You can buy a four post switch for like 50 bucks. So you can have a stack of 4 port switches somewhere at 50 bucks a pop plus some change for the wallplate, or $150 per pop... Which is cheaper?
I know you are referring to the 24+ port beasts, but even if you had these 4 port integrated plates, your company is still going to have those 24+ port beasts, so there is still no savings.
You might say, that you can save on the number of 24+ port things you need. Well, there is more to the 24+ port switch then just 24+ ports. They support other things like management stuff, etc etc. Stuff you won't get with the integrated wall plate.
While true, many IT groups charge per line, and not per pull, you have to admit the following will happen:
You have one line running from the switch panel to the cube, where there is on of these nj100 things. You will still charge the group for FOUR lines, despite only having one physical line, because the endpoint still terminates with 4 ports, so the group doesn't save any money at all.
And how is this easier to maintain? Before IT only had to manage a switch panel and the cables, now they have to manage a 4 port switch in each cube? Before if the guy had his own switch, it was his own problem, now its IT's, because its integrated in the wall-plate.
As for costs, it may reduce cost of cable pulled, but it increases cost of the endpoint.
No no no... the fact is that you DIDN'T legally purchase the full 10.1. You paid 20$ for a liscense to the upgrade. Just because the way they chose to implement the upgrade included putting the whole version on the CD DOES NOT MEAN that it is legal for you to circumvent the CheckForOSX and install it without owning the previous version.
You weren't made aware of such a license at purchase, so this becomes a sales, thus the Sales Doctrine applies. And even if you were, there is no financial gain for Apple afterwards. Meaning, it is a one time benafit for Apple. Then that makes this a sale and NOT a license, and the Sales Doctrine still applies, irregardless if you were aware of the licensing agreement.
I just talked to a lawyer friend over lunch, and we were talking about such issues:)
The only problem is nobody really challenges these shrink-wrapped EULA/UCITA crap... Hopefully one day they will be, and exposed for the BS that they are.
1.) He deleted a file. This is different than discovering a file that wasn't supposed to be there. So he didn't get something he didn't pay for, he deleted something hid did pay for.
2.) Above is irrelevent, because when you bought the CD, you are paying for the CD. You were not paying for a license for the content on the CD. So to use your own analogies:
a.) Finding an expensive watch in the car. Then the watch is yours. The sales contract referes to the car, which includes all its contents unless otherwise noted. Meaning, if you buy a Mercedes, can Mercedes approach you later and say, "Hey, you didn't pay for the carpeting, you didn't pay for the windows, you didn't pay for the spare tire, etc etc. How would you prove you paid for it? Does your sales contract show an itemized list? No? Then its all inclusive, case closed.
2.) Wrong change. So what? As a customer, I want to purchase something. The store sets the price,and I pay for it. Just because the price tag says its costs 5 bucks is irrelevant. If the store gives me 20 dollars in change, they in affect made the sale price be $-15.00
So I'm not obligated to return the money. I may feel guilty and return it out of remorse, but not because I face criminal charges if I don't. Sales dotrine says that when money changes hand, then the property ownership transfers. Money changed hands. Its not my fault the other party didn't know what they were doing.
If you bought something from a store, and they lost the money before they were able to deposit it, are you required to give them the money again? If they lost the check for example... Do you have to cut them a new one? NO!!!! Once the money left my hand, the product is mine. If you deposit the money, burn it, or wipe your a$$ with it, is none of my concern...
The whole concept of shrink-wrapped licenses that you don't see prior to purchase is silly;)
Here let me sell you this candy jar for 50 cents. You take it home, and open it, and inside you'll find the license that says, "Buy purchasing this, and opening this jar you hereby agree to transfer ownership of all your assests to...."
Companies will buy tons of these? Why? Why would a company buy a 300 dollar 4 port integrated switch, when they can just buy the switch and wall plate separately cheaper?
In fact, most companies probably won't even need to. Chances are they have a rack of switches in some closet somewhere, and they run 4 lines to your cube to the wall-plate. Or they run one line to the wall-plate, and give you a $50 switch. No need to spend $300.00 per cube.
They should counter sue apple for negligence. I mean lets say:
I park my car on the street somewhere, and I leave the keys sitting on top of the car, with a note saying, "Don't steal my car, these keys are for me. If you take them you are in violation of..."
And on the key ring there is a big shiny gold key on it, with another note attached to it saying, "Do not use this key to come into my house, located at 5555 NE 5th Ave, SomeCity, USA"
And next to your keys, you place your wallet there, with a note on it saying, "Do not take my wallet. It is for my personal use only. Do not use my duplicate Visa Cards, Social Security Card, Birth Certificate, etc etc. They are spares for me only..."
Maybe AMD should change their pricing structure. Sell the exact same processor, but charge according to what the customer sets the clock rate to. Make it part of a licensing scheme or something. If you "overclock" you must send us more money. I woner how well that system will work;)
That bottle of coke probably doesn't list the nutritional value, ingredients, etc etc. All that is probably on the box that holds all the bottles... It says not intented for resale, because the bottle doesn't have the FDA mandated labeling, meaning it would be illegal for Safeway or whatever to sell the bottle individually, because it is not labeled correctly.
If it were illegal to take something apart and resell it individually period, scrap yards would be non-existent...
1) They can probably convince a judge that the only way to install it is by agreeing to the EULA. Or that you deliberately bypassed the EULA in order to avoid it (pick your favorite way), which probably won't fly with the judge either.
But if you already bought it, it doesn't matter. Once I bought it why do I have to "install" it? What if I just use it as a coaster, and later decide to sell it? (Just saying....) Doesn't the law say that once you buy something, the scope of the thing you bought is now out of the hands of the supplier? Meaning, once its yours they can't tell you what to do with it. Think of it like this. I sell you a cookie jar. You open the jar, and there is a note in there saying, "By purchasing this cookie jar, you agreed to transfer ownership of all your assests to me, including use of your wife for my pleasure."
I don't think this would fly...
2) The EULA gives you an out - returning the software for a refund if you do not agree. The fact that that can't be done in practice isn't going to be important to the judge right then. (that's another case)
But if you already bought it, its yours. See above about rights. They can't tell me what to do with my own property.
You read too deep into what he said. He meant you can do whatever you want to it, not with it. So with your AK-47 analogy, you would be able to smash it, break it, take it apart, etc etc.
4) November 1 not October 1, and in Eastern Oregon they are absolutely essential. Try driving from Troutdale to La Grande without studded tires today (we're in the middle of a severe storm). School Teachers in La Grande have been to known to use snowmobiles and cross country skis to get to school in the winter. Of course in the Portland Area if there is even a quarter inch of snow, schools have a snow day, cause people in Western Oregon seem to be immigrants from warmer states who don't know how to drive in snow.
I tend to think the same when it rains for the first time in a while. People seem to forget how to drive, and you end up stuck in traffic for hours.
Finally, my third generation Oregonian wife respectfully says that if you don't like Oregon that much, why don't you just go home, she'd rather see the fields than the people and traffic. And she used to live in the Beaverton area when there WERE fields there (a 25 acre farm which is now an evil sub division.)
I have the same attitude of people in the USA in general. Nothing more I can't stand than people bitching about how our country sucks. So I tell em' if they don't like it, get the f*ck out than. My parents immigrated to this country, and we're all damn proud to be here.
I've lived in Oregon for about 22 years. Then I hopped across the river into washington. Let me tell you:
1. The fact that I can't pump my own gas still amazes me. There's nothing like waiting 10 minutes to do something that should only take 5.
Thats not the end of it. Oregon has no quality control laws either. Look at the pump. There is no inspection sticker on the pump, like here in WA. Dateline even did a special on this several years back. They showed some gas stations in Oregon had the regular unleaded pump and the super unleaded pump attached to the same holding tank. They also showed lots of contaminates in the gasoline, including used motor oil in the diesel fuel. And a majority of the pumps always showed more gas being pumped than actually pumped. And thats the pump, were not talking about snotty pumpers. In high school many many times I asked for 10 dollars of gas, and if I got out of the car and look at the pump, it read like 7 dollars, despite the attendent saying he pumped ten, etc etc. And then theres the many arguments with the cashier about how I asked for X amount of gas, but the attendent claims I said fill, or something. (like I could afford a fill in highschool with a 68 chevy with a V8. I was using lunch money for gas a lot of times;)
One time last year when the wife and I carpooled, and we got gas in Oregon, (she hates pumping gas), I pulled into a unical. And I saw the attendent smoking while he was pumping gas... Needless to say, I got the hell out of there as fast as I could... Sometimes you just have to wonder. Some gas stations you have to get out of your car to go to the cashier to prepay, then you wait for the guy to pump, then you gotta go back and get change. Other gas stations you hand the guy your Visa, and just sticks it in the pump and gives it back to you. And I especially hate how they try to pump more gas in the car to make it an even number, and then they either overfill, charge you for air, or they just spill gas all over your car. And they don't bother using the gas cap holder on the lid, they just toss it somewhere. Sometimes they forget to put it back on. Sometimes the drivers are idiots. One time I saw a lady drive off with the nozzle still sticking out of her tank.
As for oregon taxes. What sucks more is if you live in washington and work in Oregon. I still pay oregon taxes, but don't get a single benafit. I went to the portland library, and they said I would need to pay $75.00 a year since I'm out-of-state. If my kids go to Oregon State Univ, I need to pay out-of-state tuition, even though I pay Oregon Taxes. A recent poll showed that the county in Washington state I live in currently pays more in Oregon taxes then all but 5 counties in Oregon. And of course I couldn't vote on the tax increase/decrease measures a little while back, because I'm not an oregon resident. Hmmm, sounds like taxation without representation to me...h
Don't know about Oregon's total tax burden, but I always heard the opposite. No sales tax, but has the nations highest property taxes, and their income tax is pretty high as well. I'm a homeowner in WA, and my property taxes are lower than my aunt's house in OR, even though she has a smaller house and smaller lot. WA has no state income tax, but since I work in Oregon, I get screwed. An Oregon rep once told me the reason I have to pay Oregon Income tax is because there are, "Certain amount of jobs in Oregon, with a certain amount of tax dollars associated with it. It doesn't matter where you live, because you took an Oregon job away from an Oregonian, and are still liable for the associated tax"... I've never heard such BS.
Oregon roads are torn to shreads. ODOT (Oregon Dept of Trans) had this brilliant idea that instead of using gravel to "sand" the roads when it snows, to use salt instead. If they decided to use just salt, it wouldn't bother me, because I can just rinse down the car. But they opted for a blend!!! So now in addition to rock chips on my car, I have to worry about salt getting under the paint. Whoo hoo! And don't get me started on public transportation. They created this stupid light rail system called MAX. Its an expensive train that goes nowhere of interest. In fact, on the westside, they could've chosen a route that stops by many popular places. But instead they chose a route that doesn't. A few miles north or south would've been awesome, but instead they chose a useless one. In fact it features a stop in front of an abandoned building. And since its above ground, you STILL have to deal with traffic. Especially since we have bozos here who try to walk in front of them, or try to "race" them with their car through an intersection.
And get this. A little while ago, the chief of ODOT was interviewed about the freeway problems. Especially on US-26. ODOT just received federal money, and he was asked if they were going to use it to widen US-26. His response was, "That would be an innappropriate use of the funds". He said that they would use the money to renovate some parks in Tigard, and build a bike path, etc etc. He said that local money should be levied to widen US-26. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the federal money supposed to be used for maintenence of the federal hiways, namely: US-26, I-405, I-5, I-84, and I-205?!!! In college one of my classes talked about the federal freeway system, and that's what we learned. That's why you'll find federal freeways that seem useless, but are federal so the state doesn't have to pay as much to maintain them. Our lives would be MUUUUUCH improved if they widened all the freeways here instead of built that bull sh*t system called MAX.
Then to alleviate traffic ODOT goes and puts a carpool lane in I-5. Normally I like carpool lanes, living in LA while going to college... But guess what ODOT did. Hmmm, I-5 traffic sucks? Lets turn one of the lanes into a carpool lane. Yup, you heard me right. They took a 3 lane hiway with bad traffic, and made it a 2 lane hiway with a carpool lane. To make matters worse, its only a carpool lane from 3 to 6 pm. On top of that, no notion of a double yellow like california, so you can enter wherever you want. So you have to constantly be aware of people trying to get in... Net effect: People drive like 10mph in the carpool lane, so they don't rear-end the people who just pull in. And since its only from 3-6pm, it makes the lane useless. Did I mention the carpool lane is only like 3 miles long?
That proves nothing. That is regulated by the FCC, and computer networks ARE NOT REGULATED BY THE FCC.
Anyways, nothing in there is relevent. You are running an RJ-45 cable to your neighbor. Your neighbor is not connecting to the cable system and "receiving" jack. He is receiving IP traffic from your computer. The IP packets in question are not being offered by your cable system. It is being offered by your server. When your neighbor wishes to view internet content, an IP packet is sent to your server. Your server makes the request on behalf of your neighbor. Your server informs your neighbor what the result was.
Third party as defined in a dictionary refers to somebody that is not in the principle group. Refer to what I was talking about in setting up a network. This is not sharing via the @home network. You are doing things on behalf of another computer, not sharing with another computer. Even if you don't agree, it doesn't matter. Your neighbor is physically connected to your network. The cable modem is connected to your computer. That ocmputer is connected to the network. The network is your household, which is the principle group. Your neighbor is not a third party, because he is part of your network domain. You are "sharing" within your own domain. I repeat, YOUR OWN domain. In addition you are not even "sharing" your internet connection, because your server is NOT acting as a bridge. The nodes in your network DO NOT HAVE access to the outside world. They communicate to the gateway (your server), who connects on their behalf. That's why I said look at the network packets. Should this go to court, it would be easy to prove you are not sharing, because sharing implies shared access, but according to the ip header, the packets originated only from the NAT Server. What happens is you have a socket open on the Server talking to the outside, and another socket talking to the inside. Everything on the inside is OUTSIDE THE SCOPE of the outside network. AT&T has as much right to tell you what your private network can connect to, as they do saying that you cannot hold hands with your wife.
here is a TOS for ATT. Where does it say you cannot network your computers together?
The closest I can find is it says you cannot provide network services via the @home service. Key word here being via In this scenarios, we are NOT providing network services via @home. @home isn't even in the picture. We are providing network servies via your favorite Router/NAT application/device. @home is not taking part in any of the sharing. Your PC is just acting on behalf of other devices. Just like if you call me on the phone, and ask me to look up something for you. Thats how NAT works. You say you want to do operation X, and the NAT server will say, "ok, let me do that for you. And I'll tell you what the other computer said"
Sharing means, the server would have to say, "here is a network line. talk to the computer your damn self"...
This scenario would require your server to actually be a bridge. But a NAT server is NOT a bridge.
Some of the terms are just plain stupid. Like you can't run a server of anykind. Including HTTP. Guess that means we can't run Windows XP/ME. Both implement UPnP Services, which contain embedded HTTP Servers. Guess this means you can't buy UPnP Devices either, like your internet enabled toaster/refrigerator/etc, because all UPnP Devices have embedded HTTP Servers. Guess you can't use Desktop Remoting either, becaues that runs an RDP server.
Where does it say that it is illegal to network computers together? Where does it say it is illegal to string cable to your neighbors house? It is only illegal if said cable is a COAX cable which is SPLICED into your cable line.
(And there's about 200 posts here telling you that you aren't buying bandwidth [or 'cans'], so try reading them.)
didn't I just say it didn't matter? Whether I pay for how many cans they pick up, or just the fact that they come to my house to pick up the cans, I still paid for the service, so if its my garbage or joe blow's garbage it doesn't matter, its all just garbage.
He's not running a coax to his neighbor attached to a splitter on his cable line. He's running an RJ-45 connected to his hub. So again I ask. WHERE IS THE VIOLATION? What he is doing is no different then if their kids ran a string across the yard with tin cans on each end.
Maybe I should make a case that I was transferring protected data that was encrypted and protected with an algorithm that shall remain nameless. Since the cable company was able to determine the content of my traffic, that means that by the DMCA they illegally circumvented my protection measures.
Did you read my post? All those computers are connected to ONE PC, which is connected to the cable modem. ONE PC, ONE CONNECTION, NO VIOLATION.
In terms of network traffic, those many windows open on one PC looks identicle to the traffic from ONE NAT Server with many nodes. Basically that NAT server is doing things on behalf of other PCs. This is no different then if you call me on the phone and ask me to look up driving directions to K-MART, I look it up, and tell you. Same thing... Should AT&T then send me a bill for acting as a middle man for you?
Maybe you will understand better this way. I pay for garbage service. I get charged by the can. Lets say I don't have very much garbage this week. My neighbor has a party at his house and has tons of garbage. I take some and put it in my can, so it is now up to the brim. Should the sanitation department charge me extra for that? I paid for my bandwidth (The one can full).. And if I decided to take all my neighbors garbage, I would get charged for each can. But does this mean they can charge me an additional fee because its my neighbors? Hell no. Where the garbage came from is none of their business. Are they going to send a guy to my house to look through my garbage to try and make a determination? If so, I'll be sure to have everyone in the neighborhood that week take a crap into a plastic bag, and put it in my garbage can.
I pay for one connection. And how many computers are connected to my cable modem? ONE. So where is the violation? Please define connection for me. Look at all the packets leaving my computer. They are all originating from exactly one PC.
The rest is protocol, and none of the cable company's business.
Technically speaking, having two computers networked together with NAT and browsing, is no different then only one computer browsing with two windows open, with one of them being remoted with RDP to the other computer. Hell, for that matter is is no different than one PC with 10 windows open, all browsing different sites.
Should the cable company start charging me per session too? Hell, I have 3 windows open right now, should I be charged extra? Heck, I have two monitors on my PC, should I be charged more, because I can have two fullscreen sessions?
Its like this. Lets say I only get one email account that I pay for. I tell all my friends to email me, just put my name in the subject. If its for my wife put her name in the subject. If its for our kids, put their names in the subject, etc etc. Now one email account is serving three people. I paid for that one account, so it doesn't matter. Am I to be billed for three people now? How will they know? Its just a protocol. They can never tell what the protocol is for sure. While it may look like NAT, it could be something else. Just like the above email I described. How do you know this isn't the email sharing protocol, vs another spam email, or some other email? You don't/can't.
And you are right. My arguement WON'T get ten seconds in a court of law... BECAUSE THE CASE WOULD BE DISMISSED BEFORE YOU CAN SAY FUQ!
What do you mean granted? He didn't steal squat. Whether it was a flat rate or per use it doesn't matter. Whether he has his computer download warez all day, or whether he just uses email, and lets his neighbor download warez it doesn't matter. The useage fees have been paid.
Its like this. If the ISP is a sanitation company, and they give me a pipe to my house, and charge me for it. Whether a flat fee, or per gallon. Then it doesn't matter if I'm the only one pissing in the drain, or my neighbor pisses in it as well. As far as the company is concerned, its all my piss, and I'm paying for it.
You can NAT as many times as you want. I did it before when I was running some tests. Technically speaking there is no reason this wouldn't work anyways. NAT is a very simple protocol.
Slashdot Mirror
You can buy a four post switch for like 50 bucks. So you can have a stack of 4 port switches somewhere at 50 bucks a pop plus some change for the wallplate, or $150 per pop... Which is cheaper?
I know you are referring to the 24+ port beasts, but even if you had these 4 port integrated plates, your company is still going to have those 24+ port beasts, so there is still no savings.
You might say, that you can save on the number of 24+ port things you need. Well, there is more to the 24+ port switch then just 24+ ports. They support other things like management stuff, etc etc. Stuff you won't get with the integrated wall plate.
While true, many IT groups charge per line, and not per pull, you have to admit the following will happen:
You have one line running from the switch panel to the cube, where there is on of these nj100 things. You will still charge the group for FOUR lines, despite only having one physical line, because the endpoint still terminates with 4 ports, so the group doesn't save any money at all.
And how is this easier to maintain? Before IT only had to manage a switch panel and the cables, now they have to manage a 4 port switch in each cube? Before if the guy had his own switch, it was his own problem, now its IT's, because its integrated in the wall-plate.
As for costs, it may reduce cost of cable pulled, but it increases cost of the endpoint.
No no no... the fact is that you DIDN'T legally purchase the full 10.1. You paid 20$ for a liscense to the upgrade. Just because the way they chose to implement the upgrade included putting the whole version on the CD DOES NOT MEAN that it is legal for you to circumvent the CheckForOSX and install it without owning the previous version.
:)
You weren't made aware of such a license at purchase, so this becomes a sales, thus the Sales Doctrine applies. And even if you were, there is no financial gain for Apple afterwards. Meaning, it is a one time benafit for Apple. Then that makes this a sale and NOT a license, and the Sales Doctrine still applies, irregardless if you were aware of the licensing agreement.
I just talked to a lawyer friend over lunch, and we were talking about such issues
The only problem is nobody really challenges these shrink-wrapped EULA/UCITA crap... Hopefully one day they will be, and exposed for the BS that they are.
1.) He deleted a file. This is different than discovering a file that wasn't supposed to be there. So he didn't get something he didn't pay for, he deleted something hid did pay for.
,and I pay for it. Just because the price tag says its costs 5 bucks is irrelevant. If the store gives me 20 dollars in change, they in affect made the sale price be $-15.00
2.) Above is irrelevent, because when you bought the CD, you are paying for the CD. You were not paying for a license for the content on the CD. So to use your own analogies:
a.) Finding an expensive watch in the car. Then the watch is yours. The sales contract referes to the car, which includes all its contents unless otherwise noted. Meaning, if you buy a Mercedes, can Mercedes approach you later and say, "Hey, you didn't pay for the carpeting, you didn't pay for the windows, you didn't pay for the spare tire, etc etc. How would you prove you paid for it? Does your sales contract show an itemized list? No? Then its all inclusive, case closed.
2.) Wrong change. So what? As a customer, I want to purchase something. The store sets the price
So I'm not obligated to return the money. I may feel guilty and return it out of remorse, but not because I face criminal charges if I don't. Sales dotrine says that when money changes hand, then the property ownership transfers. Money changed hands. Its not my fault the other party didn't know what they were doing.
If you bought something from a store, and they lost the money before they were able to deposit it, are you required to give them the money again? If they lost the check for example... Do you have to cut them a new one? NO!!!! Once the money left my hand, the product is mine. If you deposit the money, burn it, or wipe your a$$ with it, is none of my concern...
The whole concept of shrink-wrapped licenses that you don't see prior to purchase is silly ;)
Here let me sell you this candy jar for 50 cents. You take it home, and open it, and inside you'll find the license that says, "Buy purchasing this, and opening this jar you hereby agree to transfer ownership of all your assests to...."
Companies will buy tons of these? Why? Why would a company buy a 300 dollar 4 port integrated switch, when they can just buy the switch and wall plate separately cheaper?
In fact, most companies probably won't even need to. Chances are they have a rack of switches in some closet somewhere, and they run 4 lines to your cube to the wall-plate. Or they run one line to the wall-plate, and give you a $50 switch. No need to spend $300.00 per cube.
Just insert the header, "I heard that:"
;)
Then it all becomes opinion
They should counter sue apple for negligence. I mean lets say:
;)
I park my car on the street somewhere, and I leave the keys sitting on top of the car, with a note saying, "Don't steal my car, these keys are for me. If you take them you are in violation of..."
And on the key ring there is a big shiny gold key on it, with another note attached to it saying, "Do not use this key to come into my house, located at 5555 NE 5th Ave, SomeCity, USA"
And next to your keys, you place your wallet there, with a note on it saying, "Do not take my wallet. It is for my personal use only. Do not use my duplicate Visa Cards, Social Security Card, Birth Certificate, etc etc. They are spares for me only..."
Maybe AMD should change their pricing structure. Sell the exact same processor, but charge according to what the customer sets the clock rate to. Make it part of a licensing scheme or something. If you "overclock" you must send us more money. I woner how well that system will work
That bottle of coke probably doesn't list the nutritional value, ingredients, etc etc. All that is probably on the box that holds all the bottles... It says not intented for resale, because the bottle doesn't have the FDA mandated labeling, meaning it would be illegal for Safeway or whatever to sell the bottle individually, because it is not labeled correctly.
If it were illegal to take something apart and resell it individually period, scrap yards would be non-existent...
1) They can probably convince a judge that the only way to install it is by agreeing to the EULA. Or that you deliberately bypassed the EULA in order to avoid it (pick your favorite way), which probably won't fly with the judge either.
But if you already bought it, it doesn't matter. Once I bought it why do I have to "install" it? What if I just use it as a coaster, and later decide to sell it? (Just saying....) Doesn't the law say that once you buy something, the scope of the thing you bought is now out of the hands of the supplier? Meaning, once its yours they can't tell you what to do with it. Think of it like this. I sell you a cookie jar. You open the jar, and there is a note in there saying, "By purchasing this cookie jar, you agreed to transfer ownership of all your assests to me, including use of your wife for my pleasure."
I don't think this would fly...
2) The EULA gives you an out - returning the software for a refund if you do not agree. The fact that that can't be done in practice isn't going to be important to the judge right then. (that's another case)
But if you already bought it, its yours. See above about rights. They can't tell me what to do with my own property.
You read too deep into what he said. He meant you can do whatever you want to it, not with it. So with your AK-47 analogy, you would be able to smash it, break it, take it apart, etc etc.
4) November 1 not October 1, and in Eastern Oregon they are absolutely essential. Try driving from Troutdale to La Grande without studded tires today (we're in the middle of a severe storm). School Teachers in La Grande have been to known to use snowmobiles and cross country skis to get to school in the winter. Of course in the Portland Area if there is even a quarter inch of snow, schools have a snow day, cause people in Western Oregon seem to be immigrants from warmer states who don't know how to drive in snow.
I tend to think the same when it rains for the first time in a while. People seem to forget how to drive, and you end up stuck in traffic for hours.
Finally, my third generation Oregonian wife respectfully says that if you don't like Oregon that much, why don't you just go home, she'd rather see the fields than the people and traffic. And she used to live in the Beaverton area when there WERE fields there (a 25 acre farm which is now an evil sub division.)
I have the same attitude of people in the USA in general. Nothing more I can't stand than people bitching about how our country sucks. So I tell em' if they don't like it, get the f*ck out than. My parents immigrated to this country, and we're all damn proud to be here.
I've lived in Oregon for about 22 years. Then I hopped across the river into washington. Let me tell you:
;)
1. The fact that I can't pump my own gas still amazes me. There's nothing like waiting 10 minutes to do something that should only take 5.
Thats not the end of it. Oregon has no quality control laws either. Look at the pump. There is no inspection sticker on the pump, like here in WA. Dateline even did a special on this several years back. They showed some gas stations in Oregon had the regular unleaded pump and the super unleaded pump attached to the same holding tank. They also showed lots of contaminates in the gasoline, including used motor oil in the diesel fuel. And a majority of the pumps always showed more gas being pumped than actually pumped. And thats the pump, were not talking about snotty pumpers. In high school many many times I asked for 10 dollars of gas, and if I got out of the car and look at the pump, it read like 7 dollars, despite the attendent saying he pumped ten, etc etc. And then theres the many arguments with the cashier about how I asked for X amount of gas, but the attendent claims I said fill, or something. (like I could afford a fill in highschool with a 68 chevy with a V8. I was using lunch money for gas a lot of times
One time last year when the wife and I carpooled, and we got gas in Oregon, (she hates pumping gas), I pulled into a unical. And I saw the attendent smoking while he was pumping gas... Needless to say, I got the hell out of there as fast as I could... Sometimes you just have to wonder. Some gas stations you have to get out of your car to go to the cashier to prepay, then you wait for the guy to pump, then you gotta go back and get change. Other gas stations you hand the guy your Visa, and just sticks it in the pump and gives it back to you. And I especially hate how they try to pump more gas in the car to make it an even number, and then they either overfill, charge you for air, or they just spill gas all over your car. And they don't bother using the gas cap holder on the lid, they just toss it somewhere. Sometimes they forget to put it back on. Sometimes the drivers are idiots. One time I saw a lady drive off with the nozzle still sticking out of her tank.
As for oregon taxes. What sucks more is if you live in washington and work in Oregon. I still pay oregon taxes, but don't get a single benafit. I went to the portland library, and they said I would need to pay $75.00 a year since I'm out-of-state. If my kids go to Oregon State Univ, I need to pay out-of-state tuition, even though I pay Oregon Taxes. A recent poll showed that the county in Washington state I live in currently pays more in Oregon taxes then all but 5 counties in Oregon. And of course I couldn't vote on the tax increase/decrease measures a little while back, because I'm not an oregon resident. Hmmm, sounds like taxation without representation to me...h
Don't know about Oregon's total tax burden, but I always heard the opposite. No sales tax, but has the nations highest property taxes, and their income tax is pretty high as well. I'm a homeowner in WA, and my property taxes are lower than my aunt's house in OR, even though she has a smaller house and smaller lot. WA has no state income tax, but since I work in Oregon, I get screwed. An Oregon rep once told me the reason I have to pay Oregon Income tax is because there are, "Certain amount of jobs in Oregon, with a certain amount of tax dollars associated with it. It doesn't matter where you live, because you took an Oregon job away from an Oregonian, and are still liable for the associated tax"... I've never heard such BS.
Oregon roads are torn to shreads. ODOT (Oregon Dept of Trans) had this brilliant idea that instead of using gravel to "sand" the roads when it snows, to use salt instead. If they decided to use just salt, it wouldn't bother me, because I can just rinse down the car. But they opted for a blend!!! So now in addition to rock chips on my car, I have to worry about salt getting under the paint. Whoo hoo! And don't get me started on public transportation. They created this stupid light rail system called MAX. Its an expensive train that goes nowhere of interest. In fact, on the westside, they could've chosen a route that stops by many popular places. But instead they chose a route that doesn't. A few miles north or south would've been awesome, but instead they chose a useless one. In fact it features a stop in front of an abandoned building. And since its above ground, you STILL have to deal with traffic. Especially since we have bozos here who try to walk in front of them, or try to "race" them with their car through an intersection.
And get this. A little while ago, the chief of ODOT was interviewed about the freeway problems. Especially on US-26. ODOT just received federal money, and he was asked if they were going to use it to widen US-26. His response was, "That would be an innappropriate use of the funds". He said that they would use the money to renovate some parks in Tigard, and build a bike path, etc etc. He said that local money should be levied to widen US-26. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the federal money supposed to be used for maintenence of the federal hiways, namely: US-26, I-405, I-5, I-84, and I-205?!!! In college one of my classes talked about the federal freeway system, and that's what we learned. That's why you'll find federal freeways that seem useless, but are federal so the state doesn't have to pay as much to maintain them. Our lives would be MUUUUUCH improved if they widened all the freeways here instead of built that bull sh*t system called MAX.
Then to alleviate traffic ODOT goes and puts a carpool lane in I-5. Normally I like carpool lanes, living in LA while going to college... But guess what ODOT did. Hmmm, I-5 traffic sucks? Lets turn one of the lanes into a carpool lane. Yup, you heard me right. They took a 3 lane hiway with bad traffic, and made it a 2 lane hiway with a carpool lane. To make matters worse, its only a carpool lane from 3 to 6 pm. On top of that, no notion of a double yellow like california, so you can enter wherever you want. So you have to constantly be aware of people trying to get in... Net effect: People drive like 10mph in the carpool lane, so they don't rear-end the people who just pull in. And since its only from 3-6pm, it makes the lane useless. Did I mention the carpool lane is only like 3 miles long?
I'm not unemployed, fortunately. But I am home sick :)
That proves nothing. That is regulated by the FCC, and computer networks ARE NOT REGULATED BY THE FCC.
Anyways, nothing in there is relevent. You are running an RJ-45 cable to your neighbor. Your neighbor is not connecting to the cable system and "receiving" jack. He is receiving IP traffic from your computer. The IP packets in question are not being offered by your cable system. It is being offered by your server. When your neighbor wishes to view internet content, an IP packet is sent to your server. Your server makes the request on behalf of your neighbor. Your server informs your neighbor what the result was.
Third party as defined in a dictionary refers to somebody that is not in the principle group. Refer to what I was talking about in setting up a network. This is not sharing via the @home network. You are doing things on behalf of another computer, not sharing with another computer. Even if you don't agree, it doesn't matter. Your neighbor is physically connected to your network. The cable modem is connected to your computer. That ocmputer is connected to the network. The network is your household, which is the principle group. Your neighbor is not a third party, because he is part of your network domain. You are "sharing" within your own domain. I repeat, YOUR OWN domain. In addition you are not even "sharing" your internet connection, because your server is NOT acting as a bridge. The nodes in your network DO NOT HAVE access to the outside world. They communicate to the gateway (your server), who connects on their behalf. That's why I said look at the network packets. Should this go to court, it would be easy to prove you are not sharing, because sharing implies shared access, but according to the ip header, the packets originated only from the NAT Server. What happens is you have a socket open on the Server talking to the outside, and another socket talking to the inside. Everything on the inside is OUTSIDE THE SCOPE of the outside network. AT&T has as much right to tell you what your private network can connect to, as they do saying that you cannot hold hands with your wife.
You said its in the contract.
here is a TOS for ATT. Where does it say you cannot network your computers together?
The closest I can find is it says you cannot provide network services via the @home service. Key word here being via In this scenarios, we are NOT providing network services via @home. @home isn't even in the picture. We are providing network servies via your favorite Router/NAT application/device. @home is not taking part in any of the sharing. Your PC is just acting on behalf of other devices. Just like if you call me on the phone, and ask me to look up something for you. Thats how NAT works. You say you want to do operation X, and the NAT server will say, "ok, let me do that for you. And I'll tell you what the other computer said"
Sharing means, the server would have to say, "here is a network line. talk to the computer your damn self"...
This scenario would require your server to actually be a bridge. But a NAT server is NOT a bridge.
Some of the terms are just plain stupid. Like you can't run a server of anykind. Including HTTP. Guess that means we can't run Windows XP/ME. Both implement UPnP Services, which contain embedded HTTP Servers. Guess this means you can't buy UPnP Devices either, like your internet enabled toaster/refrigerator/etc, because all UPnP Devices have embedded HTTP Servers. Guess you can't use Desktop Remoting either, becaues that runs an RDP server.
Where does it say that it is illegal to network computers together? Where does it say it is illegal to string cable to your neighbors house? It is only illegal if said cable is a COAX cable which is SPLICED into your cable line.
Running a separate cable/network is not covered.
(And there's about 200 posts here telling you that you aren't buying bandwidth [or 'cans'], so try reading them.)
didn't I just say it didn't matter? Whether I pay for how many cans they pick up, or just the fact that they come to my house to pick up the cans, I still paid for the service, so if its my garbage or joe blow's garbage it doesn't matter, its all just garbage.
He's not running a coax to his neighbor attached to a splitter on his cable line. He's running an RJ-45 connected to his hub. So again I ask. WHERE IS THE VIOLATION? What he is doing is no different then if their kids ran a string across the yard with tin cans on each end.
Maybe I should make a case that I was transferring protected data that was encrypted and protected with an algorithm that shall remain nameless. Since the cable company was able to determine the content of my traffic, that means that by the DMCA they illegally circumvented my protection measures.
Did you read my post? All those computers are connected to ONE PC, which is connected to the cable modem. ONE PC, ONE CONNECTION, NO VIOLATION.
In terms of network traffic, those many windows open on one PC looks identicle to the traffic from ONE NAT Server with many nodes. Basically that NAT server is doing things on behalf of other PCs. This is no different then if you call me on the phone and ask me to look up driving directions to K-MART, I look it up, and tell you. Same thing... Should AT&T then send me a bill for acting as a middle man for you?
Maybe you will understand better this way. I pay for garbage service. I get charged by the can. Lets say I don't have very much garbage this week. My neighbor has a party at his house and has tons of garbage. I take some and put it in my can, so it is now up to the brim. Should the sanitation department charge me extra for that? I paid for my bandwidth (The one can full).. And if I decided to take all my neighbors garbage, I would get charged for each can. But does this mean they can charge me an additional fee because its my neighbors? Hell no. Where the garbage came from is none of their business. Are they going to send a guy to my house to look through my garbage to try and make a determination? If so, I'll be sure to have everyone in the neighborhood that week take a crap into a plastic bag, and put it in my garbage can.
I pay for one connection. And how many computers are connected to my cable modem? ONE. So where is the violation? Please define connection for me. Look at all the packets leaving my computer. They are all originating from exactly one PC.
The rest is protocol, and none of the cable company's business.
Technically speaking, having two computers networked together with NAT and browsing, is no different then only one computer browsing with two windows open, with one of them being remoted with RDP to the other computer. Hell, for that matter is is no different than one PC with 10 windows open, all browsing different sites.
Should the cable company start charging me per session too? Hell, I have 3 windows open right now, should I be charged extra? Heck, I have two monitors on my PC, should I be charged more, because I can have two fullscreen sessions?
Its like this. Lets say I only get one email account that I pay for. I tell all my friends to email me, just put my name in the subject. If its for my wife put her name in the subject. If its for our kids, put their names in the subject, etc etc. Now one email account is serving three people. I paid for that one account, so it doesn't matter. Am I to be billed for three people now? How will they know? Its just a protocol. They can never tell what the protocol is for sure. While it may look like NAT, it could be something else. Just like the above email I described. How do you know this isn't the email sharing protocol, vs another spam email, or some other email? You don't/can't.
And you are right. My arguement WON'T get ten seconds in a court of law... BECAUSE THE CASE WOULD BE DISMISSED BEFORE YOU CAN SAY FUQ!
What do you mean granted? He didn't steal squat. Whether it was a flat rate or per use it doesn't matter. Whether he has his computer download warez all day, or whether he just uses email, and lets his neighbor download warez it doesn't matter. The useage fees have been paid.
Its like this. If the ISP is a sanitation company, and they give me a pipe to my house, and charge me for it. Whether a flat fee, or per gallon. Then it doesn't matter if I'm the only one pissing in the drain, or my neighbor pisses in it as well. As far as the company is concerned, its all my piss, and I'm paying for it.
You can NAT as many times as you want. I did it before when I was running some tests. Technically speaking there is no reason this wouldn't work anyways. NAT is a very simple protocol.