How do you define "act against sharing copyright materials"?
Not encouraging it? Discouraging it through marketing? Actively prohibiting it with technology? Spending 75% of your development budget to tweak filters every time a movie studio barks?
As you well know MPAA/RIAA defines it as the last option, and WILL sue anyone who's not doing that.
It wouldn't have really mattered, if the trojan the perp planted on the servers worked as it was described. It was said to "listen" to credit card transactions, in which case it would've been able to swipe the numbers regardless of whether the data was retained by CardSystems or not.
Anyway, for this sort of violation of rules, I think MasterCard (and other credit card companies) should terminate their contract with CardSystems. They won't, of course.
The insensitive clots ruling the world at my employer use seamlessweb so that all the worker bees would remain at their desks as long as possible.
The system generally works very well, although the 10:30am cutoff time for lunch orders can come and go very ruthlessly leaving you without the free lunch for the day.
The few problems we've had with the service have to do more with the vendors rather than seamlessweb. Some of them, especially the new restaurants in the system, have problems fullfilling the volume of orders sometimes.
They recently revamped their user interface. The old user interface made the service look a little like someone was running it from their garage. The new one is definitely an improvement and looks very professional.
You are ignorant about what's happening today in America. You're one of the sheep that doesn't care, is blind to the reality or just plain old stupid enough to trust the Government in whatever f**ed up shit they do every day.
You try get a Government job, then speak against the current administration and we'll see how long you'll have your job and your reputation. This administration has a well known and long record in character assassination of vocal opponents. I only need to point out the case of leaking Joe Wilson's wife's identity as a CIA operative.
Secret courts, secret subpoenas and indefinite detainment without charging the detainee for any crime are the definition of a police state. If you think otherwise, I don't know what I should think about you.
Well, see, the thing is human rights mean whatever the Patriot Act and other laws passed to fight "terrorism" say it means.
If the act says you have no right to due process, then, by God, that's not included in human rights any longer. If the act says you can detain people, even US citizens, without charging them for any crime indefinitely, then, by God, that's what you can do and it's not a violation of human rights.
It's what politicians, lobbyists and other professional liars have always done: redefine terms and concepts to fit their own agenda.
"What is surprising is the European zombie count is higher than that of the United States. I wonder why."
If I may hazard a guess...and that's all these are.
I think three reasons.
1. There are a couple of very big and completely clueless ISPs in Europe (blueyonder, tiscali, wanadoo). You think Comcast is bad? You have no idea...
2. Some of the national ISPs in a lot of the European countries have a much larger percentage of users within their countries than any US ISP. If that ISP happens to be one of the completely clueless ones, you have a REALLY big problem.
3. In US, the biggest ISP, AOL, has cleaned house so well that there's very little network infestation coming from them.
You're surprised a media company, i.e. a major owner of copyrighted material, uses verbiage consistent with the positions of copyright owners' lobbyists (RIAA/MPAA)?
I am hiring and have hired plenty of people who have not claimed to be experts, even for senior positions.
The problem with these self-made experts is that very few actually are. The ones who really are don't HAVE to claim they're experts. You'll know within the first 5 minutes after talking with them.
I am of the philosophy that nobody is an expert of in the technology area for very long, because the skills required to perform your job change so frequently. So rather than hiring experts, I'd rather hire someone who can demonstrate they can learn and master new skills quickly.
So, if I go to this library with a fake ID and they take my fingerprints how are they going to make sure that I am who I claim I am, if they're not crossreferencing any other fingerprint databases?
I thought I heard the policy was such that companies wanting to sell sw to Chinese would have to conduct 50% of the development in China and that the IP rights belong to Chinese.
It's not quite the same as excluding foreign companies from supplying the Chinese Government, but pretty close nevertheless.
Multinationals might be able to get around it, if they establish development centers in China and are creative with IP rights.
They are not randomly blocking. They have an escalation policy that expands the netblocks listed from jus the spammers' IP addresses and netblocks to the whole ISP's netblocks, if the problems do not get resolved within a reasonable time period.
I do agree one should be careful of choosing a blocklist to use. SPEWS is one of the most aggressive. It does not fit everyone's needs.
SPEWS does not block whole of China. Only the network providers that do not act on spam complaints. Exactly like the SBL does.
Next time before you insert your foot in your mouth, do some fact checking first.
I've heard all kinds of confusing things when people try and explain an IP address to the general public, but that a slashdot subscriber confuses an IP address with an email address takes the cake.
SPEWS blocks IP address ranges, i.e. netblocks, as the article very clearly states.
This one was a Google interview question
on
Google Web Accelerator
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
They have a question about a design of a system like this in their tech interview questions arsenal.
In the interview I was in the question was framed to address the problem of serving Google content to developing countries and other places with poor network connectivity. I wonder, if the purpose of the web accelerator is to make Google more accessible in those kind of environments than their (graphics-heavy) competitors.
"Whichever side you're on in the copyright debate, you have to agree this legislation is draconian and excessive, to say the least."
I'm a RIAA StormTrooper. I don't think the legislation is draconian or excessive at all. In fact, I was trying to bribe my poliwhore to get the death penalty in the bill for this grave offense, but he started babbling some nonsense about punishment fitting the crime. I think I'll go with another poliwhore next time.
So it's not a collection agency at all, but a RIAA's outsourced extortion division. The extortion attempt is not a collection agency trying to collect on a debt, but a bunch of scummy lawyers trying to intimidate her to settle the case before going to court.
The real story here is the fact that a collection agency is trying to collect money from this woman, not that she is sueing Comcast over alleged privacy violations.
How did the collection agency get involved? The information in the news story says nothing about it. Did she settle with the RIAA (the story implies she did not), but then not pay? Or did RIAA just hand over the "bill" to the collection agency without a settlement or a court case?
Something's fishy in the story. Either details were left out, or RIAA is up to something really fucked up.
Best. April Fool's Joke. Evar.
on
**No Title**
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
How do you define "act against sharing copyright materials"?
Not encouraging it?
Discouraging it through marketing?
Actively prohibiting it with technology?
Spending 75% of your development budget to tweak filters every time a movie studio barks?
As you well know MPAA/RIAA defines it as the last option, and WILL sue anyone who's not doing that.
Never happen.
Their thinking is that if we get MORE software patents, the costs will offset and we win.
It's fundamentally just an arms race, where the one with the biggest wallet wins and consumers always lose.
It wouldn't have really mattered, if the trojan the perp planted on the servers worked as it was described. It was said to "listen" to credit card transactions, in which case it would've been able to swipe the numbers regardless of whether the data was retained by CardSystems or not.
Anyway, for this sort of violation of rules, I think MasterCard (and other credit card companies) should terminate their contract with CardSystems. They won't, of course.
I wonder what would happen if they managed to incorporate subscription fees or other pay models into the software?
I'm thinking such a move would generate a humongous business opportunity for all involved.
You, sir, are a moron. Thank you for playing.
The insensitive clots ruling the world at my employer use seamlessweb so that all the worker bees would remain at their desks as long as possible.
The system generally works very well, although the 10:30am cutoff time for lunch orders can come and go very ruthlessly leaving you without the free lunch for the day.
The few problems we've had with the service have to do more with the vendors rather than seamlessweb. Some of them, especially the new restaurants in the system, have problems fullfilling the volume of orders sometimes.
They recently revamped their user interface. The old user interface made the service look a little like someone was running it from their garage. The new one is definitely an improvement and looks very professional.
You are ignorant about what's happening today in America. You're one of the sheep that doesn't care, is blind to the reality or just plain old stupid enough to trust the Government in whatever f**ed up shit they do every day.
You try get a Government job, then speak against the current administration and we'll see how long you'll have your job and your reputation. This administration has a well known and long record in character assassination of vocal opponents. I only need to point out the case of leaking Joe Wilson's wife's identity as a CIA operative.
Secret courts, secret subpoenas and indefinite detainment without charging the detainee for any crime are the definition of a police state. If you think otherwise, I don't know what I should think about you.
Well, see, the thing is human rights mean whatever the Patriot Act and other laws passed to fight "terrorism" say it means.
If the act says you have no right to due process, then, by God, that's not included in human rights any longer. If the act says you can detain people, even US citizens, without charging them for any crime indefinitely, then, by God, that's what you can do and it's not a violation of human rights.
It's what politicians, lobbyists and other professional liars have always done: redefine terms and concepts to fit their own agenda.
Why am I not surprised. Fucking ambulance chasers.
"What is surprising is the European zombie count is higher than that of the United States. I wonder why."
If I may hazard a guess...and that's all these are.
I think three reasons.
1. There are a couple of very big and completely clueless ISPs in Europe (blueyonder, tiscali, wanadoo). You think Comcast is bad? You have no idea...
2. Some of the national ISPs in a lot of the European countries have a much larger percentage of users within their countries than any US ISP. If that ISP happens to be one of the completely clueless ones, you have a REALLY big problem.
3. In US, the biggest ISP, AOL, has cleaned house so well that there's very little network infestation coming from them.
You're surprised a media company, i.e. a major owner of copyrighted material, uses verbiage consistent with the positions of copyright owners' lobbyists (RIAA/MPAA)?
I am hiring and have hired plenty of people who have not claimed to be experts, even for senior positions.
The problem with these self-made experts is that very few actually are. The ones who really are don't HAVE to claim they're experts. You'll know within the first 5 minutes after talking with them.
I am of the philosophy that nobody is an expert of in the technology area for very long, because the skills required to perform your job change so frequently. So rather than hiring experts, I'd rather hire someone who can demonstrate they can learn and master new skills quickly.
So, if I go to this library with a fake ID and they take my fingerprints how are they going to make sure that I am who I claim I am, if they're not crossreferencing any other fingerprint databases?
The whole idea is just completely absurd.
I thought I heard the policy was such that companies wanting to sell sw to Chinese would have to conduct 50% of the development in China and that the IP rights belong to Chinese.
It's not quite the same as excluding foreign companies from supplying the Chinese Government, but pretty close nevertheless.
Multinationals might be able to get around it, if they establish development centers in China and are creative with IP rights.
So how is that a problem with SPEWS? Looks like the Chinese ISPs don't really care about the spam problem.
They are not randomly blocking. They have an escalation policy that expands the netblocks listed from jus the spammers' IP addresses and netblocks to the whole ISP's netblocks, if the problems do not get resolved within a reasonable time period.
I do agree one should be careful of choosing a blocklist to use. SPEWS is one of the most aggressive. It does not fit everyone's needs.
SPEWS does not block whole of China. Only the network providers that do not act on spam complaints. Exactly like the SBL does.
Next time before you insert your foot in your mouth, do some fact checking first.
SPEWS does not ask fees for delisting. The only thing they care is that the spam stops.
You (or Telewest) have them confused with some other DNSBL.
I've heard all kinds of confusing things when people try and explain an IP address to the general public, but that a slashdot subscriber confuses an IP address with an email address takes the cake.
SPEWS blocks IP address ranges, i.e. netblocks, as the article very clearly states.
They have a question about a design of a system like this in their tech interview questions arsenal.
In the interview I was in the question was framed to address the problem of serving Google content to developing countries and other places with poor network connectivity. I wonder, if the purpose of the web accelerator is to make Google more accessible in those kind of environments than their (graphics-heavy) competitors.
*sigh*
Perfect example of how badly one cam miss the point made by the poster one's responding to.
Intermix Media changed names from eUniverse last summer.
That name is more familiar from a lot of spam, as they operate the flowgo.com / smilepop.com spam networks.
Once scum, always scum, I guess.
"Whichever side you're on in the copyright debate, you have to agree this legislation is draconian and excessive, to say the least."
I'm a RIAA StormTrooper. I don't think the legislation is draconian or excessive at all. In fact, I was trying to bribe my poliwhore to get the death penalty in the bill for this grave offense, but he started babbling some nonsense about punishment fitting the crime. I think I'll go with another poliwhore next time.
So it's not a collection agency at all, but a RIAA's outsourced extortion division. The extortion attempt is not a collection agency trying to collect on a debt, but a bunch of scummy lawyers trying to intimidate her to settle the case before going to court.
The real story here is the fact that a collection agency is trying to collect money from this woman, not that she is sueing Comcast over alleged privacy violations.
How did the collection agency get involved? The information in the news story says nothing about it. Did she settle with the RIAA (the story implies she did not), but then not pay? Or did RIAA just hand over the "bill" to the collection agency without a settlement or a court case?
Something's fishy in the story. Either details were left out, or RIAA is up to something really fucked up.
I kid you not.