Why should an individual have to become an ERO to transmit their *OWN* return? Why does someone have to be a 'business' to transmit their own data electronically rather than on paper?
And transmitting data does not require *specialized* software. If the IRS created a specification for the format of the data, one could use a text editor to create that format (assuming it was a text format, which there is no reason for it not to be), and an ftp program or a terminal emulator to transmit it. And this is *NO* less accurate or reliable than printing that data onto paper forms (by hand or machine), and then sending the forms by post, and in fact is likely to be more accurate, avoiding both bad handwriting and data entry errors. (And the validity of the data, eg the computations and acceptablity of deductions and whatnot, would be the same as that for paper)
The only sticky spot would be authentication - but since a scrawled signature on a peice of paper is 'good enough', I'm sure a suitable solution could be found, something involving public key signatures (the mechanism for generating should of course not be tied to any specific software, but rather should be openly specified such that anyone could produce the appropriate signatures, given a valid key). Probably you'd generate a key, print it out in some suitable format, get it signed and notarized, and mail it to the IRS, who would then place it on file to use to verify electronic submissions from you. Various 'end user' companies could produce windows pointy-clicky software for 'the massed', others could use OSS or other software (to be honest, rather than come up with a new key mechanism, I think PGP/GPG would work fine, and saves lots of development time, since those already exist, both in the open and closed worlds)
Current electronic filing concepts conflate 'preparation', and 'transmission'. I can understand the IRS not producing preparation software. They dont need to produce transmission software, only produce a specification for the format/syntax of data and method of transmission by which they would accept tax data electronically from individuals who wish to transmit only their own tax data, without them wanting or needing to go into the business of preparing or transmitting tax data for anyone else.
Its unfair that the author of the program would have to becomme an LLC or a corp, and would have to be recognized as an ERO.
An *INDIVIDUAL* should be able to utilize any method they find suitable, to be able to produce the electronic data, and then be able to transmit it directly to the IRS.
I dont want to profit, and I dont want anyone else to profit off me, I just want to be able to transmit my tax return information myself but electronically, rather than in paper form. If I am allowed to prepare and transmit it on paper (using what is essntially a 'common carrier', the USPS), why should I not be able to prepare and transmit it myself in electronic form, using an electronic 'common carrier', why should I be *required* to use a third-party, anymore than I am required to have a third party prepare my paper forms?
I also dont want the IRS to write or offer any software. In prohibiting the IRS from accepting electronic tax data from individuals directly, the law also prohibits individuals from competing against 'companies', and pretty much prevents anyone from providing that service (even to themsselves) except 'companies'.
Fine, add to the list 'dont want to waste my time installing and then keeping updated a special purpose applet specifically to have to avoid doing any of the previous'. But to be honest, I'd prefer just setting a pref here that would just suppress them entirely.
Really, it would take only a few seconds for the ed to find a link that works like the web is supposed to on google news, instead of being a whore for the NYT.
But while promoting what he calls the "digital lifestyle," Gates showed how vulnerable all consumers -- even the world's richest man -- are to hardware and software bugs.
It would *REALLY* be nice to see someone in the media finally get this right.
SB:... showed how vulnerable all *WINDOWS USERS* - even the founder and ex-CEO of the very company that makes Windows -- are to... (the fact that Windows is a buggy piece of shit)
What is it going to take to get/. editors from using links in stories that actually LINK TO the article/story they are referring to, instead of ones that prompt for some stupid login.
If it requires a login, its a private site, and isnt public news. If its public news, the same story *WILL* be posted on a public site that doesnt waste peoples time with login nonsense. It would take an editor posting a story 15 seconds to hit google news, and find such a link for a story, to substitute for where a story submitter has included a link to such a private news site. Instead of each view having to either do that or waste time either maintining a login or making up a disposable one for every story.
WHY IS SLASHDOT SUPPORTING THE NEW YORK TIMES OBNOXIOUS, PRIVACY-INVADING, AND GENERAL PAIN IN THE ASS REGISTRATION POLICY? How much are they paying, and to who?
If this is going to continue, it would be damn nice if instead of the (intermittent) '(free reg required)' comment on these stories, that fact was stored in a boolean field in the story database, so that viewers could have a prefs option to choose to just have those stories completely supressed from their slashdot experience.
And if enough people set that pref, perhaps the eds will finally realize that posting stories with that type of link is a complete waste of time.
Atlanta-based BellSouth disagrees. Bill McCloskey, a company spokesman, argues there are no barriers to entry into the broadband business, as evidenced by the army of carriers -- cable, wireless, local governments and others -- that are trying to compete.
"For anybody to say that there is no competition just doesn't compute," McCloskey says.
There are very few options for anyone that wants anything beyond dialup other than 1. Whichever cable company owns their geographic region. 2. Whichever ILEC owns the RBOC for their region. or 3. Fighing to get a 3rd party DSL service provided by (2).
The ILEC's do *everything* they can do prevent new entrants to the field, and to make it hard or expensive for existing ones, including things that I consider 'fighting dirty', such as trying to get legislation to block one of the few groups of entities that might actually have the resources and the wherewithal to be able to compete on an equal footing, the municipalities and other local government bodies.
My memory is not hazy. In fact, to this day, I have not purchased any DVD devices or DVD's.
I am however considering a DVD drive for my linux machine. I've found one for pretty cheap. However I still would have no intention of acquiring a library of DVD's. Heck, I have less than a dozen CD's. My primary goal would be to make DVD's no longer unreadable to me, as they currently are, so that on the occasion I actually had one in my possession, I could copy it to an mpeg for later viewing. Obviously I would have never considered this if it wasnt for DeCSS; and, as stated, I will never consider any use of any 'new' such format until I am able to read, access, and play the content without requiring anything other than a stock reader in my x86 machine, and non-proprietary software.
And beyond the people who cant make up their mind what color they want their car to be, what exactly is the point of this? It seems like it could facilitate car theft, as well as many other criminal pursuits (Eg witness saw the bank robbers drive away in a cherry red ford, these guys are driving a white ford, so they must be ok)
As fine as all that may be, why should you have to *pay* for the right to make a backup copy of something you have *already* paid for? It sounds like the pretense is 'we know you are going to give a copy to someone else, depriving us of our deserved right to make each and every 'consumer' with a breath to pay us for a copy of our work, so we think you should pay us ahead of time for doing so, and without us even having to take the effort to suggest that you have or might do so'..
A charge such as this *assumes* that every person that owns a PC is going to use it to make copies (legal, private, or not) of media to which they do not own the copyright, *and* that their is some obligation on their part to pre-compensate those who would claim damages as a result. Neither of those is true in any sane society.
Apparently you've missed all the stories about how notoriously hard it is to *CANCEL* AOL. About your only chance, would be to find some sort of prepaid CC or something you can use to sign up, that after you've met the requirements and obtained your iPod or whatever AOL will have no further mechanism to charge you.
Its a pyramid, its a scam, plain and simple, and if it isnt illegal its at least walking the fine line.
Its still an illegal pyramid scheme. Yes, the people at the top get theirs. At *any* point in time, for any given number of people who *have* gotten an iPod, there are *always* at least 5 times as many who have not. At *NO* point will everyone who has signed up have received one, and therein is why its a scam, and illegal.
The *ONLY* people who benefit by convincing people it isnt a scam are the people getting the 'commisions' from the various things people have to signup for to qualify, and the people who have already signed into it and realize that they have wasted their time and some money if they dont get other people to sign up.
The electric motor is the only motor that drives the wheels - the gas engine runs a genset that generates the electric. When the car is stopped, the engine shuts down, when you go to drive (and thus use more current), the engine starts as needed.
If they *DONT* protect credit(/debit) card charges with this, its somewhat useless, since thats the simplest way for someone to suck the money out of someones account.
If they do require charges to a credit card to be authorized by the SecureID card, it not only protects against outright stealing, but also prevents a merchant from saving your CC# and automatically rebilling you without your permission unless you jump thru their hoops to 'cancel' somne service - their only recourse is to terminate the service, which is as it should be.
There were two asteroids. The link labeled 'blind spot' was a link to an earlier, larger one. The link actually labelled '16 foot asteroid' described the smaller one.
I wasnt trying to convert people, nor was I whining about that app not being available (I have no need for it).
And I don't feel a need to hide what I think of MS. They are a convicted criminal, who lucked into an administration change that let the entire thing quietly go away with no remedy. IMNSHO, either the principals involved should have gone to jail, or MS should have had to make some real and considerable remedy, such as providing damages as *CASH* (not vouchers for MS products), or been forced to make changes to their software models to prevent them from locking out competitors.
And you can whine that this would take away their 'freedom to innovate' all you want - its bullshit. MS doesnt innovate, they steal or buy ideas from would-be competitors. And as a company with a monopoly position in the market, yes there are some things that would be perectly legal for a non-monopolist to do which *ARE* illegal for MS to do.
The problem with that is that it is what is know as 'force majeur (sp)'. The record labels are so huge and have so powerful, you can't enter into a mutally acceptable contract after negotiations. In fact there is no contract at all really, becuase theres no signature, and no negotiation at all, just a 'shrink wrap' that they say you are forced to agree with by opening the package. I'm still waiting for the landmark case that holds that type of agreement unenforcable.
I did *NOT* mean that I went to warez sites and downloaded pirated or hacked copies of games or other Windows software.
What I meant is that I do not use software that is not F/OSS (Eg, I use Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and GPL and BSD licensed applications which run on them)
I do not use MS Windows or any programs which require it, and any other 'nonfree' software. Yes, I admit part of the attraction is the fact that it doesnt cost anything, but even if I could get Windows for free, I wouldnt use it, becuase IMNSHO (like most programs written with the intention of making money as opposed to those written with the intention of having a well designed and working program) it SUCKS.
If you think it would take long for MS to start using any Palladium-like functionality that ends up being built into the hardware of every x86 motherboard made to lock out competition in any way they can you are a fool. For instance, I'm sure that if it catches on, MS office will by default lock every file it makes to it unless the write specifically goes in and turns it off (and in doing so they will see ominous but nonspecific warnings against doing so) which will compeltely and totally block any possibility of non-MS programs from being able to access them, even if the author has no need to protect the document, even if they are specifically sending it to someone, that person will be entirely unable to read it unless they are running MS Office, on an MS OS, on an Palladium-enabled PC. Anti-competetiveness rearing its head in full colors.
And even using it to force you to use an MS-approved player for video, audio, or other content is offensive, and in fact *could* lead to killing off any market for players that use non-protected format, making it unecoonomical for any business to write them, support them, or provide media in their formats.
DRM is incompatible with fair use. Its *MY* computer, if I want to copy some audio I legally purchsed the right to listen to into an MP3 format to play on my portable player I have *EVERY* right to do so, and the producer of that audio has no legal right to prohibit me from doing so, so they are chasing a technical ability to do so with DRM.
The fact is that the distribution of audio and video is no longer a scarce resource, and business models based on it being so are failing and will continue to fail. I dont have specific numbers, but I'm willing to bet that at *least* 75% of the price of a CD goes directly to profit of the distributor, perhaps 20% to the costs of actually producing and marketing the product, and the actual author/artist of the material is lucky if they get 5%. Given the choice, I'd rather pay the artist the 5% directly, and bypass the middleman.
Sadly, no version for any 'Free Software' platform exists, and no 'Free Software' version of either the main application, or even the 'viewer' application seems to exist, for any platform.
There isnt even a 'Freeware' version of even the viewer for any Free or OSS platform, only for Mac and Windows - so you either have to shell out megabucks for Apple hardware, or you have to shell out your soul and run Microshit OS on your x86 hardware.
So those of us that use Free Sofware exclusively will never have a chance to use this app..
Ok, he didnt violate the you-can-spam act, nor should he have been charged under that. He should be charged with theft of private information from his employer.
It's all very clever, of course, and impressive from a technological standpoint. However, alongside the rewards there's a risk to personal liberties, as the potential is once again opened for government and law-enforcement agencies to track vehicle movement.
As long as the system does not include any information that identifies the car or its owner (neither of which is necesarry for the described functionality of passing along road safety information), then this isnt a possibility.
Ah ok. I wouldnt buy something like that unless there was not only the possibility of, and in fact there was in existence, non-proprietary software that was compatible with it.
I just used their 'contact us' form to send the following comment. If you think this tech would be useful, and have any hope that it will be available using anything other than proprietary Windows apps, I encourage you to send an appropriate comment as well.
An item that seems to be missing from your FAQ, yet is assuredly a 'frequently asked question':
Will the software interface/API/commandset for this technology be publically documented, so that users and authors of Open Source software platforms will have an opportunity to add support to their applications?
The most common cd-writing software used by Linux users is described at the URL below. For your technology to be accepted in this market, you will most likely need to be sure to make the appropriate information available to its developer so that support can be added, and since this software is licensed under the GPL, it is highly unlikely it could be added if any royalty conditions were imposed, since GPL software is and must be distributed as source.
http://www.fokus.gmd.de/research/cc/glone/employ ee s/joerg.schilling/private/cdrecord.html
I encourage you to take whatever steps are necesarry to ensure that your product is available to users of Open Source platforms.
Slashdot Mirror
I will continue with this new version of Microsoft Virus Longhorn as I have with all the past ones - completely ignore it.
Why should an individual have to become an ERO to transmit their *OWN* return? Why does someone have to be a 'business' to transmit their own data electronically rather than on paper?
And transmitting data does not require *specialized* software. If the IRS created a specification for the format of the data, one could use a text editor to create that format (assuming it was a text format, which there is no reason for it not to be), and an ftp program or a terminal emulator to transmit it. And this is *NO* less accurate or reliable than printing that data onto paper forms (by hand or machine), and then sending the forms by post, and in fact is likely to be more accurate, avoiding both bad handwriting and data entry errors. (And the validity of the data, eg the computations and acceptablity of deductions and whatnot, would be the same as that for paper)
The only sticky spot would be authentication - but since a scrawled signature on a peice of paper is 'good enough', I'm sure a suitable solution could be found, something involving public key signatures (the mechanism for generating should of course not be tied to any specific software, but rather should be openly specified such that anyone could produce the appropriate signatures, given a valid key). Probably you'd generate a key, print it out in some suitable format, get it signed and notarized, and mail it to the IRS, who would then place it on file to use to verify electronic submissions from you. Various 'end user' companies could produce windows pointy-clicky software for 'the massed', others could use OSS or other software (to be honest, rather than come up with a new key mechanism, I think PGP/GPG would work fine, and saves lots of development time, since those already exist, both in the open and closed worlds)
Current electronic filing concepts conflate 'preparation', and 'transmission'. I can understand the IRS not producing preparation software. They dont need to produce transmission software, only produce a specification for the format/syntax of data and method of transmission by which they would accept tax data electronically from individuals who wish to transmit only their own tax data, without them wanting or needing to go into the business of preparing or transmitting tax data for anyone else.
Its unfair that the author of the program would have to becomme an LLC or a corp, and would have to be recognized as an ERO.
An *INDIVIDUAL* should be able to utilize any method they find suitable, to be able to produce the electronic data, and then be able to transmit it directly to the IRS.
I dont want to profit, and I dont want anyone else to profit off me, I just want to be able to transmit my tax return information myself but electronically, rather than in paper form. If I am allowed to prepare and transmit it on paper (using what is essntially a 'common carrier', the USPS), why should I not be able to prepare and transmit it myself in electronic form, using an electronic 'common carrier', why should I be *required* to use a third-party, anymore than I am required to have a third party prepare my paper forms?
I also dont want the IRS to write or offer any software. In prohibiting the IRS from accepting electronic tax data from individuals directly, the law also prohibits individuals from competing against 'companies', and pretty much prevents anyone from providing that service (even to themsselves) except 'companies'.
Fine, add to the list 'dont want to waste my time installing and then keeping updated a special purpose applet specifically to have to avoid doing any of the previous'. But to be honest, I'd prefer just setting a pref here that would just suppress them entirely.
Really, it would take only a few seconds for the ed to find a link that works like the web is supposed to on google news, instead of being a whore for the NYT.
It would *REALLY* be nice to see someone in the media finally get this right.
SB:
What is it going to take to get /. editors from using links in stories that actually LINK TO the article/story they are referring to, instead of ones that prompt for some stupid login.
If it requires a login, its a private site, and isnt public news. If its public news, the same story *WILL* be posted on a public site that doesnt waste peoples time with login nonsense. It would take an editor posting a story 15 seconds to hit google news, and find such a link for a story, to substitute for where a story submitter has included a link to such a private news site. Instead of each view having to either do that or waste time either maintining a login or making up a disposable one for every story.
WHY IS SLASHDOT SUPPORTING THE NEW YORK TIMES OBNOXIOUS, PRIVACY-INVADING, AND GENERAL PAIN IN THE ASS REGISTRATION POLICY? How much are they paying, and to who?
If this is going to continue, it would be damn nice if instead of the (intermittent) '(free reg required)' comment on these stories, that fact was stored in a boolean field in the story database, so that viewers could have a prefs option to choose to just have those stories completely supressed from their slashdot experience.
And if enough people set that pref, perhaps the eds will finally realize that posting stories with that type of link is a complete waste of time.
There are very few options for anyone that wants anything beyond dialup other than 1. Whichever cable company owns their geographic region. 2. Whichever ILEC owns the RBOC for their region. or 3. Fighing to get a 3rd party DSL service provided by (2).
The ILEC's do *everything* they can do prevent new entrants to the field, and to make it hard or expensive for existing ones, including things that I consider 'fighting dirty', such as trying to get legislation to block one of the few groups of entities that might actually have the resources and the wherewithal to be able to compete on an equal footing, the municipalities and other local government bodies.
My memory is not hazy. In fact, to this day, I have not purchased any DVD devices or DVD's.
I am however considering a DVD drive for my linux machine. I've found one for pretty cheap. However I still would have no intention of acquiring a library of DVD's. Heck, I have less than a dozen CD's. My primary goal would be to make DVD's no longer unreadable to me, as they currently are, so that on the occasion I actually had one in my possession, I could copy it to an mpeg for later viewing. Obviously I would have never considered this if it wasnt for DeCSS; and, as stated, I will never consider any use of any 'new' such format until I am able to read, access, and play the content without requiring anything other than a stock reader in my x86 machine, and non-proprietary software.
Unless I can extract the content to a non-encrypted format that I can play using non-proprietary software on stock hardware, it can go to hell.
And beyond the people who cant make up their mind what color they want their car to be, what exactly is the point of this? It seems like it could facilitate car theft, as well as many other criminal pursuits (Eg witness saw the bank robbers drive away in a cherry red ford, these guys are driving a white ford, so they must be ok)
As fine as all that may be, why should you have to *pay* for the right to make a backup copy of something you have *already* paid for? It sounds like the pretense is 'we know you are going to give a copy to someone else, depriving us of our deserved right to make each and every 'consumer' with a breath to pay us for a copy of our work, so we think you should pay us ahead of time for doing so, and without us even having to take the effort to suggest that you have or might do so'..
A charge such as this *assumes* that every person that owns a PC is going to use it to make copies (legal, private, or not) of media to which they do not own the copyright, *and* that their is some obligation on their part to pre-compensate those who would claim damages as a result. Neither of those is true in any sane society.
Apparently you've missed all the stories about how notoriously hard it is to *CANCEL* AOL. About your only chance, would be to find some sort of prepaid CC or something you can use to sign up, that after you've met the requirements and obtained your iPod or whatever AOL will have no further mechanism to charge you.
Its a pyramid, its a scam, plain and simple, and if it isnt illegal its at least walking the fine line.
Its still an illegal pyramid scheme. Yes, the people at the top get theirs. At *any* point in time, for any given number of people who *have* gotten an iPod, there are *always* at least 5 times as many who have not. At *NO* point will everyone who has signed up have received one, and therein is why its a scam, and illegal.
The *ONLY* people who benefit by convincing people it isnt a scam are the people getting the 'commisions' from the various things people have to signup for to qualify, and the people who have already signed into it and realize that they have wasted their time and some money if they dont get other people to sign up.
The electric motor is the only motor that drives the wheels - the gas engine runs a genset that generates the electric. When the car is stopped, the engine shuts down, when you go to drive (and thus use more current), the engine starts as needed.
If they *DONT* protect credit(/debit) card charges with this, its somewhat useless, since thats the simplest way for someone to suck the money out of someones account.
If they do require charges to a credit card to be authorized by the SecureID card, it not only protects against outright stealing, but also prevents a merchant from saving your CC# and automatically rebilling you without your permission unless you jump thru their hoops to 'cancel' somne service - their only recourse is to terminate the service, which is as it should be.
There were two asteroids. The link labeled 'blind spot' was a link to an earlier, larger one. The link actually labelled '16 foot asteroid' described the smaller one.
Both discuss the 'blind spot'
I wasnt trying to convert people, nor was I whining about that app not being available (I have no need for it).
And I don't feel a need to hide what I think of MS. They are a convicted criminal, who lucked into an administration change that let the entire thing quietly go away with no remedy. IMNSHO, either the principals involved should have gone to jail, or MS should have had to make some real and considerable remedy, such as providing damages as *CASH* (not vouchers for MS products), or been forced to make changes to their software models to prevent them from locking out competitors.
And you can whine that this would take away their 'freedom to innovate' all you want - its bullshit. MS doesnt innovate, they steal or buy ideas from would-be competitors. And as a company with a monopoly position in the market, yes there are some things that would be perectly legal for a non-monopolist to do which *ARE* illegal for MS to do.
The problem with that is that it is what is know as 'force majeur (sp)'. The record labels are so huge and have so powerful, you can't enter into a mutally acceptable contract after negotiations. In fact there is no contract at all really, becuase theres no signature, and no negotiation at all, just a 'shrink wrap' that they say you are forced to agree with by opening the package. I'm still waiting for the landmark case that holds that type of agreement unenforcable.
You obviously have no idea what Free Software is.
I did *NOT* mean that I went to warez sites and downloaded pirated or hacked copies of games or other Windows software.
What I meant is that I do not use software that is not F/OSS (Eg, I use Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and GPL and BSD licensed applications which run on them)
I do not use MS Windows or any programs which require it, and any other 'nonfree' software. Yes, I admit part of the attraction is the fact that it doesnt cost anything, but even if I could get Windows for free, I wouldnt use it, becuase IMNSHO (like most programs written with the intention of making money as opposed to those written with the intention of having a well designed and working program) it SUCKS.
If you think it would take long for MS to start using any Palladium-like functionality that ends up being built into the hardware of every x86 motherboard made to lock out competition in any way they can you are a fool. For instance, I'm sure that if it catches on, MS office will by default lock every file it makes to it unless the write specifically goes in and turns it off (and in doing so they will see ominous but nonspecific warnings against doing so) which will compeltely and totally block any possibility of non-MS programs from being able to access them, even if the author has no need to protect the document, even if they are specifically sending it to someone, that person will be entirely unable to read it unless they are running MS Office, on an MS OS, on an Palladium-enabled PC. Anti-competetiveness rearing its head in full colors.
And even using it to force you to use an MS-approved player for video, audio, or other content is offensive, and in fact *could* lead to killing off any market for players that use non-protected format, making it unecoonomical for any business to write them, support them, or provide media in their formats.
DRM is incompatible with fair use. Its *MY* computer, if I want to copy some audio I legally purchsed the right to listen to into an MP3 format to play on my portable player I have *EVERY* right to do so, and the producer of that audio has no legal right to prohibit me from doing so, so they are chasing a technical ability to do so with DRM.
The fact is that the distribution of audio and video is no longer a scarce resource, and business models based on it being so are failing and will continue to fail. I dont have specific numbers, but I'm willing to bet that at *least* 75% of the price of a CD goes directly to profit of the distributor, perhaps 20% to the costs of actually producing and marketing the product, and the actual author/artist of the material is lucky if they get 5%. Given the choice, I'd rather pay the artist the 5% directly, and bypass the middleman.
Sadly, no version for any 'Free Software' platform exists, and no 'Free Software' version of either the main application, or even the 'viewer' application seems to exist, for any platform.
There isnt even a 'Freeware' version of even the viewer for any Free or OSS platform, only for Mac and Windows - so you either have to shell out megabucks for Apple hardware, or you have to shell out your soul and run Microshit OS on your x86 hardware.
So those of us that use Free Sofware exclusively will never have a chance to use this app..
Otherwise, its an interesting story.
Ok, he didnt violate the you-can-spam act, nor should he have been charged under that. He should be charged with theft of private information from his employer.
As long as the system does not include any information that identifies the car or its owner (neither of which is necesarry for the described functionality of passing along road safety information), then this isnt a possibility.
Ah ok. I wouldnt buy something like that unless there was not only the possibility of, and in fact there was in existence, non-proprietary software that was compatible with it.