(7) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this subsection:
`(C) IP-ENABLED VOICE SERVICE- The term `IP-enabled voice service' means the provision of real-time 2-way voice communications offered to the public, or such classes of users as to be effectively available to the public, transmitted through customer premises equipment using TCP/IP protocol, or a successor protocol, for a fee (whether part of a bundle of services or separately) with interconnection capability such that the service can originate traffic to, or terminate traffic from, the public switched telephone network.
So it looks like it covers TCP based VoIP protocols but not UDP ones? UDP is hardly a successor protocol to TCP. Indeed its RFC comes thirteen months before that of TCP.
In the United Kingdom Copyright is both a civil and criminal offence. So if someone breaches your copyright, say alters your GPL program and redistributes without the modified source, you could complain to the police. Useful if you don't have the resources to fight a copyright battle yourself. Equally, if you breach copyright law in the UK you could go to jail.
MySQL could license the code for distribution. Equally Google could submit the code to MySQL using their existing mecanism for code contributions and transfer copyright to MySQL.
To suggest that the code can't be included because someone else owns copyright is just wrong - MySQL didn't develop the Innodb stuff, they license it. They could do the same here.
Oh come on - my Sony Ericsson T610 could dial in response to a voice command several years ago. My Nokia E61 has speech recognition. This isn't something Microsoft invented or even perfected. Decent mobile phones - i.e. those available to the rest of the world (excluding the United States) have had these features for several years.
I presume by 'unlimited downloads' they mean music subscriptions a la napster, rhapsody etc.
I've always wondered why Apple have been slow to enter that market, but to do so now without opening up their DRM is surely asking for trouble. Real have been trying to get access to the iPod market for years. Apple have tried to stop them at every opportunity. If they now try and copy that distribution method, while refusing to allow anyone else the opportunity leaves them more open than ever to charges of anti competitive behaviour, especially in the EU.
Of course it could also be an indication that Apple are about to open up their DRM? That would be great news for Real and Napster, but could be terminal for the smaller manufacturers of 'mp3' players.
You got it in one. If the people don't like it, in a democratic society they get to elect someone the think can do a better job. I think if I were in an economically depressed state, I'd be looking for the state government to pour tons into eduction. Into teachers, school buildings and technology. If they economy is depressed they need a highly motivated, well educated workforce in an area with otherwise low costs.
I don't really think I can comment on whether this individual idea is good or not, because I don;t know what other proposals their state government has to improve education. If they think iPods alone with fix things then the state is in deep trouble. If, on the other hand, they're proposing a series of measures to raise overall attainment then I wish them the very best of luck and would encourage state residents to do everything they can to support the plan and make it work.
It's not insane if people want different solutions or even want their own server. With virtualisation, a host can offer multiple php versions. You can avoid all the security problems where one script running as the webserver can read any other file accessible to the web server.
You can also get better management control of resources, preventing one site from eating up all available resources on the box.
That's not to say there aren't a million good reasons to use virtual servers in apache, just to point out that virtualising web hosts is not, by definition, a daft idea.
You'll have negotiating room if (A) you pay in cash,
Why on earth do you think that. Do you really think it's the dealer that's financing your loan? If you take a loan, the dealer gets the whole chunk of cash when the loan is approved. If you finance through the dealer they'll then get an extra bonus for selling you the finance. Dealers couldn't care less how you pay (in fact in the UK, one of the biggest car sellers, Arnold Clark no longer accepts cash. They can then reduce their overheads by spending much less on insurance).
Even if you get a Ford loan to buy your new Ford, you can be pretty sure then loan was underwritten by some other firm. The only way I cna think of the dealer not getting their cash would be if you paid by credit card where they have to pay a processing fee %age. I'm guessing there aren't many car dealers that would let you pay by credit card because of the cost to them.
The exact same argument could be used to pass a law making it illegal to build a campfire in the passenger seat of your car while driving. It's impractical to make laws to prevent every stupid thing a person may do while driving.
Hold on a minute, how many folk have you seen recently lighting a bonfire in their car while driving. Now how many have you seen using a mobile phone.
With evidence showing using a mobile phone to be more dangerous than driving while drunk, folk clearly aren't going to stop until they are told to. Hence the need for a law and proper enforcement. Fols simply don't believe they're driving carlessly, just as they thought it was okay to drive while drunk until it was legislated against, ditto wearing a seatbelt.
I think the point is that while such a change could be slipped in, it couldn't be slipped in anonymously. It'd be interesting if politicians had to take personal ownership of each line of every bill.
Actually, no - the cost of windows is at least subsidised and very possibly covered completely by the software that comes installed. They don;t provide six months of AOL, a google toolbar, anti virus software with a two week subscription and thirty other trial apps because they think you want them, it's because they get paid to put them on there.
So you can take the machine with a non transferable windows license or pay the same to have it with no OS - it's not because Dell are out to rip you off, it's because they don't make cash out of supplying you with windows.
So bittorrent offers films to rent. I can't see a way this can be implemented without DRM. Otherwise you haven't rented it, you now own the file
So, is the argument that we shouldn't be able to rent a film using our computer or is it just a complaint that they use a poorly implemented Microsoft DRM that isn't compatible across platforms. If, say, Real who already offer applications on each platform were to make some DRM that works on *nix, OS X and Windows would the/. crowd then support it?
I can't see how services like this can be delivered without some way to restrict viewing after a period of time. Is there another option I'm missing?
if you disclose the problem to the public, they can't do much apart from switching to another product or wait until microsoft developer finally fix the problem.
But that's only an issue if you get no response. What if MS email and say thanks, we've looked into this, we need to change x, y and z and it should take about two weeks before we issue a fix. What would be the advantage in going public inside those two weeks?
I can't see any valid reason for someone not to report to Mozilla first, and to expect a reasonable and speedy response, then oing public if a fix is not in place inside a sensible timescale. To do otherwise suggests the researcher is more interested in self publicity than in protecting users of the browser.
Has anyone tried the high-speed in england? - generally people have 1 Meg connections not 3 to 10 meg in the states and canada. I understand the article is about penetration.
That's just wrong. Almost every telephone exchange in the entire UK has been upgraded to ADSL2 with speeds up to 8mbit. That means about 98% of the population have access to ADSL2 speeds (which vary depending on distance from the exchange).
Also, Earthlink has been doing this for months, which is why I recently replaced the DNS servers that have been burned into my skull since working there in 1998.
Earthlink provide two DNS servers that operate normally for anyone that wants to opt out. They even have a knowledgebase article telling you about it.
There are plenty of VoIP providers that will let you pay into a credit balance with them and make calls from the balance.
Any sane provider is going to have some sort of credit limit in place where they'd turn off your account anyway - if you go bankrupt, they still have the obligation to pay Global Crossing...
In the UK... recordings are only permitted if you're registered as a data controller under the Data Protection Act. That means people recording calls that they make is generally against the law.
I'd be interested to know on what absis you say this - certainly Oftel disagree. Of course you should always consult a lawyer, but Oftel seem to believe that recording calls in the UK for personal purposes, where they won't be further distributed is perfectly legal and doesn't require you to register as a Data Controller under the DPA.
The Data Protection Act also contains an exemption for personal data processing: Domestic purposes. 36. Personal data processed by an individual only for the purposes of that individual's personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes) are exempt from the data protection principles and the provisions of Parts II and III.
You can't really blame the OS for what some stupid American operators do with it surely?
Indeed. The author uses this as an argument against Symbian, but makes no mention of the fact that Jobs has stated the iPod won't run any 3rd party software. Of course that may change, but it's hardly a plus for the iPhone.
An iPod is a hard drive, as far as an operating system is concerned. File copying is an operation of the operating system. It is up to the operating system to detect a fault and recover.
But the iPod is a removable device - the device itself therefore should deal gracefully with being removed even under non optimal conditions. Whether that means using NTFS, or another filesystem altogether I'm not sure - I'm not the hardware developer. I'm pretty sure that use of the iPod as a file storage tool is limited to a tiny percentage of Apple's customers though - if a sample of folk I know is anything to go by, probably more customers have lost data due to their iPod being unplugged than use it as a data storage device.
Apple could always have used another filesystem with a tiy fat32 partition to store windows drivers if they really wanted it to be accessible as a filesystem too.
And though the apple fanboys have modded my original post down, I'm not anti apple. I've bought an iPod a Mac Mini and a MacBook in the past twelve months. Not being anti apple does not, much as some would like to think, remove my right to criticise design decisions where there are faults.
Seriously though, Apple have full control over the ipod hardware and software. They really should have designed the iPod such that if, for whatever reason, the USB cable is unplugged while writing to disk, the operation is reverted and the iPod keeps working.
It's either laziness or, more likely, cost cutting that makes the iPod is so fragile.
After all, Apple did design the new laptops with magnetic clips for the power cable - presumably because they get tripped over, knocked out etc.
Zimbra is indeed promising. For those that said I haven't looked hard enough, it's not me that's ignorant.
My post was not to say there's nothing developing, rather that after a decade or more we haven't seen a standard develop.
Almsot everything that's suggested does about 80% of what Exchange does, never quite filling the need entirely. Many have proprietary add-ins to work with Outlook as we don't have a client to replace it (bar the attempt by Evolution which doesn't run on windows yet. Sunbird has promise but it's very early days).
What frustrates is that from the outside it seems lots of folk are trying to be the next Exchange with their own formats and techniques, rather than us seeing an open deployable standard with interoperating clients and servers.
Slashdot Mirror
Why did you click to read it? Did you expect a tech link?
It's a news site with a heavy tech influence. Get over it.
In the United Kingdom Copyright is both a civil and criminal offence. So if someone breaches your copyright, say alters your GPL program and redistributes without the modified source, you could complain to the police. Useful if you don't have the resources to fight a copyright battle yourself. Equally, if you breach copyright law in the UK you could go to jail.
MySQL could license the code for distribution. Equally Google could submit the code to MySQL using their existing mecanism for code contributions and transfer copyright to MySQL.
To suggest that the code can't be included because someone else owns copyright is just wrong - MySQL didn't develop the Innodb stuff, they license it. They could do the same here.
Oh come on - my Sony Ericsson T610 could dial in response to a voice command several years ago. My Nokia E61 has speech recognition. This isn't something Microsoft invented or even perfected. Decent mobile phones - i.e. those available to the rest of the world (excluding the United States) have had these features for several years.
I presume by 'unlimited downloads' they mean music subscriptions a la napster, rhapsody etc.
I've always wondered why Apple have been slow to enter that market, but to do so now without opening up their DRM is surely asking for trouble. Real have been trying to get access to the iPod market for years. Apple have tried to stop them at every opportunity. If they now try and copy that distribution method, while refusing to allow anyone else the opportunity leaves them more open than ever to charges of anti competitive behaviour, especially in the EU.
Of course it could also be an indication that Apple are about to open up their DRM? That would be great news for Real and Napster, but could be terminal for the smaller manufacturers of 'mp3' players.
I don't really think I can comment on whether this individual idea is good or not, because I don;t know what other proposals their state government has to improve education. If they think iPods alone with fix things then the state is in deep trouble. If, on the other hand, they're proposing a series of measures to raise overall attainment then I wish them the very best of luck and would encourage state residents to do everything they can to support the plan and make it work.
It's not insane if people want different solutions or even want their own server. With virtualisation, a host can offer multiple php versions. You can avoid all the security problems where one script running as the webserver can read any other file accessible to the web server.
You can also get better management control of resources, preventing one site from eating up all available resources on the box.
That's not to say there aren't a million good reasons to use virtual servers in apache, just to point out that virtualising web hosts is not, by definition, a daft idea.
Even if you get a Ford loan to buy your new Ford, you can be pretty sure then loan was underwritten by some other firm. The only way I cna think of the dealer not getting their cash would be if you paid by credit card where they have to pay a processing fee %age. I'm guessing there aren't many car dealers that would let you pay by credit card because of the cost to them.
With evidence showing using a mobile phone to be more dangerous than driving while drunk, folk clearly aren't going to stop until they are told to. Hence the need for a law and proper enforcement. Fols simply don't believe they're driving carlessly, just as they thought it was okay to drive while drunk until it was legislated against, ditto wearing a seatbelt.
I think the point is that while such a change could be slipped in, it couldn't be slipped in anonymously. It'd be interesting if politicians had to take personal ownership of each line of every bill.
Actually, no - the cost of windows is at least subsidised and very possibly covered completely by the software that comes installed. They don;t provide six months of AOL, a google toolbar, anti virus software with a two week subscription and thirty other trial apps because they think you want them, it's because they get paid to put them on there.
So you can take the machine with a non transferable windows license or pay the same to have it with no OS - it's not because Dell are out to rip you off, it's because they don't make cash out of supplying you with windows.
So bittorrent offers films to rent. I can't see a way this can be implemented without DRM. Otherwise you haven't rented it, you now own the file
/. crowd then support it?
So, is the argument that we shouldn't be able to rent a film using our computer or is it just a complaint that they use a poorly implemented Microsoft DRM that isn't compatible across platforms. If, say, Real who already offer applications on each platform were to make some DRM that works on *nix, OS X and Windows would the
I can't see how services like this can be delivered without some way to restrict viewing after a period of time. Is there another option I'm missing?
I can't see any valid reason for someone not to report to Mozilla first, and to expect a reasonable and speedy response, then oing public if a fix is not in place inside a sensible timescale. To do otherwise suggests the researcher is more interested in self publicity than in protecting users of the browser.
There are plenty of VoIP providers that will let you pay into a credit balance with them and make calls from the balance. Any sane provider is going to have some sort of credit limit in place where they'd turn off your account anyway - if you go bankrupt, they still have the obligation to pay Global Crossing...
The Data Protection Act also contains an exemption for personal data processing:
Domestic purposes. 36. Personal data processed by an individual only for the purposes of that individual's personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes) are exempt from the data protection principles and the provisions of Parts II and III.
Are you using the V3.0633 firmware? It seems much more responsive.
Apple could always have used another filesystem with a tiy fat32 partition to store windows drivers if they really wanted it to be accessible as a filesystem too.
And though the apple fanboys have modded my original post down, I'm not anti apple. I've bought an iPod a Mac Mini and a MacBook in the past twelve months. Not being anti apple does not, much as some would like to think, remove my right to criticise design decisions where there are faults.
Seriously though, Apple have full control over the ipod hardware and software. They really should have designed the iPod such that if, for whatever reason, the USB cable is unplugged while writing to disk, the operation is reverted and the iPod keeps working.
It's either laziness or, more likely, cost cutting that makes the iPod is so fragile. After all, Apple did design the new laptops with magnetic clips for the power cable - presumably because they get tripped over, knocked out etc.
Zimbra is indeed promising. For those that said I haven't looked hard enough, it's not me that's ignorant.
My post was not to say there's nothing developing, rather that after a decade or more we haven't seen a standard develop.
Almsot everything that's suggested does about 80% of what Exchange does, never quite filling the need entirely. Many have proprietary add-ins to work with Outlook as we don't have a client to replace it (bar the attempt by Evolution which doesn't run on windows yet. Sunbird has promise but it's very early days).
What frustrates is that from the outside it seems lots of folk are trying to be the next Exchange with their own formats and techniques, rather than us seeing an open deployable standard with interoperating clients and servers.