This "public internet" of which you speak. What companies are you referring to? Who pays them? Who runs it?
If they redirect the traffic that would have gone via each other out through their other connections, then their customers (smaller ISPs) would start complaining that Cogent/L3 are abusing the connections that the smaller ISPs are paying them for.
At least that's how I understand it, my understanding being based on what I have read over the last 24 hours on this issue.
I think the OpenOffice people have really shot themselves in the foot with their approach to cell data types. If A1 is formatted as text, and you put 1 in it, and B1 is A1+1, you get 1. Any text cell is treated as 0. This is baffling to end users who don't really know or care about the cell format.
Not only did we invent and build it -- we paid for it. That doesn't entitle us to something?
You paid for a network to be created within the US, and you paid for some research into protocols and standards. Did you lay all the sea-floor cables? I think not. Did you build the UK telecoms network? I think not. Are you entitled to decide where my computer goes when I type in www.bbc.co.uk? I think not. It's not like we can move the Prime Meridian just to screw you over!
Each national TLD should be controlled by a body appointed by that nation's government, and this information should be disseminated to the nameservers in other nations. The US are free to opt out of this system, but when the entire rest of the world is effectively using a different namespace, then you will soon find that it is worth joining it. Your ISPs would probably make that decision on behalf of the government anyway.
Re:This sort of thing...
on
RIAA Sues a Child
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
So we should assume for simplicity that your arguement is relevant when it isn't? No thanks.
While I mostly agree with you, there is a difference between downloading and distributing. If I download a song that I would never have bought (or in the case of the only song I ever downloaded, a song that I had already bought in a different form, to wit "2525" by Zager and Evans), then it can be argued that I have deprived no-one of revenue. The case in point is someone who made music available for others to download, so you only need to demonstrate that it is statistically likely that one or more of those that downloaded it would have otherwise paid for it.
Because the zdnet article is badly worded, and neither the submitter nor Taco knew that this is old news. If they'd read the article as far as the second paragraph, they'd have seen that "The computer is part of Dell's n-Series of PCs, which first started shipping without an operating system back in September 2002."
The ACCU, which is primarily UK-based but has a US chapter, produces a bi-monthly magazine that is primarily focused on C and C++, but also covers Java and Python. It also has excellent book reviews and runs a cracking conference (in the UK) every year.
And if Sony could licence FairPlay, how exactly would they encode the CD that you bought with the serial number of your iPod? FairPlay cannot be applied to CDs, so it would be utterly useless to Sony even if Apple gave it away for free.
In other words, you can only use FairPlay protection if you give the user's computer the unencrypted file. iTunes does this, and the encryption is added by the local application, which is how DVD-Jon bypassed it with pyTunes or whatever it's called.
In other news, 36.2% of all other parallel universes all named themselves "Googleverse", the other 63.8% of universes don't have a Google. Inhabitants of these other universes began to seek ways of travelling between unniverses on release of this news. Ironically, their efforts are hampered by not having a Google search engine to help in thier research.
If there is a disaster of the scale that you are considering, then no-one is going to take even the time that it would take to crack an encrypted.zip file to steal your identity. Better to store it in plain text so that it can be used to identify your bodies, that's just about all that anyone's going to be interested in doing with it.
Massive would have been if 2000 people came up to you and went to help you all at once, something the game doesn't support.
I think you're mixing up "massive" with "excessive". That would be ridiculous. There are a large number of people playing the game, enough that there is likely to be someone at the right place at the right time who is inclined to help. Contact is in-character, not in a chat room external to the game.
People who do what the GPL tries to prevent... trap themselves unto competing with a small in-house development group against the much larger one in the parent open source project, and failing.
That's true for large projects like Apache, but if I decide to release some code that I wrote, and nobody notices, but some company decides that it would make a decent product, then I am SOL. The company gets market share before I can attract a developer community to help me bring the product up to 1.0 release standard.
I have no desire to "focus" on child porn. I want to have nothing to do with it, and I weven have reservatinos about asking social workers and police officers to come into contact with such disgusting and perverted material, let alone expecting software developers to have to inspect and categorize it.
There was a piece on Watchdog last week on how Apple are refusing to replace faulty batteries if the screen is cracked. Any damage voids the warranty. The battery replacement class-action settlement doesn't apply in the UK either. I wouldn't buy an iPod, as their market share reduces their incentive to support their customers.
I had a quick go at Guild Wars at a friend's house, and when I was stuck on a mission I stood in the middle of a town area and said "Does anyone know where X is?" because I couldn't find the mission objective. Some other player walked up to me and said "Follow me", and we joined up and went outside, killed a few monsters on the way, and he showed me where I needed to go. So if there hadn't been a "massive" number of players in the game, I would have had no chance of finding help.
Personally I would have modded it down on the basis that it was coat-tailed onto a post that was nothing to do with MS v Mozilla issues, but just happened to be the first 5-rated comment. I mod those down as Offtopic, because they are offtopic to the thread that they were attached to. There's no excuse for modding it as troll or flamebait though, so I kind of agree with you.
Slashdot Mirror
This "public internet" of which you speak. What companies are you referring to? Who pays them? Who runs it?
If they redirect the traffic that would have gone via each other out through their other connections, then their customers (smaller ISPs) would start complaining that Cogent/L3 are abusing the connections that the smaller ISPs are paying them for.
At least that's how I understand it, my understanding being based on what I have read over the last 24 hours on this issue.
Phil Hibbs.
I think the OpenOffice people have really shot themselves in the foot with their approach to cell data types. If A1 is formatted as text, and you put 1 in it, and B1 is A1+1, you get 1. Any text cell is treated as 0. This is baffling to end users who don't really know or care about the cell format.
Each national TLD should be controlled by a body appointed by that nation's government, and this information should be disseminated to the nameservers in other nations. The US are free to opt out of this system, but when the entire rest of the world is effectively using a different namespace, then you will soon find that it is worth joining it. Your ISPs would probably make that decision on behalf of the government anyway.
So we should assume for simplicity that your arguement is relevant when it isn't? No thanks.
While I mostly agree with you, there is a difference between downloading and distributing. If I download a song that I would never have bought (or in the case of the only song I ever downloaded, a song that I had already bought in a different form, to wit "2525" by Zager and Evans), then it can be argued that I have deprived no-one of revenue. The case in point is someone who made music available for others to download, so you only need to demonstrate that it is statistically likely that one or more of those that downloaded it would have otherwise paid for it.
Because the zdnet article is badly worded, and neither the submitter nor Taco knew that this is old news. If they'd read the article as far as the second paragraph , they'd have seen that "The computer is part of Dell's n-Series of PCs, which first started shipping without an operating system back in September 2002."
The ACCU, which is primarily UK-based but has a US chapter, produces a bi-monthly magazine that is primarily focused on C and C++, but also covers Java and Python. It also has excellent book reviews and runs a cracking conference (in the UK) every year.
And if Sony could licence FairPlay, how exactly would they encode the CD that you bought with the serial number of your iPod? FairPlay cannot be applied to CDs, so it would be utterly useless to Sony even if Apple gave it away for free.
In other words, you can only use FairPlay protection if you give the user's computer the unencrypted file. iTunes does this, and the encryption is added by the local application, which is how DVD-Jon bypassed it with pyTunes or whatever it's called.
I would be entirely unsurprised if the EFF did this very soon.
You mean, like gmailfs? I don't know if it still works though.
In other news, 36.2% of all other parallel universes all named themselves "Googleverse", the other 63.8% of universes don't have a Google. Inhabitants of these other universes began to seek ways of travelling between unniverses on release of this news. Ironically, their efforts are hampered by not having a Google search engine to help in thier research.
To everyone else: Flame Cliff, not the submitter.
If there is a disaster of the scale that you are considering, then no-one is going to take even the time that it would take to crack an encrypted .zip file to steal your identity. Better to store it in plain text so that it can be used to identify your bodies, that's just about all that anyone's going to be interested in doing with it.
I think you're mixing up "massive" with "excessive". That would be ridiculous. There are a large number of people playing the game, enough that there is likely to be someone at the right place at the right time who is inclined to help. Contact is in-character, not in a chat room external to the game.
I can't find that in either of the articles - the word "implements" does not appear at all in either of them.
I have no desire to "focus" on child porn. I want to have nothing to do with it, and I weven have reservatinos about asking social workers and police officers to come into contact with such disgusting and perverted material, let alone expecting software developers to have to inspect and categorize it.
There was a piece on Watchdog last week on how Apple are refusing to replace faulty batteries if the screen is cracked. Any damage voids the warranty. The battery replacement class-action settlement doesn't apply in the UK either. I wouldn't buy an iPod, as their market share reduces their incentive to support their customers.
I had a quick go at Guild Wars at a friend's house, and when I was stuck on a mission I stood in the middle of a town area and said "Does anyone know where X is?" because I couldn't find the mission objective. Some other player walked up to me and said "Follow me", and we joined up and went outside, killed a few monsters on the way, and he showed me where I needed to go. So if there hadn't been a "massive" number of players in the game, I would have had no chance of finding help.
Ok, you're right.
Wine is LGPL'd.
It's "who", not "whom", as in, "who uploaded it". The "who" is the subject of the question, not the object.
Personally I would have modded it down on the basis that it was coat-tailed onto a post that was nothing to do with MS v Mozilla issues, but just happened to be the first 5-rated comment. I mod those down as Offtopic, because they are offtopic to the thread that they were attached to. There's no excuse for modding it as troll or flamebait though, so I kind of agree with you.
Microsoft Windows is a range of operating environments for personal computers and servers.
Does that "demonstrate" that Microsoft Windows is a generic term and not a trademark? The trademark office has misread that entirely.
Because a "news for nerds" site should pick out that kind of detail and clarify it. It's definitely "stuff that matters", so /. should get it right.