I think that this is probably a fair way to deal with many problems on the internet. If someone, or someone else on his network, is caught doing something they shouldn't then he is given a warning. This would allow that person, if it is not actaully him, a chance to investigate who might be using his network and stop the illegal activity. It it happens again, he is given another warning as a last chance. And if it happens a third time, he is suspended for say 30 days, then 90 days for the forth time and so on.
Obviously this would not prevent me for going out an accessing the internet in some other way, but it would probably cause me some aggravation and would get me to consider my behavior in the first place. It would also give ISPs some leverage in showing that they are doing something to combat piracy.
Sure, there may be some flaws in the implementations, but I personally like the idea.
I think a lot of people just don't have the time to set up and maintain a rig anymore
I don't hardly have time to maintain my xbox 360 anymore with the red ring of death. I've had to RMA three back to microsoft already and many people have had much worse luck. That is the problem and the blessing with consoles being so close to PC's now.
I just want to be clear on what you are suggesting. You want to implicate innocent people who just happen to own an infected computer? That may be one of the most immoral things I have ever heard. If you were so noble with your goals, I think that you would click the link with your own computer and fight with the feds yourself.
I think you are throwing too many things in together. It think that we can all agree that some things should be classified, and that a law prohibiting distributing classified information is not a terrible thing. Does the public need to know the location and launch codes to all of our ICBMs? I'm sure there is a federal law that does just that.
But I also think that there a few, but very few, things that should be 'classified' on a state level, such as the identities of undercover officers. There might be a few other things, but that is about it. Public information and information that the public wants to give about government actors should not be censored by the government or anyone else just because the police officers find it a bit embarrassing.
This limit is not on what blogs a soldier can read, but on which ones the soldier can post. They don't care what information is coming into the soldier, they just don't want a solider inadvertently leaking classified info..
I think that the closer analogy would be when you tap into your neighbor's cable.
You hook it up to your TV. Your TV detects the signal and displays the picture for you to watch. Every calls this "stealing cable" and no one seems to have a problem with that term.
This is not the law in New York, and I would imagine other jurisdictions as well. U.S. states have there own constitutions and they are free to grant broader protections than the U.S. Supreme court does on a federal level.
I know that the analogy is weak, but my point is simply that if Microsoft wants to give away free software and hardware, then that is a good thing, even if they require that Microsoft software be used on the hardware.
Most schools should welcome it because something is better than nothing. Most Public schools chould use all of the help they can get.
Im not sure about this. At some point you just have to learn to use the tool. It shop class, should the teacher teach the student about the concept of a screwdriver because the teacher doesn't want to be tied to a specific flat-head screwdriver, or should he give you a screwdriver and let you get to work? Microsoft is basically giving away licenses to schools so students can learn. Why is this so bad?
The title of the story seems to indicate that a class action suit is underway against the RIAA. That is not the case. The judge's dismissal of the case without prejudice simply means that she can now file a lawsuit and attempt to have her class certified. Class certification is a very complicated process and probably won't happen.
Where is the love for this game? I know it was on an old system that may people had to dust off to play, but I can't think of another game that was simply that fun to play start to finish.
Well, I think in an ideal legal system, this might work, but then I think you are actually moving that legal standard away from the jury, and into the hands of the police and prosecutors. The police and prosecutors are responsible for determining when a crime has been committed and what to do with it, long before a jury is ever involved. Those "do not cross" lines give everyday law enforcement a guide, so that law enforcement as a whole is somewhat uniform, and not totally arbitrary based on the individual law enforcement personal.
Deciding what punishment suits the crime is one thing, but deciding what IS a crime is another thing altogether.
Slashdot Mirror
actually, with the new plan from AT&T with the 3G IPhone, the price for unlimited texting is $20/month. See here.
This is virtually irrelevant.
Should anything 'happen to LGP' there may not be anyone left to distribute said patches.
Don't worry. GameCopyWorld will still be around.I think I saw a special on the history channel about this years ago.
I think that this is probably a fair way to deal with many problems on the internet. If someone, or someone else on his network, is caught doing something they shouldn't then he is given a warning. This would allow that person, if it is not actaully him, a chance to investigate who might be using his network and stop the illegal activity. It it happens again, he is given another warning as a last chance. And if it happens a third time, he is suspended for say 30 days, then 90 days for the forth time and so on.
Obviously this would not prevent me for going out an accessing the internet in some other way, but it would probably cause me some aggravation and would get me to consider my behavior in the first place. It would also give ISPs some leverage in showing that they are doing something to combat piracy.
Sure, there may be some flaws in the implementations, but I personally like the idea.
I really doubt that it can decrypt your passwords, other than a brute force attack. Maybe the trivial passwords on word 2003 files and the like.
Anything else you can easily do when you have physical access to the computer.
Seriously, what else are you probably going to be using at a public terminal besides Windows?
Nuke them from orbit. It is the only way to be sure.
Screw that. Give him a promotion.
I don't hardly have time to maintain my xbox 360 anymore with the red ring of death. I've had to RMA three back to microsoft already and many people have had much worse luck. That is the problem and the blessing with consoles being so close to PC's now.
People have also received life in prison for rape as well. Just because there is a maximum, doesn't mean everyone (or hardly anyone) will get it.
I just want to be clear on what you are suggesting. You want to implicate innocent people who just happen to own an infected computer? That may be one of the most immoral things I have ever heard. If you were so noble with your goals, I think that you would click the link with your own computer and fight with the feds yourself.
I think you are throwing too many things in together. It think that we can all agree that some things should be classified, and that a law prohibiting distributing classified information is not a terrible thing. Does the public need to know the location and launch codes to all of our ICBMs? I'm sure there is a federal law that does just that.
But I also think that there a few, but very few, things that should be 'classified' on a state level, such as the identities of undercover officers. There might be a few other things, but that is about it. Public information and information that the public wants to give about government actors should not be censored by the government or anyone else just because the police officers find it a bit embarrassing.
I would be interested to see what the return rate has been for these computers.
It doesn't matter how ofter you sell out if 40% are returned because a person finds out he can't run his favorite windows app.
This limit is not on what blogs a soldier can read, but on which ones the soldier can post. They don't care what information is coming into the soldier, they just don't want a solider inadvertently leaking classified info..
I think that the closer analogy would be when you tap into your neighbor's cable.
You hook it up to your TV. Your TV detects the signal and displays the picture for you to watch. Every calls this "stealing cable" and no one seems to have a problem with that term.
I have to use carbon paper forms every day.
They may be obsolete, but they are still very much in use..
That sounds like Charter Communications.
This is not the law in New York, and I would imagine other jurisdictions as well. U.S. states have there own constitutions and they are free to grant broader protections than the U.S. Supreme court does on a federal level.
A lot of links don't work 'at the moment' when you post them on Slashdot!
I know that the analogy is weak, but my point is simply that if Microsoft wants to give away free software and hardware, then that is a good thing, even if they require that Microsoft software be used on the hardware.
Most schools should welcome it because something is better than nothing. Most Public schools chould use all of the help they can get.
Im not sure about this. At some point you just have to learn to use the tool. It shop class, should the teacher teach the student about the concept of a screwdriver because the teacher doesn't want to be tied to a specific flat-head screwdriver, or should he give you a screwdriver and let you get to work? Microsoft is basically giving away licenses to schools so students can learn. Why is this so bad?
The title of the story seems to indicate that a class action suit is underway against the RIAA. That is not the case. The judge's dismissal of the case without prejudice simply means that she can now file a lawsuit and attempt to have her class certified. Class certification is a very complicated process and probably won't happen.
Actually, six months might be about right now.
When was the last time you rented a video?
Where is the love for this game? I know it was on an old system that may people had to dust off to play, but I can't think of another game that was simply that fun to play start to finish.
Well, I think in an ideal legal system, this might work, but then I think you are actually moving that legal standard away from the jury, and into the hands of the police and prosecutors. The police and prosecutors are responsible for determining when a crime has been committed and what to do with it, long before a jury is ever involved. Those "do not cross" lines give everyday law enforcement a guide, so that law enforcement as a whole is somewhat uniform, and not totally arbitrary based on the individual law enforcement personal.
Deciding what punishment suits the crime is one thing, but deciding what IS a crime is another thing altogether.