 SETI client up already:) -zAmboni www.teamlambchop.com
Slashdot Mirror
Full Text of the Nature article (without the ridiculous Nature subscription price)
Links to associated material here
Well...wouldnt the criminal activity (violation of antitrust statues) need to be directly relevant to the RICO suit? The woman may be hard pressed to say prove the harm caused by the RIAA lawsuit was due to the antitrust violation.
Well, the Orlando Sentinel shares your pessimism.
First off...there is a better, more in depth News.com story available which clears some things up.
Second...two thirds of the unclaimed money will go directly to California schools (1/2 in cash, 1/2 in MS software and cash grants).
Your though sounds kind of interesting, but wouldn't it really boil down to a voluntary California tax via Microsoft? Of course, California residents never had to wait for a Microsoft settlement to be nice to the school system, they always could have donated cash, or their tax return monies to the Cali school system. I really doubt that many if any has ever done that. Yea it sounds like a novel thing for consumers to do, but I have a sneaking feeling the people who will actually try to cash in on the settlement will be companies and small businesses who may have bough tens to hundreds of Microsoft products during the suit time period. Most consumers will either 1) not be bothered to file a claim to get their $5-30 bux back, 2) never file a claim because they have no idea about the settlement.
Please...If you are trying to justify any current/future service moves use data which reflect the service that you are providing, not data that is 6 months out of date from a company which is not in business anymore.
If bandwidth and "bandwidth hogs" are such a problem then why is AT&T raising their upload cap from 128kbps to 256, making sure there are consistent caps across their network? Please explain that one to us Mr. CEO.
Give me something that I can actually use like...
A program that will cap my CS ping at 10ms.
A program that gets rid of my horrible packet loss.
A program that gives me reliable service without downtime every other day.
A program that will uncap my 1GB/mo limit on usenet download
A program that gives me customer service who knows what they are talking about.
A program that gets rid of my horrible Comcast service and gets my old (more reliable, lower priced, higher bandwidth, more featured) Mediaone service.
and they will be totally suprised when their cable company cuts them off at their knees:
r oo t=attbi~mode=flat
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3155491~
The web pages aren't subject to the bandwidth restrictions. Only the S@H data servers are.
Cure Cancer with UD? Think again.
If you didn't see the story last week here it is (http://www.theinquirer.net/15020202.htm)
"THE INTEL/UD cancer project is about to close, but there is confusion as to whether this is due to a shortage of funds or because the work has been completed. According to Andy Prince, Director of Corporate Communications at UD, the cancer programme is about to be terminated because its goals have been met.
Said Prince: "Absolutely. We have actually exceeded our goals as far as the cancer project goes. According to the contract, we agreed to analyze 250M molecules against 8 proteins. We are close to finishing 3.5B molecules against 12 proteins and will be announcing the close of the project soon - not a premature close, but the actual end of the project. "
Our web host decided to take the server down for what has turned out to be a couple of day upgrade. We have put up up our site on a mirror in the meantime. You can check out the main Team Lamb Chop page here: tlc.hagabard.com and you can check out our benchmarking pages here: tlc.hagabard.com/bench/index.htm
Thanks for your support!
-zAmboni
-zAmboni
-zAmboni
-zAmboni
From the S@H Webpage: ...Distribution of this software is prohibited."
"Restrictions:
Because the client has the linux client flashed into ROM it appears that this card violates this restriction. The restriction could have been easily gotten around by requiring the user to download the client and then flash it into ROM themselves. I don't know if they have an "agreement" with the SETI guys or not....nor do I know if the SETI guys would sort of prosecute them. (Could they? dunno.)
Most likely by the time the card would be shipped (I heard 6-8 weeks) Version 3.0 of the client would be out and the client preinstalled on the card would be obsolete.
For those of you who would like to see a Version 3.0 Preview, we have one up right now :). You can check it out here: Version 3.0 Preview
-zAmboni
-zAmboni
-zAmboni