Does this one support authorisation with an ISA proxy? I'm sick of being stuck with IE in the office simply because the IT department have been assimilated.
There seems to be a lot of assumption that this movie would cast Batman and Superman as enemies. I would hope that it would not be a movie where we are expected to cheer one and jeer the other. I expect it to be that both of them unite against a common enemy, but fall out over each others methods. Perhaps Batman gets pissed that Superman was off saving a cat from up a tree while the villain was making his get-away. Or Superman gets the hump when Batman gets a little too vicious in extracting information from the villain's cronies. Either way, something like this would make for a better movie than pitching them as enemies.
Now the movie I'd REALLY like to see would be Martial Law vs The X-Men.
I have to agree. The only improvement we could possibly make over the keyboard is intuitive voice input as seen on Star Trek. Until this technology is common-place the keyboard is King. A while back the UK magazine Linux Format had an article about accessibility. One of the devices they had a picture of was a huge almost horseshoe shaped wotnot. You placed the wotnot between yourself and your display and then pointed at the display through the wotnot. Sensors in the wotnot detected your finger and translated it into a position on screen. In a sense you could control the display by pointing at it. But you needed this huge unsightly wotnot. My immediate reaction was "Stop it! This is silly!"
I'm browsing and posting using Lynx, which makes banner ads pretty useless. Does this mean that doubleclick.net are gonna haul the Lynx coders into court, and force me to start using Internet Exploder?
Taken from "An Open Letter to the DOJ" by Ganesh Prassad on LinuxToday:- The world is learning the cynical lesson that the American justice system is a
mere extension of the free market -- you get as much justice as you can afford to pay for.
I have to agree with this. Is there work in progress on both Abiword and OpenOffice to read each others files? This would make it a joy to have both applications and be able to choose between fast and light, or big, slow and feature rich knowing that I could use either on a single file. At the moment it seems that the only common file format between them is the Bletcherous Word Doc.
Goannae no dae that? (Don't do that). Firstly, OpenOffice does an excellent job of importing and exporting MS file formats, but the file formats are still secret and proprietary, so OpenOffice will not do a perfect job. Secondly, if you're sharing documents then unless all parties AGREE to use DOC as the format to use then it is extremely rude to expect others to be able to read a proprietary format, no matter how popular it is. Until the day dawns that Open/StarOffice files are the standard then stick to text, html, rtf or pdf for sending out documents.
At least the Herbalife affair involves a final product. Here's an example of a UK based scam I fell for a few years ago (before I had email and became a hardened spam cynic).
I replied to a "work from home". It said you would earn by mailing envelopes (2 pounds per envelope). I figured I would receive a bundle of letters and envelopes and would be paid for stuffing and mailing them to the recipients. Oh how wrong.
I replied by getting in touch with a guy from Gateshead. This resulted in an application form arriving from T.F. Race Associates in London. The form was accompanied with all the usual motivational bumpf, and very little in the way of explanation. In order to receive my "Getting Started" pack I had to send T.F. Race 15 pounds.
Not a lot of money, so why not. When I received the pack I was deeply disappointed. It explained how to make your money. You had to advertise "work from home" wherever you could, and include your own phone number in the advertisement. Then, as people replied to the advertisements you sent their replies off to T.F. Race, and received 2 pounds per reply. T.F. Race would then receive 15 pounds for each of those replies that followed up by ordering the pack.
It was basically a pyramid scheme, where the market could eventually get saturated and your 15 pounds investment would simply disappear. At least I am thankful that I learned a valuable lesson and that it only cost 15 pounds, rather than the 1000's of pounds that some people lose with such scams.
The reason that public performance is restricted with regard to copyright materials is because it is a way of leveraging royalties. "You can only perform this in public if you pay us a squigillion dollars!"
What the copyright holders seem to forget though, is that public performance is free advertising.
That's why record labels bribe radio stations for airplay.
That's also why I release my own music using the Open Audio License, since I want as many people to hear it.
If someone came to me and told me about this great new band they'd heard, but under copyright law they couldn't let me hear the band, but would have to buy my own copy I would be unlikely to buy their album, and would probably never hear them. I'd be a lot more likely to buy the album if I heard it first.
It's the music with the most hype, and the most public performance that sells. Why won't these idiots let that through their thick skulls?
The article was a bit light on nitty gritty details, like how much do credits cost.
If a burn credit is not too expensive (i.e. cheap enough that you don't mind paying for the song) then simply burn all the music you want to keep, then rip the CD into MP3s.
All this nonsense about restricting downloads and downloads expiring is simply a way of making things a tad inconvenient.
Don't insult our intelligence by creating these poxy restrictions that you hope will stop us owning the music we pay for.
What we need is a system that offers 30 second MP3s free, and then charges you per song for those that you choose to download the full version of. This works a treat for Songplayer with their song files. Why can't it work for digital music?
One of the biggest reasons that pointy haired types use when refusing to consider Free software is "Whom do we sue if it goes wrong?" Well, it appers that the answer is the same for Free software as it is for Microsoft. You ain't got a hope in hell of successfully sueing anybody, so just use the best technical solution.
Epic Battles eh? I hope so, since from the trailer that is currnetly doing the rounds at the cinema it looks like an over blown love / teenage angst story.
Firstly does anyone have details about how the songs expire once you cancel service. Do the files use such a proprietary protocol that requires a handshake with the service before it will play?
Also, how long will it take the geek crowd to write something that will convert the files to MP3 or Ogg (even just intercepting the audio output) and therefore remove the shackles?
I would say no. It may be argued that Microsoft may be a threat to RedHat, Mandrakesoft, Caldera etc. but they could never be a threat to Linux.
Linus would continue to maintain the kernel, GNU would remain hairy, and ESR would remain mouthy no matter how much ground Microsoft may take from us.
The only way Microsoft can threaten Linux is with crap like the SSSCA. Even then they can't use it to kill Linux, they could only force it out of the USA.
it's not the technology that's the issue, it's how it is applied.
Where did this quote come from? We desperately need to keep it on file and to be able to quote them.
If this is true then the MPAA are not concerned with circumvention devices, but what SOME people may use them for.
Try Catching the REAL criminals
on
eBay Beats DMCA
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Making unauthorised copies of a copyrighted work is illegal. That's fair do's, and a deal that I accept as right. However, it has become difficult to enforce. It's almost impossible to catch and prosecute people who make copies of CDs for their friends, and other such illegal acts. As a result, lawmakers and "content" providers fall over themselves making up daft laws and policies in order to combat the problem. Instead of targetting eBay, and firing the DMCA at them (which is itself a circumvention device - it enables the law to circumvent going after the REAL criminals, and instead sends them after those who attempt to enrich society) would it not make more sense to hang around eBay for a while, bid on unauthorised material (I REFUSE to use the word Pirated), offer to pay by cheque, and then send the heavy mob round to the address, thus catching the real criminal? Surely if such tactics could be used instead of lazily hiding behind the DMCA we wouldn't need such daft laws in the first place, and the REAL criminals would be in jail, instead of an innocent Russian hacker.
If you want to share your MP3s and get away with it then you need to do two things. First, make sure that you can claim fair use for all MP3s on your machine (ie, those that are copyrighted, make sure you have the CD, Tape, Vinyl etc). Second, "accidentally" make the folder that contains them a (read-only) windows share. If you don't use a firewall the whole world will be able to download them whenever you're on-line, but you're not guilty of using a p2p file sharing system.
Disclaimer: This advice comes with no warranty. If your ass ends up in jail, I ain't responsible.
So, are you going to tell us what the CD was, and who the record label was? Your CD can be the first in Whitfield Diffie's "Defective CD Database". We'll understand if you don't want to tell us because it's a Back Street Boys CD or some other candy coated commercial horror. They can do whatever the hell they like to such CDs and we won't care.
Slashdot Mirror
Does this one support authorisation with an ISA proxy?
I'm sick of being stuck with IE in the office simply because the IT department have been assimilated.
There seems to be a lot of assumption that this movie would cast Batman and Superman as enemies.
I would hope that it would not be a movie where we are expected to cheer one and jeer the other.
I expect it to be that both of them unite against a common enemy, but fall out over each others methods.
Perhaps Batman gets pissed that Superman was off saving a cat from up a tree while the villain was making his get-away. Or Superman gets the hump when Batman gets a little too vicious in extracting information from the villain's cronies. Either way, something like this would make for a better movie than pitching them as enemies.
Now the movie I'd REALLY like to see would be Martial Law vs The X-Men.
So how long d'you reckon it will take for someone to work out where to use a black marker in order to circumvent it?
I have to agree. The only improvement we could possibly make over the keyboard is intuitive voice input as seen on Star Trek.
Until this technology is common-place the keyboard is King.
A while back the UK magazine Linux Format had an article about accessibility. One of the devices they had a picture of was a huge almost horseshoe shaped wotnot. You placed the wotnot between yourself and your display and then pointed at the display through the wotnot. Sensors in the wotnot detected your finger and translated it into a position on screen. In a sense you could control the display by pointing at it. But you needed this huge unsightly wotnot. My immediate reaction was "Stop it! This is silly!"
I'm browsing and posting using Lynx, which makes banner ads pretty useless.
Does this mean that doubleclick.net are gonna haul the Lynx coders into court, and force me to start using Internet Exploder?
Taken from "An Open Letter to the DOJ" by Ganesh Prassad on LinuxToday:-
The world is learning the cynical lesson that the American justice system is a mere extension of the free market -- you get as much justice as you can afford to pay for.
I have to agree with this.
Is there work in progress on both Abiword and OpenOffice to read each others files?
This would make it a joy to have both applications and be able to choose between fast and light, or big, slow and feature rich knowing that I could use either on a single file.
At the moment it seems that the only common file format between them is the Bletcherous Word Doc.
Goannae no dae that? (Don't do that).
Firstly, OpenOffice does an excellent job of importing and exporting MS file formats, but the file formats are still secret and proprietary, so OpenOffice will not do a perfect job.
Secondly, if you're sharing documents then unless all parties AGREE to use DOC as the format to use then it is extremely rude to expect others to be able to read a proprietary format, no matter how popular it is.
Until the day dawns that Open/StarOffice files are the standard then stick to text, html, rtf or pdf for sending out documents.
At least the Herbalife affair involves a final product. Here's an example of a UK based scam I fell for a few years ago (before I had email and became a hardened spam cynic).
I replied to a "work from home". It said you would earn by mailing envelopes (2 pounds per envelope). I figured I would receive a bundle of letters and envelopes and would be paid for stuffing and mailing them to the recipients. Oh how wrong.
I replied by getting in touch with a guy from Gateshead. This resulted in an application form arriving from T.F. Race Associates in London. The form was accompanied with all the usual motivational bumpf, and very little in the way of explanation. In order to receive my "Getting Started" pack I had to send T.F. Race 15 pounds.
Not a lot of money, so why not. When I received the pack I was deeply disappointed. It explained how to make your money. You had to advertise "work from home" wherever you could, and include your own phone number in the advertisement. Then, as people replied to the advertisements you sent their replies off to T.F. Race, and received 2 pounds per reply. T.F. Race would then receive 15 pounds for each of those replies that followed up by ordering the pack.
It was basically a pyramid scheme, where the market could eventually get saturated and your 15 pounds investment would simply disappear. At least I am thankful that I learned a valuable lesson and that it only cost 15 pounds, rather than the 1000's of pounds that some people lose with such scams.
The reason that public performance is restricted with regard to copyright materials is because it is a way of leveraging royalties. "You can only perform this in public if you pay us a squigillion dollars!"
What the copyright holders seem to forget though, is that public performance is free advertising.
That's why record labels bribe radio stations for airplay.
That's also why I release my own music using the Open Audio License, since I want as many people to hear it.
If someone came to me and told me about this great new band they'd heard, but under copyright law they couldn't let me hear the band, but would have to buy my own copy I would be unlikely to buy their album, and would probably never hear them. I'd be a lot more likely to buy the album if I heard it first.
It's the music with the most hype, and the most public performance that sells. Why won't these idiots let that through their thick skulls?
The article was a bit light on nitty gritty details, like how much do credits cost.
If a burn credit is not too expensive (i.e. cheap enough that you don't mind paying for the song) then simply burn all the music you want to keep, then rip the CD into MP3s.
All this nonsense about restricting downloads and downloads expiring is simply a way of making things a tad inconvenient.
Don't insult our intelligence by creating these poxy restrictions that you hope will stop us owning the music we pay for.
What we need is a system that offers 30 second MP3s free, and then charges you per song for those that you choose to download the full version of. This works a treat for Songplayer with their song files. Why can't it work for digital music?
I was playing Elite in 1984. Damn, that was a fine game.
One of the biggest reasons that pointy haired types use when refusing to consider Free software is "Whom do we sue if it goes wrong?"
Well, it appers that the answer is the same for Free software as it is for Microsoft.
You ain't got a hope in hell of successfully sueing anybody, so just use the best technical solution.
Epic Battles eh? I hope so, since from the trailer that is currnetly doing the rounds at the cinema it looks like an over blown love / teenage angst story.
The biggest barrier remains the cost of the multifunction gadgets
Um, no. The biggest barrier will be scum like the RIAA and MPAA and their bastard spawn the DMCA and SSSCA.
Have you seen the register today?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23436.html
Mr. Greene would disagree!
So IP over Avian Carriers now has competition for hack of the year. Nice one guys.
Firstly does anyone have details about how the songs expire once you cancel service. Do the files use such a proprietary protocol that requires a handshake with the service before it will play?
Also, how long will it take the geek crowd to write something that will convert the files to MP3 or Ogg (even just intercepting the audio output) and therefore remove the shackles?
Don't you mean another twist in the "Linux getting ready for Joe User's Desktop" saga?
Let's ditch the in fighting eh, and concentrate on the real issue here.
Is Microsoft THE threat to Linux?
I would say no. It may be argued that Microsoft may be a threat to RedHat, Mandrakesoft, Caldera etc. but they could never be a threat to Linux.
Linus would continue to maintain the kernel, GNU would remain hairy, and ESR would remain mouthy no matter how much ground Microsoft may take from us.
The only way Microsoft can threaten Linux is with crap like the SSSCA. Even then they can't use it to kill Linux, they could only force it out of the USA.
So if an American website is not bound by a French ruling, then perhaps there's hope for a certain Russian Programmer accused of breaking US law.
it's not the technology that's the issue, it's how it is applied.
Where did this quote come from? We desperately need to keep it on file and to be able to quote them.
If this is true then the MPAA are not concerned with circumvention devices, but what SOME people may use them for.
Making unauthorised copies of a copyrighted work is illegal. That's fair do's, and a deal that I accept as right. However, it has become difficult to enforce.
It's almost impossible to catch and prosecute people who make copies of CDs for their friends, and other such illegal acts.
As a result, lawmakers and "content" providers fall over themselves making up daft laws and policies in order to combat the problem.
Instead of targetting eBay, and firing the DMCA at them (which is itself a circumvention device - it enables the law to circumvent going after the REAL criminals, and instead sends them after those who attempt to enrich society) would it not make more sense to hang around eBay for a while, bid on unauthorised material (I REFUSE to use the word Pirated), offer to pay by cheque, and then send the heavy mob round to the address, thus catching the real criminal?
Surely if such tactics could be used instead of lazily hiding behind the DMCA we wouldn't need such daft laws in the first place, and the REAL criminals would be in jail, instead of an innocent Russian hacker.
If you want to share your MP3s and get away with it then you need to do two things.
First, make sure that you can claim fair use for all MP3s on your machine (ie, those that are copyrighted, make sure you have the CD, Tape, Vinyl etc).
Second, "accidentally" make the folder that contains them a (read-only) windows share. If you don't use a firewall the whole world will be able to download them whenever you're on-line, but you're not guilty of using a p2p file sharing system.
Disclaimer: This advice comes with no warranty. If your ass ends up in jail, I ain't responsible.
So, are you going to tell us what the CD was, and who the record label was?
Your CD can be the first in Whitfield Diffie's "Defective CD Database".
We'll understand if you don't want to tell us because it's a Back Street Boys CD or some other candy coated commercial horror. They can do whatever the hell they like to such CDs and we won't care.