I'm sorry to inform everyone that our grant may not be renewed because we don't have access to enough eggs to demonstrate progress on our research. As a result, some positions may not be funded next year.
There's also one other strength of Wikipedia that often gets ignored -links. This makes it an even better starting point than a print dictionary in that more authoritative and in-depth information on anything from the definition of a word to a complex theory is often only a click away.
IOW its not just the information provided, its the linking to more information -something the web was designed for.
Get a phone call you don't want? Call the company back and make sure you do it for double the damage you incurred.
I'd always thought, if it had been done early enough, this could have killed SPAM. Imagine if everyone who received a Viagra SPAM called the company's toll-free number to say they didn't want to order anything? Or visited their web site and left a few messages. Heck, even have a SPAMmer of the day on/., where every/. reader was encouraged to "visit" the site of the day. Put the power of/.'ing to good use.
Theoretically, that's where the fine comes in. Profits for the quarter just dropped $5.3 million and the stock price went down a bit, "down $0.06 to $13.71" from TFA.
I'm not sure if, or how you figured in two factors. One, that only a certain % of calls would be to people on the DNC list, and, two, what % of people on the DNC list who were called, actually filed a complaint.
I also wonder how a telemarketing company that does that volume of business could accidently do this. It says in one case DirecTV supplied the list. Didn't the telemarketing company check it agaisnst the DNC list, or did DirecTV give them the list with the understanding that they had already filtered the list? In the cases where telemarketing companies were simply paid a commision (assuming they used their own list of numbers), I would think they would ultimately be responsible (and it sounds like they were held accountable).
Was wondering the same thing myself. Based on my experience its about 50-50 US citizens to non-citizens.
From what I'm seeing it also doesn't specify area of specialty. There can be a big difference between a Civil Engineer, Electrical Engineer, and Chemical Engineer (to name a few). How well is each area represented?
After looking again, I'm thinking the writer of TFA is a little off. I can see a URL to a page to download a software media player and enter the code to download part of a movie. This business of giving away media players just doesn't make sense to me.
Having more "Happy Meal" toys around the house than I can count, I have to wonder who would want a media player that came in a happy meal? The last such "media player" we got required a wind-up before unrecognizable pictures scrolled by.
They're going to be giving away a wifi enabled media player in a Happy Meal? Riiight.
Next they'll be telling me the Big Kid's Meal comes with an HD-TV.
Yes, the fact that female avatars are designed to appeal to straight male desire is clear.
Is that true? I'm just trying to put the whole story (considering I haven't actually read the story, it being/.'d and all) together with one of the most popular dolls for young girls of all time. The Barbie Doll. Given the doll's far-out-of reality proportions, there was debate years ago about wether Barbie had the figure she did because that's what girls wanted to relate to, or if it was all a male designer's fantasy pushed on girls by a patriarchical society telling them that's what they should look like.
Bottom line is, given a choice, would femaile gamers be using realistically proportioned avatars, or avatars with real-world proportions? Would most male gamers choose to be Conan the Barbarian, or Bill Gates? Are female gamers any different in that regard -Wonder Woman or Martha Stewart?
I can see the lack on armor on a caster, but a fighter?
Which brings up a point that's always amused me. I'd expect the fighters to have a physique behond belief, but even the male casters make most real-world professional athletes look like wimps.
I don't know if the 20% rate is good or bad, but it does raise the quality question in my mind. If many of the bits can barely be read reliably, does that mean a scratch that normally wouldn't be a problem will cause a read error? IMO that does go towards the question of life expectancy -even to the point of how well they'll handle the warping, etc. that happens over time.
The other question is what constitutes a passing grade vs. a failure? Are we talking about a quality level where 100% of players can play the new disk with zero errors, or 90% of players can play it back without noticable errors?
I don't think its so easy to circumvent the real use for DRM -control. Let's face it, DRM isn't about preventing piracy. You know it, I know it, and the MPAA and RIAA know it. Piracy is just the ruse they can sell to the public, lawmakers, etc. Do you think they could have gotten the DMCA passed if they stated they needed it, not to prevent piracy, but so they could control what users were allowed to do with the media after they purchased it?
DVDs are the perfect example of this. I've now run into 2 DVDs that won't even allow me to fast forward or skip the two trailers at the beginning. Even hitting the "Stop" button gives me an, "Operation Not Permitted" response. Disabling "Stop" does not prevent piracy, it only allows control. And my DVD manufacturer is forced to comply with the will of the MPAA, not mine. Just think of the fun when the broadcast flag gives them the same capability (or more) for controlling recordings made of over-the-air content (you will be forced to watch that commercial).
So if anyone says DRM is needed to prevent piracy, ask them how disabling the "Stop" function prevents piracy. It may seem trivial, but not being able to do that one little thing is what exposes the fraud being purpetrated by the MPAA.
Face it, "cyberwarefare" is a bigger threat to the US than it is to "terrorists."
Which is exactly why the US needs to be adept at cyberwarfare. Its not just about attacking others, its about defense as well. If there were a terrorist cyberattack aimed at some part of the US infrastructure, you need someone capable of finding the source and shutting it down. I see that as the most likely scenario, but I could be wrong.
I'm not so sure that "someone" should be the Air Force though.
I hope they (or someone) is working hard on the cyber-war front. Maybe I'm wrong, but the US seems to be the most vulnerable country in the world to that type of attack.
And personally, if the choice is drop some bonbs or take out electronically take out an ISP, I'd say take out the ISP. I'd much rather have the collateral damage be disrupting a few businesses than the nightime cleaning crew at some government installation.
You make some good points. I see it as adding to the list of options that can be used to minimize collateral damage.
A agree with the latter part of your statement, but the first part makes a big assumption -that DRM is about thwarting piracty. IMO its not. Its about controlling content after the sale. For proof I can offer only:
Conjecture : The RIAA and MPAA know DRM schemes will be broken, thus don't rely on them to protect their revenue stream.
Observation : The MPAA already has more control over your DVD player than you do. I've already run across a couple DVDs that won't even allow me to bypass the trailers at the beginning. Even pushing the "Stop" button only elicits an "Operation Not Permitted" message. Is that preventing piracy or exerting control?
Just wait until the broadcast flag passes, TiVo has already given us a glimpse. Think you'll be able to save an entire season of a show on your PVR? Think your PVR will allow you to fast-forward through commercials? Isn't it wonderful what digital tech lets them do that they couldn't do with the old analog stuff because they were too late? Note how current laws like the DMCA are the only things that let them do it.
Nobody is trying to make copies of their software. They're trying to get rid of it, make sure that it's actually gone, and ensure that your computer still functions afterward.
The software is the protection device used to prevent copying of the CD, put there (according to Sony) with the user's permission as part of the terms of use. By publishing that the software exists, and how to remove it, you're publishing a method to circumvent a protection device.This knowledge can be used to allow a user to make illegal copies of a CD.
We may agree that Sony's methods are heinous and inneffectual, but that doesn't mean its not covered. Telling someone how to remove this may legally be no different that telling them how to remove CSS on DVDs. Both are circumventing a software protection device.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe they mail subpoenas in situations where the person who's being required to appear isn't going to be hostile,
Or, in this case if I'm reading it correctly, you're being let off the hook.
Not to mention, that for all we know the analysis may be completely wrong.
Yeah, she's 83% Happy, 9% Disgusted, 6% Fearful, 2% Angry.
We're sure she's not 87% Happy, 2% Disgusted, 6% Fearful, 5% Angry? What kind of degree of certainty do we have with these numbers?
Who cares where the egg came from?
I'm sorry to inform everyone that our grant may not be renewed because we don't have access to enough eggs to demonstrate progress on our research. As a result, some positions may not be funded next year.
BTW, anyone here want to donate some eggs?
There's also one other strength of Wikipedia that often gets ignored -links. This makes it an even better starting point than a print dictionary in that more authoritative and in-depth information on anything from the definition of a word to a complex theory is often only a click away.
IOW its not just the information provided, its the linking to more information -something the web was designed for.
That's what I was wondering, and from TFA,
A source close to the Cupertino (Calif.) company says sales of iTunes gift cards are "off the charts," so downloads should surge after Christmas.
Get a phone call you don't want? Call the company back and make sure you do it for double the damage you incurred.
/., where every /. reader was encouraged to "visit" the site of the day. Put the power of /.'ing to good use.
I'd always thought, if it had been done early enough, this could have killed SPAM. Imagine if everyone who received a Viagra SPAM called the company's toll-free number to say they didn't want to order anything? Or visited their web site and left a few messages. Heck, even have a SPAMmer of the day on
Theoretically, that's where the fine comes in. Profits for the quarter just dropped $5.3 million and the stock price went down a bit, "down $0.06 to $13.71" from TFA.
I'm not sure if, or how you figured in two factors. One, that only a certain % of calls would be to people on the DNC list, and, two, what % of people on the DNC list who were called, actually filed a complaint.
I also wonder how a telemarketing company that does that volume of business could accidently do this. It says in one case DirecTV supplied the list. Didn't the telemarketing company check it agaisnst the DNC list, or did DirecTV give them the list with the understanding that they had already filtered the list? In the cases where telemarketing companies were simply paid a commision (assuming they used their own list of numbers), I would think they would ultimately be responsible (and it sounds like they were held accountable).
Was wondering the same thing myself. Based on my experience its about 50-50 US citizens to non-citizens.
From what I'm seeing it also doesn't specify area of specialty. There can be a big difference between a Civil Engineer, Electrical Engineer, and Chemical Engineer (to name a few). How well is each area represented?
After looking again, I'm thinking the writer of TFA is a little off. I can see a URL to a page to download a software media player and enter the code to download part of a movie. This business of giving away media players just doesn't make sense to me.
Having more "Happy Meal" toys around the house than I can count, I have to wonder who would want a media player that came in a happy meal? The last such "media player" we got required a wind-up before unrecognizable pictures scrolled by.
They're going to be giving away a wifi enabled media player in a Happy Meal? Riiight.
Next they'll be telling me the Big Kid's Meal comes with an HD-TV.
IMO the point still stands -they are targetted at a female audience. Doesn't mean men don't buy them, just that they're not the target audience.
Yes, the fact that female avatars are designed to appeal to straight male desire is clear.
/.'d and all) together with one of the most popular dolls for young girls of all time. The Barbie Doll. Given the doll's far-out-of reality proportions, there was debate years ago about wether Barbie had the figure she did because that's what girls wanted to relate to, or if it was all a male designer's fantasy pushed on girls by a patriarchical society telling them that's what they should look like.
Is that true? I'm just trying to put the whole story (considering I haven't actually read the story, it being
Bottom line is, given a choice, would femaile gamers be using realistically proportioned avatars, or avatars with real-world proportions? Would most male gamers choose to be Conan the Barbarian, or Bill Gates? Are female gamers any different in that regard -Wonder Woman or Martha Stewart?
I can see the lack on armor on a caster, but a fighter?
Which brings up a point that's always amused me. I'd expect the fighters to have a physique behond belief, but even the male casters make most real-world professional athletes look like wimps.
IOW 2nd dude do'd doo on 1st dude's do'in?
I don't know if the 20% rate is good or bad, but it does raise the quality question in my mind. If many of the bits can barely be read reliably, does that mean a scratch that normally wouldn't be a problem will cause a read error? IMO that does go towards the question of life expectancy -even to the point of how well they'll handle the warping, etc. that happens over time.
The other question is what constitutes a passing grade vs. a failure? Are we talking about a quality level where 100% of players can play the new disk with zero errors, or 90% of players can play it back without noticable errors?
I don't think its so easy to circumvent the real use for DRM -control. Let's face it, DRM isn't about preventing piracy. You know it, I know it, and the MPAA and RIAA know it. Piracy is just the ruse they can sell to the public, lawmakers, etc. Do you think they could have gotten the DMCA passed if they stated they needed it, not to prevent piracy, but so they could control what users were allowed to do with the media after they purchased it?
DVDs are the perfect example of this. I've now run into 2 DVDs that won't even allow me to fast forward or skip the two trailers at the beginning. Even hitting the "Stop" button gives me an, "Operation Not Permitted" response. Disabling "Stop" does not prevent piracy, it only allows control. And my DVD manufacturer is forced to comply with the will of the MPAA, not mine. Just think of the fun when the broadcast flag gives them the same capability (or more) for controlling recordings made of over-the-air content (you will be forced to watch that commercial).
So if anyone says DRM is needed to prevent piracy, ask them how disabling the "Stop" function prevents piracy. It may seem trivial, but not being able to do that one little thing is what exposes the fraud being purpetrated by the MPAA.
Why not? Isn't cyberspace "flying with a joystick" how most of us got, umm, "turned on" to the internet?
Talk of "Cyber Wars" makes me think of a certain Star Trek episode.
Face it, "cyberwarefare" is a bigger threat to the US than it is to "terrorists."
Which is exactly why the US needs to be adept at cyberwarfare. Its not just about attacking others, its about defense as well. If there were a terrorist cyberattack aimed at some part of the US infrastructure, you need someone capable of finding the source and shutting it down. I see that as the most likely scenario, but I could be wrong.
I'm not so sure that "someone" should be the Air Force though.
The only logical way to do it then is for the army to handle the wired cyber world, and the Air Force can take care of the wireless.
New Air Force motto : All your base station are belong to us.
I hope they (or someone) is working hard on the cyber-war front. Maybe I'm wrong, but the US seems to be the most vulnerable country in the world to that type of attack.
And personally, if the choice is drop some bonbs or take out electronically take out an ISP, I'd say take out the ISP. I'd much rather have the collateral damage be disrupting a few businesses than the nightime cleaning crew at some government installation.
You make some good points. I see it as adding to the list of options that can be used to minimize collateral damage.
missing things like out-of-order execturion.
Which is important for those of us doing out-of-order typing.
A agree with the latter part of your statement, but the first part makes a big assumption -that DRM is about thwarting piracty. IMO its not. Its about controlling content after the sale. For proof I can offer only:
Conjecture : The RIAA and MPAA know DRM schemes will be broken, thus don't rely on them to protect their revenue stream.
Observation : The MPAA already has more control over your DVD player than you do. I've already run across a couple DVDs that won't even allow me to bypass the trailers at the beginning. Even pushing the "Stop" button only elicits an "Operation Not Permitted" message. Is that preventing piracy or exerting control?
Just wait until the broadcast flag passes, TiVo has already given us a glimpse. Think you'll be able to save an entire season of a show on your PVR? Think your PVR will allow you to fast-forward through commercials? Isn't it wonderful what digital tech lets them do that they couldn't do with the old analog stuff because they were too late? Note how current laws like the DMCA are the only things that let them do it.
Nobody is trying to make copies of their software. They're trying to get rid of it, make sure that it's actually gone, and ensure that your computer still functions afterward.
The software is the protection device used to prevent copying of the CD, put there (according to Sony) with the user's permission as part of the terms of use. By publishing that the software exists, and how to remove it, you're publishing a method to circumvent a protection device.This knowledge can be used to allow a user to make illegal copies of a CD.
We may agree that Sony's methods are heinous and inneffectual, but that doesn't mean its not covered. Telling someone how to remove this may legally be no different that telling them how to remove CSS on DVDs. Both are circumventing a software protection device.