That is the reason why many states have laws against possessing buglary tools... because intent is so hard to prove until the crime has been committed.
Since the supposed standard of proof in a criminal court is "beyond reasonable doubt" it should be hard to prove guilt. Also numbers of arrests or convictions are not a good metric for performance of a criminal justice system.
Over half a million dollars? That's outrageous!. I suppose that DirectTV is just assuming that anybdy that bought modded equipment was going to buy every single channel and every single pay-per-view event/movie they ever offered.
It appears commonplace to use these kind of daft metrics. They probably include people using unoffical decoders who couldn't get the official ones even if they wanted to.
Hmm so I guess the South pole and northern canada and alaska are very sunny places?
Actually they are. At least for the half year they are in 24 hour daylight. Also the polar regions are the dryest area of the planet, so you are unlikely to get clouds in the way.
If there is a catalyst, then it is possible that one isomer will be perferred. You are absoultly correct for non-catalyzed reactions - and you are probably more of a synthetic person than I am.
Especially if that catalyst is a chiral compound. Which is the case in biological systems.
Hmm. Not.arpa.us then? Is the idea that all numbers across the globe fit into.arpa, or is this an example of an inappropriate TLD?
Don't you mean "another", rather than an... e164.arpa is a SLD anyway.
.com and.org have a sensible argument to make themselves out to be international.
If that were the case these domains wouldn't be very well used, especially.com. Since it is hard and expensive for a commercial entity to operate globally.
Phone numbers are definitely region-specific however, and they certainly should be encompassed within . domains.
Over most of the planet phone numbers are "country" specific. Maybe what would be needed would be an additional TLD of.nanp to cope with the one case which isn't country specific.
Re:Settle down, man, it's better than you think.
on
U.S. Endorses ENUM
·
· Score: 1
Sure, it's been argued that this means anyone can find out your phone number from your IP, your IP from your phone number or something similar, and telemarket the living daylights out of you. Not true. Unsolicited telemarketing spam, as you've no doubt been reading on Slashdot, is likely to soon become illegal in all states and most of Europe - at least, that's what I see happening.
Since a fair amount of spam is sent by criminals anyway why should one more help anyway? Especially since spam can be sent from anywhere... It's not as if the UN security council is passing resolutions against spammers.
f you think about it, if someone is trying to get a hold of you why should they have to try several distinct numbers and addresses? Doesn't it make sense to have just one, and information gets routed to the appropriate interface (phone, e-mail, IM, etc
Because people wear different "hats" and very few people would want to give out their personal telephone number for business usage or vice versa.
In an organization where the Libyans chair the Human Rights Committee, and the Iraquis the chair the disarmament committee I can only wonder how the Internet Committee would turn out.
Well the worst it could be would be run by the same bunch as it is now...
I was just thinking that perhaps it should be handed over to the ITU [itu.int]. If they can get the world's phone systems talking to one another, the Internet should be a piece of cake in comparison. (You ever look at telephony protocols? You don't want to. Trust me.)
The telephone protocols having the extra complication that you have a situation of NANP and rest of the planet. Which somehow have to manage to interconnect.
Perhaps its time that the running of the internet be taken out of any one nations hands. Perhaps the correct solution is to no longer leave the controlling body's in the hands of the US.
A big part of the problem is overuse of gTLDs resulting in a hierarchical naming system being used as though it is a few flat namespaces. A DNS name is functionally similar to a telephone number or a postal address.
Perhaps the running of the internet should become a United Nations function?
When the US government is doing it now? You're joking, right?
A contract is simply a binding agreement between two parties entered willingly. Its been pretty well esablished that both parties entering the contract must agree to it, knowning what they are entering into.
Also in order to be valid there also needs to be an exchange of "consideration". Which can be anything of value, as considered by all parties to the contract.
iirc, you bought it and have the right to use it, but you do not have the right to copy it. Some court case held that loading the program into RAM qualified as copying. You need additional license to copy the program into RAM.
No, I don't think this makes any sense, for a long list of reasons, but I think it's the whole rational behind EULAs.
If you applied this "logic" even handedly you'd need to agree to an EULA in order to read the software EULA. (Since in order to read you need to copy the data to a kind of DRAM.) The software company would also need to agree to an EULA in order to read your covering letter returning the software when you didn't agree to the software EULA. Of course there isn't anything to prevent "the law" being nonsensical, illogical or self contradictory...
sometimes just buying hardware implies agreement to software terms. For example toshiba laptops have a sticker on the plastic wrap stating that just by taking the computer out, you've accepted the EULA for ALL software bundled with the computer
If this was legally sound all software companies would be out of business. Since a disgruntled customer could send them a binding contract where all they had to do to accept the conditions would be to open the envelope.
ADSL has a contention of 50:1 - It's published, everyone knows it. If everyone connected to your DSLAM tried to download at the same time you'd get about 2kbps.
Except you don't know either what the uplink bandwidth the DSLAM actually has available (it's connected to a ATM network, which also has its own contention ratio) or how many ports on the DSLAM are actually connected to anything. The 50:1 could easily mean something along the line of 2,500 512k connections eventually wind up running through 1 100M ethernet port at the ISP end.
If you went to an all you can eat buffet and then were stopped from doing so, you'd be pissed, and would probably want your money back.
A closer analogy would be if you had been sold a year's pass to an "all you can eat" buffet. Which changed to be restricted to "X amount of food per Y amount of time" after a few months.
Restaurants are well within their right to charge certain customers more to eat at their all-you-can-eat buffets. If they notice that a regular customer regularly eats an obscene quantity of food when they walk through the door, most restaurants will start charging that customer more to eat there. I have several friends who fit that category.
However people are not tied to a specific restaurant. They can easily go elsewhere if they no longer thing they are getting a good deal at a specific resturant.
Also, ISPs are well within their right to charge customers more money who regularly consume large amounts of bandwith.
The difference is that the customer may not be able to simply go elsewehere. The customer may also have to sue to recover any money already paid or counter sue if the ISP thinks they are entitled to more money after having changed the service they are offering the customer.
The reason answer is in bandwith throttling and the like. During busy times, clamp the bandwidth an individual can use. They still get unlimited usage of it, it's just scaled back. I would lvoe a service that offered a huge maximum like 10mbit or something, and just clamed it to something reasonable during the day, like 512kbit or something. Better yet, have a device that does dynamic traffic shaping.
Even more sensible only restrict when contention actually is an issue on that part of the network.
then don't sell 24/7 unlimited bandwidth if you don't mean it. They have the same thing as an "all you can eat bar". Should I not be allowed to purchase all you can eat ribbs because last time I did I ate four full racks?
One important difference is that "all you can eat" food outlets don't use long term contracts. So if one treats you badly your only potential losses are the cost of one meal.
They can't have it both ways (have unlimted usage and require no one use much), if you offer "all you can eat" someone like me is going to come along and eat all they can.
In truth, the 1GB/day limits aren't really that bad. Think about it... 200 tracks/day is over 600 minutes (10 hours!) of new music per day.
In practice quite possibly less, since every transfer protocol has some kind of overhead. The point is that they changed the rules after agreeing a contract with the customers. Including cases where customers had already paid.
Your heavy users are balanced out by the light ones, you can talk contension ratios all you like, but when everyone is on at the same time, eg evening, and if you cannot cope then , then its a network problem not a user problem.
Thing is it isn't a matter for the customer how NTL has or has not implimented their network. Also a lot of the time it isn't clear exactly what some contention ratio is actually refering to in the first place. Without a detailed diagram of the network topography you may as well quote random numbers.
The ISS AFAIK has more then 6 docking ports. While you can dock at most two shuttles to it due to space constraints, you can make a Christmas tree of Soyuz and Progress craft out of it. Which in fact means more crew then with a shuttle.
If 6 isn't enough it's perfectly possible to fit more or to use a docking adaptor.
What the ISS needs to make itself ecomomically more reasonable is not more shuttle. It is a higher capacity cargo container launched with disposable boosters like the Ariana 5, Proton or if it is something even bigger Energia. After all that is what Energia was designed for - to be a modular booster capable to deliver hundreds of tons into low orbit (it cannot reach stationary).
Maybe not at full payload, IIRC it can get a smaller payload into Lunar orbit.
Slashdot Mirror
That is the reason why many states have laws against possessing buglary tools... because intent is so hard to prove until the crime has been committed.
Since the supposed standard of proof in a criminal court is "beyond reasonable doubt" it should be hard to prove guilt.
Also numbers of arrests or convictions are not a good metric for performance of a criminal justice system.
Over half a million dollars? That's outrageous!. I suppose that DirectTV is just assuming that anybdy that bought modded equipment was going to buy every single channel and every single pay-per-view event/movie they ever offered.
It appears commonplace to use these kind of daft metrics. They probably include people using unoffical decoders who couldn't get the official ones even if they wanted to.
1. Should it be illegal to tell someone how to do something?
Not when the law in question is passed by the US Congress, since the US Congress is explicitally denyed the ability to pass such a law.
Hmm so I guess the South pole and northern canada and alaska are very sunny places?
Actually they are. At least for the half year they are in 24 hour daylight. Also the polar regions are the dryest area of the planet, so you are unlikely to get clouds in the way.
Well...no. I run a commerical entity that operates globally. This commecial entity consists of one person - me.
.com website.
Your "global company", of course, accepts any kind of currency potential customers might have handy
However, it has no trouble dealing with customers across the globe and it does this through use of its
Tough luck if they want to use the phone.
All depends on the nature of what you're offering (I do a very small scale hosting service).
"very small scale" and "operating globally" sounds somewhat mutually exclusive.
If there is a catalyst, then it is possible that one isomer will be perferred. You are absoultly correct for non-catalyzed reactions - and you are probably more of a synthetic person than I am.
Especially if that catalyst is a chiral compound. Which is the case in biological systems.
Hmm. Not .arpa.us then? Is the idea that all numbers across the globe fit into .arpa, or is this an example of an inappropriate TLD?
.com and .org have a sensible argument to make themselves out to be international.
.com. Since it is hard and expensive for a commercial entity to operate globally.
.nanp to cope with the one case which isn't country specific.
Don't you mean "another", rather than an... e164.arpa is a SLD anyway.
If that were the case these domains wouldn't be very well used, especially
Phone numbers are definitely region-specific however, and they certainly should be encompassed within . domains.
Over most of the planet phone numbers are "country" specific. Maybe what would be needed would be an additional TLD of
Sure, it's been argued that this means anyone can find out your phone number from your IP, your IP from your phone number or something similar, and telemarket the living daylights out of you. Not true. Unsolicited telemarketing spam, as you've no doubt been reading on Slashdot, is likely to soon become illegal in all states and most of Europe - at least, that's what I see happening.
Since a fair amount of spam is sent by criminals anyway why should one more help anyway? Especially since spam can be sent from anywhere... It's not as if the UN security council is passing resolutions against spammers.
f you think about it, if someone is trying to get a hold of you why should they have to try several distinct numbers and addresses? Doesn't it make sense to have just one, and information gets routed to the appropriate interface (phone, e-mail, IM, etc
Because people wear different "hats" and very few people would want to give out their personal telephone number for business usage or vice versa.
Why do laws have to be so complicated? Because no rule set can easily fit the complexity of life.
Why does that mean that you need statutes which are so complicated the people passing them don't understand...
In an organization where the Libyans chair the Human Rights Committee, and the Iraquis the chair the disarmament committee I can only wonder how the Internet Committee would turn out.
Well the worst it could be would be run by the same bunch as it is now...
I was just thinking that perhaps it should be handed over to the ITU [itu.int]. If they can get the world's phone systems talking to one another, the Internet should be a piece of cake in comparison. (You ever look at telephony protocols? You don't want to. Trust me.)
The telephone protocols having the extra complication that you have a situation of NANP and rest of the planet. Which somehow have to manage to interconnect.
Perhaps its time that the running of the internet be taken out of any one nations hands. Perhaps the correct solution is to no longer leave the controlling body's in the hands of the US.
A big part of the problem is overuse of gTLDs resulting in a hierarchical naming system being used as though it is a few flat namespaces. A DNS name is functionally similar to a telephone number or a postal address.
Perhaps the running of the internet should become a United Nations function?
When the US government is doing it now? You're joking, right?
A contract is simply a binding agreement between two parties entered willingly. Its been pretty well esablished that both parties entering the contract must agree to it, knowning what they are entering into.
Also in order to be valid there also needs to be an exchange of "consideration". Which can be anything of value, as considered by all parties to the contract.
iirc, you bought it and have the right to use it, but you do not have the right to copy it. Some court case held that loading the program into RAM qualified as copying. You need additional license to copy the program into RAM.
No, I don't think this makes any sense, for a long list of reasons, but I think it's the whole rational behind EULAs.
If you applied this "logic" even handedly you'd need to agree to an EULA in order to read the software EULA. (Since in order to read you need to copy the data to a kind of DRAM.) The software company would also need to agree to an EULA in order to read your covering letter returning the software when you didn't agree to the software EULA.
Of course there isn't anything to prevent "the law" being nonsensical, illogical or self contradictory...
sometimes just buying hardware implies agreement to software terms. For example toshiba laptops have a sticker on the plastic wrap stating that just by taking the computer out, you've accepted the EULA for ALL software bundled with the computer
If this was legally sound all software companies would be out of business. Since a disgruntled customer could send them a binding contract where all they had to do to accept the conditions would be to open the envelope.
ADSL has a contention of 50:1 - It's published, everyone knows it. If everyone connected to your DSLAM tried to download at the same time you'd get about 2kbps.
Except you don't know either what the uplink bandwidth the DSLAM actually has available (it's connected to a ATM network, which also has its own contention ratio) or how many ports on the DSLAM are actually connected to anything.
The 50:1 could easily mean something along the line of 2,500 512k connections eventually wind up running through 1 100M ethernet port at the ISP end.
but simply breaking encryption isn't covered...breaking encryption on copyrighted materials (ie, access control) is what is forbidden.
Copyright is automatic though. Thus the data sent over a communications channel is covered by copyright laws.
If you went to an all you can eat buffet and then were stopped from doing so, you'd be pissed, and would probably want your money back.
A closer analogy would be if you had been sold a year's pass to an "all you can eat" buffet. Which changed to be restricted to "X amount of food per Y amount of time" after a few months.
Restaurants are well within their right to charge certain customers more to eat at their all-you-can-eat buffets. If they notice that a regular customer regularly eats an obscene quantity of food when they walk through the door, most restaurants will start charging that customer more to eat there. I have several friends who fit that category.
However people are not tied to a specific restaurant. They can easily go elsewhere if they no longer thing they are getting a good deal at a specific resturant.
Also, ISPs are well within their right to charge customers more money who regularly consume large amounts of bandwith.
The difference is that the customer may not be able to simply go elsewehere. The customer may also have to sue to recover any money already paid or counter sue if the ISP thinks they are entitled to more money after having changed the service they are offering the customer.
The reason answer is in bandwith throttling and the like. During busy times, clamp the bandwidth an individual can use. They still get unlimited usage of it, it's just scaled back. I would lvoe a service that offered a huge maximum like 10mbit or something, and just clamed it to something reasonable during the day, like 512kbit or something. Better yet, have a device that does dynamic traffic shaping.
Even more sensible only restrict when contention actually is an issue on that part of the network.
then don't sell 24/7 unlimited bandwidth if you don't mean it. They have the same thing as an "all you can eat bar". Should I not be allowed to purchase all you can eat ribbs because last time I did I ate four full racks?
One important difference is that "all you can eat" food outlets don't use long term contracts. So if one treats you badly your only potential losses are the cost of one meal.
They can't have it both ways (have unlimted usage and require no one use much), if you offer "all you can eat" someone like me is going to come along and eat all they can.
So they need to price accordingly...
In truth, the 1GB/day limits aren't really that bad. Think about it... 200 tracks/day is over 600 minutes (10 hours!) of new music per day.
In practice quite possibly less, since every transfer protocol has some kind of overhead.
The point is that they changed the rules after agreeing a contract with the customers. Including cases where customers had already paid.
Your heavy users are balanced out by the light ones, you can talk contension ratios all you like, but when everyone is on at the same time, eg evening, and if you cannot cope then , then its a network problem not a user problem.
Thing is it isn't a matter for the customer how NTL has or has not implimented their network.
Also a lot of the time it isn't clear exactly what some contention ratio is actually refering to in the first place. Without a detailed diagram of the network topography you may as well quote random numbers.
The ISS AFAIK has more then 6 docking ports. While you can dock at most two shuttles to it due to space constraints, you can make a Christmas tree of Soyuz and Progress craft out of it. Which in fact means more crew then with a shuttle.
If 6 isn't enough it's perfectly possible to fit more or to use a docking adaptor.
What the ISS needs to make itself ecomomically more reasonable is not more shuttle. It is a higher capacity cargo container launched with disposable boosters like the Ariana 5, Proton or if it is something even bigger Energia. After all that is what Energia was designed for - to be a modular booster capable to deliver hundreds of tons into low orbit (it cannot reach stationary).
Maybe not at full payload, IIRC it can get a smaller payload into Lunar orbit.