you suggest that the banks are scheming to make a profit on theft?!?!?
sorry, but Occam's Razor shreds your argument to bits my friend
the banks don't want nefarious individuals stealing our money any more than we do. It's very, very bad for business
If I was a genius recluse who had just been outed and was being hounded by the media, the first thing I would do is login to an account I hadn't used in years and say, "it ain't me!"
yes apparently...unless of course you are HR and have the responsibility of weeding potential candidates
for that you just need the ability to blindly check resumes for a list of arbitrary requirements
I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!
Do you really want your phone company deciding who can and cannot call you?
While I generally loath spammers, I think this is the point that makes the net neutrality argument valid
I am continually frustrated by my ISPs spam blocking. There is no opt out, I can't white list senders, and they won't disclose fully how they identify what is and is not spam.
There have been several instances where senders emails to me simply disappeared with no indication to me or the sender that the message was discarded. I feel that my email is often too important to have my ISP arbitrarily discarding it in this manner.
While I appreciate that my ISP is marketing this to me as a "feature" and they are somehow doing me a favor, the reality is they are just trying to lower their costs by mitigating spam and the burden it places on their servers and network.
My preference would be for them to not block my spam for me, or at least give me a way to opt out of their blocking and let me manage it myself so I can have a stronger sense of confidence that messages sent to me are arriving as intended.
Thus, while I don't agree that SPAM should be allowed, I do agree that allowing ISPs to block it should be disallowed.
but I have demonstrated prior art on the concept of a socially unified patent system that covers geographic and ideological boundaries
guess I need to look for a patent trolling firm to help me rake in the summary judgements
There was an interesting NY Times article on the cost per customer for Verizon to deploy their FiOS product. Essentially it was $4k per subscriber.
That's an awfully long payback when you are only getting less than a few hundred bucks a month and you also need to have money to operate the network, provide sales and technical support, etc
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/19/technology/19fios.html
Perhaps continued development in technologies like LTE will provide less expensive methods to get customers in the future
Slashdot Mirror
you suggest that the banks are scheming to make a profit on theft?!?!? sorry, but Occam's Razor shreds your argument to bits my friend the banks don't want nefarious individuals stealing our money any more than we do. It's very, very bad for business
If I was a genius recluse who had just been outed and was being hounded by the media, the first thing I would do is login to an account I hadn't used in years and say, "it ain't me!"
yes apparently...unless of course you are HR and have the responsibility of weeding potential candidates for that you just need the ability to blindly check resumes for a list of arbitrary requirements
Can't Congress just pass a law prohibiting this like they are doing with guns and murder?
I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!
Way to act like Veruca Salt!
Do you really want your phone company deciding who can and cannot call you?
While I generally loath spammers, I think this is the point that makes the net neutrality argument valid I am continually frustrated by my ISPs spam blocking. There is no opt out, I can't white list senders, and they won't disclose fully how they identify what is and is not spam.
There have been several instances where senders emails to me simply disappeared with no indication to me or the sender that the message was discarded. I feel that my email is often too important to have my ISP arbitrarily discarding it in this manner.
While I appreciate that my ISP is marketing this to me as a "feature" and they are somehow doing me a favor, the reality is they are just trying to lower their costs by mitigating spam and the burden it places on their servers and network.
My preference would be for them to not block my spam for me, or at least give me a way to opt out of their blocking and let me manage it myself so I can have a stronger sense of confidence that messages sent to me are arriving as intended.
Thus, while I don't agree that SPAM should be allowed, I do agree that allowing ISPs to block it should be disallowed.
but I have demonstrated prior art on the concept of a socially unified patent system that covers geographic and ideological boundaries guess I need to look for a patent trolling firm to help me rake in the summary judgements
There was an interesting NY Times article on the cost per customer for Verizon to deploy their FiOS product. Essentially it was $4k per subscriber. That's an awfully long payback when you are only getting less than a few hundred bucks a month and you also need to have money to operate the network, provide sales and technical support, etc http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/19/technology/19fios.html Perhaps continued development in technologies like LTE will provide less expensive methods to get customers in the future
amusing how Trend Micro blocks access to this site http://global.sitesafety.trendmicro.com/