This is a product of the fact that people want to be able to reclaim their time. That is to say, letting a box push information to them at it's own speed is a waste of time and doesn't give them exactly what they want.
I agree. My fiance and I had to decide between keeping the cable or getting an extra cell phone. We decided to get the extra cell phone, as we'd get more use of it. It's been a blessing. We don't miss the toxic waste that was on the extra cable channels (we still have basic), and we're finding other things to do with our time that are more productive. We didn't cancel because we were looking to spend our time better. We cancelled because we grew tired of paying for many channels of garbage. The extra quality time was just a pleasant side effect.
TV isn't going anywhere though, as soon as the TV companies get off their collective butts and get more and more on-demand TV then viewers will return to that medium (even if it is through their computer/digital entertainment unit).
Maybe, maybe not. I don't know about other people, but the reason I don't use Pay-per-View is the prices. I can see cable offering a la carte and more indemand programming, but charging an arm and a leg for it, if history is any indication. I'm already paying WAY more for cable than I'd like. I'd rather see more quality programming. The stuff on cable is just garbage and the commercials are getting out of hand! I don't mind watching some relevant, NON-REDUNDANT commercials, since I know that pays the bills. But a lot of the cable channels, with few commercials in their collective pool (*cough* Sci-Fi *cough* Comedy Central *cough*) show the same annoying commercials about Zentrax-3 over and over and over. Even though I've seen the commercial about 1000 times in the last week, why isn't it enough that the average viewer only see that specific commercial ONCE per half hour program? Because you have a certain set amount allocated for commercials, you say, and need to fill them? Well, perhaps that needs to change.
I like Fedora, but I'm not running it in a production environment. However, it seems stable enough for severaldedicatedhosts to deploy... Other than that, whats really the different between the two besides packaging managers? They both have apt-get available, plus the Core 2 will come standard with 2.6.
I dunno, look at any major shared or dedicated hosting company that uses Linux. What are they running? Discount and shared servers run RedHat 9 (and now I'm starting to see Fedora), and professional and dedicated run RHEL 3. Once in awhile I see Debian, but it's a RedHat world in the Linux hosting market. That's a lot of customers. As far as I've observed, SuSE hosting is a rarity.
Personally, I like RegisterFLY.com because they have the WHOIS protection for only $1.50/year, whereas GoDaddy charges $9/year. It might not seem like a lot, but if you own a lot of domains it really adds up fast.
> Walk into a Best Buy or similar large electronics store. Buy something in stock. Usually, they have some machines at decent prices... the down side is that they may not be the machine you want. It sounds like you have some specific needs or demands.
I'd say the real down side is trying to convince the sales associate why you don't want the service plan. WHEN will they understand that I'm a freaking cheap-ass, Fat Wallet groupie looking for the best deals, trying to rape your fine retail establishment of any fair profit you might think you're entitled to! Good thing electroncis stores don't have facial identification scanners yet.
"Security to ops - we have a cherry picker in sector 4c!"
Ehh, customers of BlackICE are probably used to annoying software being installed on their computers anyway. The loss of data is probably on par with the annoyances BlackICE's notifications create for both the user and the poor soul(s) at the call center of his/her choice.
luser: "It says someone might be trying to break into my computer! How can I stop them?" Me: "Um, it's just a port scan. You probably get scanned hundreds of times a day. It's normal." luser: "But BlackICE says it might be an attack!" Me: "Try clearing your Internet Explorer cache and rebooting. Call back if problems persist."
For the love of GOD, please don't install BlackICE or similarly annoying firewalls on your parent's or novice friends computers! Spend the $30 and get them a hardware solution, or at least use something that is less of a PITA.
> eBay is financially rigged to favor the
auctioneer instead of the customer.
Um, last I checked the auctioneer *is* the customer. In all the auctions I had, I, as the seller, paid both fees on the eBay and PayPal transactions. It's just like buying real estate with a seller's agent - they are looking out for the best interests of the seller, whom is their customer.
> I stopped
doing ANY business with eBay after getting
ripped off a few times in rapid succession.
It's possible I've just been lucky, but I've had goot luck with both services. Granted, I've never had my checking account "cleaned out" like your friend, however, I HAVE been ripped off a few times in the past. I have a rating of 102 right now (buying and selling). Out of those 102 transactions, I've probably been ripped about 3-4 times. So I've saved or made money 98 times and been ripped off 4 times. In the end, I made more money than I lost both buying and selling.
In the end, from the times I've gotten ripped off, I could adopt the attitude that I will never use eBay again. However, the money I lost from the bad auctions is far less than the money I gained from the good ones, and far less than the extra money I would have spend buying retail. As long as I'm coming out ahead in the long run, I say it's A-OK. You take the good with the bad, however, I have never been involved in a transaction for > $300, with most being
PS, modern web browsers have this neet feature called "line wrapping". You aren't required to hard-code your own carriage returns - the browser takes care of it for you!;)
> Blocking web access also means that those users aren't able to download good, free virus scanners like Grisoft's AVG.
1. They (or whomever set up their computer) had a chance for the free option before letting their computers get infected, thus contributing to the toxic waste on the Internet.
2. So what if they have to buy something? It contributes to the economy, creates jobs, and teaches them a lesson.
3. There's always the "smart friend" who can give you AVG on CD-ROM. Don't have a smart friend? See #2.
4. Why are people so against computer maintenance but have no problem budgeting for regular car maintenance?
> What they're doing is right. It's THEIR network, they can do whatever you want. It's not like you have a right to use the internet.
Should the same concept apply to the power company? How about Microsoft? I would agree completely if there were choices, but since broadband constitutes a natural monopoly in some areas, it's not like we have much choice. I want to use the Internet as a well-intentioned consumer, but I don't want to be abused by my provider. The fact that it is a natural monopoly means they can't just "do what they want". It has to be reasonable.
I support the idea of shutting off zombie machines, however, if my provider restricts my access, am I just supposed to live with it? Perhaps. I just hope the local power company doesn't decide to shut off my power for an hour per day to conserve. It is their network, after all, and I can live without power for an hour (in the warmer months anyway).
Before you say, "well, move to an area that has cable AND DSL," I would say that having two mega corporations in charge instead of one doesn't make much of a difference in quality or choice.
All we're asking for is for the cable providers to be reasonable. Shut off offenders, offer some explanation why, and please allow those of us who know how to take care of our machines access to the ports and protocols we need.
Looks like SCO's business model is catching on. If you can't innovate, litigate! Maybe we could make the Kodak icon the EPCOT Center too? It will be a symbol for all companies whose business model revolves around suing those who were successful where they were not.
You almost had me agreeing with you until this line. They are one of the biggest providers of discounted rack servers on the planet. NetCraftapparently knows about them too, and had an interview with Marsh before this whole thing happened. They host a lot of boxes and just got done building a second data center.
> Wouldn't a cheaper solution than buying the licenses have been so switch from linux to freebsd?
Ummm, perhaps because a large sum of their customers don't want BSD. Perhaps because many of their customers already have legions of RedHat machines and want to remain consistent. Perhaps because Ensim isn't supported on supported on BSD (AFAIK), one of their three supported control panels?
Adding BSD servers is a fine idea, but replacing Linux with them is not. People still want Linux servers. What an enormous victory it would be anyway for MS-SCO if they could get a company with as many boxes as EV1 to ditch all their Linux servers.
Nobody ever heard of?! EVERYONE in the hosting industry knows of EV1Servers (aka Rackshack). They are one of the biggest providers of discounted rack servers on the planet. NetCraftapparently knows about them too, and had an interview with Marsh. The host a LOT of boxes.
They are likely the biggest provider of startup web hosting servers around. Although they aren't the cheapestaround, they are probably the cheapest that still offers any level of service. I'd say anyone who hasn't heard of them probably isn't in the industry.
> Ultimately, free trade works out well; I think one of the issues is that white collar jobs are just beginning to feel the pinch, and are acting like manufacturers did in the 1970s and 1980s.
So it didn't work out well for the blue collars, and it's not working for the white collars. I guess it's working well for the ivory tower folk. Or are you from India, Hemos?:/
> I doubt that they'll be willing to spend the millions of dollars on lawyers that IBM is spending, though, so its not likely that it will be any more of a test.
Unless they, like SCO is to Microsoft, are the puppet of another big player. If not Faydor, perhaps someone else. I could see IBM/Novell/RedHat funding a campaign for a smaller "innocent victim of SCO" just to give SCO another black eye.
Or perhaps it's all the aspiring entrepreneurs who are trying to make a quick buck with no regard for ethics or other people.
I was born and raised in the U.S., but some of the scams I see just sicken me and the lengths people will go to to make a quick buck. Some people will even take advantage of their friends and family! Who needs enemies when your own brother or sister is trying to guilt you into their latest multi-level marketing endeavor.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. My fiance and I had to decide between keeping the cable or getting an extra cell phone. We decided to get the extra cell phone, as we'd get more use of it. It's been a blessing. We don't miss the toxic waste that was on the extra cable channels (we still have basic), and we're finding other things to do with our time that are more productive. We didn't cancel because we were looking to spend our time better. We cancelled because we grew tired of paying for many channels of garbage. The extra quality time was just a pleasant side effect.
Maybe, maybe not. I don't know about other people, but the reason I don't use Pay-per-View is the prices. I can see cable offering a la carte and more indemand programming, but charging an arm and a leg for it, if history is any indication. I'm already paying WAY more for cable than I'd like. I'd rather see more quality programming. The stuff on cable is just garbage and the commercials are getting out of hand! I don't mind watching some relevant, NON-REDUNDANT commercials, since I know that pays the bills. But a lot of the cable channels, with few commercials in their collective pool (*cough* Sci-Fi *cough* Comedy Central *cough*) show the same annoying commercials about Zentrax-3 over and over and over. Even though I've seen the commercial about 1000 times in the last week, why isn't it enough that the average viewer only see that specific commercial ONCE per half hour program? Because you have a certain set amount allocated for commercials, you say, and need to fill them? Well, perhaps that needs to change.
I like Fedora, but I'm not running it in a production environment. However, it seems stable enough for several dedicated hosts to deploy... Other than that, whats really the different between the two besides packaging managers? They both have apt-get available, plus the Core 2 will come standard with 2.6.
Does Adobe own Alias?
I dunno, look at any major shared or dedicated hosting company that uses Linux. What are they running? Discount and shared servers run RedHat 9 (and now I'm starting to see Fedora), and professional and dedicated run RHEL 3. Once in awhile I see Debian, but it's a RedHat world in the Linux hosting market. That's a lot of customers. As far as I've observed, SuSE hosting is a rarity.
How soon we forget.
> Please tell me what I'm doing wrong, because I've never been broken into.
What's your IP? ;)
> Why pay $9.99/yr when you can pay less...
Advanced DNS features?
Personally, I like RegisterFLY.com because they have the WHOIS protection for only $1.50/year, whereas GoDaddy charges $9/year. It might not seem like a lot, but if you own a lot of domains it really adds up fast.
> Walk into a Best Buy or similar large electronics store. Buy something in stock. Usually, they have some machines at decent prices... the down side is that they may not be the machine you want. It sounds like you have some specific needs or demands.
I'd say the real down side is trying to convince the sales associate why you don't want the service plan. WHEN will they understand that I'm a freaking cheap-ass, Fat Wallet groupie looking for the best deals, trying to rape your fine retail establishment of any fair profit you might think you're entitled to! Good thing electroncis stores don't have facial identification scanners yet.
"Security to ops - we have a cherry picker in sector 4c!"
Ehh, customers of BlackICE are probably used to annoying software being installed on their computers anyway. The loss of data is probably on par with the annoyances BlackICE's notifications create for both the user and the poor soul(s) at the call center of his/her choice.
luser: "It says someone might be trying to break into my computer! How can I stop them?"
Me: "Um, it's just a port scan. You probably get scanned hundreds of times a day. It's normal."
luser: "But BlackICE says it might be an attack!"
Me: "Try clearing your Internet Explorer cache and rebooting. Call back if problems persist."
For the love of GOD, please don't install BlackICE or similarly annoying firewalls on your parent's or novice friends computers! Spend the $30 and get them a hardware solution, or at least use something that is less of a PITA.
> eBay is financially rigged to favor the auctioneer instead of the customer.
Um, last I checked the auctioneer *is* the customer. In all the auctions I had, I, as the seller, paid both fees on the eBay and PayPal transactions. It's just like buying real estate with a seller's agent - they are looking out for the best interests of the seller, whom is their customer.
> I stopped doing ANY business with eBay after getting ripped off a few times in rapid succession.
It's possible I've just been lucky, but I've had goot luck with both services. Granted, I've never had my checking account "cleaned out" like your friend, however, I HAVE been ripped off a few times in the past. I have a rating of 102 right now (buying and selling). Out of those 102 transactions, I've probably been ripped about 3-4 times. So I've saved or made money 98 times and been ripped off 4 times. In the end, I made more money than I lost both buying and selling.
In the end, from the times I've gotten ripped off, I could adopt the attitude that I will never use eBay again. However, the money I lost from the bad auctions is far less than the money I gained from the good ones, and far less than the extra money I would have spend buying retail. As long as I'm coming out ahead in the long run, I say it's A-OK. You take the good with the bad, however, I have never been involved in a transaction for > $300, with most being
PS, modern web browsers have this neet feature called "line wrapping". You aren't required to hard-code your own carriage returns - the browser takes care of it for you! ;)
> Blocking web access also means that those users aren't able to download good, free virus scanners like Grisoft's AVG.
1. They (or whomever set up their computer) had a chance for the free option before letting their computers get infected, thus contributing to the toxic waste on the Internet.
2. So what if they have to buy something? It contributes to the economy, creates jobs, and teaches them a lesson.
3. There's always the "smart friend" who can give you AVG on CD-ROM. Don't have a smart friend? See #2.
4. Why are people so against computer maintenance but have no problem budgeting for regular car maintenance?
> What they're doing is right. It's THEIR network, they can do whatever you want. It's not like you have a right to use the internet.
Should the same concept apply to the power company? How about Microsoft? I would agree completely if there were choices, but since broadband constitutes a natural monopoly in some areas, it's not like we have much choice. I want to use the Internet as a well-intentioned consumer, but I don't want to be abused by my provider. The fact that it is a natural monopoly means they can't just "do what they want". It has to be reasonable.
I support the idea of shutting off zombie machines, however, if my provider restricts my access, am I just supposed to live with it? Perhaps. I just hope the local power company doesn't decide to shut off my power for an hour per day to conserve. It is their network, after all, and I can live without power for an hour (in the warmer months anyway).
Before you say, "well, move to an area that has cable AND DSL," I would say that having two mega corporations in charge instead of one doesn't make much of a difference in quality or choice.
All we're asking for is for the cable providers to be reasonable. Shut off offenders, offer some explanation why, and please allow those of us who know how to take care of our machines access to the ports and protocols we need.
Looks like SCO's business model is catching on. If you can't innovate, litigate! Maybe we could make the Kodak icon the EPCOT Center too? It will be a symbol for all companies whose business model revolves around suing those who were successful where they were not.
I wouldn't worry about being sued by a lawyer who still rents. He/she has obviously not been that successful ;)
/kidding
> They are not some litte ISP.
You almost had me agreeing with you until this line. They are one of the biggest providers of discounted rack servers on the planet. NetCraft apparently knows about them too, and had an interview with Marsh before this whole thing happened. They host a lot of boxes and just got done building a second data center.
> Wouldn't a cheaper solution than buying the licenses have been so switch from linux to freebsd?
Ummm, perhaps because a large sum of their customers don't want BSD. Perhaps because many of their customers already have legions of RedHat machines and want to remain consistent. Perhaps because Ensim isn't supported on supported on BSD (AFAIK), one of their three supported control panels?
Adding BSD servers is a fine idea, but replacing Linux with them is not. People still want Linux servers. What an enormous victory it would be anyway for MS-SCO if they could get a company with as many boxes as EV1 to ditch all their Linux servers.
> And SCO is suing for three billion.
$5 billion
> How can recognize ...
Was that a Confucius?
Try again, their forums site is running LAMP. Probably just a weak box that isn't used to that kind of traffic for their forums.
> an ISP nobody ever heard of
Nobody ever heard of?! EVERYONE in the hosting industry knows of EV1Servers (aka Rackshack). They are one of the biggest providers of discounted rack servers on the planet. NetCraft apparently knows about them too, and had an interview with Marsh. The host a LOT of boxes.
They are likely the biggest provider of startup web hosting servers around. Although they aren't the cheapest around, they are probably the cheapest that still offers any level of service. I'd say anyone who hasn't heard of them probably isn't in the industry.
> Ultimately, free trade works out well; I think one of the issues is that white collar jobs are just beginning to feel the pinch, and are acting like manufacturers did in the 1970s and 1980s.
So it didn't work out well for the blue collars, and it's not working for the white collars. I guess it's working well for the ivory tower folk. Or are you from India, Hemos? :/
> Remember to keep your write-up suitable for pointy-headed managers...
Did Beldar quit his TV repair gig and move up the ranks at Dilbert Co.?
> I doubt that they'll be willing to spend the millions of dollars on lawyers that IBM is spending, though, so its not likely that it will be any more of a test.
Unless they, like SCO is to Microsoft, are the puppet of another big player. If not Faydor, perhaps someone else. I could see IBM/Novell/RedHat funding a campaign for a smaller "innocent victim of SCO" just to give SCO another black eye.
Or perhaps it's all the aspiring entrepreneurs who are trying to make a quick buck with no regard for ethics or other people.
I was born and raised in the U.S., but some of the scams I see just sicken me and the lengths people will go to to make a quick buck. Some people will even take advantage of their friends and family! Who needs enemies when your own brother or sister is trying to guilt you into their latest multi-level marketing endeavor.
> That Verisign's site finder is a brazen abuse of their power as a service provider.
Ehh, it's nothing new. Have you ever used the PayFlow web interface? More like a crime against humanity...