I guess the idea is really who cares? So the MPAA doesn't want you to watch stuff on whatever. Ok just don't buy the hardware in the firstplace. Sometimes it seems that people act like you are losing some right by not being able to watch a DVD movie. It's not like your day is incomplete without the 15th anniversary release of Teen Wolf with extra footage.
I can tell its obvious flamebait, but, it contains a small nugget worth responding to.
Okay. So. Next up. You use Linux, or say, MacOS, or even better, Amiga, and a new fabulous and cheap networking solution comes along. But, an organization comes along, and says, you can only run this on windows, not on MacOS, Linux, or Amiga.
Furthermore, they state unequivically, that, they will sue and prosecute anyone who attempts to write a driver for their hardware on another OS, without their permission. And without paying them huge fees.
So. Now. What do we have here:
1) a standard which is becoming the norm 2) if everyone uses it, and price fixing is then involved, along with control of every aspect of delivery, that equals monopoly. 3) a predatory system which stifles free trade. 4) a small number and minority telling the majority that they will do what the minority wants, even though the majority has shelled out its money for something that will surely become the next standard, and, ergo, a must have. 5) bad bad bad business.
Im sorry to say sir, it is about losing rights. The minute a company tells me I cant do something with a piece of personal property which I purchased, in my own private home, that is the moment they have control over me.
Well, with all due respect, thats BS. And, I, nor the people (i.e. 2600) who are going to court like it. I purchase something, I can do with it what I want.
If I want to write a driver to play DVD's on my Atari 2600, and then release that to the public, thats my right. And, nobody, no matter how much money they have, has a right to steal, cheat or otherwise rob me of that right. Nobody has a right to form a scheme with intent to defraud anyone of their rights to personal property, or what they can do with said property.
And, that, my little troll, is something you need to come to terms with...
While I think Apple's been going a tad overboard with their legal assaults, to some effect, I do *understand* where they are at with this.
They have worked a long time to get the company back in the black, and back to doing the kind of innovations they are famous for. Not the kind where you buy a company and innovate, but, actually do the hard work, pour sweat, etc.
As I see the perspective, Apple didnt want anyone stealing their moment. I have to agree with them. It was truly their moment. The cubed G4, the snow iMac, the deal with Circut City, the entry level mac starting at $799.
These are all of the fruits Apple worked hard to bring. I think they have every reason to defend the right to announce it on their own terms. I like Mac Rumor sites as much as the next guy. But, I also think Apple earned the right to unveil at their leasure.
On the other side, what they did with Macintouch was blatant and damned wrong. (For those that dont know, they sent threatening letters to Ric Ford, and the hosting ISP to get things pulled, and got a hot letter right back telling them where they could shove it)
But, all in all, im happy with the new gear. I cant wait to order and place some of the new stuff. I especially cant wait for LinuxPPC to catch up to em.
Re:If the new system were subject to popular contr
on
Pirate DNS?
·
· Score: 1
3. For the cases when the majority gets disgruntled by monopolistic practices, or when companies don't bow to popular pressure to open up (e.g. ebay or icq), or for the cases when the community can build a better replacement for a site that's holding back the natural development of internet for the sole purpose of making billions, we reserve the right to revoke any domain name with a popular referendum a la USENET
Yes, however, with the size of the web, and the DNS system, Im afraid that Mark Twain's eerie words would come to bear:
"If you want to make sure nothing gets done, form a committee. "
I think it would be hard to garner a clear and concise 'majority' with the population of the net. Especially when you would consider the fact that you might have alot of factions, each with an axe to grind over this and that.
While I favor doing *something* about NSI, somehow, I dont think putting it *all* into the hands of the net community at large is a wise idea.
5. People may not rent, sell or delegate any of their decision-making powers, and the new DNS shall remain forever under popular democratic control
This is a nice idea. But, not very feasable. The quickest way to get someone to do something, is tell them not to do it. In addition, such a policy would most likely be riddled with loopholes. Not to mention, how in god's name would such a policy even be enforced? Granted, I would find it difficult to believe that someone like bill gates could get a world majority of people to vote his way, either thru rent/bribe/payoff.......but, still, even if they did, this idea is wholly unfeasable.
As an IRC Operator, and, as a user, and, as a former server admin. I've seen many changes, both good and bad on IRC.
DoS attacks have gotten way out of hand. To the point that providers are no longer so willing to donate anything to operating the medium, because of the inherent risks involved. Who can blame them?
IRC is a *free* service. Its unmoderated. And, it has been here for a long time. The people such as myself who devote time, money, resources, are getting *fed UP* with the small minority of people who think its their GOD GIVEN right to smurf a server, or an oper. Its not. And, honestly, I can understand the motive behind this shutdown.
People are getting tired of volunteering, and indeed, donating their time, money and effort only to have someone Distribute a smurf attack that cripples not only their target, but a wide geographical area just so someone can flip a finger.
DDoS is *not* a right. Its not *cool*. Its the act of someone who is small in mind, who suddenly has to do something disruptive because thats the only way they can communicate. Its base primitive behavior. To be the loudest one of all. Its the bigger dick contest to an extreme, and it affects everyone. It is, quite simply, the act of a coward who has yet to learn the value of real communication.
So, I would say, to any of you, whether your use IRC, or dont, re-evaluate your position on this. IRC is an old medium. Its the best realtime conference medium available. Its changed alot yes, we are no longer the same medium described in RFC1459, I doubt Jarrko ever thought it would go this far. But, it did. And here we are.
Yes, this affects users as well. Yes, the smurf and packet kiddies will probably find other targets. That is not the point.
The point is: If you cant use the medium properly, then we arent gonna provide it for you. Period. Nobody is making money off running IRC. We have no motive in providing you the service. We do it because we enjoy the medium, and feel the medium is so good, its worth sharing, but, if you want to abuse our good will, and the effort we put forth...
Then, your damn right, we *will* pick up our ball and go home.
I am strongly against this idea for one simple reason.
Spammers will probably use this to better evade IRCops like myself who spend hours dealing with their stupid BS in the first place. pr0n, Long Distance, etc...
We already have a hard enough time weeding these idiots who flood channels, mass msg, and invite whole segments of lusers. Then of course, you have the zoom bots, the ones that join, get the channel list, ignore the IRCops, spam the rest and leave.
Add some AI to it, now, converrsation can ensue, possibly making it much easier to evade the policy of the network. Why stop at conversation? Lets teach the bots how to BNC when it gets an autokill or gline. For client based bots, how about we teach them to dial back in, to gain another IP. To change its ident, so it can evade any KLine/autokill/gline and keep right on spamming.
*sigh*
Want to invent something worthwhile? Streamline ircd for the next 10 years. Its starting to show its age. =)
Lucas = poet with a camera, who did his best to keep hype to a minimum. He also has a following, he knows it. And released the trailers/previews in such a way as to tease, but to give nothing away.
Early Reviews = from what I have seen, alot o reviewers have been giving it lukewarm reviews. But, what it all comes down to is what the fans think. Also, Ebert has seen it, and thought it a good film.
Selling out: I dont think lucas has sold out at all. He honestly hasnt had time, if you think about it, as he has been involved in production right up until release. In addition, ive noticed that there is a trend to slam those who have something big, mainly by people who lack any talent of their own.
I also think it should be pointed out, Lucas is doing this with his own money. He has every right to recoup some of it. If he didnt care, he would have pulled the money out of Fox.
I noticed that someone mentioned something about Lucas resisting DVD release. So what? Its his film. Not yours. He has every right to control how/when it is viewed, and the medium in which it is viewed. And, knowing lucas, he has something in mind.
In other words, lets stop all the complaining, see the movie. form an opinion. But or gods sakes, quit complaining about what lucas is/isint/could be/hasnt done to *your* satisfaction.
Having a vision of something isint easy. Making the vision a reality is even harder. Making a vision a reality when you have a bunch of people telling you what a bastard you are for this or that is even more tough.
Cluepon = get a vision. make it happen. you'll see what Im saying. Ill bet Linus knows what its all about.
Slashdot Mirror
I can tell its obvious flamebait, but, it contains a small nugget worth responding to.
Okay. So. Next up. You use Linux, or say, MacOS, or even better, Amiga, and a new fabulous and cheap networking solution comes along. But, an organization comes along, and says, you can only run this on windows, not on MacOS, Linux, or Amiga.
Furthermore, they state unequivically, that, they will sue and prosecute anyone who attempts to write a driver for their hardware on another OS, without their permission. And without paying them huge fees.
So. Now. What do we have here:
1) a standard which is becoming the norm
2) if everyone uses it, and price fixing is then involved, along with control of every aspect of delivery, that equals monopoly.
3) a predatory system which stifles free trade.
4) a small number and minority telling the majority that they will do what the minority wants, even though the majority has shelled out its money for something that will surely become the next standard, and, ergo, a must have.
5) bad bad bad business.
Im sorry to say sir, it is about losing rights. The minute a company tells me I cant do something with a piece of personal property which I purchased, in my own private home, that is the moment they have control over me.
Well, with all due respect, thats BS. And, I, nor the people (i.e. 2600) who are going to court like it. I purchase something, I can do with it what I want.
If I want to write a driver to play DVD's on my Atari 2600, and then release that to the public, thats my right. And, nobody, no matter how much money they have, has a right to steal, cheat or otherwise rob me of that right. Nobody has a right to form a scheme with intent to defraud anyone of their rights to personal property, or what they can do with said property.
And, that, my little troll, is something you need to come to terms with...
While I think Apple's been going a tad overboard with their legal assaults, to some effect, I do *understand* where they are at with this.
They have worked a long time to get the company back in the black, and back to doing the kind of innovations they are famous for. Not the kind where you buy a company and innovate, but, actually do the hard work, pour sweat, etc.
As I see the perspective, Apple didnt want anyone stealing their moment. I have to agree with them. It was truly their moment. The cubed G4, the snow iMac, the deal with Circut City, the entry level mac starting at $799.
These are all of the fruits Apple worked hard to bring. I think they have every reason to defend the right to announce it on their own terms. I like Mac Rumor sites as much as the next guy. But, I also think Apple earned the right to unveil at their leasure.
On the other side, what they did with Macintouch was blatant and damned wrong. (For those that dont know, they sent threatening letters to Ric Ford, and the hosting ISP to get things pulled, and got a hot letter right back telling them where they could shove it)
But, all in all, im happy with the new gear. I cant wait to order and place some of the new stuff. I especially cant wait for LinuxPPC to catch up to em.
3. For the cases when the majority gets disgruntled by monopolistic practices, or when companies don't bow to popular pressure to open up (e.g. ebay or icq), or for the cases when the community can build a better replacement for a site that's holding back the natural development of internet for the sole purpose of making billions, we reserve the right to revoke any domain name with a popular referendum a la USENET
Yes, however, with the size of the web, and the DNS system, Im afraid that Mark Twain's eerie words would come to bear:
"If you want to make sure nothing gets done, form a committee. "
I think it would be hard to garner a clear and concise 'majority' with the population of the net. Especially when you would consider the fact that you might have alot of factions, each with an axe to grind over this and that.
While I favor doing *something* about NSI, somehow, I dont think putting it *all* into the hands of the net community at large is a wise idea.
5. People may not rent, sell or delegate any of their decision-making powers, and the new DNS shall remain forever under popular democratic control
This is a nice idea. But, not very feasable. The quickest way to get someone to do something, is tell them not to do it. In addition, such a policy would most likely be riddled with loopholes. Not to mention, how in god's name would such a policy even be enforced? Granted, I would find it difficult to believe that someone like bill gates could get a world majority of people to vote his way, either thru rent/bribe/payoff.......but, still, even if they did, this idea is wholly unfeasable.
As an IRC Operator, and, as a user, and, as a former server admin. I've seen many changes, both good and bad on IRC.
DoS attacks have gotten way out of hand. To the point that providers are no longer so willing to donate anything to operating the medium, because of the inherent risks involved. Who can blame them?
IRC is a *free* service. Its unmoderated. And, it has been here for a long time. The people such as myself who devote time, money, resources, are getting *fed UP* with the small minority of people who think its their GOD GIVEN right to smurf a server, or an oper. Its not. And, honestly, I can understand the motive behind this shutdown.
People are getting tired of volunteering, and indeed, donating their time, money and effort only to have someone Distribute a smurf attack that cripples not only their target, but a wide geographical area just so someone can flip a finger.
DDoS is *not* a right. Its not *cool*. Its the act of someone who is small in mind, who suddenly has to do something disruptive because thats the only way they can communicate. Its base primitive behavior. To be the loudest one of all. Its the bigger dick contest to an extreme, and it affects everyone. It is, quite simply, the act of a coward who has yet to learn the value of real communication.
So, I would say, to any of you, whether your use IRC, or dont, re-evaluate your position on this. IRC is an old medium. Its the best realtime conference medium available. Its changed alot yes, we are no longer the same medium described in RFC1459, I doubt Jarrko ever thought it would go this far. But, it did. And here we are.
Yes, this affects users as well. Yes, the smurf and packet kiddies will probably find other targets. That is not the point.
The point is: If you cant use the medium properly, then we arent gonna provide it for you. Period. Nobody is making money off running IRC. We have no motive in providing you the service. We do it because we enjoy the medium, and feel the medium is so good, its worth sharing, but, if you want to abuse our good will, and the effort we put forth...
Then, your damn right, we *will* pick up our ball and go home.
Supernaut
I am strongly against this idea for one simple reason.
Spammers will probably use this to better evade IRCops like myself who spend hours dealing with their stupid BS in the first place. pr0n, Long Distance, etc...
We already have a hard enough time weeding these idiots who flood channels, mass msg, and invite whole segments of lusers. Then of course, you have the zoom bots, the ones that join, get the channel list, ignore the IRCops, spam the rest and leave.
Add some AI to it, now, converrsation can ensue, possibly making it much easier to evade the policy of the network. Why stop at conversation? Lets teach the bots how to BNC when it gets an autokill or gline. For client based bots, how about we teach them to dial back in, to gain another IP. To change its ident, so it can evade any KLine/autokill/gline and keep right on spamming.
*sigh*
Want to invent something worthwhile? Streamline ircd for the next 10 years. Its starting to show its age. =)
Katz = Complain O' Matic
Lucas = poet with a camera, who did his best to keep hype to a minimum. He also has a following, he knows it. And released the trailers/previews in such a way as to tease, but to give nothing away.
Early Reviews = from what I have seen, alot o reviewers have been giving it lukewarm reviews. But, what it all comes down to is what the fans think. Also, Ebert has seen it, and thought it a good film.
Selling out: I dont think lucas has sold out at all. He honestly hasnt had time, if you think about it, as he has been involved in production right up until release. In addition, ive noticed that there is a trend to slam those who have something big, mainly by people who lack any talent of their own.
I also think it should be pointed out, Lucas is doing this with his own money. He has every right to recoup some of it. If he didnt care, he would have pulled the money out of Fox.
I noticed that someone mentioned something about Lucas resisting DVD release. So what? Its his film. Not yours. He has every right to control how/when it is viewed, and the medium in which it is viewed. And, knowing lucas, he has something in mind.
In other words, lets stop all the complaining, see the movie. form an opinion. But or gods sakes, quit complaining about what lucas is/isint/could be/hasnt done to *your* satisfaction.
Having a vision of something isint easy. Making the vision a reality is even harder. Making a vision a reality when you have a bunch of people telling you what a bastard you are for this or that is even more tough.
Cluepon = get a vision. make it happen. you'll see what Im saying. Ill bet Linus knows what its all about.
Supernaut