Well if you remember IBM out spent the DOJ in the 80's(?) over antitrust allegations.. Which at the time they did a better job then MaBell (at&t) did witht he DOJ and better than MS did later with the DOJ. Quite frankly if SCO intends to persue this IBM will legal them into permanent bankruptcy (faster than they were going anyway). I also think that SCO is full of crap. IBM files more patents every year than anyone else.. I suspect that their lawyers would have told them if they were giving anythign away that didnt belong to them.
umm which "fucking law" are you referring to. The one washington already has inplace or the changes MS is advocating?
Ya know when you carry on like a ranting swede you tend to miss points *already discussed*. Please note "Does a company become liable if they don't shut down a users that violates the law or TOS in a timely manner?"
Also blocking outbound smtp can also cause other problems to legit users. The better solution would be to allow authenticated connections. Just like one that I use on one of my accounts. I can send smtp, its not blocked by my isp, and my mailhost isnt used as a relay. Is that having a "faintest clue"?
I might remind you that analogies only work when you use analgous things. You are tyring to use Company:Customers::company:employees. That plain donest work.
No I am not saying its ok for a company to " dump toxic waste into others back yards and poison their wells" Because those things are already illegal. Which only begs the questions that if a company has the staff to dump it ho can they not have the staff to dispose of it properly? Companies are responsible for the action of itself and its staff when doing company business. *USERS* are not part of the company.
And if you actually bother to *read* what I wrote it was about finding the lines of responsibility and liability in these cases, because they are going to happen.. and soon.
Ya know after reading this guys reply over and over trying to formulate a response I just go more and more pissed off cause he didnâ(TM)t bother to read what I wrote. I *still* wish stupidity was monopolistic.
Well I disagree with the strategy of MS. However, there is one thing that we need to look it. ISPs don't want to be liable for huge damages for their users use/abuse/hijacking (sending spam). This is a valid concern if you get a customer that gets on your network and your staff is to small to deal with it the second it happens (this really cant be a concern of MSN).
Of course this comes down to the basics of economics (guns, booze, cars, etc) is a company responsible for the actions of it's customers? Does a company become liable if they don't shut down a users that violates the law or TOS in a timely manner? What is a timely manner? when does it become corporate negligence? How much investigation needs to be done before you shut someone off? How do you avoid mistakes?
I think this lobbying monies would be better spend to address these legal issues instead of removing tools from 'victims'
Re:ok, so he removes it from his lexicon so what?
on
Verbing Weirds Google
·
· Score: 1
that C&D letter seems to be rather odd. no law firm, no postal address, not a form letter. If one wants a letter of this nature to be taken seriously and to have the appearance of validity a 'missive' that this one appears to be, doenst cut it, as compared to the mounds of other c&ds we have seen before.
As its been done elsewhere in this discussion, reporting on the state of the language is not a trademark violation. They are just gonna have to suck it up.
I wonder if this is more of the "throw more tech at it and it doesnt matter how bad it is we'll ram thru by sheer will" method of hardware (and software) design?
This is just about the biggest hot topic in the world isnt it? here is my bit...
A UI has *lots* to tweak. pointers, buttons, windows. color, highlights, and now with 3d shading and drop shadows and etc etc..
Thing is most people dont change these things. Those who do usually go with 'sets/skins' and many of them are horrid evil monsters of the abyss.
Thing is do you really want to be able to configure all that stuff? With x-windowsyou can get in there and tweak everything. Thats all well and good. but who is gonna put a generic 'grandma' front end on that? And even if you have a nice screen to fiddle all the bits, will grandma even know what half the things are? Then you have the flip side of having almost nothing user configurable out of the box (Aqua). You can go 3rd party to go in there and chage the stuff, but then we are back the horrible skinning thing (as has been said elsewhere in this thread.
So the big question is how much is enough? How much is too much? Should anyone really waste the time letting people tweak everything? Does a compay that tries to make a coherent look and feel let people go and throw off the UI elements when they chose a 96 pt font for their "ok" button?
Mind you this is going to just get more fuzzy when the UI starts using vector 2d and 3d, and even more animated objects in the UI. Just wait untilyour head explodes when you see the pink hello kitty desktop of doom.
Assuming the macintosh version of VPC survives the next fallout between MS and apple, I predict that MS-VPC (for the macintosh) will immediately stop supporting any version of windows other than the latest.
I very much doubt that the investment willbe wasted.. i'll betcah some (much) of it willbe rolled into a PS3/4 game once the technology is baddass enough to make it all work right.
*shrug* regardless of the argument time will ultimately show what the end use of the technology will be. Keep in mind here that this is a broader issue than mere points of logic. The individual tracking of music sold is well within the MO of the members of the RIAA, as based on their previous statemetns and actions. A psychological profile if you will. I think it unlinkely that if such a technology were available it woudlnot be made use of.
Its not an attempt to curb piracy *now* or so they say. If they are going to put data in the files similar to a barcode for tracking purposes, what makes anyone think they will stop there and not just add an identifer for the transaction number you bought the song with?
Thing is it this going to be a simple issue of tackingon data, ot they are gonna 'watermark' the digital data, not to cause damage but just to track. If 'hidden data' is the method, what happens whenyou transcode the music?
Well this just occured to me.. If the EULA says that you can return it to the store for a refund if you dont agree with the license, hasn't the store infact agreed to take itback and give a refund by selling the item with that kinda of EULA. The store can't claim they don't agree to their responsibilites under the EULA.
Yes i have heard of a credit card. A credit card is basically an on demand loan, i.e. not your money. I was making a point about the shifting nature of the use of your money (that you have in a financial institution.
Too bad the spammers from all of APNIC are out of your reach een if forged headers are illegal. the only way to address thisis to have end to end certification certification of where the email is coming from.
All your privacy are blong to us..
on
The Future of Money
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I hope all of you/.ers see the consequences here. Firstly without cash the govt will know eveything you buy and when you buy it.
Also all of a sudden all of these banks and other get a peice of your money for the 'convience' of not using cash.. and then when it catches on they will charge you for the privilidge of using cash. If you recall, when ATMs first came out they were all free to use because it saved the banks money as oposed to have everyone seeing bank tellers. Then they started to charge you to use the bank tellers because it cost them more then if you used the ATM. Then they charge you to use the ATM as a convience fee.
So you are going to be charged a fee to replace your card that has an intentional limited life span, you will be charged to transfer funds to it, you will be charged an electronic transaction fee when you use it. Its like an infinite infusion of middlemen.
Slashdot Mirror
Well if you remember IBM out spent the DOJ in the 80's(?) over antitrust allegations.. Which at the time they did a better job then MaBell (at&t) did witht he DOJ and better than MS did later with the DOJ. Quite frankly if SCO intends to persue this IBM will legal them into permanent bankruptcy (faster than they were going anyway). I also think that SCO is full of crap. IBM files more patents every year than anyone else.. I suspect that their lawyers would have told them if they were giving anythign away that didnt belong to them.
Remeber that a 56k modem has a theoretical maximum of 17G/30 days,
well the DCMA is quickly becoming the Dont Make Competition ACT.
same as the old crap.
Omron : We're in control :)
umm which "fucking law" are you referring to. The one washington already has inplace or the changes MS is advocating?
Ya know when you carry on like a ranting swede you tend to miss points *already discussed*. Please note "Does a company become liable if they don't shut down a users that violates the law or TOS in a timely manner?"
Also blocking outbound smtp can also cause other problems to legit users. The better solution would be to allow authenticated connections. Just like one that I use on one of my accounts. I can send smtp, its not blocked by my isp, and my mailhost isnt used as a relay. Is that having a "faintest clue"?
I might remind you that analogies only work when you use analgous things. You are tyring to use Company:Customers::company:employees. That plain donest work.
Have you considered decaf?
Way to miss the point there guy.
No I am not saying its ok for a company to " dump toxic waste into others back yards and poison their wells" Because those things are already illegal. Which only begs the questions that if a company has the staff to dump it ho can they not have the staff to dispose of it properly? Companies are responsible for the action of itself and its staff when doing company business. *USERS* are not part of the company.
And if you actually bother to *read* what I wrote it was about finding the lines of responsibility and liability in these cases, because they are going to happen.. and soon.
Ya know after reading this guys reply over and over trying to formulate a response I just go more and more pissed off cause he didnâ(TM)t bother to read what I wrote. I *still* wish stupidity was monopolistic.
Well I disagree with the strategy of MS. However, there is one thing that we need to look it. ISPs don't want to be liable for huge damages for their users use/abuse/hijacking (sending spam). This is a valid concern if you get a customer that gets on your network and your staff is to small to deal with it the second it happens (this really cant be a concern of MSN).
Of course this comes down to the basics of economics (guns, booze, cars, etc) is a company responsible for the actions of it's customers? Does a company become liable if they don't shut down a users that violates the law or TOS in a timely manner? What is a timely manner? when does it become corporate negligence? How much investigation needs to be done before you shut someone off? How do you avoid mistakes?
I think this lobbying monies would be better spend to address these legal issues instead of removing tools from 'victims'
that C&D letter seems to be rather odd. no law firm, no postal address, not a form letter. If one wants a letter of this nature to be taken seriously and to have the appearance of validity a 'missive' that this one appears to be, doenst cut it, as compared to the mounds of other c&ds we have seen before.
As its been done elsewhere in this discussion, reporting on the state of the language is not a trademark violation. They are just gonna have to suck it up.
I wonder if this is more of the "throw more tech at it and it doesnt matter how bad it is we'll ram thru by sheer will" method of hardware (and software) design?
This is just about the biggest hot topic in the world isnt it? here is my bit...
A UI has *lots* to tweak. pointers, buttons, windows. color, highlights, and now with 3d shading and drop shadows and etc etc..
Thing is most people dont change these things. Those who do usually go with 'sets/skins' and many of them are horrid evil monsters of the abyss.
Thing is do you really want to be able to configure all that stuff? With x-windowsyou can get in there and tweak everything. Thats all well and good. but who is gonna put a generic 'grandma' front end on that? And even if you have a nice screen to fiddle all the bits, will grandma even know what half the things are? Then you have the flip side of having almost nothing user configurable out of the box (Aqua). You can go 3rd party to go in there and chage the stuff, but then we are back the horrible skinning thing (as has been said elsewhere in this thread.
So the big question is how much is enough? How much is too much? Should anyone really waste the time letting people tweak everything? Does a compay that tries to make a coherent look and feel let people go and throw off the UI elements when they chose a 96 pt font for their "ok" button?
Mind you this is going to just get more fuzzy when the UI starts using vector 2d and 3d, and even more animated objects in the UI. Just wait untilyour head explodes when you see the pink hello kitty desktop of doom.
Note to self.. google is not a good spell checker
on the science side of good eats, the emulsifer is from eggs or soy and called lethicin.
Assuming the macintosh version of VPC survives the next fallout between MS and apple, I predict that MS-VPC (for the macintosh) will immediately stop supporting any version of windows other than the latest.
perhaps if a decsion on this topic had happened long ago, 'brokers' wouldnt be selling this info to begin with and such it woudl not have happened.
Perhaps you also need to take a valium.
Unlike with the beta for the inital release they are acually allowing the macintosh uses to test this time.
I very much doubt that the investment willbe wasted.. i'll betcah some (much) of it willbe rolled into a PS3/4 game once the technology is baddass enough to make it all work right.
Tell me about the genes of the rabbits george!
*shrug* regardless of the argument time will ultimately show what the end use of the technology will be. Keep in mind here that this is a broader issue than mere points of logic. The individual tracking of music sold is well within the MO of the members of the RIAA, as based on their previous statemetns and actions. A psychological profile if you will. I think it unlinkely that if such a technology were available it woudlnot be made use of.
Its not an attempt to curb piracy *now* or so they say. If they are going to put data in the files similar to a barcode for tracking purposes, what makes anyone think they will stop there and not just add an identifer for the transaction number you bought the song with? Thing is it this going to be a simple issue of tackingon data, ot they are gonna 'watermark' the digital data, not to cause damage but just to track. If 'hidden data' is the method, what happens whenyou transcode the music?
Well this just occured to me.. If the EULA says that you can return it to the store for a refund if you dont agree with the license, hasn't the store infact agreed to take itback and give a refund by selling the item with that kinda of EULA. The store can't claim they don't agree to their responsibilites under the EULA.
well yes it woudlhave to be actually draconian. i dont think that 'forging'headers for non UCE is going to be a problem.
Yes i have heard of a credit card. A credit card is basically an on demand loan, i.e. not your money. I was making a point about the shifting nature of the use of your money (that you have in a financial institution.
Too bad the spammers from all of APNIC are out of your reach een if forged headers are illegal. the only way to address thisis to have end to end certification certification of where the email is coming from.
I hope all of you /.ers see the consequences here. Firstly without cash the govt will know eveything you buy and when you buy it.
Also all of a sudden all of these banks and other get a peice of your money for the 'convience' of not using cash.. and then when it catches on they will charge you for the privilidge of using cash. If you recall, when ATMs first came out they were all free to use because it saved the banks money as oposed to have everyone seeing bank tellers. Then they started to charge you to use the bank tellers because it cost them more then if you used the ATM. Then they charge you to use the ATM as a convience fee.
So you are going to be charged a fee to replace your card that has an intentional limited life span, you will be charged to transfer funds to it, you will be charged an electronic transaction fee when you use it. Its like an infinite infusion of middlemen.