On the flipside, though: unless you have the ActiveX plugin for Mozilla installed, you won't be hit by a deluge of "Do you want to install"s every time you go to some sites, and there's less chance of GETTING the spyware.
I'm not saying you don't have a point, though. Just adding something.
Someone else might have given them incentive, but the end-user still gives the go-ahead. They can pay and pay and pay and pay, but it won't do a thing until I click "OK"*.
* Unless it's a trojan/worm/virus/etc. with no warning and no deeply-buried EULA clause.
Well, if you didn't get alarmed when the random, suspicious-looking fellow you were playing poker with was crawling around behind your TV with pliers...
Not really. The end-user installed something that overwrote or supplemented content on a website. In most of these cases, it was probably not their intention to recieve popups, but it by their own doing that they accepted the EULAs or clicked "Okay" on the ActiveX boxes.
If precedent gets set, though, what if another user truly wants a site-correlating popup service... something like a "human rights warning" or a more automated "RIAA radar" or something. The creators of that software could be sued on the same grounds. The end-user installed a something that overwrote or supplemented the content on a website.
"Moral equivelancy" is hogwash for the simple reason that the law does not make such equivelences.
----
1.) Read more carefully. 2.) Think less literally.
Did I ever say infringement was theft? No. I was agreeing with the GPP, that it was similar to hiring without pay (bouncing a paycheck), and disagreeing with the PP's argument of "Money and everything it buys is tangible."
There's this idea that if infringement isn't theft, than there's nothing (or less) wrong with infringement. Since there's no event of "I have this thing, which is not yours anymore, but is mine.", then no one is really losing anything, are they? (Not your argument per se, but a general feel I get.)
The PP seems to think that money is only for exchanges of tangible goods. I refute this with the bullet-list.
You can say "Well... that's CONTRACT infringement, and that's TRESPASSING..." The fact remains: The underlying reason you'd be kicked out for not paying in these situations is the fact that you did not pay, for these things which the PP says are intangible and irrelevant.
Regarding "Words have distinct meanings/definitions...", certainly someone who compares me to "Goebels in the Third Reich" can understand the concepts of COMPARISON and SIMILE. The fact that an apple is not an orange is true. To say they are not both fruit, however...
"Money and the objects it buys are tangable [sic]." --
See a movie. Go to a concert. Get a car repair (excluding "parts" cost). Go to an amusement park. Go to a doctor's office.
What there is tangible? Try doing it with no money in your pocket, though, and you'll be booted as soon as you're caught.
The only difference between a concert and a recording is that the recording is time-shifting the work from its original time and location. If you're not paying for the recording, it's tantamount to hiring without pay.
And what methodology do you use to ensure that your software is safe, I have to ask? ---
Download it from a trusted source (or check it against a hash from a trusted source). It might not be totally secure, but there's a lot less of a chance of it being malicious.
Although a call is probably best, I've heard that email is considered better than postal. Postal mail is slow, bulky, and needs to be terrorist-proofed, which backs it up and causes a hassle.
Fax, perhaps?
Re:Answer from someone in the business
on
RFID MasterCard
·
· Score: 1
...and, after R-ing-TFA, I find that you still have to take the card out of your wallet and "tap" it next to the reciever.
Because we all know how much work it is to swipe a card through a slot. Never mind. This is "who cares" technology in my book.
Re:Answer from someone in the business
on
RFID MasterCard
·
· Score: 1
Another (simple) way would also be to deactivate the sender unless a specific area of the card was pressed at the time (very much like the battery testers on some AA batteries only work while you're closing the circuit with your fingertips)...
--
Good idea, but it runs counter to the whole "hands-free" convenience of the RFID card. I'd go with the whole "PIN number" idea. Dial a PIN on the console, but never have to reach for your wallet.
Personally, I'd really like to see more development in that area. If online music retailers could have a good, solid, yet audibly insignificant watermarking scheme, it would allow them to track down infringers, while still leaving the music wide open to legal uses. Furthermore, seeing a few pirates getting legal-blasted for distributing their watermarked works could be a decent deterrant. It's a win-win.
In reply to some other posts, I disagree with applying the "Information should be free" idea to music. It's not "information", it's a product. Information is already free (in the US), thanks to fair use laws. You are no more "informed" by hearing a fair-use-friendly synopsis of a song than by possessing the actual song. The fact that an item is intangible or copyable does not mean that it does not take time and energy to produce.
Well, if you don't need it, it takes time. As in introduction to programming, too, it's so far down the road of all-work-no-payoff that a new initiate people would probably turned off programming entirely.
If you're just using simple gates and such, why even use the blocks, in that scenario? Maybe a few physical-action or physical-interface type blocks (motor, light sensor), but logic operations would be just as easily handled on the PC.
Actually, this leads to a good idea... A "freakout" mode if your box thinks it's getting portscanned. Once a certain number or sequence of ports gets hit, it just goes total lockup for, say, 5 or 10 minutes (unless you knock the "unfreakout" sequence?). Combine this with using nonstandard ports, and you'd have a pretty good chance of surviving a portscan.
I don't really think it's about clue versus lack thereof. It's just that cable, with its local loop and shared bandwidth, is much more succeptible to service degradation when one user is eating up a lot of bandwidth. Sure, they could cap it or slow it, but it's much easier just to say "no", and block services that are known to cause high use.
This is why you see less of this on DSL. Besides a high bandwidth bill, the provider really doesn't take much more of a hit. All that bps is assigned to you, and only you. Your neighbors don't complain if you max it out.
As for cable, things like SSH, Telnet, and the like are less common, and would usually have less bandwidth usage and less popularity (fewer users) than a garden-variety HTTP/FTP server.
Any server that uses port-knocking probably isn't going to make it far beyond geek-level. These people are fewer, more knowlegable (won't unnecessarily saturate the loop), and probably know how to connect to a nonstandard port.
The biggest thing you'd have to watch with a portknocking app on filtered broadband is that all the "key" ports aren't filtered upstream.
Click Death, a.k.a. the Click of Death, is the sound you hear when your Zip/Jaz disk (or drive) is probably trashed, beyond all repair. When all other methods of reading a portion of data fail, the last ditch effort of the Zip drive is to raise, then lower again, the reading heads in an attempt to reposition or realign them. This makes a "click...cah, click...cah, click...cah" sound: Click Death.
Some positive spin and marketing on that could help. Keep the core, and make the application more relevant. Drop the code into something like a sim that (a few) more people might find interesting.
Slashdot Mirror
On the flipside, though: unless you have the ActiveX plugin for Mozilla installed, you won't be hit by a deluge of "Do you want to install"s every time you go to some sites, and there's less chance of GETTING the spyware.
I'm not saying you don't have a point, though. Just adding something.
Succeptible to Joe Jobs, though. I'd hate to be the third-party retailer some spammer got pissed at if this became popular.
Someone else might have given them incentive, but the end-user still gives the go-ahead. They can pay and pay and pay and pay, but it won't do a thing until I click "OK"*.
* Unless it's a trojan/worm/virus/etc. with no warning and no deeply-buried EULA clause.
Well, if you didn't get alarmed when the random, suspicious-looking fellow you were playing poker with was crawling around behind your TV with pliers...
Not really. The end-user installed something that overwrote or supplemented content on a website. In most of these cases, it was probably not their intention to recieve popups, but it by their own doing that they accepted the EULAs or clicked "Okay" on the ActiveX boxes.
If precedent gets set, though, what if another user truly wants a site-correlating popup service... something like a "human rights warning" or a more automated "RIAA radar" or something. The creators of that software could be sued on the same grounds. The end-user installed a something that overwrote or supplemented the content on a website.
Hey, don't knock it. I hear it's even going to have a built-in entertainment system that plays Phantom games.
I've always wanted something like "SAMPLE", not that they'd give me that... something else that sounds like a sample plate, though.
"Moral equivelancy" is hogwash for the simple reason that the law does not make such equivelences.
----
1.) Read more carefully.
2.) Think less literally.
Did I ever say infringement was theft? No. I was agreeing with the GPP, that it was similar to hiring without pay (bouncing a paycheck), and disagreeing with the PP's argument of "Money and everything it buys is tangible."
There's this idea that if infringement isn't theft, than there's nothing (or less) wrong with infringement. Since there's no event of "I have this thing, which is not yours anymore, but is mine.", then no one is really losing anything, are they? (Not your argument per se, but a general feel I get.)
The PP seems to think that money is only for exchanges of tangible goods. I refute this with the bullet-list.
You can say "Well... that's CONTRACT infringement, and that's TRESPASSING..." The fact remains: The underlying reason you'd be kicked out for not paying in these situations is the fact that you did not pay, for these things which the PP says are intangible and irrelevant.
Regarding "Words have distinct meanings/definitions...", certainly someone who compares me to "Goebels in the Third Reich" can understand the concepts of COMPARISON and SIMILE. The fact that an apple is not an orange is true. To say they are not both fruit, however...
"Money and the objects it buys are tangable [sic]."
--
See a movie.
Go to a concert.
Get a car repair (excluding "parts" cost).
Go to an amusement park.
Go to a doctor's office.
What there is tangible? Try doing it with no money in your pocket, though, and you'll be booted as soon as you're caught.
The only difference between a concert and a recording is that the recording is time-shifting the work from its original time and location. If you're not paying for the recording, it's tantamount to hiring without pay.
You're right. It's not theft. A more proper analogy would be that of hiring someone without paying them.
This is a better thing... how?
For YEARS the Republicans argued, We could do great things if only we didn't have gridlock in Washington.
----
Perhaps they meant "great" as in "big", not as in "very good"?
And what methodology do you use to ensure that your software is safe, I have to ask?
---
Download it from a trusted source (or check it against a hash from a trusted source). It might not be totally secure, but there's a lot less of a chance of it being malicious.
Although a call is probably best, I've heard that email is considered better than postal. Postal mail is slow, bulky, and needs to be terrorist-proofed, which backs it up and causes a hassle.
Fax, perhaps?
...and, after R-ing-TFA, I find that you still have to take the card out of your wallet and "tap" it next to the reciever.
Because we all know how much work it is to swipe a card through a slot. Never mind. This is "who cares" technology in my book.
Another (simple) way would also be to deactivate the sender unless a specific area of the card was pressed at the time (very much like the battery testers on some AA batteries only work while you're closing the circuit with your fingertips)...
--
Good idea, but it runs counter to the whole "hands-free" convenience of the RFID card. I'd go with the whole "PIN number" idea. Dial a PIN on the console, but never have to reach for your wallet.
** FLEB sits back and enjoys being an Emusic subscriber... 22 cents a song, LAME VBR MP3 without DRM...
Burn it to a CD, sell the CD, delete the original.
How do you feel about unique-ID watermarking?
Personally, I'd really like to see more development in that area. If online music retailers could have a good, solid, yet audibly insignificant watermarking scheme, it would allow them to track down infringers, while still leaving the music wide open to legal uses. Furthermore, seeing a few pirates getting legal-blasted for distributing their watermarked works could be a decent deterrant. It's a win-win.
In reply to some other posts, I disagree with applying the "Information should be free" idea to music. It's not "information", it's a product. Information is already free (in the US), thanks to fair use laws. You are no more "informed" by hearing a fair-use-friendly synopsis of a song than by possessing the actual song. The fact that an item is intangible or copyable does not mean that it does not take time and energy to produce.
-- Let me ask how it hurts? --
Well, if you don't need it, it takes time. As in introduction to programming, too, it's so far down the road of all-work-no-payoff that a new initiate people would probably turned off programming entirely.
If you're just using simple gates and such, why even use the blocks, in that scenario? Maybe a few physical-action or physical-interface type blocks (motor, light sensor), but logic operations would be just as easily handled on the PC.
Actually, this leads to a good idea... A "freakout" mode if your box thinks it's getting portscanned. Once a certain number or sequence of ports gets hit, it just goes total lockup for, say, 5 or 10 minutes (unless you knock the "unfreakout" sequence?). Combine this with using nonstandard ports, and you'd have a pretty good chance of surviving a portscan.
(Shoot idea full of holes... now.)
I don't really think it's about clue versus lack thereof. It's just that cable, with its local loop and shared bandwidth, is much more succeptible to service degradation when one user is eating up a lot of bandwidth. Sure, they could cap it or slow it, but it's much easier just to say "no", and block services that are known to cause high use.
This is why you see less of this on DSL. Besides a high bandwidth bill, the provider really doesn't take much more of a hit. All that bps is assigned to you, and only you. Your neighbors don't complain if you max it out.
As for cable, things like SSH, Telnet, and the like are less common, and would usually have less bandwidth usage and less popularity (fewer users) than a garden-variety HTTP/FTP server.
Any server that uses port-knocking probably isn't going to make it far beyond geek-level. These people are fewer, more knowlegable (won't unnecessarily saturate the loop), and probably know how to connect to a nonstandard port.
The biggest thing you'd have to watch with a portknocking app on filtered broadband is that all the "key" ports aren't filtered upstream.
Click Death, a.k.a. the Click of Death, is the sound you hear when your Zip/Jaz disk (or drive) is probably trashed, beyond all repair. When all other methods of reading a portion of data fail, the last ditch effort of the Zip drive is to raise, then lower again, the reading heads in an attempt to reposition or realign them. This makes a "click...cah, click...cah, click...cah" sound: Click Death.
Some positive spin and marketing on that could help. Keep the core, and make the application more relevant. Drop the code into something like a sim that (a few) more people might find interesting.
No, they still count those ones as "active users".
What, you thought that uninstaller actually did anything?