Telemarketing is a commercial activity, and thus better (or just as well) regulated by the F-Trade-C, instead of the F-Communications-C.
It fits in with privacy laws and when passed by the FTC, better expands to cover any form of harassing sales, not just those by telephone. If the FCC took over they'd be unable to in the future ban unsolicited paper mail from these companies, whereas this would be in the FTCs jurisdiction.
That's the problem. You say it's not my decision to make. Bullshit. I'm not going to give up the right to decide right and wrong for myself.
If people do X for hundreds of years, and everything thinks it's okay, then a corporation smelling profit bribes the government to make X illegal so people have to purchase Y, it doesn't make X wrong even though it is illegal. Similarly, if the government wanted to reduce the population and declared red-heads non-people (or any other arbitrary example) so that we could kill them and take their posessions it wouldn't make it right, though it would be legal.
Because the law isn't an indicator of what's right, I think I need to make my own decisions, thank you very much.
And, in that sense, it does matter who I'm "stealing" from and what I'm "stealing". If I don't agree that copyright can be retroactively extended I feel perfectly justified in copying Steamboat Willie. If I want $100 and I could take it from you, a working stiff, or the RIAA, a collective that supports unjust laws, I feel justified in taking it from them. They've payed for laws that make it okay to steal money from me. I've never burned a single song, in MP3 or cd-audio, onto a CD, yet for every CD I buy to put my own data onto I'm paying the music industry. And *none* of that has ever been shown to go to the artists. They've said they keep the money, as a cost of collecting the money, but that it's to compensate the artists...
How, if you actually examine what's going on, would disobeying an unjust law be wrong when the only people hurt are part of this collective?
Very astute. They're all the same, some just wear different shirts. They're both in it for themselves, not for you. If they get paid to screw you over, guess what's going to happen.
It's okay though, we expect nothing else, they're just doing to to maximize shareholder value!
Why I didn't get rich is that I didn't know *when*. It's pretty obvious when you watch a drunk juggling chainsaws that it's going to get messy, but you don't know when and if it's going to be him or the audience that's going to suffer.
Anyone with even a basic clue, which evidently leaves out most economists, knew the dot-com boom was going to end. As I said, Amazon was worth billions and could be replicated with a million dollars and six months. Obviously even if the online book market was big enough other companies would step in with their own portals and take some of that traffic. There wasn't any lock-in besides branding and that's never been enough, in the end, to win out over lower prices. (Which is what the other companies would have offered, to break into Amazon's market.)
That obviously meant that Amazon wasn't going to be a billion dollar company forever. I knew this from the beginning. Maybe I really am that smart, with an IQ of 300, but I knew that their easy ride couldn't last. I don't actually think it's that hard to see though, much as I'd like to think that I must be a genius to have noticed it.
Did I know when it was going to die? No. There's a big difference between being smart enough to see that a house of cards will collapse and predicting the weather and knowing when.
And gold always goes up when the market goes bad. Always has, always will, until someone manages to transmute lead to gold and people realise it's just a shiny metal. Again, the reason I'm not rich is that while I can predict the trivial things I can't tell when.
Let me guess, I'd have to be a physicist to predict that the sun will shine tomorrow?
Then why isn't he mega rich? Mistress Cleo "predicted" most of this stuff too, and most of it's pretty obvious if you think about it.
Amazon.com doesn't do anything (and did less back then) that you couldn't replicate with a coding team and six months. It wasn't worth a billion. Same with most of the Dot-Com companies. Overvalued stocks -> market crash. Wow!
The terrorist attack is a pretty easy guess too. Eventually the terrorists will strike the country that's #1 on their most-hated list. Well duh!
And gold is a given if the market tanks or if there a disaster (and the market tanks).
But, did he predict any of this well enough to invest in it and get rich, or did he say a bunch of obvious things? I'd accept that Warren Buffet knows what he's doing with stocks, he's gotten rich from it, but this guy didn't say anything an astrologer couldn't. In finance more than anywhere else, put your money where your mouth is.
But knowing that you'll read an email titled "Hey, it's Dave, we met at Comdex" lets them forge better subject lines until you're afraid to read any email that isn't white-listed.
As is, the subject lines I get in spam only very rarely aproximate my real email, and as such as easily sorted. If they knew which ones looked real they'd all start looking like that.
White-lists and challenge-response email. First, allow everything from your mom and your friends. Then, for every new address that emails you, send them a message saying: "I have received email from you, if this isn't spam, respond with the number in the included picture either in the body or subject of your email. You email will be stored up to 24h while waiting for your response. This is a one-time procedure."
Then if I email you I have 24h to check my email, view the picture, and reply with the secret number. When I do, I become white-listed (bypassing the check in the future) and my original email gets sent to you. If I don't pass the challenge the email gets silently deleted.
That, and finding the names of spammers and giving them blanket parties. Hard to compose spam with broken fingers and bruised organs. 100% pure vigilante justice.:)
Or even a combo of the delay system and Spam Assasain. If the received emails look spammy, but don't actually peak the meter, you delay a little bit. For every SA point over a certain limit you delay n^2 seconds, for example. If they send mail that looks a little spammy it appears like a slow server. If they send something that looks really nasty it takes 60 seconds to ack each email before receiving the next.
Spam is a numbers game and it can be slowed down it'll hurt them.
That's a great idea. Not only does it solve a lot of the spam issues, but it puts the burden on the spam-hosting ISP (they have to store all the email) so they have an incentive to stop this, but it also fixes a lot of generic email issues.
For instance, why do many email systems cap attachment size? Because they don't want to store my 2GB file while waiting for someone to download it. But in the new system it's up to the end user to download it so they can decide if its too large or not. If I want to send a 2gb attachment it's my server (or my ISP's server) that takes the hit while they decide.
It'd be almost completely transparent to the end user. You could even fetch their email, when they ask for it, and store it in an IMAP mailbox.
The only problem with it that I can see is that because it involves a response, the spammer knows that the account is active and that they picked up the spam. Right now, spam is a very shot-in-the-dark type thing. With this, or webbugs in the email, they'd have a much better idea of who reads spam and what subject lines get through.
If you ISP can't provide proper email service, purchase it from someone who can. Once you've got your net connect you can send email, via a gateway perhaps, from anyone who will sell you an account.
To withstand a DDoS, should we use a distributed service? And how about something anonymous like Freenet? It's obvious from the fact that spammers are DDoSing these lists that they hate them, and they'd only hate them if they worked... We need to keep them alive somehow.
Perhaps the blackhole lists should buy connectivity from the same company that provides backbone connection for the RIAA/MPAA. If we're going to be taken out, we might as well aim the collateral damage. And you never know, maybe these big corps with their legal funds can attack a few spammers.:)
But if the RIAA pressed for criminal charges, where applicable, it'd actually be for a crime and handled by the criminal justice system. As is, they can just threaten someone with a multi-thousand dollar demand, or an expensive civil defense, and people pretty much have to give in or go bankrupt. Unless of course, they're photogenic like a 12-year old or a grandmother.
The whole problem with the US court system is that you can bankrupt someone with a frivolous lawsuit and just because you withdraw it at the end they can't get an injunction to keep you from doing it again.
I saw this in Underworld in the theatre tonight. Maybe 10+ instances of red dots. I *think* they're in various patterns, but I'm not sure. They always seemed to happen during an action scene so it's hard to tell.
I complained about red dots on the picture and got free passes. Maybe if enough people complain they'll stop.
Open Source is a hobbyist movement. If you say "I can't do X" you'll get a hobbyist level answer. It's somewhat like ham radio. If you say "I can't setup a ham->phone bridge" you'll get people who say "Buy X, Y and Z, wire them together like this, connect to this, and viola."
You might have wanted a three word answer, but you're in the wrong place. If you want it easy, you don't want a ham radio, you want a cell phone.
Ditto with open source. It's not intentionally hard, but people aren't wasting time making encrypted filesystems trivial enough for Grandma to use. Grandma is using the cellphone equivalent, Xandros or some other hand-holding distro and doesn't even know crypto exists.
As long as the community is primarily hobbyist, which the bleeding edge always will be, you'll get this sort of answer. No matter what the community is, ham radio, overclocking, car modifications, etc. Eventually that'll trickle down to your consumer level product and you won't even have to read anything to figure out how to use it.
Most security related bugs in crypto apps are going to be standard buffer overflows and such. The sort of thing any programmer can help with. As for the algorithms themselves, sure people without math degrees aren't going to be able to help analyze them, but that's why even if you roll you own crypto app you use an existing algorithm and accepted key handling practices, etc.
It's only bad when you merge an iPod with a hard-drive with a cell-phone and get a phone three times larger than normal and a music player with a number pad, not the best of either world.
Get rid of the hard drive though and use a phone with a graphical display (easy to remap for non-phone UI) and it's suddely very reasonable. Cell phones already have all the circuitry for playing sounds. Plug in headphones and you're set.
Little flash cards can already hold between 256MB and 3GB depending on the type. Easily enough for hours of music.
Don't discount the convergence concept. My cell-phone works as a flashlight (not the screen, it's got two white LEDs at the end) and while it's not as good as a dedicated flashlight I've always got it with me and it's a lot better than nothing. Certainly more useful that I thought when I bought the phone.
If you use predictive text input, you shouldn't need to double-tap a number. This means that you press the number twice and it records it as two sets of [ABC]. The phone stores this simple regex and matches it against a word list, in frequency order.
So you type 8378 ([TUV][[DEF][PQRS][TUV]) and the phone suggests 'Test', hit the alternate word key (if your phone has one) and it'll switch to 'Vest', and back to 'Test'.
Of course, if you're entering URLs or names, or if your phone doesn't have an user dictionary, predictive text input may not help and you're back to pressing 'next' or waiting a second to finish one letter and go to the next if they're on the same key.
You could fairly easily keep a system from being harmed by email trojans.
It's better for a trojan to email your files out rather than deleting them, and better yet for the trojan to not even be able to see your files.
This is fairly easily accomplished, in an ideal design, by launching the email process without write or ideally even, read permissions to your important documents. The EMail client would only be able to write to an incoming directory, the worst it could do if it was exploited would be to delete your email (but not the backups) and whatever was in the incoming directory (maybe - the OS could let it create but not overwrite.)
If you want to email someone a document you could either put a copy of the document in your outgoing folder, copy it into the clipboard or drag-and-drop it into the email program, or browse to the file with a system control that verifies that input is coming from the user, or their shell, and not from a trojan. The email client could request the system file browser dialog but wouldn't be able to actually control anything. Instead of the email program getting back a location of the file and opening it itself it'd simply be given the whole contents. It wouldn't know where on disk the user browsed to or anything.
This wouldn't be that hard to implement. Much like making the stack non-executable. It's a simple idea that would prevent a ton of attacks, but it'd require changing much of what we do now just because we went down another road, even though the idea itself is pretty simple.
The problem with property rights is that they start where the rich define them.
The richest family in my province, last I heard anyway, is in the cattle business. They own hundreds of thousands of acres of grazing land.
What did they pay for it? Nothing. They came along and put up a fence around it. Why do they own that land? Why could the governments of the time parcel out the whole of North America, despite the fact that there were people here, and expect that those "property rights" would be respected?
As I see it, I'd be just as justified in claiming half of their land. Just take a big roll of barbed wire and fence myself off a huge chunk. It's what they did, right?
And if they don't like it, I don't see how they can expect me to respect their view on property rights which essentially says "I can fence it off and claim it, but you have to abide by my fence". Seems unfair to me.
Some people create out of nothing, or at least consume very few raw materials, like inventors or artists. Other people "create" wealth by exploiting more than their fare share of the resources. Had BillG not broken a lot of laws to get where he was, I'd respect his wealth more than that of the oil families for instance, because he created value (the value of windows is left to the reader to judge). Other people just sell what they put a fence around.
Until there's a fair start, I see no problem in taxing the bejeezus out of the rich. As far as I'm concerned, very few of them earned what they have.
I have to second this. These days the military takes a lot of flak because they get used as the government's international policy enforcement arm for unpopular policy. It keeps people from seeing what an essential job they do and how screwed we'd all be if they weren't there keeping us safe.
Of course, Solaris would infringe on other OSes. SCO would join the fray, only to be told that other operating systems before Unix allocated memory so they couldn't do that, etc...
This rampant IP shit has got to end, especially with copyrights lasting nigh unto an eternity.
Actually, the best thing to limit copyright length and scope would be if similar code infringed. It'd make an unworkable mess out of the situation in days and we'd have to scrap it or throw away everything since Univac.
Slashdot Mirror
Telemarketing is a commercial activity, and thus better (or just as well) regulated by the F-Trade-C, instead of the F-Communications-C.
It fits in with privacy laws and when passed by the FTC, better expands to cover any form of harassing sales, not just those by telephone. If the FCC took over they'd be unable to in the future ban unsolicited paper mail from these companies, whereas this would be in the FTCs jurisdiction.
That's the problem. You say it's not my decision to make. Bullshit. I'm not going to give up the right to decide right and wrong for myself.
If people do X for hundreds of years, and everything thinks it's okay, then a corporation smelling profit bribes the government to make X illegal so people have to purchase Y, it doesn't make X wrong even though it is illegal. Similarly, if the government wanted to reduce the population and declared red-heads non-people (or any other arbitrary example) so that we could kill them and take their posessions it wouldn't make it right, though it would be legal.
Because the law isn't an indicator of what's right, I think I need to make my own decisions, thank you very much.
And, in that sense, it does matter who I'm "stealing" from and what I'm "stealing". If I don't agree that copyright can be retroactively extended I feel perfectly justified in copying Steamboat Willie. If I want $100 and I could take it from you, a working stiff, or the RIAA, a collective that supports unjust laws, I feel justified in taking it from them. They've payed for laws that make it okay to steal money from me. I've never burned a single song, in MP3 or cd-audio, onto a CD, yet for every CD I buy to put my own data onto I'm paying the music industry. And *none* of that has ever been shown to go to the artists. They've said they keep the money, as a cost of collecting the money, but that it's to compensate the artists...
How, if you actually examine what's going on, would disobeying an unjust law be wrong when the only people hurt are part of this collective?
Very astute. They're all the same, some just wear different shirts. They're both in it for themselves, not for you. If they get paid to screw you over, guess what's going to happen.
It's okay though, we expect nothing else, they're just doing to to maximize shareholder value!
Oh wait...
Why I didn't get rich is that I didn't know *when*. It's pretty obvious when you watch a drunk juggling chainsaws that it's going to get messy, but you don't know when and if it's going to be him or the audience that's going to suffer.
Anyone with even a basic clue, which evidently leaves out most economists, knew the dot-com boom was going to end. As I said, Amazon was worth billions and could be replicated with a million dollars and six months. Obviously even if the online book market was big enough other companies would step in with their own portals and take some of that traffic. There wasn't any lock-in besides branding and that's never been enough, in the end, to win out over lower prices. (Which is what the other companies would have offered, to break into Amazon's market.)
That obviously meant that Amazon wasn't going to be a billion dollar company forever. I knew this from the beginning. Maybe I really am that smart, with an IQ of 300, but I knew that their easy ride couldn't last. I don't actually think it's that hard to see though, much as I'd like to think that I must be a genius to have noticed it.
Did I know when it was going to die? No. There's a big difference between being smart enough to see that a house of cards will collapse and predicting the weather and knowing when.
And gold always goes up when the market goes bad. Always has, always will, until someone manages to transmute lead to gold and people realise it's just a shiny metal. Again, the reason I'm not rich is that while I can predict the trivial things I can't tell when.
Let me guess, I'd have to be a physicist to predict that the sun will shine tomorrow?
Ahh yes, a hate crime, as opposed to the much more common love crimes.
Then why isn't he mega rich? Mistress Cleo "predicted" most of this stuff too, and most of it's pretty obvious if you think about it.
Amazon.com doesn't do anything (and did less back then) that you couldn't replicate with a coding team and six months. It wasn't worth a billion. Same with most of the Dot-Com companies. Overvalued stocks -> market crash. Wow!
The terrorist attack is a pretty easy guess too. Eventually the terrorists will strike the country that's #1 on their most-hated list. Well duh!
And gold is a given if the market tanks or if there a disaster (and the market tanks).
But, did he predict any of this well enough to invest in it and get rich, or did he say a bunch of obvious things? I'd accept that Warren Buffet knows what he's doing with stocks, he's gotten rich from it, but this guy didn't say anything an astrologer couldn't. In finance more than anywhere else, put your money where your mouth is.
But knowing that you'll read an email titled "Hey, it's Dave, we met at Comdex" lets them forge better subject lines until you're afraid to read any email that isn't white-listed.
As is, the subject lines I get in spam only very rarely aproximate my real email, and as such as easily sorted. If they knew which ones looked real they'd all start looking like that.
White-lists and challenge-response email. First, allow everything from your mom and your friends. Then, for every new address that emails you, send them a message saying: "I have received email from you, if this isn't spam, respond with the number in the included picture either in the body or subject of your email. You email will be stored up to 24h while waiting for your response. This is a one-time procedure."
:)
Then if I email you I have 24h to check my email, view the picture, and reply with the secret number. When I do, I become white-listed (bypassing the check in the future) and my original email gets sent to you. If I don't pass the challenge the email gets silently deleted.
That, and finding the names of spammers and giving them blanket parties. Hard to compose spam with broken fingers and bruised organs. 100% pure vigilante justice.
Or even a combo of the delay system and Spam Assasain. If the received emails look spammy, but don't actually peak the meter, you delay a little bit. For every SA point over a certain limit you delay n^2 seconds, for example. If they send mail that looks a little spammy it appears like a slow server. If they send something that looks really nasty it takes 60 seconds to ack each email before receiving the next.
Spam is a numbers game and it can be slowed down it'll hurt them.
That's a great idea. Not only does it solve a lot of the spam issues, but it puts the burden on the spam-hosting ISP (they have to store all the email) so they have an incentive to stop this, but it also fixes a lot of generic email issues.
For instance, why do many email systems cap attachment size? Because they don't want to store my 2GB file while waiting for someone to download it. But in the new system it's up to the end user to download it so they can decide if its too large or not. If I want to send a 2gb attachment it's my server (or my ISP's server) that takes the hit while they decide.
It'd be almost completely transparent to the end user. You could even fetch their email, when they ask for it, and store it in an IMAP mailbox.
The only problem with it that I can see is that because it involves a response, the spammer knows that the account is active and that they picked up the spam. Right now, spam is a very shot-in-the-dark type thing. With this, or webbugs in the email, they'd have a much better idea of who reads spam and what subject lines get through.
If you ISP can't provide proper email service, purchase it from someone who can. Once you've got your net connect you can send email, via a gateway perhaps, from anyone who will sell you an account.
To withstand a DDoS, should we use a distributed service? And how about something anonymous like Freenet? It's obvious from the fact that spammers are DDoSing these lists that they hate them, and they'd only hate them if they worked... We need to keep them alive somehow.
:)
Perhaps the blackhole lists should buy connectivity from the same company that provides backbone connection for the RIAA/MPAA. If we're going to be taken out, we might as well aim the collateral damage. And you never know, maybe these big corps with their legal funds can attack a few spammers.
But if the RIAA pressed for criminal charges, where applicable, it'd actually be for a crime and handled by the criminal justice system. As is, they can just threaten someone with a multi-thousand dollar demand, or an expensive civil defense, and people pretty much have to give in or go bankrupt. Unless of course, they're photogenic like a 12-year old or a grandmother.
The whole problem with the US court system is that you can bankrupt someone with a frivolous lawsuit and just because you withdraw it at the end they can't get an injunction to keep you from doing it again.
I saw this in Underworld in the theatre tonight. Maybe 10+ instances of red dots. I *think* they're in various patterns, but I'm not sure. They always seemed to happen during an action scene so it's hard to tell.
I complained about red dots on the picture and got free passes. Maybe if enough people complain they'll stop.
Open Source is a hobbyist movement. If you say "I can't do X" you'll get a hobbyist level answer. It's somewhat like ham radio. If you say "I can't setup a ham->phone bridge" you'll get people who say "Buy X, Y and Z, wire them together like this, connect to this, and viola."
You might have wanted a three word answer, but you're in the wrong place. If you want it easy, you don't want a ham radio, you want a cell phone.
Ditto with open source. It's not intentionally hard, but people aren't wasting time making encrypted filesystems trivial enough for Grandma to use. Grandma is using the cellphone equivalent, Xandros or some other hand-holding distro and doesn't even know crypto exists.
As long as the community is primarily hobbyist, which the bleeding edge always will be, you'll get this sort of answer. No matter what the community is, ham radio, overclocking, car modifications, etc. Eventually that'll trickle down to your consumer level product and you won't even have to read anything to figure out how to use it.
Most security related bugs in crypto apps are going to be standard buffer overflows and such. The sort of thing any programmer can help with. As for the algorithms themselves, sure people without math degrees aren't going to be able to help analyze them, but that's why even if you roll you own crypto app you use an existing algorithm and accepted key handling practices, etc.
It's only bad when you merge an iPod with a hard-drive with a cell-phone and get a phone three times larger than normal and a music player with a number pad, not the best of either world.
Get rid of the hard drive though and use a phone with a graphical display (easy to remap for non-phone UI) and it's suddely very reasonable. Cell phones already have all the circuitry for playing sounds. Plug in headphones and you're set.
Little flash cards can already hold between 256MB and 3GB depending on the type. Easily enough for hours of music.
Don't discount the convergence concept. My cell-phone works as a flashlight (not the screen, it's got two white LEDs at the end) and while it's not as good as a dedicated flashlight I've always got it with me and it's a lot better than nothing. Certainly more useful that I thought when I bought the phone.
If you use predictive text input, you shouldn't need to double-tap a number. This means that you press the number twice and it records it as two sets of [ABC]. The phone stores this simple regex and matches it against a word list, in frequency order.
So you type 8378 ([TUV][[DEF][PQRS][TUV]) and the phone suggests 'Test', hit the alternate word key (if your phone has one) and it'll switch to 'Vest', and back to 'Test'.
Of course, if you're entering URLs or names, or if your phone doesn't have an user dictionary, predictive text input may not help and you're back to pressing 'next' or waiting a second to finish one letter and go to the next if they're on the same key.
You could fairly easily keep a system from being harmed by email trojans.
It's better for a trojan to email your files out rather than deleting them, and better yet for the trojan to not even be able to see your files.
This is fairly easily accomplished, in an ideal design, by launching the email process without write or ideally even, read permissions to your important documents. The EMail client would only be able to write to an incoming directory, the worst it could do if it was exploited would be to delete your email (but not the backups) and whatever was in the incoming directory (maybe - the OS could let it create but not overwrite.)
If you want to email someone a document you could either put a copy of the document in your outgoing folder, copy it into the clipboard or drag-and-drop it into the email program, or browse to the file with a system control that verifies that input is coming from the user, or their shell, and not from a trojan. The email client could request the system file browser dialog but wouldn't be able to actually control anything. Instead of the email program getting back a location of the file and opening it itself it'd simply be given the whole contents. It wouldn't know where on disk the user browsed to or anything.
This wouldn't be that hard to implement. Much like making the stack non-executable. It's a simple idea that would prevent a ton of attacks, but it'd require changing much of what we do now just because we went down another road, even though the idea itself is pretty simple.
Funny troll. Just what do you think a hotfix is, if not a kernel patch?
A cave? Pure luxury! In my day we had nothing but animal skins and sticks, and we had to hunt our own animals to get the skins!
The problem with property rights is that they start where the rich define them.
The richest family in my province, last I heard anyway, is in the cattle business. They own hundreds of thousands of acres of grazing land.
What did they pay for it? Nothing. They came along and put up a fence around it. Why do they own that land? Why could the governments of the time parcel out the whole of North America, despite the fact that there were people here, and expect that those "property rights" would be respected?
As I see it, I'd be just as justified in claiming half of their land. Just take a big roll of barbed wire and fence myself off a huge chunk. It's what they did, right?
And if they don't like it, I don't see how they can expect me to respect their view on property rights which essentially says "I can fence it off and claim it, but you have to abide by my fence". Seems unfair to me.
Some people create out of nothing, or at least consume very few raw materials, like inventors or artists. Other people "create" wealth by exploiting more than their fare share of the resources. Had BillG not broken a lot of laws to get where he was, I'd respect his wealth more than that of the oil families for instance, because he created value (the value of windows is left to the reader to judge). Other people just sell what they put a fence around.
Until there's a fair start, I see no problem in taxing the bejeezus out of the rich. As far as I'm concerned, very few of them earned what they have.
I have to second this. These days the military takes a lot of flak because they get used as the government's international policy enforcement arm for unpopular policy. It keeps people from seeing what an essential job they do and how screwed we'd all be if they weren't there keeping us safe.
Thanks guys.
Of course, Solaris would infringe on other OSes. SCO would join the fray, only to be told that other operating systems before Unix allocated memory so they couldn't do that, etc...
This rampant IP shit has got to end, especially with copyrights lasting nigh unto an eternity.
Actually, the best thing to limit copyright length and scope would be if similar code infringed. It'd make an unworkable mess out of the situation in days and we'd have to scrap it or throw away everything since Univac.
Yeah, a drive cabinet would be a nightmare to use.
But 5.25 HDs, single height, could hold (judging by platter area) over twenty times the data. Still easy to swap, but a nicer size.
They'd be slow, but I connect to my fileserver over 100mbps, even with 10 people using it I rarely see any delay.