That's possible... I'm sure the fraction of available material that has been written by Joe or Suzie six-pack is much greater than it was ten years ago. Why would I trust my crazies on FB???
Damn Nagle.;) Gamers have been hating buffers since modems. Dropped packets are not evil. Apps which require low latency but humble bandwidth should be able to interrupt the queue, but I can't think of a way that ISPs could really distinguish these apps reliably and it falls back to the problem of ISP choosing favorites. With latency and max bandwidth to an arbitrary host as unknown and varying, as well as the volume of traffic exchanged with the host, the empirical ramp-up/back off seems to be best for a single connection to get good bandwidth. Contention between high bandwidth transfer with less important latency needs and low bandwith transfer with important latency needs is not working well. Makes me think about profiling or tailoring TCP parameters for different connection types, people jumped through all sorts of hoops to try to tailor their stuff to low latency when dial-up was king.
I'm not sure that a perfect copy could be made in any case due to specific effects of the copying or hot-swapping process itself.
Say you have a process intended to snapshot a mind by capturing physical config of the brain. We cannot measure all of this without affecting the system as part of the measurement process. Recovering every detail (impossible) of every particle etc. requires subtly touching every particle etc. Even if you had a wonderful scanner that got a nearly perfect picture as minimally invasively as possible, it's quite likely that undergoing such a scan would be psychologically disturbing. Assuming the scan takes finite time at all, what do we get in the copy? The mind's contents just prior to being zapped with the scan? What it felt like being scanned? The mind that has memory of the scan just having been completed? I don't see any sort of perfect synchronous copy to really be possible or meaningful.
As far as the survivors would go, an original and copy might well recognize differences between themselves based upon differing views of "the divergence".:)
How the survivors (at least the copy) might act could be influenced by expectations programmed into the copying process itself if there were enough understanding of what was being copied. A surviving mind that was expected to operate with any significant changes in hardware might be in an ill place indeed without some modifications of physical expectations.
Thanks for stating it. It seems there are others who still believe that (in at least U.S. plus others) constitutionally established notions of fair use that have existed for quite some time should ultimately trump recent attempts to abridge those rights. Things rapidly become absurd when measures are taken that prevent personal in-house reasonable editing etc. for completely reasonable and fair use of copyrighted material.
These efforts may be within the legal rights of the copyright holder - but it is sort of poor taste to assume that your paying customers, the people who give you money, are shady thieves. If a user is clever enough to recover the ability to use their fair use rights, I don't see where the provider has much to complain about. If the user then violates the rights of the holder, well, it's on... and expect a date in court some day. It sure seems to me that the DMCA clashes with established fair use. For the life of me I cannot understand how the Supreme Court has not stood up on this one.
I'm not quite sure. It is an interesting additional piece of information required. It seems to be a combination of something you know (albeit not on a conscious level in full detail), and something you are. It cannot really be conveyed from one user to another without elaborate workarounds. Nor casually observed. At least it might help avoid account borrowing.
Thanks for a thought out reply. I could have done without the derision.
Well, you can continue with baseless speculation, or you can actually learn about the sitaution and find out that DRM restrictions are only applied when an application requests them.
It isn't baseless speculation that the locks are present. The system is one policy decision away from presumptive guilt for use of uncertified data. It's sort of like owning a car with a government-operated shutdown switch and their assurances that it will only be used to affect criminals. The principle is bothersome.
You can also continue with the paranoia if you want, but there's an utter lack of any sort of precedent for the scenario you are positing. Nor is there any rational argument in favour of it, given Microsoft has nothing to gain and a lot to lose from partaking in the behaviour you describe.
At the moment. For their sake, I hope Microsoft would not try to abuse their position for market control. Of course, they've
never done any such things in the past and should be trusted at face presentation. Not... Forgive my "paranoia".
Stop blaming Microsoft for something they have essentially zero influence over. You don't "request" anything from them. Whether or not DRM allows or stops you from doing something with media you purchase is 100%, completely and utterly, in the hands of that media's publisher.
I don't fully agree. Practically, there is truth there, but I don't believe that any licensing agreement that eliminates constitutionally established fair-use rights is correctly legally enforceable. Microsoft has the right and ability to build whatever locks they feel like in their OS. It doesn't mean that I'm going to want to buy the OS. I won't be "scared" into using their OS because, oh my, it's the only way to play back XYZ encumbered content. As I said, I don't use encumbered content. There aren't enough other noteworthy improvements to the OS to make it attractive to me.
You are essentially arguing that the gunsmith is responsible if someone gets shot. They're not, and neither is Microsoft if someone decides to encumber their content with DRM.
The gunsmith is NOT responsible. But they do enable the facility of getting it done. Agreed this is a fact of life. People can use tools to many ends. I'm also sympathetic to content-holders and their concern over their own rights, in an environment where their rights are getting stepped all over.
I AM saying that I personally have little use for content that is so encumbered that it cannot be remixed or modified from a full fidelity copy in legal ways for my own personal use. That is probably unusual use compared to most consumers of artistic content. Given my interest in accessing things at this level, an OS like Vista which enforces policies on these sorts of areas is just not attractive to me.
Make no mistake. The only people who are responsible for DRM-encumbering are those releasing DRMed content. The companies making DVD and Blu-Ray players aren't the cause of DRM, and neither is Microsoft. You will never, ever defeat DRM by shooting the messenger.
I mostly agree, though I think that Microsoft's technologies legitimize the content-holder's practices, when they may in fact be legally unenforceable. I don't expect to see DRM "defeated". There may always be a place for it given the reluctance of the public to pay for anything that they feel they can get for free. But I'll vote with my dollars. I won't play with Vista until it truly offers me something that I want or feel I need. And I won't buy content that has been overly encumbered or squashed to a low quality. It's just not anything that I need...
Some people might have an interest in re-mixing various pieces of content for their own personal use.
Then they should avoid content where the copyright holder stops them from doing this via DRM.
I agree with avoiding the use of material that is DRM encumbered where it does not suit one's needs. That is indeed how I operate. I have no interest in any currently offered encumbered material. I buy material I like at the highest unencumbered quality reasonably and economically available and then play with it as I wish for my own personal use.
I haven't played with Vista yet, but I'm not naive. It was well known that this sort of stream protection was desired by Microsoft as a core feature of the operating system, beyond the control of the user. I know that they implemented something along those lines with the PVP stuff. What I do not know is the extent to which access to existing non-DRM material is hindered, nor what Microsoft's attitude toward things might be in a few years with the locks more usable. Perhaps they decide that ripping an existing Audio CD is too likely to involve a copyright violation, and should be prohibited. They're moving dangerously close to enforcing the rights of copyright holders in dubious legal situations. I don't want it. Don't need their grubby paws on my output streams. Particularly when I have no use for DRM encumbered content.
I commented because the parent poster implied that simple playback of content is all that a user should desire or require. I expect to be able to be more with my data. Why the hell should Microsoft or a content holder be at all involved with the way I choose to manipulate data between my PC and my eyes/ears, for any of a million presumably legal uses of the data. If I did have an encumbered piece of music, I have an "analog" right (capability?) to use any equalizer to manipulate the data presentation to my own ears. That "right" apparently does not extend to the digital realm in Microsoft's view. It is a permission to be requested. I don't feel that I need to request permission from Microsoft when I am obeying the law.
People should consider whether or not their "fair use" rights for content are satisfied by simple playback capability. Then again, I consider the DMCA unconstitutional because of the curtailing of existing constitutionally established limits on fair use. My opinion doesn't hold a lot of weight...
Also, simply being able to play back content doesn't meet the goals of all users.
Some people might have an interest in re-mixing various pieces of content for their own personal use. Burying streams underneath DRM locks, or hiding them by default when playing non-DRM content for the convenience and security of DRM material may inhibit reasonable use of information. I don't really know the extent of such operation within Vista, if any. But I don't want to pay that kind of price for the DRM war.
I'm glad your disease was diagnosed. I received my diagnosis about
two weeks ago. I'm stunned at how much affect that bloody wheat had
on my life, and also at the ubiquity of gluten-containing ingredients
in processed foods that would seemingly not need to contain grain.
Oh well, yea potatoes.:) Perhaps this might result in availability of a few more
processed foods that don't contain gluten.
That method is not so useful for machines without floppy drives. Perhaps it is possible to trick XP into genning a boot disk on a USB key drive but I don't know the trick.
Nero will burn a bootable CD with a DR-DOS startup, but the configuration lacked enough memory to run an Award BIOS updater correctly.
I ended up booting from an old Win98 CD to get the BIOS flash to run...
Here are a few sections from an onerously written agreement given to employees in a shop with no existing NDA:
All inventions or other creations, whether or not patentable or copyrightable, and all ideas, reports, and creative works, including, without limitation, computer programs, manuals and related materials, made or conceived in whole or in part by the Employee while employed by the company, which relate in any manner whatsoever to the business, existing or proposed, of the Company or any other business or research or development effort in which the Company or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates engages during the Employee's employment with the company will be disclosed promptly by the Employee to the Company and shall be the sole and exclusive property of the Company. All such works that may be protected by copyright shall be considered "Work Made For Hire." Recognizing that any such work may be determined not to be a Work Made For Hire and to protect the Company's sole ownership of all such works, the Employee by this Agreement assigns all of the Employee's ownership, right, title, interest, copyrights in such works completely and exclusively to the Company. The Employee shall execute and deliver any instrument or document and shall do all other things the Company reasonably requests (both during and after the Employee's employment with the Company) to confirm the Company's complete ownership and to enforce the Company's ownership rights in any such Work Made for Hire, ideas, concepts, products, processes and/or other creative works.
(i.e. Anything we can tangentially relate IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER with our business interests is ours.)
Best Interest. The Employee's services performed for the Company and its supervisors, employees, clients/customers, and others, and the Employee's representation of the Company regarding clients/customers and the public will in all events be consistent with the policies, procedures, and standards (oral or written.). The employee agrees that in all aspects of his/her employment, he/she shall comply with the policies, procedures, and standards (oral or written) of the Company as established from time to time. The Employee shall devote substantially his/her entire time and energy and shall use his/her best efforts to fulfill faithfully, responsibly and to the best of his/her ability the Employee's duties and to promote the business and interest of the Company. The Employee shall comply with all federal, state and municipal laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations relating to his/her employment.
(Slavery clause? Thought you were going to eat dinner and read a book tonight? Ha!)
No Employment Agreement. The employee agrees that the company is not by reason of this Agreement obligated to continue the Employee in the employment of the Company for any specific period of time or term.
Assignment of Rights and Obligations. This agreement shall be binding upon and to inure to the benefit of the Company, its successors and assigns. The Agreement shall be binding upon Employee and his/her heirs, personal and legal representatives and guardians and shall inure to the benefit of the Employee. The COmpany may assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement, in whole or in part, at anytime after the effective date without advance notice to the Employee; the Employee may not assign the Employee's rights or obligations under this agreement.
(Isn't that what everybody wants - to bring into the world a child with DRM encumbrances)
Indemnification. The employee will indemnify the Company and its directors, officers, agents, employees, heirs, successors and assigns against any lawsuit, claim, liability, fines or expense (including reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs and any judgment) which results from the negligent acts or failures to act by the Employee.
(Barely know what to say about that one. So utterly ass-backward.)
Some of these companies are really bold. I can't imagine why anybody would accept such an agreement...
Yeah that will be fun until you get nailed to a tree by a group of quality individuals. The path forward is not backward. Despite the horrifying fraction of less than useful people in modern society.
Any piece of data can be interpreted as an encrypted form of any other piece of data, with a suitably convoluted "encryption/decryption" mechanism. Even zeroes.:)
Is up2date dead in Fedora or no? I thought I had heard somethng about it being loosened up to work with apt-get on the back end - ? I thought we were looking at a situation where fairly automagic updating would be possible, just that the packages wouldn't be vetted by RH.
Yep! Sunshine can be a pretty amazing disinfectant.
A ChemE professor with an interest in mycology emphasized to me how well it works. Was once caught in the desert with the only nearby water in a rock pothole, contaminated by very old cow dung. Was still pretty yellow looking after filtering through ceramic/iodine pump filter. An hour in the scorching desert sun helped the color slightly and improved our confidence in the water. Not so fun to drink, but did the trick and didn't make us sick...
Slashdot Mirror
That's possible... I'm sure the fraction of available material that has been written by Joe or Suzie six-pack is much greater than it was ten years ago. Why would I trust my crazies on FB???
Damn Nagle. ;) Gamers have been hating buffers since modems. Dropped packets are not evil. Apps which require low latency but humble bandwidth should be able to interrupt the queue, but I can't think of a way that ISPs could really distinguish these apps reliably and it falls back to the problem of ISP choosing favorites. With latency and max bandwidth to an arbitrary host as unknown and varying, as well as the volume of traffic exchanged with the host, the empirical ramp-up/back off seems to be best for a single connection to get good bandwidth. Contention between high bandwidth transfer with less important latency needs and low bandwith transfer with important latency needs is not working well. Makes me think about profiling or tailoring TCP parameters for different connection types, people jumped through all sorts of hoops to try to tailor their stuff to low latency when dial-up was king.
I love threads like this because I know there will be at least a half-dozen shortcuts suggested by others of which I was blissfully unaware. :)
I'm not sure that a perfect copy could be made in any case due to specific effects of the copying or hot-swapping process itself.
Say you have a process intended to snapshot a mind by capturing physical config of the brain. We cannot measure all of this without affecting the system as part of the measurement process. Recovering every detail (impossible) of every particle etc. requires subtly touching every particle etc. Even if you had a wonderful scanner that got a nearly perfect picture as minimally invasively as possible, it's quite likely that undergoing such a scan would be psychologically disturbing. Assuming the scan takes finite time at all, what do we get in the copy? The mind's contents just prior to being zapped with the scan? What it felt like being scanned? The mind that has memory of the scan just having been completed? I don't see any sort of perfect synchronous copy to really be possible or meaningful.
As far as the survivors would go, an original and copy might well recognize differences between themselves based upon differing views of "the divergence". :)
How the survivors (at least the copy) might act could be influenced by expectations programmed into the copying process itself if there were enough understanding of what was being copied. A surviving mind that was expected to operate with any significant changes in hardware might be in an ill place indeed without some modifications of physical expectations.
But if me-ME lives in a human body and digi-ME lives in a Mac mini, it's pretenses will fail badly. :)
Thanks for stating it. It seems there are others who still believe that (in at least U.S. plus others) constitutionally established notions of fair use that have existed for quite some time should ultimately trump recent attempts to abridge those rights. Things rapidly become absurd when measures are taken that prevent personal in-house reasonable editing etc. for completely reasonable and fair use of copyrighted material.
These efforts may be within the legal rights of the copyright holder - but it is sort of poor taste to assume that your paying customers, the people who give you money, are shady thieves. If a user is clever enough to recover the ability to use their fair use rights, I don't see where the provider has much to complain about. If the user then violates the rights of the holder, well, it's on... and expect a date in court some day. It sure seems to me that the DMCA clashes with established fair use. For the life of me I cannot understand how the Supreme Court has not stood up on this one.
I'm not quite sure. It is an interesting additional piece of information required. It seems to be a combination of something you know (albeit not on a conscious level in full detail), and something you are. It cannot really be conveyed from one user to another without elaborate workarounds. Nor casually observed. At least it might help avoid account borrowing.
Thanks for a thought out reply. I could have done without the derision.
Well, you can continue with baseless speculation, or you can actually learn about the sitaution and find out that DRM restrictions are only applied when an application requests them.
It isn't baseless speculation that the locks are present. The system is one policy decision away from presumptive guilt for use of uncertified data. It's sort of like owning a car with a government-operated shutdown switch and their assurances that it will only be used to affect criminals. The principle is bothersome.
You can also continue with the paranoia if you want, but there's an utter lack of any sort of precedent for the scenario you are positing. Nor is there any rational argument in favour of it, given Microsoft has nothing to gain and a lot to lose from partaking in the behaviour you describe.
At the moment. For their sake, I hope Microsoft would not try to abuse their position for market control. Of course, they've never done any such things in the past and should be trusted at face presentation. Not... Forgive my "paranoia".
Stop blaming Microsoft for something they have essentially zero influence over. You don't "request" anything from them. Whether or not DRM allows or stops you from doing something with media you purchase is 100%, completely and utterly, in the hands of that media's publisher.
I don't fully agree. Practically, there is truth there, but I don't believe that any licensing agreement that eliminates constitutionally established fair-use rights is correctly legally enforceable. Microsoft has the right and ability to build whatever locks they feel like in their OS. It doesn't mean that I'm going to want to buy the OS. I won't be "scared" into using their OS because, oh my, it's the only way to play back XYZ encumbered content. As I said, I don't use encumbered content. There aren't enough other noteworthy improvements to the OS to make it attractive to me.
You are essentially arguing that the gunsmith is responsible if someone gets shot. They're not, and neither is Microsoft if someone decides to encumber their content with DRM.
The gunsmith is NOT responsible. But they do enable the facility of getting it done. Agreed this is a fact of life. People can use tools to many ends. I'm also sympathetic to content-holders and their concern over their own rights, in an environment where their rights are getting stepped all over.
I AM saying that I personally have little use for content that is so encumbered that it cannot be remixed or modified from a full fidelity copy in legal ways for my own personal use. That is probably unusual use compared to most consumers of artistic content. Given my interest in accessing things at this level, an OS like Vista which enforces policies on these sorts of areas is just not attractive to me.
Make no mistake. The only people who are responsible for DRM-encumbering are those releasing DRMed content. The companies making DVD and Blu-Ray players aren't the cause of DRM, and neither is Microsoft. You will never, ever defeat DRM by shooting the messenger.
I mostly agree, though I think that Microsoft's technologies legitimize the content-holder's practices, when they may in fact be legally unenforceable. I don't expect to see DRM "defeated". There may always be a place for it given the reluctance of the public to pay for anything that they feel they can get for free. But I'll vote with my dollars. I won't play with Vista until it truly offers me something that I want or feel I need. And I won't buy content that has been overly encumbered or squashed to a low quality. It's just not anything that I need...
Some people might have an interest in re-mixing various pieces of content for their own personal use.
Then they should avoid content where the copyright holder stops them from doing this via DRM.
I agree with avoiding the use of material that is DRM encumbered where it does not suit one's needs. That is indeed how I operate. I have no interest in any currently offered encumbered material. I buy material I like at the highest unencumbered quality reasonably and economically available and then play with it as I wish for my own personal use.
I haven't played with Vista yet, but I'm not naive. It was well known that this sort of stream protection was desired by Microsoft as a core feature of the operating system, beyond the control of the user. I know that they implemented something along those lines with the PVP stuff. What I do not know is the extent to which access to existing non-DRM material is hindered, nor what Microsoft's attitude toward things might be in a few years with the locks more usable. Perhaps they decide that ripping an existing Audio CD is too likely to involve a copyright violation, and should be prohibited. They're moving dangerously close to enforcing the rights of copyright holders in dubious legal situations. I don't want it. Don't need their grubby paws on my output streams. Particularly when I have no use for DRM encumbered content.
I commented because the parent poster implied that simple playback of content is all that a user should desire or require. I expect to be able to be more with my data. Why the hell should Microsoft or a content holder be at all involved with the way I choose to manipulate data between my PC and my eyes/ears, for any of a million presumably legal uses of the data. If I did have an encumbered piece of music, I have an "analog" right (capability?) to use any equalizer to manipulate the data presentation to my own ears. That "right" apparently does not extend to the digital realm in Microsoft's view. It is a permission to be requested. I don't feel that I need to request permission from Microsoft when I am obeying the law.
People should consider whether or not their "fair use" rights for content are satisfied by simple playback capability. Then again, I consider the DMCA unconstitutional because of the curtailing of existing constitutionally established limits on fair use. My opinion doesn't hold a lot of weight...
Also, simply being able to play back content doesn't meet the goals of all users.
Some people might have an interest in re-mixing various pieces of content for their own personal use. Burying streams underneath DRM locks, or hiding them by default when playing non-DRM content for the convenience and security of DRM material may inhibit reasonable use of information. I don't really know the extent of such operation within Vista, if any. But I don't want to pay that kind of price for the DRM war.
As Too Short once said: "If you lose it... you ain't my momma's son... it ain't free... go and buy another one."
I'm glad your disease was diagnosed. I received my diagnosis about two weeks ago. I'm stunned at how much affect that bloody wheat had on my life, and also at the ubiquity of gluten-containing ingredients in processed foods that would seemingly not need to contain grain.
Oh well, yea potatoes. :) Perhaps this might result in availability of a few more
processed foods that don't contain gluten.
That method is not so useful for machines without floppy drives. Perhaps it is possible to trick XP into genning a boot disk on a USB key drive but I don't know the trick.
Nero will burn a bootable CD with a DR-DOS startup, but the configuration lacked enough memory to run an Award BIOS updater correctly.
I ended up booting from an old Win98 CD to get the BIOS flash to run...
Here are a few sections from an onerously written agreement given to employees in a shop with no existing NDA:
All inventions or other creations, whether or not patentable or copyrightable, and all ideas, reports, and creative works, including, without limitation, computer programs, manuals and related materials, made or conceived in whole or in part by the Employee while employed by the company, which relate in any manner whatsoever to the business, existing or proposed, of the Company or any other business or research or development effort in which the Company or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates engages during the Employee's employment with the company will be disclosed promptly by the Employee to the Company and shall be the sole and exclusive property of the Company. All such works that may be protected by copyright shall be considered "Work Made For Hire." Recognizing that any such work may be determined not to be a Work Made For Hire and to protect the Company's sole ownership of all such works, the Employee by this Agreement assigns all of the Employee's ownership, right, title, interest, copyrights in such works completely and exclusively to the Company. The Employee shall execute and deliver any instrument or document and shall do all other things the Company reasonably requests (both during and after the Employee's employment with the Company) to confirm the Company's complete ownership and to enforce the Company's ownership rights in any such Work Made for Hire, ideas, concepts, products, processes and/or other creative works.
(i.e. Anything we can tangentially relate IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER with our business interests is ours.)
Best Interest. The Employee's services performed for the Company and its supervisors, employees, clients/customers, and others, and the Employee's representation of the Company regarding clients/customers and the public will in all events be consistent with the policies, procedures, and standards (oral or written.). The employee agrees that in all aspects of his/her employment, he/she shall comply with the policies, procedures, and standards (oral or written) of the Company as established from time to time. The Employee shall devote substantially his/her entire time and energy and shall use his/her best efforts to fulfill faithfully, responsibly and to the best of his/her ability the Employee's duties and to promote the business and interest of the Company. The Employee shall comply with all federal, state and municipal laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations relating to his/her employment.
(Slavery clause? Thought you were going to eat dinner and read a book tonight? Ha!)
No Employment Agreement. The employee agrees that the company is not by reason of this Agreement obligated to continue the Employee in the employment of the Company for any specific period of time or term.
Assignment of Rights and Obligations. This agreement shall be binding upon and to inure to the benefit of the Company, its successors and assigns. The Agreement shall be binding upon Employee and his/her heirs, personal and legal representatives and guardians and shall inure to the benefit of the Employee. The COmpany may assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement, in whole or in part, at anytime after the effective date without advance notice to the Employee; the Employee may not assign the Employee's rights or obligations under this agreement.
(Isn't that what everybody wants - to bring into the world a child with DRM encumbrances)
Indemnification. The employee will indemnify the Company and its directors, officers, agents, employees, heirs, successors and assigns against any lawsuit, claim, liability, fines or expense (including reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs and any judgment) which results from the negligent acts or failures to act by the Employee.
(Barely know what to say about that one. So utterly ass-backward.)
Some of these companies are really bold. I can't imagine why anybody would accept such an agreement...
So what's a Mexican-American then? ;)
http://www.swatch.com/internettime/
eMSH?
Yeah that will be fun until you get nailed to a tree by a group of quality individuals. The path forward is not backward. Despite the horrifying fraction of less than useful people in modern society.
It would be nasty if they got clever enough to inject ads into media files that people would want to watch/listen to.
He sanded the "nipples" off. Ouch...
Any piece of data can be interpreted as an encrypted form of any other piece of data, with a suitably convoluted "encryption/decryption" mechanism. Even zeroes. :)
Is up2date dead in Fedora or no? I thought I had heard somethng about it being loosened up to work with apt-get on the back end - ? I thought we were looking at a situation where fairly automagic updating would be possible, just that the packages wouldn't be vetted by RH.
Yep! Sunshine can be a pretty amazing disinfectant.
A ChemE professor with an interest in mycology emphasized to me how well it works. Was once caught in the desert with the only nearby water in a rock pothole, contaminated by very old cow dung. Was still pretty yellow looking after filtering through ceramic/iodine pump filter. An hour in the scorching desert sun helped the color slightly and improved our confidence in the water. Not so fun to drink, but did the trick and didn't make us sick...
Yeah maybe it'll decide to be clever enough to randomly DoS non-Belkin equipment on the network. Still shaking my head...
Me too.