I'm not one to criticize most of the work all of these people are doing, but I have to ask whether there's really a point to doing this? I mean, for one thing, is this something mozilla should be concentrating on? We have yet to see a completed, stable browser out of the project, and yet there's this announcement apparently dated this past Sunday.
Also, is this something that people really want in the browser? I mean, how many people use chat-specific protocols aside from IRC? I'm not really up on all of this stuff, so maybe there are like 20 often used chat protocols, but in my surfing, most people use already web-based solutions like java applets, constant-refreshes (annoying, IMHO), or forum based communication (ala slashdot or motley fool, etc.). I'm not sure if this is even a great idea.
However, as I said, if this is what they want to do, let them do it. I'm just curious as to why.
Sujal
Discussions ongoing at license-discuss
on
APSL 1.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
There are continuing (calm) discussions ongoing at license-discuss, FYI.
The first thing I thought of was 1984 when I saw the headline...
Targetting demographics is one thing, but I'm sure I watch some things I don't want anyone knowing about:-) Thankfully, the cable companies are covered by legistlation regarding selling pay-per-view information. I wonder if that law is broad enough to cover this information?
Also, to me, the difference between this and hit counters is that with hit counters, 60% of the time, you're annonymous.
well, I'm seriously thinking about doing it now. I tend to be the Linux proponent on my project team (I run it at home, and just ordered a machine from Penguin:-).
I have some bandwidth (not a ton, though... like a few hundred MB a day... not slashdot sized:-) to spare. If people would like a resource like this, just email me at sujal@worldnet.att.net and/or sujal@sujal.net with suggestions, comments, etc.
If someone else is willing to do this, or has already started, please email me so I can help them rather than doubling up effort. Thanks
The laws specifically cover *selling* that information to others (in other words, they can do what they want with the info, just not sell it to advertisers).
The one thing that bugs me is when people complain about how Blockbuster and cable companies and credit card companies can already track you and what you do.
That's quite true, but it's important to realize that there are laws covering information companies gain from video rentals, cable pay-per-view purchases, and credit card purchases. Companies are not allowed to sell that information, period.
DIVX wouldn't be half as bad if a similar law covered it, too, IMHO. The privacy thing is the biggest drawback. I also hate the idea of paying if you accidently put in the wrong disk or whatnot, but the idea of my porn^H^H^H^H movie preferences being sold scares me.:-)
Makes you wonder, though, why Microsoft would apply for the patent? Are they having security problems? Or are they planning on unleashing a horde of thieves on their competitors and want to prevent them from protecting their doors?:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Also, is this something that people really want in the browser? I mean, how many people use chat-specific protocols aside from IRC? I'm not really up on all of this stuff, so maybe there are like 20 often used chat protocols, but in my surfing, most people use already web-based solutions like java applets, constant-refreshes (annoying, IMHO), or forum based communication (ala slashdot or motley fool, etc.). I'm not sure if this is even a great idea.
However, as I said, if this is what they want to do, let them do it. I'm just curious as to why.
Sujal
Sujal
The first thing I thought of was 1984 when I saw the headline...
Targetting demographics is one thing, but I'm sure I watch some things I don't want anyone knowing about :-) Thankfully, the cable companies are covered by legistlation regarding selling pay-per-view information. I wonder if that law is broad enough to cover this information?
Also, to me, the difference between this and hit counters is that with hit counters, 60% of the time, you're annonymous.
Sujal
I have some bandwidth (not a ton, though... like a few hundred MB a day... not slashdot sized :-) to spare. If people would like a resource like this, just email me at sujal@worldnet.att.net and/or sujal@sujal.net with suggestions, comments, etc.
If someone else is willing to do this, or has already started, please email me so I can help them rather than doubling up effort. Thanks
Sujal
The laws specifically cover *selling* that information to others (in other words, they can do what they want with the info, just not sell it to advertisers).
Sujal
That's quite true, but it's important to realize that there are laws covering information companies gain from video rentals, cable pay-per-view purchases, and credit card purchases. Companies are not allowed to sell that information, period.
DIVX wouldn't be half as bad if a similar law covered it, too, IMHO. The privacy thing is the biggest drawback. I also hate the idea of paying if you accidently put in the wrong disk or whatnot, but the idea of my porn^H^H^H^H movie preferences being sold scares me. :-)
Sujal
Please don't take any of that seriously.