Stelios doesn't seem to be trying to do anything like that - he just wants the distributors to provide him with films on the terms they would offer to any other cinema.
True, but on domain name issues he doesn't want to deal on the same terms as everyone else. Instead of using ICANN (he lost ICANN rulings), he runs straight to the UK courts. So it's one rule for him, another rule for everyone else. So if he wants companies to play fair with him he should play fair with others.
Yes, easyCinema, in their way, is trying to force the MPAA into signing a contract
No they're not. The MPAA is American. Easycinema is in the UK. I didn't realise that we were offically another american state (although these days it does appear that way).
As for lawyers, well Stelios likes them. As he owns EasyJet, EasyRentaCar and others, he has a nasty tendancy to sue for any domain name that starts with Easy* and Easi*. When ICANN started ruling against him in domain disputes he stopped using it, and starting using the UK courts instead. He's got great PR, but underneath it all he wants his own monopoly on domain names. He finally backed down in the case of EasyArt. You may want to read up at easyprotest2.com and consider if this is the sort of person geeks should be backing.
Actually you can set the automatic updating to install automatically and reboot once a day if necessary. However anyone that would let that happen in a live server environment is a moron, considering certain hot fixes have killed severs.
its a good thing we'll have MS's Trusted Computing Platform soon
You may joke, but at least with console games, X-Box, PS/2 and the like the likelihood of cheating is reduced. I'm happily playing Wolfenstein on the x-box now, and it's just like the PC version.
You can freely burn the songs onto a standard CD and then listen to them anywhere and in any manner you choose.
THAT's the different between Apple DRM and MS DRM.
Actually Microsoft's DRM does allow you to burn to CD. Or transfer to portable players. The difference is Microsoft provides content owners with the ability to toggle these features. Don't blame Microsoft if record labels won't turn the flag on. EMI's new service, for example, is supposed to allow CD burning.
XP DOES have some DRM features, built in to Media Player (e.g. you can rip a file from a CD, but only in dumbass WMA format, and only at a low bit-rate).
Out of the box sure, but then there are $20 MP3 addins. As for the WMA limited to low rate, balls. Up to 192 kps, by default. Hardly low.
2003 Server includes DirectX 6 but WMP9, BTW. This is hilarious, since sound and graphics acceleration are off by default, and if you *DO* play a media file or a CD with media player, all the visualizations are on and completely handled by your CPU.
What do you expect? DirectX runs at the kernel level. That last thing you need is something like a video player running at kernel level on a server OS.
> the excuse is to share file swap storage space as well.
Believe it, or not, Microsoft Research have a distributed file system like this. Built on Pastry, their Peer to Peer layer, they've produced PAST, a "large-scale, peer-to-peer archival storage utility that provides scalability, availability, security and cooperative resource sharing. Files in PAST are immutable and can be shared at the discretion of their owner." This was around 2 years ago.
Pizza deliveries don't go to the bad part of town, nor do taxis.
Consider this, a town next to your house sends frequent visitors. 99% of these visitors vandalise your town, break windows and steal. How do you stop your house being abused? Banning all people from that town is reasonable. If you do know someone there you can always give them permission on an individual basis.
Telstra are well known for not acting on abuse reports, not caring about open proxies, hosting a lot of spammers, including Dean Westbury and generally not playing nice. I'm more than happy to block Telstra on my mail server. I've never seen a legit email from them yet.
Digital Impact is not a "known spammer". Everything they send out has clear and effective unsubscribe methods.
Can you prove it's effective? Hell, "make penis now boobies here" spam has clear unsubscribe methods.
If DI/m0.net aren't spammers, why haven't they gotten out of the blacklists they are in? Why the complaints on usenet
Why did I get an email bounce
23:36:06 Wirehub! Internet DNSBL 209.11.164.116 microsoft2003launch@email.microsoft.com
I don't recall signing up for product launch emails. In fact, the only reason MS has my main home address is for their security bulletins. My profile on MS's site only has this option ticked. I doubt that email from microsoft2003launch@email.microsoft.com is a security bulletin. Ironically, if MS had mailed it from their own IP space, it would have reached my inbox.
What do they have against it? They can't get it to work. The first camera phone doesn't work with bluetooth headsets, they never talk to any bluetooth PC device that isn't a Nokia, which makes backing the phones up painful and each phone, with each ROM revision messes up something else, so the phones don't talk to each other.
I've given up on Nokias now because of this. Next time, I may end up with a Sony.
I can see obvious problems with this, having had my identity stolen a little in the UK.
2 years ago I had a cheque (check) book and American Express card stolen from the post. They were stolen by either
Postal workers
People in my shared building
From that information the thieves now had my full name, bank details and details of a credit card I held (albeit a cancelled cards and cancelled cheques). From this information they purchased mobile phones, billed to me and applied for numerous store cards. I only discovered this when the bills started arriving.
Now, if BT's scheme goes off information available on the Electricity bill (keep in mind there are NUMEROUS electricity suppliers, so numerous databases to tie together), what is to stop someone stealing your electricity bill? Note that the electricy reference is per household, not per person. Now, tie this into the electoral role (which is already sold to marketers, and you can check and query it at your local library, so it's not private) that might almost be adequate.
Except the electoral role is updated once a year. You can actually manage to miss it completly if you move at exactly the wrong time.
Also people can choose to opt out of the data sharing that the electoral role provides (but not the information sharing to the credit agencies).
Lets not forget that BT is a private company, not answerable to anyone except the shareholders. I'm not sure if this is better or worse than the government forcing a scheme through.
I'm saying he is full of bull because the process of querying domains on email receipt was in place long before spam became the problem it is today. Sure the amount of queries will have gone up because of the increase in bogus spam, but the lookups where never solely implemented as an anti-spam message, it's just a nice side effect. Blaming anti-spam measures is wrong, blame the people that caused the lookups, the spammers.
Many anti-spam tools verify "From" addresses and perhaps other fields. If the From address has an invalid hostname, such as "spam.my.domain," the root servers will see more requests, because the top level domain does not exist.
DNS lookups on the sender address was common before there was a major spam problem. It makes sense, why would you want to take email from somewhere you cannot reply to? So I don't think you can blame anti-spam tools for this.
Anti-spam tools also make various checks on the IP address of the connecting client -- for example, the various "realtime blackhole lists" and basic in-addr.arpa checks.
in-addr.arpa checks has been a standard
practice in networking software, not just email, since it was available. Some FTP servers do it, some web servers do it, your web log analyzer does it, IRC does it. You can't put that one onto anti-spam tools either.
The use of dnsBL lists will, of course, create extra load, when you look up the name servers for the list(s) you are using. But in all likelihood the NS and A records are cached at your local server. You're not hitting the root server with every lookup.
This guy seems full of bull. Note that he is not a LEAD scientist for the root servers, he's a lead scientist for the company that produced the report.
You mean, finally, they're using proper JOIN syntax?
However, it's not like ANSI SQL 92 is useful (hey, even Postgres makes it:) ), it's damned limited. So every database manufacturer starts adding their extensions in (and this isn't solely a Microsoft trait, Oracle, Sybase, IBM, Informix, everyone does it, and once you rely on those (and you will), you can kiss easy migration goodbye.
Every SQL "distribution" has it's own quirks. For example, Oracle isn't (or wasn't last time I looked) ANSI SQL 92 compliant. MS SQL does a better job of this.
Everyone implements triggers diferently, or not at all, some SQL databases don't have stored procedures, locking mechanisms vary, even connection methods vary. The optimisations you have learnt, and coded for on one database server generally fail on another.
I've been on the sharp end of migrating Oracle to MS SQL server, and in the end we threw the Oracle stored procedures away and rewrote the SQL.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually the Orange SPV has been around for over 6 months. It's not exactly now.
True, but on domain name issues he doesn't want to deal on the same terms as everyone else. Instead of using ICANN (he lost ICANN rulings), he runs straight to the UK courts. So it's one rule for him, another rule for everyone else. So if he wants companies to play fair with him he should play fair with others.
No they're not. The MPAA is American. Easycinema is in the UK. I didn't realise that we were offically another american state (although these days it does appear that way).
As for lawyers, well Stelios likes them. As he owns EasyJet, EasyRentaCar and others, he has a nasty tendancy to sue for any domain name that starts with Easy* and Easi*. When ICANN started ruling against him in domain disputes he stopped using it, and starting using the UK courts instead. He's got great PR, but underneath it all he wants his own monopoly on domain names. He finally backed down in the case of EasyArt. You may want to read up at easyprotest2.com and consider if this is the sort of person geeks should be backing.
No mouse, no keyboard. I find the analog stick works quite nicely. However I never did use a mouse when I was on the PC.
Actually you can set the automatic updating to install automatically and reboot once a day if necessary. However anyone that would let that happen in a live server environment is a moron, considering certain hot fixes have killed severs.
You may joke, but at least with console games, X-Box, PS/2 and the like the likelihood of cheating is reduced. I'm happily playing Wolfenstein on the x-box now, and it's just like the PC version.
THAT's the different between Apple DRM and MS DRM.
Actually Microsoft's DRM does allow you to burn to CD. Or transfer to portable players. The difference is Microsoft provides content owners with the ability to toggle these features. Don't blame Microsoft if record labels won't turn the flag on. EMI's new service, for example, is supposed to allow CD burning.
Out of the box sure, but then there are $20 MP3 addins. As for the WMA limited to low rate, balls. Up to 192 kps, by default. Hardly low.
2003 Server includes DirectX 6 but WMP9, BTW. This is hilarious, since sound and graphics acceleration are off by default, and if you *DO* play a media file or a CD with media player, all the visualizations are on and completely handled by your CPU.
What do you expect? DirectX runs at the kernel level. That last thing you need is something like a video player running at kernel level on a server OS.
Believe it, or not, Microsoft Research have a distributed file system like this. Built on Pastry, their Peer to Peer layer, they've produced PAST, a "large-scale, peer-to-peer archival storage utility that provides scalability, availability, security and cooperative resource sharing. Files in PAST are immutable and can be shared at the discretion of their owner." This was around 2 years ago.
Pizza deliveries don't go to the bad part of town, nor do taxis.
Consider this, a town next to your house sends frequent visitors. 99% of these visitors vandalise your town, break windows and steal. How do you stop your house being abused? Banning all people from that town is reasonable. If you do know someone there you can always give them permission on an individual basis.
Telstra are well known for not acting on abuse reports, not caring about open proxies, hosting a lot of spammers, including Dean Westbury and generally not playing nice. I'm more than happy to block Telstra on my mail server. I've never seen a legit email from them yet.
It covers other countries too, as well as some ISPs (including certain ones that don't give a damn like wannadoo and interbusiness.it)
Assuming you're not a troll, no
Now users can tick if their stories are duplicates or not.
This could outlaw transparent proxies at ISPs. After all, they lie about where the request came from, and where it goes to.
Can you prove it's effective? Hell, "make penis now boobies here" spam has clear unsubscribe methods.
If DI/m0.net aren't spammers, why haven't they gotten out of the blacklists they are in? Why the complaints on usenet
Why did I get an email bounce
23:36:06 Wirehub! Internet DNSBL 209.11.164.116 microsoft2003launch@email.microsoft.com
I don't recall signing up for product launch emails. In fact, the only reason MS has my main home address is for their security bulletins. My profile on MS's site only has this option ticked. I doubt that email from microsoft2003launch@email.microsoft.com is a security bulletin. Ironically, if MS had mailed it from their own IP space, it would have reached my inbox.
They make a very loud clicking, slutter like sound. Hard to hide.
What do they have against it? They can't get it to work. The first camera phone doesn't work with bluetooth headsets, they never talk to any bluetooth PC device that isn't a Nokia, which makes backing the phones up painful and each phone, with each ROM revision messes up something else, so the phones don't talk to each other.
I've given up on Nokias now because of this. Next time, I may end up with a Sony.
But does joe public know this? I doubt it. They only realise when the paper mail shot arrives.
I can see obvious problems with this, having had my identity stolen a little in the UK.
2 years ago I had a cheque (check) book and American Express card stolen from the post. They were stolen by either
From that information the thieves now had my full name, bank details and details of a credit card I held (albeit a cancelled cards and cancelled cheques). From this information they purchased mobile phones, billed to me and applied for numerous store cards. I only discovered this when the bills started arriving.
Now, if BT's scheme goes off information available on the Electricity bill (keep in mind there are NUMEROUS electricity suppliers, so numerous databases to tie together), what is to stop someone stealing your electricity bill? Note that the electricy reference is per household, not per person. Now, tie this into the electoral role (which is already sold to marketers, and you can check and query it at your local library, so it's not private) that might almost be adequate.
Except the electoral role is updated once a year. You can actually manage to miss it completly if you move at exactly the wrong time.
Also people can choose to opt out of the data sharing that the electoral role provides (but not the information sharing to the credit agencies).
Lets not forget that BT is a private company, not answerable to anyone except the shareholders. I'm not sure if this is better or worse than the government forcing a scheme through.
When did robots.txt start applying to ftp?
I'm saying he is full of bull because the process of querying domains on email receipt was in place long before spam became the problem it is today. Sure the amount of queries will have gone up because of the increase in bogus spam, but the lookups where never solely implemented as an anti-spam message, it's just a nice side effect. Blaming anti-spam measures is wrong, blame the people that caused the lookups, the spammers.
Many anti-spam tools verify "From" addresses and perhaps other fields. If the From address has an invalid hostname, such as "spam.my.domain," the root servers will see more requests, because the top level domain does not exist.
DNS lookups on the sender address was common before there was a major spam problem. It makes sense, why would you want to take email from somewhere you cannot reply to? So I don't think you can blame anti-spam tools for this.
Anti-spam tools also make various checks on the IP address of the connecting client -- for example, the various "realtime blackhole lists" and basic in-addr.arpa checks.
in-addr.arpa checks has been a standard practice in networking software, not just email, since it was available. Some FTP servers do it, some web servers do it, your web log analyzer does it, IRC does it. You can't put that one onto anti-spam tools either.
The use of dnsBL lists will, of course, create extra load, when you look up the name servers for the list(s) you are using. But in all likelihood the NS and A records are cached at your local server. You're not hitting the root server with every lookup.
This guy seems full of bull. Note that he is not a LEAD scientist for the root servers, he's a lead scientist for the company that produced the report.
You mean, finally, they're using proper JOIN syntax?
However, it's not like ANSI SQL 92 is useful (hey, even Postgres makes it :) ), it's damned limited. So every database manufacturer starts adding their extensions in (and this isn't solely a Microsoft trait, Oracle, Sybase, IBM, Informix, everyone does it, and once you rely on those (and you will), you can kiss easy migration goodbye.
Every SQL "distribution" has it's own quirks. For example, Oracle isn't (or wasn't last time I looked) ANSI SQL 92 compliant. MS SQL does a better job of this.
Everyone implements triggers diferently, or not at all, some SQL databases don't have stored procedures, locking mechanisms vary, even connection methods vary. The optimisations you have learnt, and coded for on one database server generally fail on another.
I've been on the sharp end of migrating Oracle to MS SQL server, and in the end we threw the Oracle stored procedures away and rewrote the SQL.
Oops, apologies, been a while since I needed to check. Serves me right for being too lazy to look it up again.