It was applied at the ISP level. There wasn't really a choice at the individual level. Not that I'm in favor of SPAM, but we shouldn't sacrifice our freedoms in the hope of cutting down on it.
If I had a hundred customers (just pulling a number out of thin air) and I personally didn't like SPAM and subscribed to ORBS then none of my clients could receive email from anyone on the list. It didn't matter if they were spammers or not. Unfortunately, in Gilmore's case it's a matter of him WANTING to run an open relay, but his provider NOT giving him the option. Perhaps, just a guess here, it's a form of blackmail. Either all of your users tow the line or we'll blacklist you. Not really a nice thing to do.
I've read something to the effect that this is like a boycott, nope. I boycott is when you and a group of like minded individuals stop frequenting a business to convince the business to change its practices. ORBS is like someone standing in the mail room of your apartment building, rejecting your mail if it happened to come from someone on their list. (i.e. the town of Spamonia has been determined to be very friendly to spammers, therefore Spamonia is placed on the ORBS. Now any mail from Spamonia is confiscated in the mailroom and marked return to sender. If your grandmother just happens to live in Spamonia, well you won't be getting any mail from her. But she's NOT a spammer you cry, to bad they tell you. In order to "encourage" Spamonia not to be so friendly to spammers we're not allowing you to receive any mail from your grandmother. If you don't like it, well you can change apartment buildings (ISP) or she can move out of Spamonia (ISP). Of course you can always "encourage" Spamonian officials to denounce their spam loving ways.)
If you as an individual, or business are interested, then your ISP could tell you about the ORBS and ask you if you want to be a part of it. Sort of like a mega ISP level mail filter. In that case though, it would loose much of its effect to terrorize. It would be more like a group of people boycotting and asking you if you would want to join them. Instead it's a small group of administrators "protecting" you from these bad evil spam friendly things.
Here's one final image to leave you with. Imagine that the ORBS people and the ISP's that subscribe to it were PETA (I'm not trying to single out PETA here, just using them as an example). They are against cruelty to animals, a group of them believes that eating meat or meat products (like SPAM;) is a horrendous crime. Normally you would expect them to protest McDonald's, Burger King, etc. Some people would notice, some might even care, most wouldn't. How much more effective would they be if they could have people stationed in the lobbies of major apartment buildings and business complexes that would reject all packages and products from a town that happened to have a McDonalds? "Sorry Mam, we have determined that New York City is friendly toward businesses that are cruel to animals. Until New York gets rid of all of it's McDonald's restaurants we can't allow any packages or products from there on the premises. You want to receive your letters, clothes, products from people in New York City? As soon as we can confirm that there are no more McDonald's restaurants in business in New York City we'll be happy to let mail from there through. Thanks for subscribing to our service. "
You mean you didn't subscribe to their service? Don't worry, the management did, and they didn't inform you. Well, it all for your own good. Must stop those evil cruel to animal corporations (or spammers.....)
Why do people always seem to bring up the old,
"If you have nothing to hide then hide nothing." non argument?
People should have the right to be left alone.
Privacy != criminality
The only people who want you to have no privacy don't want anyone to know what they are doing.
Why is it that everyone wears cloths, lives in non-transparent houses, uses envelopes instead of postcards? Perhaps it's because we are all criminals. After all, using onion2k's logic, what are we trying to hide?
Luckilly it isn't a crime to want/have some measure of privacy, well at least not yet.
Not having privacy is the mark of a police state, not a republic/democracy. Yes some people will commit crimes, but our lives shouldn't revolve around making it easier to be a cop.
I believe the "cube" itself isn't an embeded application. It's a stand alone unit using a single board computer. The reason it is sensitive to ESD damage is that the manufacturer left the circuit board exposed on the bottom (the aluminum cube only covers 5 sides) so that the end user could access the compact flash slot.
I would suppose an embeded application wouldn't leave the circuit board exposed.
Actually you can, it's called releasing your code under more than one license.
If you take a close look at Troll Tech, that's EXACTLY what they did with the QT lib. (and why HP, Sun, and IBM chose the LGPL'ed GNOME desktop to standardize on instead of KDE*)
So you CAN release your source under the GPL AND make money by allowing people to create closed apps with it. It doesn't have to be an either OR situation.
*Yes I realize that the underlying libs and NOT all of GNOME is LGPLed.
We in the US were rather stupid to fight that war _FOR_ the French. Now I could be mistaken (not having a good history book handy), but Ho Chi Min (sp?) actually aided the US against Japan in WWII with the promise that we would help him gain independence for his country after the war. Heck, he even modled himself after George Washington, and was gung ho about the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.
Guess what, the war ended, the FRENCH didn't want to get out of their little asian colony and unfortunately those in power (in the US) were to eurocentric/anti-asian to keep our promise to the Vietnamese people. Since we wouldn't keep our promise to get the French OUT of Vietnam he got help from the communists (go figure). Once he did that, well after Korea, and the fear of the "Domino theory" we just had to stop the "naked communist agression".
Funny though, that the French bugged out and left us in the States to keep fighting.
If we had a bit more back bone and got the French to leave Vietnam in the beginning, not only would we have avoided a useless conflict, but the world would have had a nice little democratic republic in south east asia.
While it is illegal to sell "weapons/cigs/alcohol" to minors, movies are a strictly voluntary thing.
There is some noise on capital hill about making them not so voluntary. Perhaps they should be fined for deceptive trade practices, or false advertising, or so our congress critters say. Some stores and movie theaters are not letting minors buy warning labeled video games/music or not letting minors into R rated movies, but they don't have to.
Personally I think that our children should be exposed to all sorts of ideas. There are some things that you might want to either wait until they are more mature, or at least be there to explain it to them. If you've done a decent job as a parent, they shouldn't have a problem.
Now, rotting their lungs out smoking, pickling their liver drinking, or accidentally blowing their brains out. Those are things that you should have a parent or guardian present _BEFORE_ you hand any of those things over to a minor.
Here's a strange thought for you; They want to make sure that minors don't play violent video games, yet most states still allow a minor (admittedly only girls) to have an abortion without her parents consent, and in some cases knowledge. Go figure.
Yes, Ford is trying to control who can link to them. Something, if aquired would quickly bring the world wide web as we know it to a screeching halt. No one should be _legally_ forced to get permission to link to anyone.
If the redirect _really_ bothered Ford all that much, all they had to do was refuse referrals (i.e. redirects) from www.fuckgeneralmoters.com.
Unless you are implying that one of the larger companies in the country can't hire anyone capable of running a web server.
*Uggg*
Re:Mixed Response on This One
on
Congress@Work
·
· Score: 1
Actually the Supreme Court of this U.S. of A. has REPEATEDLY ruled that we DO have a right to anonymity. In fact much of the early papers penned by the founding fathers were published under pseudonyms.
The right to speak anonymously is very important in a democratic (ok, we're a republic, but it still holds) society. In fact you yourself spoke anonymously when you voted in the last election (You did vote didn't you?). Unless of course you wrote your name, address, ssn across the top of your ballot.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, no.
;) is a horrendous crime. Normally you would expect them to protest McDonald's, Burger King, etc. Some people would notice, some might even care, most wouldn't. How much more effective would they be if they could have people stationed in the lobbies of major apartment buildings and business complexes that would reject all packages and products from a town that happened to have a McDonalds? "Sorry Mam, we have determined that New York City is friendly toward businesses that are cruel to animals. Until New York gets rid of all of it's McDonald's restaurants we can't allow any packages or products from there on the premises. You want to receive your letters, clothes, products from people in New York City? As soon as we can confirm that there are no more McDonald's restaurants in business in New York City we'll be happy to let mail from there through. Thanks for subscribing to our service. "
It was applied at the ISP level. There wasn't really a choice at the individual level. Not that I'm in favor of SPAM, but we shouldn't sacrifice our freedoms in the hope of cutting down on it.
If I had a hundred customers (just pulling a number out of thin air) and I personally didn't like SPAM and subscribed to ORBS then none of my clients could receive email from anyone on the list. It didn't matter if they were spammers or not. Unfortunately, in Gilmore's case it's a matter of him WANTING to run an open relay, but his provider NOT giving him the option. Perhaps, just a guess here, it's a form of blackmail. Either all of your users tow the line or we'll blacklist you. Not really a nice thing to do.
I've read something to the effect that this is like a boycott, nope. I boycott is when you and a group of like minded individuals stop frequenting a business to convince the business to change its practices. ORBS is like someone standing in the mail room of your apartment building, rejecting your mail if it happened to come from someone on their list. (i.e. the town of Spamonia has been determined to be very friendly to spammers, therefore Spamonia is placed on the ORBS. Now any mail from Spamonia is confiscated in the mailroom and marked return to sender. If your grandmother just happens to live in Spamonia, well you won't be getting any mail from her. But she's NOT a spammer you cry, to bad they tell you. In order to "encourage" Spamonia not to be so friendly to spammers we're not allowing you to receive any mail from your grandmother. If you don't like it, well you can change apartment buildings (ISP) or she can move out of Spamonia (ISP). Of course you can always "encourage" Spamonian officials to denounce their spam loving ways.)
If you as an individual, or business are interested, then your ISP could tell you about the ORBS and ask you if you want to be a part of it. Sort of like a mega ISP level mail filter. In that case though, it would loose much of its effect to terrorize. It would be more like a group of people boycotting and asking you if you would want to join them. Instead it's a small group of administrators "protecting" you from these bad evil spam friendly things.
Here's one final image to leave you with. Imagine that the ORBS people and the ISP's that subscribe to it were PETA (I'm not trying to single out PETA here, just using them as an example). They are against cruelty to animals, a group of them believes that eating meat or meat products (like SPAM
You mean you didn't subscribe to their service? Don't worry, the management did, and they didn't inform you. Well, it all for your own good. Must stop those evil cruel to animal corporations (or spammers.....)
In the states, well at least in the section of it where I live, what you are refering to is called a duplex.
Ugg...
Why do people always seem to bring up the old,
"If you have nothing to hide then hide nothing." non argument?
People should have the right to be left alone.
Privacy != criminality
The only people who want you to have no privacy don't want anyone to know what they are doing.
Why is it that everyone wears cloths, lives in non-transparent houses, uses envelopes instead of postcards? Perhaps it's because we are all criminals. After all, using onion2k's logic, what are we trying to hide?
Luckilly it isn't a crime to want/have some measure of privacy, well at least not yet.
Not having privacy is the mark of a police state, not a republic/democracy. Yes some people will commit crimes, but our lives shouldn't revolve around making it easier to be a cop.
I believe the "cube" itself isn't an embeded application. It's a stand alone unit using a single board computer. The reason it is sensitive to ESD damage is that the manufacturer left the circuit board exposed on the bottom (the aluminum cube only covers 5 sides) so that the end user could access the compact flash slot.
I would suppose an embeded application wouldn't leave the circuit board exposed.
Um, then it wouldn't be "Opt-out", it would be "Opt-in". Something industry fears like a vampire fears being stranded in Antartica during the summer.
Please don't feed the trolls.
I've personally seen this exact same post in way to many threads to count. After a while you just tune them out, like banner ads.
If *BSD is dying or not really doesn't have anything to do with this thread, or ANY of the threads under this topic.
"Move along looky loose, nothing to see here..."
Actually you can, it's called releasing your code under more than one license.
If you take a close look at Troll Tech, that's EXACTLY what they did with the QT lib. (and why HP, Sun, and IBM chose the LGPL'ed GNOME desktop to standardize on instead of KDE*)
So you CAN release your source under the GPL AND make money by allowing people to create closed apps with it. It doesn't have to be an either OR situation.
*Yes I realize that the underlying libs and NOT all of GNOME is LGPLed.
You forgot Windows98 SP1, it goes between Windows98 and Windows98 SE (ups the "core" to Win98 SE without all of the eye candy and connection sharing).
;)
Just trying to be helpful....
Um, as to Vietnam,
We in the US were rather stupid to fight that war _FOR_ the French. Now I could be mistaken (not having a good history book handy), but Ho Chi Min (sp?) actually aided the US against Japan in WWII with the promise that we would help him gain independence for his country after the war. Heck, he even modled himself after George Washington, and was gung ho about the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.
Guess what, the war ended, the FRENCH didn't want to get out of their little asian colony and unfortunately those in power (in the US) were to eurocentric/anti-asian to keep our promise to the Vietnamese people. Since we wouldn't keep our promise to get the French OUT of Vietnam he got help from the communists (go figure). Once he did that, well after Korea, and the fear of the "Domino theory" we just had to stop the "naked communist agression".
Funny though, that the French bugged out and left us in the States to keep fighting.
If we had a bit more back bone and got the French to leave Vietnam in the beginning, not only would we have avoided a useless conflict, but the world would have had a nice little democratic republic in south east asia.
Just my $0.02 (canadian, before taxes)
Actually,
While it is illegal to sell "weapons/cigs/alcohol" to minors, movies are a strictly voluntary thing.
There is some noise on capital hill about making them not so voluntary. Perhaps they should be fined for deceptive trade practices, or false advertising, or so our congress critters say. Some stores and movie theaters are not letting minors buy warning labeled video games/music or not letting minors into R rated movies, but they don't have to.
Personally I think that our children should be exposed to all sorts of ideas. There are some things that you might want to either wait until they are more mature, or at least be there to explain it to them. If you've done a decent job as a parent, they shouldn't have a problem.
Now, rotting their lungs out smoking, pickling their liver drinking, or accidentally blowing their brains out. Those are things that you should have a parent or guardian present _BEFORE_ you hand any of those things over to a minor.
Here's a strange thought for you; They want to make sure that minors don't play violent video games, yet most states still allow a minor (admittedly only girls) to have an abortion without her parents consent, and in some cases knowledge. Go figure.
Yes, Ford is trying to control who can link to them. Something, if aquired would quickly bring the world wide web as we know it to a screeching halt. No one should be _legally_ forced to get permission to link to anyone.
If the redirect _really_ bothered Ford all that much, all they had to do was refuse referrals (i.e. redirects) from www.fuckgeneralmoters.com.
Unless you are implying that one of the larger companies in the country can't hire anyone capable of running a web server.
*Uggg*
Actually the Supreme Court of this U.S. of A. has REPEATEDLY ruled that we DO have a right to anonymity. In fact much of the early papers penned by the founding fathers were published under pseudonyms.
The right to speak anonymously is very important in a democratic (ok, we're a republic, but it still holds) society. In fact you yourself spoke anonymously when you voted in the last election (You did vote didn't you?). Unless of course you wrote your name, address, ssn across the top of your ballot.
someone247356