Sure bad logic is very deep. Stopping someone from using your server, where they have opportunities to find another server is more like locking them out, not locking them in... moron. Think about it.
I'm glad some other people out there are concerned about this as well as I am. This is the great thing about Open Source... if there's bloat we can start cutting it down nicely. However, it would be nice if we could get all those modifications into the distrobutions.
I don't have to remind people what the C64 could do with 64K of memory. Sure we need more than 64K of memory, but Linux runs far far far from optimal efficiency.
Bad analogy. It's more akin to "they didn't kill him, they locked him OUT of their gates until they could prove he wasn't a problem"
Don't forget, the ISP owns the server and the service. I'm sure they are within their agreements. And I am sure you can find another ISP if you don't like it or start your own.
"ISPs have been made responsible for removing illegal and harmful content under so-called notice and take down (NTD) procedures, once they have been put on notice by a complainant."
and
"ISPs are acting as judge, jury and private investigator at the same time. They not only have to make a judgement whether a website is illegal or not - they also have to act as a private detective agency, investigating the accusations and deciding on the merits of the evidence they gather."
Of course they are. Should there be a law that says ISP's are not allowed to take down sites which they host unless there is a court order to do so? I really don't get the point.
Or maybe the government should say that ISP's are NOT responsible for content on their servers? I think they are. I think servers are the properties of their owners, not a shared property of all the users.
It is not beneficial for an ISP to remove their user's content! If the problem ever got big enough to the point where people were making fraudulent claims willy-nilly, I'm certain the ISP's would be more careful in their handling.
If someone complains about your content, they take it down soon. If you say nothing, then obviously you either admit that you shouldn't have it up, or you don't care about it. If you complain, they'll look at it. Only when there is an argument between the two will they even bother to look at it. Of course a real complaint involves sending them about 2 to 5 emails insisting that what they did was wrong. But you know, it isn't really that bad of a system--it works itself out.
"This statement is not grammatically, politically, or factually correct. Does he mean "Linus has Hansen's disease"? I hope not. But if he does, fortunately, it is highly treatable these days. If he means Linux is wasting away, the facts speak otherwise. If he means "Linux is very contagious" this is true, but a better wording could have been chosen."
I think he means something like "Linux is a disease which feeds off of the healthy body of commercial software."
Not to mention the fact that there's no good reason to think this is Atlantis except that it might get you an article published in the news. Either basic logic escapes these people, or they're doing it on purpose.
They find a city that no one found before. Well what else could it possibly be except Atlantis? I suppose some people wouldn't have even suspected Atlantis to be in a mountainous region, but obviously these folks didn't fall for that "Atlantis fell into the ocean" story the ancients purposefully tell to try to throw us off.
I say take their money. I mean what's the big deal? I'd rather drain as much money from them as possible. Sites peppered with MS ads which contain nothing but how great Linux is probably don't help MS that much.
I know everyone seems to like Firefox, but I still like the old Mozilla project. While I like the fact that Firefox is standalone, with the old Mozilla, I can middle-click a link in my mail client and have it open up a new tab in my browser. Whereas if I prefer, I can regular click the link, and have it open in a new window or the old window.
I posted these observations to a mozilla help group, and the best they could come up with is something that forces the browser to automatically load new links into a new tab (which was a pain to set up on linux anyway).
Oh, and one other thing for both old Mozilla and Firefox (that someone mentioned before): please get rid of the profiles. It's insanely redundant to have each user with multiple profiles. This is a hold over from the Windows 95/98 days, and certainly isn't necessary anymore.
I don't think companies want to cooperate that much. The people who own the servers aren't always in direct opposition to spam anyway. And then you have some companies (verizon) that think that avoiding spam justifies them not applying correct SMTP protocols.
Well said from a technological standpoint, but I've always thought that the idea was just to prevent average joe user from doing things. Of course as long as the signal is usable, it can be recorded... but as long as 90% of the population can't do that, they've done their job.
Ok, I admit I don't know everything about wireless service, but how does sending out "no service" messages constantly "better than messing with everything that uses the same frequencies cellphones do"? I don't get it. I thought that if you used a frequency then nothing else could use it for that period of time. Doesn't sending out "no service" also block everything else?
Japan is pretty vigilant until it comes to Japanese companies. Anti-trust laws? Japan is the center of huge conglomerate coroporations like Mitsubishi and Sony! Japan is completely unfair towards foreign companies, putting the small foreign business man through red tape until he gives up, and then using these so-called 'anti-trust laws' to raid bigger foreign companies, while their own domestic companies are immune to this kind of treatment.
Actually I'm already a safe driver. I've never been in an accident, and I get pretty ticked off that people aren't careful and make my normal hour trip home a 4 hour trip home. I think that OTHER people getting this technology will improve my safety before ME getting this technology will.
Oh and on another note, every time I see an accident, it involves someone who I wouldn't consider "wealthy" either. I think wealthy people have a bigger investment in their car, and more of a deterrent to smashing into things. I know that isn't true accross the board, but picture the person you'd classify as "the worst type of driver" and tell me if you think he's rich.
I think about this a lot actually. What constitutes code that doesn't belong to YOU? Well if you write a full piece of software and you just blatantly copy it over to your next employer, I definitely think that's wrong. But where is the line between your "working knowledge" of code, and the code itself?
Personally, when I've coded, I've always done all the research, done all the work, come up with all the code by myself. If I came up with a great loop for file I/O that I really like to use, to use with a file format I think is convenient and I use it for my employer, do I have to make sure I "forget" it? In this case everyone SHOULD keep a code library to make sure they don't ever re-use code.
Furthermore, when I start working at a company I bring to the company MY knowledge and experience. Do they suddenly own that knowledge and experience simply because I used it on their project? 90% of the time I'm using pieces of code I wrote for myself long ago for my employer's software.
To build something significant on the moon, I presume they will be using materials from earth. How will this affect the orbit of the moon? I hope they make sure not to "over do it" or anything. Once the moon's mass is changed beyond a certain threshold, I suspect it will either escape or crash into the earth. How much does "one base" weigh?
Yes, and don't forget the Music industry had to be CONVINCED to adopt the CD format because they thought it might hurt their sales to produce something which has such a long life span. Apparently they were counting on you needing more than one copy of that tape cassette. Now new technology has come up again, and there's no way they can either approve or disapprove of people adopting it. They aren't in control anymore.
"It's peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me." -- Thomas Jefferson
Exactly. And futhermore, P2P really hurts those bands which produce 1 hit per CD (as defined by popularity) a lot more than bands which produce wonderful compilations which are appreciated by their "fans" (as defined by people who really like the music and aren't just into the "now"). This is because if you're just trying to keep up with the trends, you'll download the song and forget ever buying it--by that time it will be something new. However if you really appreciate music, you will buy the music you really like.
To me this means that P2P helps improve the quality of music by rewarding the better musicians a little bit more. However, I must admit I still don't think it's ok to copy music you don't own.
I don't know if we're on the same page or not, but I wouldn't feel guilty either from just downloading a cracked copy if I had bought the real thing. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of "you shouldn't share or crack software" because then you're allowing anyone who hasn't bought it to have it.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure bad logic is very deep. Stopping someone from using your server, where they have opportunities to find another server is more like locking them out, not locking them in... moron. Think about it.
I'm glad some other people out there are concerned about this as well as I am. This is the great thing about Open Source... if there's bloat we can start cutting it down nicely. However, it would be nice if we could get all those modifications into the distrobutions.
I don't have to remind people what the C64 could do with 64K of memory. Sure we need more than 64K of memory, but Linux runs far far far from optimal efficiency.
Bad analogy. It's more akin to "they didn't kill him, they locked him OUT of their gates until they could prove he wasn't a problem"
Don't forget, the ISP owns the server and the service. I'm sure they are within their agreements. And I am sure you can find another ISP if you don't like it or start your own.
"ISPs have been made responsible for removing illegal and harmful content under so-called notice and take down (NTD) procedures, once they have been put on notice by a complainant."
and
"ISPs are acting as judge, jury and private investigator at the same time. They not only have to make a judgement whether a website is illegal or not - they also have to act as a private detective agency, investigating the accusations and deciding on the merits of the evidence they gather."
Of course they are. Should there be a law that says ISP's are not allowed to take down sites which they host unless there is a court order to do so? I really don't get the point.
Or maybe the government should say that ISP's are NOT responsible for content on their servers? I think they are. I think servers are the properties of their owners, not a shared property of all the users.
It is not beneficial for an ISP to remove their user's content! If the problem ever got big enough to the point where people were making fraudulent claims willy-nilly, I'm certain the ISP's would be more careful in their handling.
If someone complains about your content, they take it down soon. If you say nothing, then obviously you either admit that you shouldn't have it up, or you don't care about it. If you complain, they'll look at it. Only when there is an argument between the two will they even bother to look at it. Of course a real complaint involves sending them about 2 to 5 emails insisting that what they did was wrong. But you know, it isn't really that bad of a system--it works itself out.
That would be correct, except it seems that we have evolved to the point where marriage doesn't include sex anymore.
But... how do you know when what you're looking at is the idea or an implementation? Isn't an implementation also an idea?
"This statement is not grammatically, politically, or factually correct. Does he mean "Linus has Hansen's disease"? I hope not. But if he does, fortunately, it is highly treatable these days. If he means Linux is wasting away, the facts speak otherwise. If he means "Linux is very contagious" this is true, but a better wording could have been chosen."
I think he means something like "Linux is a disease which feeds off of the healthy body of commercial software."
Not to mention the fact that there's no good reason to think this is Atlantis except that it might get you an article published in the news. Either basic logic escapes these people, or they're doing it on purpose.
They find a city that no one found before. Well what else could it possibly be except Atlantis? I suppose some people wouldn't have even suspected Atlantis to be in a mountainous region, but obviously these folks didn't fall for that "Atlantis fell into the ocean" story the ancients purposefully tell to try to throw us off.
Tricky bastards.
I say take their money. I mean what's the big deal? I'd rather drain as much money from them as possible. Sites peppered with MS ads which contain nothing but how great Linux is probably don't help MS that much.
"The keys are then sent back to the virus creator"
I've always wondered about this sort of thing... doesn't that make the creator pretty easy to catch?
When I first saw this I thought I read a virus named Torgo! It wobbles around, moves slowly, and takes care of your computer while you're away.
I know everyone seems to like Firefox, but I still like the old Mozilla project. While I like the fact that Firefox is standalone, with the old Mozilla, I can middle-click a link in my mail client and have it open up a new tab in my browser. Whereas if I prefer, I can regular click the link, and have it open in a new window or the old window.
I posted these observations to a mozilla help group, and the best they could come up with is something that forces the browser to automatically load new links into a new tab (which was a pain to set up on linux anyway).
Oh, and one other thing for both old Mozilla and Firefox (that someone mentioned before): please get rid of the profiles. It's insanely redundant to have each user with multiple profiles. This is a hold over from the Windows 95/98 days, and certainly isn't necessary anymore.
Ever have dejavu?
I don't think companies want to cooperate that much. The people who own the servers aren't always in direct opposition to spam anyway. And then you have some companies (verizon) that think that avoiding spam justifies them not applying correct SMTP protocols.
Well said from a technological standpoint, but I've always thought that the idea was just to prevent average joe user from doing things. Of course as long as the signal is usable, it can be recorded... but as long as 90% of the population can't do that, they've done their job.
Ok, I admit I don't know everything about wireless service, but how does sending out "no service" messages constantly "better than messing with everything that uses the same frequencies cellphones do"? I don't get it. I thought that if you used a frequency then nothing else could use it for that period of time. Doesn't sending out "no service" also block everything else?
Japan is pretty vigilant until it comes to Japanese companies. Anti-trust laws? Japan is the center of huge conglomerate coroporations like Mitsubishi and Sony! Japan is completely unfair towards foreign companies, putting the small foreign business man through red tape until he gives up, and then using these so-called 'anti-trust laws' to raid bigger foreign companies, while their own domestic companies are immune to this kind of treatment.
Actually I'm already a safe driver. I've never been in an accident, and I get pretty ticked off that people aren't careful and make my normal hour trip home a 4 hour trip home. I think that OTHER people getting this technology will improve my safety before ME getting this technology will.
Oh and on another note, every time I see an accident, it involves someone who I wouldn't consider "wealthy" either. I think wealthy people have a bigger investment in their car, and more of a deterrent to smashing into things. I know that isn't true accross the board, but picture the person you'd classify as "the worst type of driver" and tell me if you think he's rich.
I think about this a lot actually. What constitutes code that doesn't belong to YOU? Well if you write a full piece of software and you just blatantly copy it over to your next employer, I definitely think that's wrong. But where is the line between your "working knowledge" of code, and the code itself?
Personally, when I've coded, I've always done all the research, done all the work, come up with all the code by myself. If I came up with a great loop for file I/O that I really like to use, to use with a file format I think is convenient and I use it for my employer, do I have to make sure I "forget" it? In this case everyone SHOULD keep a code library to make sure they don't ever re-use code.
Furthermore, when I start working at a company I bring to the company MY knowledge and experience. Do they suddenly own that knowledge and experience simply because I used it on their project? 90% of the time I'm using pieces of code I wrote for myself long ago for my employer's software.
To build something significant on the moon, I presume they will be using materials from earth. How will this affect the orbit of the moon? I hope they make sure not to "over do it" or anything. Once the moon's mass is changed beyond a certain threshold, I suspect it will either escape or crash into the earth. How much does "one base" weigh?
Yes, and don't forget the Music industry had to be CONVINCED to adopt the CD format because they thought it might hurt their sales to produce something which has such a long life span. Apparently they were counting on you needing more than one copy of that tape cassette. Now new technology has come up again, and there's no way they can either approve or disapprove of people adopting it. They aren't in control anymore.
"It's peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me." -- Thomas Jefferson
[Emphasis mine.]
Read: "idea" = "intellectual property"
Exactly. And futhermore, P2P really hurts those bands which produce 1 hit per CD (as defined by popularity) a lot more than bands which produce wonderful compilations which are appreciated by their "fans" (as defined by people who really like the music and aren't just into the "now"). This is because if you're just trying to keep up with the trends, you'll download the song and forget ever buying it--by that time it will be something new. However if you really appreciate music, you will buy the music you really like.
To me this means that P2P helps improve the quality of music by rewarding the better musicians a little bit more. However, I must admit I still don't think it's ok to copy music you don't own.
I don't know if we're on the same page or not, but I wouldn't feel guilty either from just downloading a cracked copy if I had bought the real thing. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of "you shouldn't share or crack software" because then you're allowing anyone who hasn't bought it to have it.