Just out of curiousity, what feder and state laws would you be violating?
Well, shit. You had to ask. I didn't include a link in my original post because I couldn't find it straight away. Now that you've made me search for it I find I can't find it! Damn!
I ran across it some time ago researching a predicament of my own. Now I've got to go searching again to find it.
I do clearly recall, though, that if you accuse someone of a felony offense without just cause you have committed a felony offense yourself.
If you really need to know I would suggest contacting a lawyer.
problem is, it kinda looks like they did their homework.
The problem is you didn't follow all the links. To quote:
"The problem I have though, is that I was never running a node. Ever. Indeed, I do not own, nor have I ever owned, a single piece of wireless networking equipment.
No cards, no WAPs, no nothing. All I did was express interest in the project, and sign on to the maps as a *possible* *cloud* node. I have never attended a NYCWireless meeting. I havn't participated in the listservs in months."
To quote the letter:
"We have information indicating that you or someone using your Road Runner account has been transmitting the Road Runner service over a wireless network so that anyone with a wireless network card can tap into our service without authorization from us."
Further quoting:
"This activity also violates a number of federal and state laws..."
Sure sounds like accusation to me. But where is the "homework?" Where is the evidence and just cause for making the accusation?
Since this kind of user interface has been sucessfully studied and used since the 80's, how is this news?
I distinctly remember viewing a demo from a major educational institute in the 80's where an individual was seated in front of a large projection screen.
I'd agree. A neighbor down the block tried to get rid of a 12' dish by placing it by the road with a "free" sign on it. It was a month before it finally disappeared. But then, 12' dishes are not much in demand these days.
Considering GPS jitter, something the article didn't mention, nor has anyone else addressed in this discussion, just how locally geographic do they expect to get?
It's not like someone couldn't (worst case) poke their head out of the next door cave and grab your message.
I've had this baby for several years now and haven't read a frozen food package since.
Among other nifty features is a big red button marked "Frozen Food" I just pop the dinner in, press the button and minutes later I'm enjoying a perfectly cooked meal.
I'll go through withdrawls if this thing ever craps out.
Why shouldn't shareware authors expect to make a profit? Because you say so?
No, because the shareware model, having been around for a long, long, time only makes money if you have something really slick to offer. You only deserve remuneration commensurate with the quality of your offering.
Years ago I released several useful programs as shareware. While they were useful to some, they weren't, in any way, "killer apps." I found out that even though I spent my time on creating quality - though marginally useful - applications, that time didn't translate into monetary remuneration.
Should I be bitter about the fact that a few used my programs and didn't pay? Or more accurately, should I re-examine what I think is valuable?
An example of a shareware program that made money is ProComm. It stands alone as a defacto standard of exceptional usefulness, a 'killer app' that deserved its success.
Profitability in shareware is a measure of the author's ability to offer something of fantastic value. While the author spent hours in development and thinks he deserves monetary gain for doing so, the public will decide whether it merits squat.
So, no, shareware authors should not expect to make a profit.
Point taken. However, I've been around for far too long to not have picked up on a few cues.
Trailers tend to try to put their best foot forward right from the start, adding extra tidbits as time passes. The Time Machine trailers sucked right out of the chute. If that was the best they had to offer, then it's awfully obvious there is nothing more to see here, move along.
Here's a prediction using the same a priori reasoning about Ice Age: A Total Bomb.
but that movie was never any good. "Ooo a movie about computers!" Puh-lease. That doesn't make up for a weak plot and bad acting. If this movie was released now-days with up-to-date effects, it would bomb badly
You obviously never experienced it in all it's glorious theatrical release.
The Geek factor alone, at the time, made it worth sitting through three times in a row. It was a world previously experienced only by SIGGRAPH attendees, and only then in 10 minute shorts.
This movie was that world delivered to the masses, Drooling Geeks, included. And we loved it!
You forgot to mention that is a SOLID week or three to set up Coda (give up your life in the mean time). Even when it works, it does so for only a minuscule subset of needs. The resources it consumes may not be worth it.
While I admire the effort, Coda is far and away from addressing real world connectivity problems. rsync works just as well without the major headaches and overhead.
Perhaps if it had been quoted properly in the first place I wouldn't have made the comment.
But then, I probably shouldn't hold Slashdot to journalistic standards. It is, after all, just a couple of geeks who barely passed English 101 who run this site.;)
Slashdot Mirror
Just out of curiousity, what feder and state laws would you be violating?
Well, shit. You had to ask. I didn't include a link in my original post because I couldn't find it straight away. Now that you've made me search for it I find I can't find it! Damn!
I ran across it some time ago researching a predicament of my own. Now I've got to go searching again to find it.
I do clearly recall, though, that if you accuse someone of a felony offense without just cause you have committed a felony offense yourself.
If you really need to know I would suggest contacting a lawyer.
problem is, it kinda looks like they did their homework.
The problem is you didn't follow all the links. To quote:
"The problem I have though, is that I was never running a node. Ever. Indeed, I do not own, nor have I ever owned, a single piece of wireless networking equipment.
No cards, no WAPs, no nothing. All I did was express interest in the project, and sign on to the maps as a *possible* *cloud* node. I have never attended a NYCWireless meeting. I havn't participated in the listservs in months."
To quote the letter:
"We have information indicating that you or someone using your Road Runner account has been transmitting the Road Runner service over a wireless network so that anyone with a wireless network card can tap into our service without authorization from us."
Further quoting:
"This activity also violates a number of federal and state laws..."
Sure sounds like accusation to me. But where is the "homework?" Where is the evidence and just cause for making the accusation?
Acusing someone of criminal activity without just cause is, itself a felony.
Evidence found of craters on the Moon!
Since this kind of user interface has been sucessfully studied and used since the 80's, how is this news?
I distinctly remember viewing a demo from a major educational institute in the 80's where an individual was seated in front of a large projection screen.
The dialog went something like this:
"Move the yellow ship here (pointing)."
"Which ship?"
"The yellow ship."
"OK" [Moved]
"Delete this ship (pointing)."
"OK" [Deleted]
"Add a red ship."
"Where?"
"Here (pointing)."
"OK" [Red ship added at the pointed to location]
"Move the blue ship next to the red ship."
"Next to which ship?"
"The red ship."
"OK"
ad infinitum.
I'd agree. A neighbor down the block tried to get rid of a 12' dish by placing it by the road with a "free" sign on it. It was a month before it finally disappeared. But then, 12' dishes are not much in demand these days.
I once knew a fellow back in the 80's from China who was contantly buying up scrap equipment with the intent to ship it home. Now they don't want it.
I don't see how a retinal scan would be a problem. You already have your photo on the driver's license. It's the same thing - only really close up.
Well, you could if it wasn't aready slashdotted.
you can't get there from here
All you have to do is press the "S" button for article submission.
:)
Of course the editors need an "R" button for "Rejected." But then, I think auto-reject is a feature already built in.
I don't trust anything that exposes itself natively.
Some things just aren't meant to be seen!
Considering GPS jitter, something the article didn't mention, nor has anyone else addressed in this discussion, just how locally geographic do they expect to get?
It's not like someone couldn't (worst case) poke their head out of the next door cave and grab your message.
Augh! Frozen beer!
If you can't take the foam and ice, the waiting for it to thaw is hell when it's the last you've got!
I've had this baby for several years now and haven't read a frozen food package since.
Among other nifty features is a big red button marked "Frozen Food" I just pop the dinner in, press the button and minutes later I'm enjoying a perfectly cooked meal.
I'll go through withdrawls if this thing ever craps out.
Oh, yes what a blazing glory that was.
I guess a dim smudge is better than the wonderous display put on by comet Kohoutek
Why shouldn't shareware authors expect to make a profit? Because you say so?
No, because the shareware model, having been around for a long, long, time only makes money if you have something really slick to offer. You only deserve remuneration commensurate with the quality of your offering.
Years ago I released several useful programs as shareware. While they were useful to some, they weren't, in any way, "killer apps." I found out that even though I spent my time on creating quality - though marginally useful - applications, that time didn't translate into monetary remuneration.
Should I be bitter about the fact that a few used my programs and didn't pay? Or more accurately, should I re-examine what I think is valuable?
An example of a shareware program that made money is ProComm. It stands alone as a defacto standard of exceptional usefulness, a 'killer app' that deserved its success.
Profitability in shareware is a measure of the author's ability to offer something of fantastic value. While the author spent hours in development and thinks he deserves monetary gain for doing so, the public will decide whether it merits squat.
So, no, shareware authors should not expect to make a profit.
Point taken. However, I've been around for far too long to not have picked up on a few cues.
Trailers tend to try to put their best foot forward right from the start, adding extra tidbits as time passes. The Time Machine trailers sucked right out of the chute. If that was the best they had to offer, then it's awfully obvious there is nothing more to see here, move along.
Here's a prediction using the same a priori reasoning about Ice Age: A Total Bomb.
Anyone who who even caught a sidelong glimpse of the trailers could tell this was a lame 02's remake of the superior 60's "Time Machine."
It was instantly recognizable as a dead horse straight out of the gate.
Katz actually spent good money just so he could "First Post" a review on a shitty movie?
Dude, while I don't expect more, I certainly hope for it.
The only thing SPAMers invented was spam and new techiques to spam.
"The only thing advertisers invented was new techniques to advertise."
And the point you fell so short of making is?
Netscape has never been pro-privacy. They invented cookies so that advertisers could track readers and now they are tracking them directly themselves.
That makes about as much sense as saying "Spammers invented open relays so they could spew their crap across the Internet."
Reality isn't your forte, is it?
but that movie was never any good. "Ooo a movie about computers!" Puh-lease. That doesn't make up for a weak plot and bad acting. If this movie was released now-days with up-to-date effects, it would bomb badly
You obviously never experienced it in all it's glorious theatrical release.
The Geek factor alone, at the time, made it worth sitting through three times in a row. It was a world previously experienced only by SIGGRAPH attendees, and only then in 10 minute shorts.
This movie was that world delivered to the masses, Drooling Geeks, included. And we loved it!
Uga Uga
You forgot to mention that is a SOLID week or three to set up Coda (give up your life in the mean time). Even when it works, it does so for only a minuscule subset of needs. The resources it consumes may not be worth it.
While I admire the effort, Coda is far and away from addressing real world connectivity problems. rsync works just as well without the major headaches and overhead.
Perhaps if it had been quoted properly in the first place I wouldn't have made the comment.
;)
But then, I probably shouldn't hold Slashdot to journalistic standards. It is, after all, just a couple of geeks who barely passed English 101 who run this site.
Huh? .us has been live for a decade.