I think you can file a chargeback for a charge made under duress. Since the GoDaddy contract was pretty vague in the first place I don't think they could win.
Pay the $50, move your domains, chargeback the $50 and/or file a suit in small claims court.
They'll dispute the filing and keep pulling out parts of their license agreement to counter it. Dispute the agreement as being invalid. When all is said and done, you'll be out a few days of work, GoDaddy will have wasted a ton on lawyers.
(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is Slashdot, use common sense, this is not advice, you are feeling sleepy...sleepy...SLEEPY...you want to buy me a 50" HDTV.)
Oh yay, a technicality, the second-to-last resort of the troll.
RTFA, it's about device drivers, not low level components.
Since we're going to be technical AND troll at the same time:
1. Your math works out to $5000, not $300,000. 2. It's spelled unforeseen. 3. You forgot a paragraph break between the quote and your text, a question mark after the word poorly, not to mention the lack of visits from our friend Mr. Comma. 4. You missed the required "OMG M$!!!!!" at the end of your message. 5. No lottery numbers.
First off, winsock isn't a driver, it's an OS component. Drivers "drive" hardware, I know it's complex, but think about it for a few days, you'll figure it out.
So what will Microsoft do when their own drivers rate poorly
I've rarely had a device driver from Microsoft crash. Actually, I can't think of one in the past few years, not since the XP beta actually.
So, secondly you're blindly assuming that Microsoft drivers will rate poorly. Unless you are using 100% generic components, I DOUBT you'll have any major devices using a Microsoft supplied device driver. (Possibly your mouse, unless you like running your video in 800x600x32k for some reason)
Now, since you obviously have pychcic powers and can see the future, can you go predict the lotto numbers for this weekend? I could use a few extra bucks.
First, the intentions of the first amendment were to protect speech, or else it would have said '...abridging the freedom of political speech...'
It doesn't say that, and I think it was intended to be an absolute freedom, including running naked in the streets like a fool. There are other penalties for being a fool in public, such as people not dealing with you. Granted, being shunned doesn't have much of an effect in today's society, but that's really another discussion.
Second, this law isn't about pornography, this is about putting some vague restrictions on the sale of games. Lets face facts, the law outlaws the sale of loony tunes games, it's poorly written.
Third, art is protected.
And finally, would you consider a cooking recipe to be protected? (For example, you want to bake up a batch of 'I hate Bush cupcakes').
IMHO, The ninth amendment is what lets you apply the first amendment to games. Just because the first amendment doesn't say 'video games' doesn't mean they are not protected as a form of speech. It's not listed because they weren't invented yet, but we do know what the intentions were when the first amendment was written.
Running around naked in public isn't really a human right, so that's a poor example.
Ok, your version is slightly more efficient, since it's the same process. Mine won't leak memory though, as a batch file terminates when calling a new batch file.
I noticed that everytime wgatray.exe is run, it's making a quick call out to MS to check for updates. It's not alot of bandwidth, but I imagine it's a special server at MS that is doing the checking.
Now, if, for example, someone were to write a simple program that called wgatray.exe in an infinite loop and had a few hundred thousand people running it, then Microsoft would wind up on the end of a DoS attack. What would happen if the wga server was down? Would Windows stop working?
(When I say simple, I mean simple, as in a 2 line batch file, didn't Microsoft think this through?) tray.bat ----------- wgatray.exe tray.bat
That's what's known as a media whoring bill. It has no chance of passing, but it gets some free news time for the Democratic party where they don't ask any tough questions.
It's the same as the amendment to ban gay marriage. It won't pass, but gets the President some much needed press whoring time where they don't ask any tough questions.
Either way, it's a huge waste of time and money and shows just how sad both parties are.
Client validation is only useful for round-trip bandwidth reduction, it's nice to have, but not secure in any way. It can stop the occasional accidental bad input. (e.g. entering strings when numerical data is called for, pop up a message box telling you not to do that), it won't stop anyone really interested in corrupting your data.
The app server should be validating everything being posted to it. Is this string too long, too short, not a string, wrong encoding, etc...
The DB server should ALSO be validating everything coming from the app server. Don't trust your application server, it could have a bug, it could have been hacked, it might not be your app server, who knows. Strict stored procedures with no r/w access to tables is a really the only way to go. (To: My Co-Workers, Using select * queries and running as dbo and/or sa is usually a sign that you're not doing it right)
Yes, it's paranoid thinking, yes, it's more work and yes, there is a slight performance hit, but it is secure and it's damn hard to break.
It's a little strong, but it does fall into the definition.
The use of force (taking down servers) by a group (spammers) against people/property (blue & others) with the intention of intimidating socieities (blues users) for ideological (financial too) reasons.
It's time we started thinking up an alternative to the current DNS setup.
DNS in its current state is: Easy to break. Easy to use to break other systems. Tied too tightly into SMTP. (Think about it) Tied in to the whims of ICANN and whoever tells them what to do. Tied in to the whims of Verisign.
DNS is the Achilies Heel of the Internet. (One of several apparently, but that's another article)
Congress has the responsibility to follow the constitution when giving out federal funds. Adding restrictions to funding that are blatantly abridging the freedom of speech is criminal.
This is not about an imminent danger to children. I am absolutely for restrictions on children for dangerous materials such as weapons, alcohol, tobacco, etc...
This is a blanket restriction designed to further disempower people under the age of 18.
Slashdot Mirror
It's never a good idea to mix languages on any project.
Like for example, SQL and Perl. Wait a sec...
Use the best tools for the job, sometimes multiple languages are needed.
That's like calling Commodore 64 BASIC inferior to Commodore 128 BASIC.
OK, seriously, people, use the best tool for the job, anyone who tells you otherwise is a clueless idiot.
Not every project requires the same language.
e.g. Don't spend an hour writing a C++ program when a batch file can do the job in 5 minutes.
Well, in theory that's how it works.
Many cops just want to 'dispense some justice' so their media whore DA's can make everyone look good and ensure they get a promotion.
So, the next time some petty little schmuck like Rudy Giuliani wants to turn jaywalking into a felony, you know why.
I think you can file a chargeback for a charge made under duress. Since the GoDaddy contract was pretty vague in the first place I don't think they could win.
Pay the $50, move your domains, chargeback the $50 and/or file a suit in small claims court.
They'll dispute the filing and keep pulling out parts of their license agreement to counter it. Dispute the agreement as being invalid. When all is said and done, you'll be out a few days of work, GoDaddy will have wasted a ton on lawyers.
(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is Slashdot, use common sense, this is not advice, you are feeling sleepy...sleepy...SLEEPY...you want to buy me a 50" HDTV.)
Oh yay, a technicality, the second-to-last resort of the troll.
RTFA, it's about device drivers, not low level components.
Since we're going to be technical AND troll at the same time:
1. Your math works out to $5000, not $300,000.
2. It's spelled unforeseen.
3. You forgot a paragraph break between the quote and your text, a question mark after the word poorly, not to mention the lack of visits from our friend Mr. Comma.
4. You missed the required "OMG M$!!!!!" at the end of your message.
5. No lottery numbers.
I'm disapointed in you.
First off, winsock isn't a driver, it's an OS component. Drivers "drive" hardware, I know it's complex, but think about it for a few days, you'll figure it out.
So what will Microsoft do when their own drivers rate poorly
I've rarely had a device driver from Microsoft crash. Actually, I can't think of one in the past few years, not since the XP beta actually.
So, secondly you're blindly assuming that Microsoft drivers will rate poorly. Unless you are using 100% generic components, I DOUBT you'll have any major devices using a Microsoft supplied device driver. (Possibly your mouse, unless you like running your video in 800x600x32k for some reason)
Now, since you obviously have pychcic powers and can see the future, can you go predict the lotto numbers for this weekend? I could use a few extra bucks.
First, the intentions of the first amendment were to protect speech, or else it would have said '...abridging the freedom of political speech...'
It doesn't say that, and I think it was intended to be an absolute freedom, including running naked in the streets like a fool. There are other penalties for being a fool in public, such as people not dealing with you. Granted, being shunned doesn't have much of an effect in today's society, but that's really another discussion.
Second, this law isn't about pornography, this is about putting some vague restrictions on the sale of games. Lets face facts, the law outlaws the sale of loony tunes games, it's poorly written.
Third, art is protected.
And finally, would you consider a cooking recipe to be protected? (For example, you want to bake up a batch of 'I hate Bush cupcakes').
IMHO, The ninth amendment is what lets you apply the first amendment to games. Just because the first amendment doesn't say 'video games' doesn't mean they are not protected as a form of speech. It's not listed because they weren't invented yet, but we do know what the intentions were when the first amendment was written.
Running around naked in public isn't really a human right, so that's a poor example.
Being that it's not enumerated in the constitution that games are a protected form of speech, it's up to the state to decide.
Ninth Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Yeah, but that requires more typing :)
Ok, your version is slightly more efficient, since it's the same process. Mine won't leak memory though, as a batch file terminates when calling a new batch file.
I noticed that everytime wgatray.exe is run, it's making a quick call out to MS to check for updates. It's not alot of bandwidth, but I imagine it's a special server at MS that is doing the checking.
Now, if, for example, someone were to write a simple program that called wgatray.exe in an infinite loop and had a few hundred thousand people running it, then Microsoft would wind up on the end of a DoS attack. What would happen if the wga server was down? Would Windows stop working?
(When I say simple, I mean simple, as in a 2 line batch file, didn't Microsoft think this through?)
tray.bat
-----------
wgatray.exe
tray.bat
Just a FYI, your activation code should reset in about 6 months, so you'll be able to use it again.
The article sounded like he was using the tool at school and letting others use it as well. Unfortunately, it's not very clear.
It's not really the website, it's that you're using a tool to circumvent their filters.
IANAL, but I don't think they have any legal recourse for shutting down the site, but they can go after you for bypassing the filters.
Now, if all you're doing is mirroring content, then that's another story. It depends on the content.
That's what's known as a media whoring bill. It has no chance of passing, but it gets some free news time for the Democratic party where they don't ask any tough questions.
It's the same as the amendment to ban gay marriage. It won't pass, but gets the President some much needed press whoring time where they don't ask any tough questions.
Either way, it's a huge waste of time and money and shows just how sad both parties are.
Products are not speech. ... A game or a product has no status of any kind under the Bill of Rights.
No products? So books don't count... Whoops, thanks for playing.
Please re-read the text of the First Amendment, it doesn't have a 'unless it's for sale' clause in there.
Amtrak Quiet Cars
At least Amtrak gets this right.
Why would an app server intrusion cause a db server intrusion? They shouldn't share any login account resources.
Sure, the procedures could have bugs, the idea is to minimise the risks.
Besides, if you lock out slelect, drop and delete (etc...) access to the app server, it makes it much harder to do damage on the DB server.
Multi-Layered validation is the only way to go.
Client validation is only useful for round-trip bandwidth reduction, it's nice to have, but not secure in any way. It can stop the occasional accidental bad input. (e.g. entering strings when numerical data is called for, pop up a message box telling you not to do that), it won't stop anyone really interested in corrupting your data.
The app server should be validating everything being posted to it. Is this string too long, too short, not a string, wrong encoding, etc...
The DB server should ALSO be validating everything coming from the app server. Don't trust your application server, it could have a bug, it could have been hacked, it might not be your app server, who knows. Strict stored procedures with no r/w access to tables is a really the only way to go. (To: My Co-Workers, Using select * queries and running as dbo and/or sa is usually a sign that you're not doing it right)
Yes, it's paranoid thinking, yes, it's more work and yes, there is a slight performance hit, but it is secure and it's damn hard to break.
Actually, yes. But we tend to call that harassment.
The difference between the two is pretty much how much fear you are causing the victim.
It's a little strong, but it does fall into the definition.
The use of force (taking down servers) by a group (spammers) against people/property (blue & others) with the intention of intimidating socieities (blues users) for ideological (financial too) reasons.
It's time we started thinking up an alternative to the current DNS setup.
DNS in its current state is:
Easy to break.
Easy to use to break other systems.
Tied too tightly into SMTP. (Think about it)
Tied in to the whims of ICANN and whoever tells them what to do.
Tied in to the whims of Verisign.
DNS is the Achilies Heel of the Internet. (One of several apparently, but that's another article)
That seems like an awful lot of steps don't you think? Do you consider that intuitive?
As opposed to what? Editing files to change menus? Having to hunt for a control applet for menu changing?
Watching cable TV requires more steps.
It is functionality where you need it, and it's only four clicks away.
Congress has the responsibility to follow the constitution when giving out federal funds. Adding restrictions to funding that are blatantly abridging the freedom of speech is criminal.
This is not about an imminent danger to children. I am absolutely for restrictions on children for dangerous materials such as weapons, alcohol, tobacco, etc...
This is a blanket restriction designed to further disempower people under the age of 18.