I wish! Where I live, I'll see an RDSLAM on the 12th of Never. We have copper between us and USQWest's switch (fiber! LOL -- nobody used fiber back when these lines were laid). The problem is distance. We're too remote. That's why I'm doubly amazed at AT&TB -- as bad as they are, at least they consider us customers; USQWest considers us a nuisance.
Starship Trooper (User #523907) posted some code that may or may not kill the new ads here in Slashdot [haven't tried 'em, so I can't vouch for their effectiveness].
jamie pointed out that it might not be safe to run javascript hosted on someone else's server.
Hence, I said: [emphasis mine; read the parent for the full text]
Hmmm. I guess Astral Traveller and Starship Trooper are the same dude. How many other accounts you got? Ever mod yourself up? (ever mod yourself down?)
I don't doubt that lots of people have multiple accounts, but if you do you should be careful which ones you use in which thread:-)
Since when has the equivilent of cron needed a web browser to work?
Apparantly since 1998 or so.
Re:There goes my brainstorm...
on
Wireless Mania
·
· Score: 2
Let me get this straight: They were charging enough to cover the cost of providing the service but not enough to cover the cost of running the business, and were surprised when they went broke? And this is a surprise to you, too? Weren't you paying attention about a year ago (do you even get this reference)? You really should stay out of the market if you don't understand this fancy-schmancy economics stuff. "Buy low, sell high" is not a new idea.
What amazes me is how many people forget that, as bad as AT&T Broadband may be, TCI was far worse. I don't wish to defend AT&T Broadband, but they brought me more than 40 cable channels, which TCI certanly did not do (TCI reduced our lineup when they bought our previous cable company), and AT&T brought us broadband internet (USQWest says they will never bring DSL to our neighborhood -- we can't get better than 26,000 bps dialup!).
AT&T isn't great, but they're not the devil incarnate. (Bill Gate$ still holds that title:-) I'd rather stay with AT&T than switch to Comcast, but I guess I won't have a choice in that.
There are at least two different ways to respond to this problem: 1) pay-per-view, or 2) make sure it's not easier to ditch the commercials.
What's wrong with the HBO model? Pay a flat fee for all you can watch. Why does it have to be Pay Per View? You'd think the MPAA and RIAA would look at the number of cable subscribers who pay for basic or extended -vs- the number who pay for a premium package with HBO/Showtime/etc. -vs- the number who consistantly buy PPV. Discounting the occasional one-off PPV (Mike Tyson vs. Godzilla for 15 rounds -- exactly what PPV was made for), I'll bet PPV is way down on the list. If you watch many movies, HBO/Showtime is a much better deal.
Personally I don't bother with the premium channels -- I rent videos because the selection is so much better, and it's truely on demand, when I want. If they'd offer on-demand selection (which is what the Internet promises) at a flat rate, then I'm interested; otherwise, keep your god-damned DRM crap away from me -- I ain't buying it (literally).
Spam is an email ad, not an Internet ad. So, technically, spamming people who have viewed DoubleClick ads on web pages is OK per their privacy policy. Besides, it's their privacy policy, not yours. They can change it anytime they like.
To make life a little easier. If you have a bunch of email accounts, it is nice to have all email.forwarded to one account. Then, you can check all your email at once.
So how would I reply? If I'm forwarding TheBoss@MyLittleBusiness.com to DumbBunny@Home.com, then when I reply to a customer they see "DumbBunny" instead of "TheBoss". Great way to run a business from home!
And, why would MS be porting it to FreeBSD if they did not want Linux to have it as well.
Maybe because they like (and have used) code released under the BSD license, with it's permission to steal open source code and embed it in proprietary code, while they fear/loath/hate code released under the GPL, with it's viral clause that forces you to open up any proprietary code you embed it in? That's just my guess.
demanding a royalty would be something like extortion.
LOL! You haven't read the discussion, or you're new to the DMCA, aren't you? Of course it's extortion! That's the point! The DMCA just makes it legal extortion.
Why do you think the X-Box has a proprietary, almost-but-not-quite-USB connector? You won't be allowed to make an aftermarket controller without paying a royalty. They (Big Business, not just M$ or NOA) want patent-strength protection for things they can't patent, and DMCA is how they'll get it.
My first two computers had their keyboards built into the base unit -- what a pain! Thank God whoever thought to make the keyboard a separate item didn't try to patent that idea.
I dunno, I could be talking out my ass here, but doesn't Nintendo require a royalty for every game anyone makes? If you use this device to make your own game, aren't you "depriving" Nintendo of their royalty on that game? (never mind that you can't play it without paying them for the console in the first place, their business model depends on blade sales, not handle sales)
If so, then the device is, in their mind (and by extention, the Government's mind) "primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection" -- protection of their royalties!
The better question is "Why would they share the same email account?"
There are lots of things I might email my sister that I wouldn't want my wife to see (such as "what do you think I should get her for our anniversary?")
The only people who would call Bill Clinton a "Liberal" are Republicans on the far Right (am I being redundant? I don't think so). I tend to vote Democrat (when there isn't a Libertarian on the ballot) and FWIW I certainly don't consider him very Liberal. The only real difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is who's money they're pocketing (and, lately, the answer on both sides has been "Micro$oft's").
Do the "people you know" also enjoy the monthly subscription fee? Will they enjoy it more, or less, as the fee goes up?
Somehow I think the hardware cost of a do-it-yourself box will be more than repaid by the savings in subscriptions.
Oh, and can your Replay/TiVo/whatever play games, or record/play/serve-to-the-household-network CDs? DVDs? MP3s? A homegrown box can do whatever you want it to, not whatever they want it to.
Cons:
Won't work without Direct TV. Or were you able to buy a lifetime subscription to DirectTV for only $250? If so, please tell the rest of us how to get the same deal:-)
Gee, devphil, you say:
The solution is not to ban or otherwise stop using blacklists, the solution is simply to (vocally) promote the ones which stay on top of the problem.
But your.sig says:
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Using SPAM blacklists is trying to apply a technological solution to a sociological problem, which your.sig proclaims won't work*. Either change your.sig or rethink your actions.
* And it doesn't: we still have SPAM despite the blacklists.
Just an FYI, you must install the patch separately; if you try Windows Update you'll be greeted with the usual message that you need no critical updates (at least, that should be the ususal message you get when you go there:-)
In other words, M$ don't consider this a critical update! Morons.
Slashdot Mirror
I wish! Where I live, I'll see an RDSLAM on the 12th of Never. We have copper between us and USQWest's switch (fiber! LOL -- nobody used fiber back when these lines were laid). The problem is distance. We're too remote. That's why I'm doubly amazed at AT&TB -- as bad as they are, at least they consider us customers; USQWest considers us a nuisance.
The bad thing about blocking the ads is then you don't know which companies to boycott.
Starship Trooper (User #523907) posted some code that may or may not kill the new ads here in Slashdot [haven't tried 'em, so I can't vouch for their effectiveness].
jamie pointed out that it might not be safe to run javascript hosted on someone else's server.
Astral Traveller (User #540334) then says:
Hmmm. I guess Astral Traveller and Starship Trooper are the same dude. How many other accounts you got? Ever mod yourself up? (ever mod yourself down?)I don't doubt that lots of people have multiple accounts, but if you do you should be careful which ones you use in which thread :-)
Apparantly since 1998 or so.
Let me get this straight: They were charging enough to cover the cost of providing the service but not enough to cover the cost of running the business, and were surprised when they went broke? And this is a surprise to you, too? Weren't you paying attention about a year ago (do you even get this reference)? You really should stay out of the market if you don't understand this fancy-schmancy economics stuff. "Buy low, sell high" is not a new idea.
Geeze, could the font be any smaller? Is this their way of enticing us to buy the dead tree version?
What amazes me is how many people forget that, as bad as AT&T Broadband may be, TCI was far worse. I don't wish to defend AT&T Broadband, but they brought me more than 40 cable channels, which TCI certanly did not do (TCI reduced our lineup when they bought our previous cable company), and AT&T brought us broadband internet (USQWest says they will never bring DSL to our neighborhood -- we can't get better than 26,000 bps dialup!).
AT&T isn't great, but they're not the devil incarnate. (Bill Gate$ still holds that title :-) I'd rather stay with AT&T than switch to Comcast, but I guess I won't have a choice in that.
What's wrong with the HBO model? Pay a flat fee for all you can watch. Why does it have to be Pay Per View? You'd think the MPAA and RIAA would look at the number of cable subscribers who pay for basic or extended -vs- the number who pay for a premium package with HBO/Showtime/etc. -vs- the number who consistantly buy PPV. Discounting the occasional one-off PPV (Mike Tyson vs. Godzilla for 15 rounds -- exactly what PPV was made for), I'll bet PPV is way down on the list. If you watch many movies, HBO/Showtime is a much better deal.
Personally I don't bother with the premium channels -- I rent videos because the selection is so much better, and it's truely on demand, when I want. If they'd offer on-demand selection (which is what the Internet promises) at a flat rate, then I'm interested; otherwise, keep your god-damned DRM crap away from me -- I ain't buying it (literally).
Spam is an email ad, not an Internet ad. So, technically, spamming people who have viewed DoubleClick ads on web pages is OK per their privacy policy. Besides, it's their privacy policy, not yours. They can change it anytime they like.
So how would I reply? If I'm forwarding TheBoss@MyLittleBusiness.com to DumbBunny@Home.com, then when I reply to a customer they see "DumbBunny" instead of "TheBoss". Great way to run a business from home!
Maybe because they like (and have used) code released under the BSD license, with it's permission to steal open source code and embed it in proprietary code, while they fear/loath/hate code released under the GPL, with it's viral clause that forces you to open up any proprietary code you embed it in? That's just my guess.
No wide posts here, either.
From the story I get the impression they're trying.
LOL! You haven't read the discussion, or you're new to the DMCA, aren't you? Of course it's extortion! That's the point! The DMCA just makes it legal extortion.
Why do you think the X-Box has a proprietary, almost-but-not-quite-USB connector? You won't be allowed to make an aftermarket controller without paying a royalty. They (Big Business, not just M$ or NOA) want patent-strength protection for things they can't patent, and DMCA is how they'll get it.
My first two computers had their keyboards built into the base unit -- what a pain! Thank God whoever thought to make the keyboard a separate item didn't try to patent that idea.
I dunno, I could be talking out my ass here, but doesn't Nintendo require a royalty for every game anyone makes? If you use this device to make your own game, aren't you "depriving" Nintendo of their royalty on that game? (never mind that you can't play it without paying them for the console in the first place, their business model depends on blade sales, not handle sales)
If so, then the device is, in their mind (and by extention, the Government's mind) "primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection" -- protection of their royalties!
The better question is "Why would they share the same email account?"
There are lots of things I might email my sister that I wouldn't want my wife to see (such as "what do you think I should get her for our anniversary?")
Somehow I think the hardware cost of a do-it-yourself box will be more than repaid by the savings in subscriptions.
Oh, and can your Replay/TiVo/whatever play games, or record/play/serve-to-the-household-network CDs? DVDs? MP3s? A homegrown box can do whatever you want it to, not whatever they want it to.
Won't work without Direct TV. Or were you able to buy a lifetime subscription to DirectTV for only $250? If so, please tell the rest of us how to get the same deal
The solution is not to ban or otherwise stop using blacklists, the solution is simply to (vocally) promote the ones which stay on top of the problem.
But your .sig says:
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Using SPAM blacklists is trying to apply a technological solution to a sociological problem, which your .sig proclaims won't work*. Either change your .sig or rethink your actions.
* And it doesn't: we still have SPAM despite the blacklists.
In other words, M$ don't consider this a critical update! Morons.