I only noticed it because their URL is ntlug.org so it almost seems intentional (Maybe should have gone with NoTxLug.. although maybe that means they can't transmit any data?)
NTLUG? Sorry if I'm being rude, but I find it incredibly hilarious that a LUG was named NTLUG. Someone thought it was a joke when they came up with that name, and then it stuck, right? Maybe next we'll have LUGXP?
The root of my point is that a ccTLD is for a specific country. I'm not saying.com is THE answer, but I don't think the ccTLDs should be used for outside purposes.
Your points made me think of an alternative idea. Instead of "only that country can use that country's ccTLD," perhaps a second-level domain under the ccTLD that signifies "within the country." ie. local.us or something like that.
Of course this made me think of yet another point =) Something like the removal of.gov in favor of gov.us, or making it us.gov (and allowing all other countries to participate under the.gov TLD).
I suppose I'm living in an ideal world, where.ccTLD refers to things within the country, but TLDs like.com,.net,.whatever aren't run by mega-corps but instead near-free-except-for-operating-costs distributed by some sort of autonomous entity (sanctioned by the UN).
I feel that a country should not be allowed to run their ccTLD from outside their country, and by the same token, I don't think people or businesses not affiliated in some way with the country, should be allowed to purchase domains from within that country's ccTLD.
Are there some good reasons why one would want to go against this practice? I realize countries might not have the infrastructure to support running a ccTLD, but I think that's a larger problem... why does the country need an operational TLD if no one can run it? And for my second point.. perhaps revenue is an important reason (the.to and.nu domains come to mind, among others), but I think perhaps in this case, certain restrictions should apply. That's why we have.com, et al... for non-country-aligned domains.
There IS a market as far as I'm concerned. My work Palm (Handspring Visor) gets about a month of battery life. It may be monochrome, but it has a fairly recent PalmOS and runs most apps, I can play games and it even has a backlight. Someone gave me a Palm m130 (nice color display, fancy features) and it gets a few days at best. I can't imagine having one of those 3-4 hour PDAs.
With computers getting faster and faster, doesn't it seem like batteries ARE getting better, simply to keep up with the higher power requirements of new devices. Sure you still only get 2,3, or 4 hours of battery life... but would a battery from 1990 even provide half as long a life as a battery from 2000 or 2004?
You know it's too bad they don't, say, just donate the money they're spending on this program to help improve schools. I know it's a pipe dream, but I still wish I could see them donate money toward better textbooks, more teachers, smaller class sizes instead of some ridiculous program that the kids either won't understand, or already do understand and hate the MPAA anyway.
I guess it depends where in California you're at. In Los Angeles, it's definitely a Windows community (I have worked with many other schools and almost everyone is primarily [but not necessarily 100%] Windows-centric).
It's possible that people feel that if they're lazy, the money will just go to the schools anyway, so why bother?
Personally, I work for a California school system, and I figure if I don't claim it, I'll end up seeing (most of) it when it comes back to us and I can purchase needed supplies (and yes, you'll just have to deal with the fact that in general, schools are now primarily Windows-based, and more likely than not, we're going to pick up a few Windows licenses with that money).
It seems to me that the RIAA does actually realize filesharing and p2p help sales, but since it is still an "illegal" activity, they need to look like they're combating it, otherwise it could be taken as a sign that it's ok to steal their bread and butter, in which case sales probably would drop. It's a bit of a system... p2p increases sales, but needs to be "fought" in order to keep p2p increasing sales, and from the RIAA point of view, if a few nice people get sued in the process, all the better for the RIAA.
Not that anyone will ever get down to reading this comment, but...
I figured, what the hell, I'll send em $10, and while I still had the PayPal tab open, I realized I wanted to look up information on the 'ni' particle in Japanese. Popped a search into Google and the first match was... Wikipedia. I guess a little donating here and there can pay off in the end.
Granted there were thousands of other matches, but if all those matches needed money, and no one gave them any, all the sites would be gone. So for $10, I figure it's worth supporting free information.
I'm not sure why they're cheaper, but I compared the prices of the books I bought this semester to the prices on BookCentral.com (the website listed in the NYTimes article) with my school's bookstore ( http://www.book.uci.edu/ ) and my books were 40-50% cheaper from the bookstore. These are new, US edition books.
And I agree with that too, but I was referring to something I recall happening (but can't find through searching) with a bunch of the bigger universities a while back... maybe a year or so ago... where there was a push to start blocking ports and managing traffic to make the *AAs happy.
It says "(c)olleges and universities generally do not have a legal duty to control students' private conduct."
So does this mean they should no longer be forced to block ports, monitor traffic, etc with anything relating to p2p activities? Sure the uni could do it if they wanted to, but wasn't there a huge big thing about the *AA's wanting unis to help them stop the p2pers. It sounds like they are no longer obligated to control which ports are open on the firewall, etc.
The GT3/K is only in limited production from Sony and you will need to contact them directly if you are serious about buying. (800-711-6277 or sales@dynamism.com)
Isn't that weird that they would say "you must buy it from Sony directly" then link you to dynamism?
Slashdot Mirror
I only noticed it because their URL is ntlug.org so it almost seems intentional (Maybe should have gone with NoTxLug.. although maybe that means they can't transmit any data?)
NTLUG? Sorry if I'm being rude, but I find it incredibly hilarious that a LUG was named NTLUG. Someone thought it was a joke when they came up with that name, and then it stuck, right? Maybe next we'll have LUGXP?
The root of my point is that a ccTLD is for a specific country. I'm not saying .com is THE answer, but I don't think the ccTLDs should be used for outside purposes.
.gov in favor of gov.us, or making it us.gov (and allowing all other countries to participate under the .gov TLD).
.ccTLD refers to things within the country, but TLDs like .com, .net, .whatever aren't run by mega-corps but instead near-free-except-for-operating-costs distributed by some sort of autonomous entity (sanctioned by the UN).
Your points made me think of an alternative idea. Instead of "only that country can use that country's ccTLD," perhaps a second-level domain under the ccTLD that signifies "within the country." ie. local.us or something like that.
Of course this made me think of yet another point =) Something like the removal of
I suppose I'm living in an ideal world, where
I feel that a country should not be allowed to run their ccTLD from outside their country, and by the same token, I don't think people or businesses not affiliated in some way with the country, should be allowed to purchase domains from within that country's ccTLD.
.to and .nu domains come to mind, among others), but I think perhaps in this case, certain restrictions should apply. That's why we have .com, et al... for non-country-aligned domains.
Are there some good reasons why one would want to go against this practice? I realize countries might not have the infrastructure to support running a ccTLD, but I think that's a larger problem... why does the country need an operational TLD if no one can run it? And for my second point.. perhaps revenue is an important reason (the
Thoughts?
There IS a market as far as I'm concerned. My work Palm (Handspring Visor) gets about a month of battery life. It may be monochrome, but it has a fairly recent PalmOS and runs most apps, I can play games and it even has a backlight. Someone gave me a Palm m130 (nice color display, fancy features) and it gets a few days at best. I can't imagine having one of those 3-4 hour PDAs.
With computers getting faster and faster, doesn't it seem like batteries ARE getting better, simply to keep up with the higher power requirements of new devices. Sure you still only get 2,3, or 4 hours of battery life... but would a battery from 1990 even provide half as long a life as a battery from 2000 or 2004?
I can't wait for a few hours from now when enough /.ers visit, then the people will have the question marks when nothing loads.
Except 4chan is geared toward porn...
(I only know because I visit!)
A nightmare? Girls offering geeks "favors" sounds like one of those dreams you have once every decade!
You know it's too bad they don't, say, just donate the money they're spending on this program to help improve schools. I know it's a pipe dream, but I still wish I could see them donate money toward better textbooks, more teachers, smaller class sizes instead of some ridiculous program that the kids either won't understand, or already do understand and hate the MPAA anyway.
I guess it depends where in California you're at. In Los Angeles, it's definitely a Windows community (I have worked with many other schools and almost everyone is primarily [but not necessarily 100%] Windows-centric).
It's possible that people feel that if they're lazy, the money will just go to the schools anyway, so why bother?
Personally, I work for a California school system, and I figure if I don't claim it, I'll end up seeing (most of) it when it comes back to us and I can purchase needed supplies (and yes, you'll just have to deal with the fact that in general, schools are now primarily Windows-based, and more likely than not, we're going to pick up a few Windows licenses with that money).
It seems to me that the RIAA does actually realize filesharing and p2p help sales, but since it is still an "illegal" activity, they need to look like they're combating it, otherwise it could be taken as a sign that it's ok to steal their bread and butter, in which case sales probably would drop. It's a bit of a system... p2p increases sales, but needs to be "fought" in order to keep p2p increasing sales, and from the RIAA point of view, if a few nice people get sued in the process, all the better for the RIAA.
The downside to sigalert is that you have to pay for the wireless access and your custom route, though it's a small fee... about $20/year.
Not that anyone will ever get down to reading this comment, but...
I figured, what the hell, I'll send em $10, and while I still had the PayPal tab open, I realized I wanted to look up information on the 'ni' particle in Japanese. Popped a search into Google and the first match was... Wikipedia. I guess a little donating here and there can pay off in the end.
Granted there were thousands of other matches, but if all those matches needed money, and no one gave them any, all the sites would be gone. So for $10, I figure it's worth supporting free information.
I'm not sure why they're cheaper, but I compared the prices of the books I bought this semester to the prices on BookCentral.com (the website listed in the NYTimes article) with my school's bookstore ( http://www.book.uci.edu/ ) and my books were 40-50% cheaper from the bookstore. These are new, US edition books.
Go figure.
Print out a /. comment page?
And I agree with that too, but I was referring to something I recall happening (but can't find through searching) with a bunch of the bigger universities a while back... maybe a year or so ago... where there was a push to start blocking ports and managing traffic to make the *AAs happy.
This one is more fun: here
If they're trying to offer a secure server Linux distro, you'd think they'd run their webserver on that instead of OpenBSD.
It says "(c)olleges and universities generally do not have a legal duty to control students' private conduct."
So does this mean they should no longer be forced to block ports, monitor traffic, etc with anything relating to p2p activities? Sure the uni could do it if they wanted to, but wasn't there a huge big thing about the *AA's wanting unis to help them stop the p2pers. It sounds like they are no longer obligated to control which ports are open on the firewall, etc.
And people say I have no time on my hands.
Which is only even more weird since both the phone number and email address are for Dynamism, not Sony.
From the article:
The GT3/K is only in limited production from Sony and you will need to contact them directly if you are serious about buying. (800-711-6277 or sales@dynamism.com)
Isn't that weird that they would say "you must buy it from Sony directly" then link you to dynamism?
Actually, Dynamism has had this listed for about a year now:
http://www.dynamism.com/gt3/index.shtml