Couldn't major ISP's (Telstra and Optus in Australia, or AOL, MSN and Earthlink in the States, for example) set their DNS servers to check not only the traditional hierarchy, but these new DNS servers as well?
In exchange, Name.Space or whoever could give, say AOL their own TLD. Rather than give out http://hometown.aol.com/Bob27484947, they could give out http://Bob27484947.aol.
Just a thought... dunno if its feasible or not.
That actually sounds like a pretty good marketing idea. The only thing would be that bob2748497.aol wouldn't be accessible by traditional DNS users. Perhaps as an interim solution, do as Name.Space has done and also set it up as bob2748497.aol.com
Don't most browsers these days (read: Netscape and IE) default to adding a.com extension to unresolved hostnames? If I'm correct on that, then it's a pretty simple matter for anyone who also owns a.com domain name to use Name.Space as well.
Why would they add another domain instead of utilizing subdomains though? I don't know...less administrative overhead? Somehow I'm not too sure of that, considering that you'd still want to use subdomains for Internet wide connectivity. And, you'll probably want to run your own nameservers. Ah well, maybe that's not such a bright idea after all....
In Windows Media Player 7, they took out the ability to Save the streaming video file you're watching. Watching the same stream in Media Player 6, you can save it no problem.
According to Q273006, this is "by design". Thanks, guys.
Microsoft waited for you to initiate the upgrade. That did not happen with ReplayTV. Nowhere near "another example" (unless you meant another [off-topic] example)
So what? If Warner calls it "shareware" and uses a license that actually is much more restrictive than that term implies, he has added misleading advertising to his list of problems.
The term "shareware" implies, as I stated, that it is not to be sold or included in a distribution without the author's permission.
Not that I give a rat's ass about Warner, but he is on the right side here. As for implications for the GPL or other free software, no I don't really see this as having an effect. About the only thing that could be relevant here is that a) if you don't register your copyright, then you're screwed; and b) if you don't have money to fight it out in a court of law, then you could very well be screwed anyways.
The seal says if you break the seal you are assumed to have agreed to the licence.
So, if I cut the bottom of the CD case out and open it that way, am I not agreeing to their license? For the "click Yes to accept" type of licenses, what if I use the TAB keys and the space bar to select "Yes" instead of clicking?
It will also say if you don't like that you should return the software for a full refund (though I suspect the store will charge a restocking fee or some bullshit)
Bwahahaha!!! Just try to return opened software anywhere. They won't charge you a restocking fee, they just won't accept it as a return.
Apparently, Warner doesn't understand the concept of shareware. The idea behind shareware is to get people to distribute software freely and as widely as possible. Shareware puts the responsibility of paying for the software on the end user that actually uses the software. If Warner didn't want people to distribute his software, he shouldn't call it "shareware".
Another provision of most "shareware" is that the only charge for it can be reasonable costs of distribution and media. By bundling this software with their hardware, and by touting this software on the box, one can reasonably assume that part of the price of the hardware was going to fund the software. Also, most shareware prevents inclusion on compilation CD's without permission from author.
And, of course, shareware isn't a licensing term, it's more of a generic category. Different shareware can have wildly different licenses.
RIght so I can use Intel code in my products without getting permission. So I didn't give them credit, but they haven't lost anything.
Not only that, but I suppose I can go ahead and copy my Windows 2000 Advanced Server CD and sell it for $150. After all, Microsoft is actually being credited (it's their name all over the bloated POS, not mine), so everybody's happy, right?
Darn right. Step 1, award reasonable legal costs to the winner in clear cut cases that only reached court because of the obstinacy of defendants. Makes the Big Guy a little more likely to be the first to blink in the pre-trial game of chicken. Seems to work OK in the UK.
While things like this can and do happen in the States, they're pretty few and far between and mostly depend on the ideological views of the residing judge. It is common, however, to specify legal costs as damages when filing suit. The problem being, of course, that you must be able to fund the lawsuit to begin with, and then recoup your losses. In this case, as in many others, the would-be-plaintiff doesn't have the money to even begin the lawsuit.
Of course, he may be able to find a lawyer who is willing to work contingency (percentage of won damages...if it's $0, then lawyer's fee is $0. Though you normally still have to pay expenses up-front) or pro bono. My advice would be to look for a good lawyer with a history of IP cases and fighting for the little guy. Then beg and plead for his pity. Barring that, try to make enough national media attention (hint: Slashdot doesn't count....NYTimes does count) in order to get a lawyer interested.
The corporations have money, and he doesn't. Thus, they can buy the lawyers, judges, etc. that they need, and he can't. They know this, so they (the corps) aren't afraid of him.
Sad, but true. This is what our legal system is nowadays
While I don't doubt that a great many judges have been bought off, I don't think this really is the rule. I actually rspect most judges, even those who I don't agree with, because I feel they are trying to do the right thing.
As far as money and lawyers go, however, it's a totally different story. Large teams of lawyers and their bankrolling corporation don't have to buy judges. All they have to do is buy time. And, so the paper war begins. Most little guys can't afford to pay a lawyer $x an hour to deal with the avalanche of paperwork that can be filed by a team of 6 lawyers. And even if the little guy could afford to pay his lawyer for it, the lone lawyer wouldn't stand a chance in hell of keeping up with it. So, he'd have to hire more lawyers. Eventually, it's a much better idea either to drop the suit, or settle out-of-court for an "undisclosed amount".
And, that, my friends, is really how the (civil) law works.
I've got a machine (currently catching dust) that my brother-in-law wants to give to his brother once I install Windows on it -- but I can't find a DOS based CDROM driver for this old machine so I can start the installation. I could have this thing running as an xterminal in my house in under five minutes.
There are ways around that, you know. Temporarily replace the CD-ROM, move the HDD to another machine, use an external// port CD-ROM, cable 2 machines together thru// or Serial port and run Laplink; if it's got DOS, install MS-LANMan and do it over the network; copy the.CABs to another HDD and install as a slave; blah, blah, blah. It's only another 15 minutes worth of work.
Don't eat a potato that's sprouting or getting a green layer beneath the skin.
I know this is getting way off-topic...but, damnit man, I don't want to die! So, if the potato is sprouting, but I cut off the sprouts and then peel it, is it OK to eat raw? How about cooked? And if it has a green layer, if I peel it am I safe?
I'll simply apologize for the incorrect term and move on. =) For the record, however, I'll have to agree with UltraBot2K1...I should have used herbicide.
He tried to kill them with RoundUp. They didn't die. He knew which ones to spray therefore he knew which were which (since he wouldn't spary RoundUp on the whole crop). End of story.
In Canada you die of the common cold on a waiting list.
And therein lies the problem. Morons who run to the doctor for every sniffle, ache, and runny nose because they really do think they're going to die. Perhaps if people only went to the doctor when medically necessary, or for an annual exam, then there wouldn't be such a large waiting list.
Why doesn't some insurance company come out with a Catastrophe-Medical Insurance plan? In other words, I'll pay for routine Dr. visits (I never go), but if I break my leg or come down with Cancer, then I'm covered....
Someone mentioned he tried to kill it using RoundUp(tm) pesticide. Obviously then, he knew which plants were the modified ones. Sounds to me like he actually did know which was which, but figured that since they came in on the wind he was okay to grow them. And, I'd have to agree with him. If a truck drives by and drops some dirt on my lawn, do I have to give that dirt back to it's rightful owner?
In all reality, a hacker is someone who is extremely skilled with computers. A hacker also has knowledge about how to break into a system. For instance, any system administrator worth a damn is a hacker. That is to say that they are skilled with computers and know how to break into the system. This puts them in a position to keep computer criminals (note the word choice, criminals not hackers) from breaking into the system.
I'm not sure I'd agree with that, really. In the olden days, when I used to keep up with such jargon, a hacker was no more or less than a "tinkerer". And it didn't necessarily have to be with computers. I consider some above-average mechanics to be "hackers", in that it's a mindset-not an occupation.
A "cracker" is someone who cracks into computers...hence the name, cracker (not be confused with Florida Crackers, which prefer their nom-de-jeur (sp?) capitalized). These would usually, be criminals, but not necessarily black-hat. Unfortunately, there does seem to have been a large overlap between hackers and crackers, in that people with the hacker mindset would often resort to cracking for the sheer fun and curiousity of it. That is, they're a criminal in actions, but not necessarily in spirit.
A "phreaker" is someone who abuses the phone systems (note the ph)...this isn't really done anymore AFAIK, but was quite popular in the 80's.
Now, with the proliferation of newbies on the Internet, we've given rise to this new breed of criminal written about in MSNBC. While it's not really appropiate to label him as a "hacker", it's not too far off from the old "social-engineering" tactics employed by crackers. But, personally, I think this is just a twist on a con-man/scam artist. Just because he uses a computer to get more victims doesn't mean we have to come up with another name for him.
As for the 6-digit income/year, you've got to figure at least half of that is BS. So, we're down to $50,000. Now figure that that's retail value. If he selling this stuff (and I'm sure he is), then he's probably getting less than 50% of the retail for it. So, now we're looking at $25,000. And that's not unrealistic.
Will he get caught? Possibly...Is it likely. Not unless he scores big or pisses off the worng people. The only people who have incentive to track him are the retailers. The stolen card member is only out $50 at worst. The credit card company will simply refuse payment to the merchant, because they were not able to verify the card was not authorized. (The CC Co.'s idea of verification is to check the signature...obviously this is impossible online, so the merchant bears the risk). So, the merchant takes the chargeback and writes it off as uncollectible. Part of doing business on the 'Net.
It's pretty simple. The NetZero account is "untraceable" because no real info is needed to sign up, and no credit card. Anonymizer hides the originating IP address, so it's difficult to even find out that it's a Netzero account. *67 will block private sector companies from receving CallerID info (unless it's an 800#, which will still receive the info), but the telco's logs would still have info.
So basically, anyone trying to track down would have to go thru Anonymizer.com to get their logs on the IP address (do they even keep logs?), then thru NetZero to get an account name, whcih would be bogus. Then Feds would try to get the phone number from NetZero, would not be able to. So, now they have to subpoena the phone company for logs of who called this Netzero node # at this time. It is a large pain in the ass.
Contrast this with a spammer who doesn't take these precautions. Ask store.com for the orginating IP address. nslookup the ip address, returns as an Orlando, FL Bellsouth dialup node. Call BellSouth, ask who had this IP address at this time. BellSouth gives account info. All done.
If you read the article, the second hacker at midnight starts netting ccs. At 12:30 he has about 30. Then he calls the 800 numbers on the back. What, did he get the actual credit cards in his email? or did he not check his facts?
No...but each bank has an identifying (IIRC) quartet in the CC #. Cross-reference the quartet to a list of CC issuing banks and their 800#'s. Nice and easy...
As mentioned before, the difficult part is the drop.
No one is making money on web content these days. Web publishing, in most cases, is a great big black hole sucking in cash.
Perhaps not, but Lexis-Nexis makes a great deal of money, and I'm sure the NYT charge a great deal of money for archives on CD-ROM, transmitted to L-N, etc. I don't think this is as short-sighted as posting on a webpage for free access. It's when money changes hands that people get upset.
And there's a world of difference between mp3's and this. Mp3's are (usually) not shared for profit...10% of $0.00 is still $0.00. As for fair use not extending to other owners, check out the Audio Home Recording Act Section 1008...that's the one that says your neighbor coming over and making a copy of your tape to listen on is A-OK. And the RIAA got paid boatloads of money from Sony, etc. to agree to that law. What the NYT and others are doing is obviously for profit. And that changes everything.
If you don't want compatibility, go for the WinNT/2K Kernel! Geez...how hard is this to understand? You get upset because there's limitations imposed by legacy code, or you get upset because in "upgrading" M$ breaks something that used to work. Guess what...can't have it both ways. That's probably one of the main reasons M$ is recommending a new PC for XP. So people like you can stop complaining about legacy code/your hw don't work.
I'm getting pretty sick and tired of everyone posting their own little horror stories with WinNT/2K/Linux, etc. I propose a rule. Before posting half of a story, you must first find and eradicate the problem. We all know that NT/2K/9x/Linux are all capable of running semi-stable for the average home user. If you encounter otherwise, please fix the issue by whatever means necessary, then you can report back to us and blame it on the OS, drivers, apps, whatever the hell it was.
But you just saying "Windows is slow", "Windows freezes", blah, blah just makes me think that you know absolutely nothing about computers or Windows. You sound like my Grandma! Figure out what the damn problem is, then you can complain...otherwise just say you don't know or care what the hell is wrong and blame it on your damn self!
Slashdot Mirror
That actually sounds like a pretty good marketing idea. The only thing would be that bob2748497.aol wouldn't be accessible by traditional DNS users. Perhaps as an interim solution, do as Name.Space has done and also set it up as bob2748497.aol.com
Don't most browsers these days (read: Netscape and IE) default to adding a .com extension to unresolved hostnames? If I'm correct on that, then it's a pretty simple matter for anyone who also owns a .com domain name to use Name.Space as well.
Why would they add another domain instead of utilizing subdomains though? I don't know...less administrative overhead? Somehow I'm not too sure of that, considering that you'd still want to use subdomains for Internet wide connectivity. And, you'll probably want to run your own nameservers. Ah well, maybe that's not such a bright idea after all....
Microsoft waited for you to initiate the upgrade. That did not happen with ReplayTV. Nowhere near "another example" (unless you meant another [off-topic] example)
The term "shareware" implies, as I stated, that it is not to be sold or included in a distribution without the author's permission.
Not that I give a rat's ass about Warner, but he is on the right side here. As for implications for the GPL or other free software, no I don't really see this as having an effect. About the only thing that could be relevant here is that a) if you don't register your copyright, then you're screwed; and b) if you don't have money to fight it out in a court of law, then you could very well be screwed anyways.
Who the hell needs closing tags anyways, damnit!?!
So, if I cut the bottom of the CD case out and open it that way, am I not agreeing to their license? For the "click Yes to accept" type of licenses, what if I use the TAB keys and the space bar to select "Yes" instead of clicking?
It will also say if you don't like that you should return the software for a full refund (though I suspect the store will charge a restocking fee or some bullshit)
Bwahahaha!!! Just try to return opened software anywhere. They won't charge you a restocking fee, they just won't accept it as a return.
Another provision of most "shareware" is that the only charge for it can be reasonable costs of distribution and media. By bundling this software with their hardware, and by touting this software on the box, one can reasonably assume that part of the price of the hardware was going to fund the software. Also, most shareware prevents inclusion on compilation CD's without permission from author.
And, of course, shareware isn't a licensing term, it's more of a generic category. Different shareware can have wildly different licenses.
Not only that, but I suppose I can go ahead and copy my Windows 2000 Advanced Server CD and sell it for $150. After all, Microsoft is actually being credited (it's their name all over the bloated POS, not mine), so everybody's happy, right?
Unless they sold off their "copyrighted" CD to the highest bidder in their liquidation.
While things like this can and do happen in the States, they're pretty few and far between and mostly depend on the ideological views of the residing judge. It is common, however, to specify legal costs as damages when filing suit. The problem being, of course, that you must be able to fund the lawsuit to begin with, and then recoup your losses. In this case, as in many others, the would-be-plaintiff doesn't have the money to even begin the lawsuit.
Of course, he may be able to find a lawyer who is willing to work contingency (percentage of won damages...if it's $0, then lawyer's fee is $0. Though you normally still have to pay expenses up-front) or pro bono. My advice would be to look for a good lawyer with a history of IP cases and fighting for the little guy. Then beg and plead for his pity. Barring that, try to make enough national media attention (hint: Slashdot doesn't count....NYTimes does count) in order to get a lawyer interested.
While I don't doubt that a great many judges have been bought off, I don't think this really is the rule. I actually rspect most judges, even those who I don't agree with, because I feel they are trying to do the right thing.
As far as money and lawyers go, however, it's a totally different story. Large teams of lawyers and their bankrolling corporation don't have to buy judges. All they have to do is buy time. And, so the paper war begins. Most little guys can't afford to pay a lawyer $x an hour to deal with the avalanche of paperwork that can be filed by a team of 6 lawyers. And even if the little guy could afford to pay his lawyer for it, the lone lawyer wouldn't stand a chance in hell of keeping up with it. So, he'd have to hire more lawyers. Eventually, it's a much better idea either to drop the suit, or settle out-of-court for an "undisclosed amount".
And, that, my friends, is really how the (civil) law works.
There are ways around that, you know. Temporarily replace the CD-ROM, move the HDD to another machine, use an external // port CD-ROM, cable 2 machines together thru // or Serial port and run Laplink; if it's got DOS, install MS-LANMan and do it over the network; copy the .CABs to another HDD and install as a slave; blah, blah, blah. It's only another 15 minutes worth of work.
I know this is getting way off-topic...but, damnit man, I don't want to die! So, if the potato is sprouting, but I cut off the sprouts and then peel it, is it OK to eat raw? How about cooked? And if it has a green layer, if I peel it am I safe?
I'll simply apologize for the incorrect term and move on. =) For the record, however, I'll have to agree with UltraBot2K1...I should have used herbicide.
Well, I actually meant in the States...since that's where I live. But, that is a bit absurd for the poor Canucks.....
Are raw potatoes really poisonous?!? I eat them all the time!!!! Where did you get this info?!?!?
He tried to kill them with RoundUp. They didn't die. He knew which ones to spray therefore he knew which were which (since he wouldn't spary RoundUp on the whole crop). End of story.
And therein lies the problem. Morons who run to the doctor for every sniffle, ache, and runny nose because they really do think they're going to die. Perhaps if people only went to the doctor when medically necessary, or for an annual exam, then there wouldn't be such a large waiting list.
Why doesn't some insurance company come out with a Catastrophe-Medical Insurance plan? In other words, I'll pay for routine Dr. visits (I never go), but if I break my leg or come down with Cancer, then I'm covered....
Someone mentioned he tried to kill it using RoundUp(tm) pesticide. Obviously then, he knew which plants were the modified ones. Sounds to me like he actually did know which was which, but figured that since they came in on the wind he was okay to grow them. And, I'd have to agree with him. If a truck drives by and drops some dirt on my lawn, do I have to give that dirt back to it's rightful owner?
I'm not sure I'd agree with that, really. In the olden days, when I used to keep up with such jargon, a hacker was no more or less than a "tinkerer". And it didn't necessarily have to be with computers. I consider some above-average mechanics to be "hackers", in that it's a mindset-not an occupation.
A "cracker" is someone who cracks into computers...hence the name, cracker (not be confused with Florida Crackers, which prefer their nom-de-jeur (sp?) capitalized). These would usually, be criminals, but not necessarily black-hat. Unfortunately, there does seem to have been a large overlap between hackers and crackers, in that people with the hacker mindset would often resort to cracking for the sheer fun and curiousity of it. That is, they're a criminal in actions, but not necessarily in spirit.
A "phreaker" is someone who abuses the phone systems (note the ph)...this isn't really done anymore AFAIK, but was quite popular in the 80's.
Now, with the proliferation of newbies on the Internet, we've given rise to this new breed of criminal written about in MSNBC. While it's not really appropiate to label him as a "hacker", it's not too far off from the old "social-engineering" tactics employed by crackers. But, personally, I think this is just a twist on a con-man/scam artist. Just because he uses a computer to get more victims doesn't mean we have to come up with another name for him.
As for the 6-digit income/year, you've got to figure at least half of that is BS. So, we're down to $50,000. Now figure that that's retail value. If he selling this stuff (and I'm sure he is), then he's probably getting less than 50% of the retail for it. So, now we're looking at $25,000. And that's not unrealistic.
Will he get caught? Possibly...Is it likely. Not unless he scores big or pisses off the worng people. The only people who have incentive to track him are the retailers. The stolen card member is only out $50 at worst. The credit card company will simply refuse payment to the merchant, because they were not able to verify the card was not authorized. (The CC Co.'s idea of verification is to check the signature ...obviously this is impossible online, so the merchant bears the risk). So, the merchant takes the chargeback and writes it off as uncollectible. Part of doing business on the 'Net.
Phreaks are people who abuse the phone system. I believe these would simply be described as Internet-savvy con artists.
So basically, anyone trying to track down would have to go thru Anonymizer.com to get their logs on the IP address (do they even keep logs?), then thru NetZero to get an account name, whcih would be bogus. Then Feds would try to get the phone number from NetZero, would not be able to. So, now they have to subpoena the phone company for logs of who called this Netzero node # at this time. It is a large pain in the ass.
Contrast this with a spammer who doesn't take these precautions. Ask store.com for the orginating IP address. nslookup the ip address, returns as an Orlando, FL Bellsouth dialup node. Call BellSouth, ask who had this IP address at this time. BellSouth gives account info. All done.
Perhaps not, but Lexis-Nexis makes a great deal of money, and I'm sure the NYT charge a great deal of money for archives on CD-ROM, transmitted to L-N, etc. I don't think this is as short-sighted as posting on a webpage for free access. It's when money changes hands that people get upset.
And there's a world of difference between mp3's and this. Mp3's are (usually) not shared for profit...10% of $0.00 is still $0.00. As for fair use not extending to other owners, check out the Audio Home Recording Act Section 1008...that's the one that says your neighbor coming over and making a copy of your tape to listen on is A-OK. And the RIAA got paid boatloads of money from Sony, etc. to agree to that law. What the NYT and others are doing is obviously for profit. And that changes everything.
If you don't want compatibility, go for the WinNT/2K Kernel! Geez...how hard is this to understand? You get upset because there's limitations imposed by legacy code, or you get upset because in "upgrading" M$ breaks something that used to work. Guess what...can't have it both ways. That's probably one of the main reasons M$ is recommending a new PC for XP. So people like you can stop complaining about legacy code/your hw don't work.
But you just saying "Windows is slow", "Windows freezes", blah, blah just makes me think that you know absolutely nothing about computers or Windows. You sound like my Grandma! Figure out what the damn problem is, then you can complain...otherwise just say you don't know or care what the hell is wrong and blame it on your damn self!