The TC license actually has the following text in it :
NOTHING IN THIS LICENSE SHALL IMPLY OR BE CONSTRUED AS A PROMISE,
OBLIGATION, OR COVENANT NOT TO SUE FOR COPYRIGHT OR TRADEMARK
INFRINGEMENT.
A license is a promise not to sue, if you follow the licensing conditions. The license literally says 'there is nothing you can do to potentally stop us from suing you'. This makes it non-free because nothing in the license allows you to do anything more than regular copyright would allow (which is nothing) without risk of being sued. It's not only not FLOSS, it's literally not distributable or usable without a risk being sued.
The man was selling dousing rods which were labeled as golfball finders as bombdetectors.
They were equally successful at either task. They weren't golfball detectors any more than they were bomb detectors. The con was the dousing rod aspect of it, not the 'golf ball finder' stuff. The problem is people believing in magic, not a mislabeled golfbal detector.
I don't think it's quite that nefarious. You get the ability to download the movies basically, something that is ostensibly 'impossible' with the flash player. You also get higher resolutions and they take out all the ads. I don't consider it a bad deal for an copy-edited gaming magazine without ads for a year.:)
I did say that's why *I* pay for it, not that it's the only thing you get:)
The escapist has html5 video support (webm and h.264) if you subscribe to their 'publisher's club' it's 20 dollars a year. I use that, for the single purpose of not having to deal with Flash.
My main issue is that there is no recourse. I did everything right, I had a/19 with all the correct WHOIS information, my server had nothing illegal on it or things that spamhaus doesn't like. (those two things aren't necessarily the same, that's the other thing that really annoys me)
And to pressure my ISP they decided to make it impossible for ME to use the server I paid for. I understand what they are trying to do, but the way they are doing it leaves a lot to be desired. If they actually cared about the damage they did they would have unblocked my/19 for at least a reasonable period of time for me to migrate. It's not like I got a warning or anything, I only found out I was shitlisted after people started to complain.
After that it took me several days to get everything moved over, DNS changed etc, and again: no recourse, no way of temporarily getting my service restored. The only thing I got was a warm fuck you from Spamhaus.
According to TFA his list is opt-in only, so unless he's lying about that he doesn't appear to be a spammer.
I've had similar experiences with Spamhaus btw, they decided to nix my upstream provider and when I complained I was told that I should use another ISP because mine wasn't well liked.
I can assure you I have never sent a single spam email in my life.
This is the whole point of TFA though, there's no incentive for companies running mail services to ensure that legitimate mail gets delivered. It's simply cheaper to not bother with false positives at all because the cost of non-delivery is placed squarely on the shoulders of the sender. This is why Spamhaus could easily force me to switch ISPs, it doesn't cost them anything to put my IP range on a shitlist, but it cost me money and effort to migrate my service.
yes, no shitty 4 dollar 'picture processor' in a TV is ever going to really improve the picture. We're not talking about some trick to improve framerates here though. We're talking about a film that is actually shot at 48 frames per second, which as you point out look fantastic. I was not making the argument that higher fps == better viewing.
Anyone who values picture quality turns off their TV's 'frame enhancement' software anyway, right?
That is a terrible misconception, it will be 'awful and distracting' only because you got used to films looking like films at 24fps and 'home video' having smoother motion. That's the thing though, 'home video' has had a quality advantage over 'cinema' in the smoothness department for a long time, it is sad that this increase in quality has become synonymous with poor films and videos. Maybe more ironic than sad.
All the other benefits of cinema will remain, higher picture quality, bigger screens, popcorn, but now with the added benefit of having natural looking motion. I don't see how that can possibly be a bad thing. I've been waiting for this 'breakthrough' for a LONG time, and I'm sure that most people will agree that it's an improvement.
That's not actually a big surprise is it? All these religious people preaching the love of their deity are all scared, really, really scared. That's the problem. They can't listen to other arguments and risk going to incarnation of a less pleasant afterlife, hell, or whatever other things they might believe in.
Religion is about instilling fear and shame in it's followers and this is just another example of what effects it has.
look here the 'cyberbunker.com' guys are not the actual guys who own and operate the actual physical building that they have named the cyberbunker. Cyberbunker.com just rents some space from cb3rob which actually owns the building (and has it's own hosting company/network business)
It is confusing, I agree and perhaps it was done on purpose but I know for a fact that the guys running cyberbunker.com are actually different people.
Abuse:
This includes but is not limited to:
* Any criminal activities, as defined by the law of:
o Customer's country of residence (natural persons) or company registration,
* Mass sending of unsollicted e-mail (SPAM).
* Sending floods of any kind to any other computer system or network which inhibits the correct behaviour of said computer system or network.
* Harrassment of individuals.
* Endangering the quality of service or network stability for other internet users in any way.
They will keep customers online unless the law tells them to take them offline.
Weren't we all outraged when the 'three strikes and your out' laws basically meant that three COMPLAINTS means someone could lose their Internet access without appeal, and without a trial?
When A2B refused to remove cyberbunker from the Internet entirely they indeed added just the one/21 on the SBL. This was not a network that was routed to the cyberbunker and just 'one of their networks' a range that had nothing to do with the case at all... I think the sentiment was quite clear.
The 'blackmail' in this case is 'We will keep all of A2B on the SBL unless you disconnect one of your paying customers from the Internet entirely'
They don't care that A2B doesn't send SPAM they just really dislike the cyberbunker and are abusing the power of their SBL to try and remove entities that they don't like from the Internet entirely.
Note that the cyberbunker will remove spammers, their ToS:
This includes but is not limited to:
* Any criminal activities, as defined by the law of:
o Customer's country of residence (natural persons) or company registration,
* Mass sending of unsollicted e-mail (SPAM).
* Sending floods of any kind to any other computer system or network which inhibits the correct behaviour of said computer system or network.
* Harrassment of individuals.
* Endangering the quality of service or network stability for other internet users in any way.
It's just that if spamhaus says that someone is doing 'something illegal' without specifying what it is, the cyberbunker isn't just going to disconnect them. Spamhaus *really* dislikes it when an ISP doesn't blindly follow their 'opinions' and most ISPs do because if they don't they get blackmailed like Cyberbunker was before and A2B is now.
But if this opinion is automatically taken as fact by 2/3rds of the Internet's email servers and you go to an ISP and say: "We want you to remove this and this customer from the Internet or we will be of the opinion that all your outgoing email is unwanted SPAM." the this kind of changes the picture.
This isn't about some SBL, Spamhaus is not taking anything less than Complete removal from the Internet for CB3ROB I think that this goes slightly further than an 'opinion'
Slashdot Mirror
Check out the link in my previous post, it has a fairly complete legal interpretation of the license by the Fedora lawyers.
The TC license actually has the following text in it :
NOTHING IN THIS LICENSE SHALL IMPLY OR BE CONSTRUED AS A PROMISE,
OBLIGATION, OR COVENANT NOT TO SUE FOR COPYRIGHT OR TRADEMARK
INFRINGEMENT.
A license is a promise not to sue, if you follow the licensing conditions. The license literally says 'there is nothing you can do to potentally stop us from suing you'. This makes it non-free because nothing in the license allows you to do anything more than regular copyright would allow (which is nothing) without risk of being sued. It's not only not FLOSS, it's literally not distributable or usable without a risk being sued.
http://lists.freedesktop.org/a...
Thanks, I didn't know!
The man was selling dousing rods which were labeled as golfball finders as bombdetectors.
They were equally successful at either task. They weren't golfball detectors any more than they were bomb detectors. The con was the dousing rod aspect of it, not the 'golf ball finder' stuff. The problem is people believing in magic, not a mislabeled golfbal detector.
I don't think it's quite that nefarious. You get the ability to download the movies basically, something that is ostensibly 'impossible' with the flash player. You also get higher resolutions and they take out all the ads. I don't consider it a bad deal for an copy-edited gaming magazine without ads for a year. :)
I did say that's why *I* pay for it, not that it's the only thing you get :)
The escapist has html5 video support (webm and h.264) if you subscribe to their 'publisher's club' it's 20 dollars a year. I use that, for the single purpose of not having to deal with Flash.
They already have, you can enable an experimental webgl version of streetview that seems to work just fine for me.
I've been flash-less for the better part of 5 years now :) Never regret!
It kind of did, Sega CD 32x! :)
that was a /29 not a /19 whoops
My main issue is that there is no recourse. I did everything right, I had a /19 with all the correct WHOIS information, my server had nothing illegal on it or things that spamhaus doesn't like. (those two things aren't necessarily the same, that's the other thing that really annoys me)
And to pressure my ISP they decided to make it impossible for ME to use the server I paid for. I understand what they are trying to do, but the way they are doing it leaves a lot to be desired. If they actually cared about the damage they did they would have unblocked my /19 for at least a reasonable period of time for me to migrate. It's not like I got a warning or anything, I only found out I was shitlisted after people started to complain.
After that it took me several days to get everything moved over, DNS changed etc, and again: no recourse, no way of temporarily getting my service restored. The only thing I got was a warm fuck you from Spamhaus.
According to TFA his list is opt-in only, so unless he's lying about that he doesn't appear to be a spammer.
I've had similar experiences with Spamhaus btw, they decided to nix my upstream provider and when I complained I was told that I should use another ISP because mine wasn't well liked.
I can assure you I have never sent a single spam email in my life.
This is the whole point of TFA though, there's no incentive for companies running mail services to ensure that legitimate mail gets delivered. It's simply cheaper to not bother with false positives at all because the cost of non-delivery is placed squarely on the shoulders of the sender.
This is why Spamhaus could easily force me to switch ISPs, it doesn't cost them anything to put my IP range on a shitlist, but it cost me money and effort to migrate my service.
Actually it is much simpler than that;
GPL is designed to protect users' interests
BSD is designed to protect developers' interests
Which is why the 'allow websites to choose their own fonts, instead of my selection above' checkbox is unchecked on my Firefox :)
Your typos were trivial to spot in Dejavu Sans Mono which, incidentally, is my favorite monospace font! :D
And we all know that that software is entirely static and won't ever get updated to support data uris before they are in widespread use.
Good catch sir!
Yes! Don't let children near priests!
A director is free to add motion blur to his picture in post, if it's for 'artistic reasons' you can do whatever you want.
Just don't go and tell me that the blurryness in the fight scenes of 'the dark knight' where an artistic statement...
yes, no shitty 4 dollar 'picture processor' in a TV is ever going to really improve the picture. We're not talking about some trick to improve framerates here though. We're talking about a film that is actually shot at 48 frames per second, which as you point out look fantastic. I was not making the argument that higher fps == better viewing.
Anyone who values picture quality turns off their TV's 'frame enhancement' software anyway, right?
right? :)
That is a terrible misconception, it will be 'awful and distracting' only because you got used to films looking like films at 24fps and 'home video' having smoother motion. That's the thing though, 'home video' has had a quality advantage over 'cinema' in the smoothness department for a long time, it is sad that this increase in quality has become synonymous with poor films and videos. Maybe more ironic than sad.
All the other benefits of cinema will remain, higher picture quality, bigger screens, popcorn, but now with the added benefit of having natural looking motion. I don't see how that can possibly be a bad thing. I've been waiting for this 'breakthrough' for a LONG time, and I'm sure that most people will agree that it's an improvement.
Use mine every day, couldn't be happier. Looking to upgrade to an n950 actually, if I can get one. N9 otherwise.
That's not actually a big surprise is it? All these religious people preaching the love of their deity are all scared, really, really scared. That's the problem. They can't listen to other arguments and risk going to incarnation of a less pleasant afterlife, hell, or whatever other things they might believe in.
Religion is about instilling fear and shame in it's followers and this is just another example of what effects it has.
look here the 'cyberbunker.com' guys are not the actual guys who own and operate the actual physical building that they have named the cyberbunker. Cyberbunker.com just rents some space from cb3rob which actually owns the building (and has it's own hosting company/network business)
It is confusing, I agree and perhaps it was done on purpose but I know for a fact that the guys running cyberbunker.com are actually different people.
let's not forget their abuse policy
Abuse:
This includes but is not limited to:
* Any criminal activities, as defined by the law of:
o Customer's country of residence (natural persons) or company registration,
* Mass sending of unsollicted e-mail (SPAM).
* Sending floods of any kind to any other computer system or network which inhibits the correct behaviour of said computer system or network.
* Harrassment of individuals.
* Endangering the quality of service or network stability for other internet users in any way.
They will keep customers online unless the law tells them to take them offline.
Weren't we all outraged when the 'three strikes and your out' laws basically meant that three COMPLAINTS means someone could lose their Internet access without appeal, and without a trial?
But if spamhaus does it it's fine? Really?
Read spamhaus's own writeup on the matter.
When A2B refused to remove cyberbunker from the Internet entirely they indeed added just the one /21 on the SBL. This was not a network that was routed to the cyberbunker and just 'one of their networks' a range that had nothing to do with the case at all... I think the sentiment was quite clear.
The 'blackmail' in this case is 'We will keep all of A2B on the SBL unless you disconnect one of your paying customers from the Internet entirely'
They don't care that A2B doesn't send SPAM they just really dislike the cyberbunker and are abusing the power of their SBL to try and remove entities that they don't like from the Internet entirely.
Note that the cyberbunker will remove spammers, their ToS:
This includes but is not limited to:
* Any criminal activities, as defined by the law of:
o Customer's country of residence (natural persons) or company registration,
* Mass sending of unsollicted e-mail (SPAM).
* Sending floods of any kind to any other computer system or network which inhibits the correct behaviour of said computer system or network.
* Harrassment of individuals.
* Endangering the quality of service or network stability for other internet users in any way.
It's just that if spamhaus says that someone is doing 'something illegal' without specifying what it is, the cyberbunker isn't just going to disconnect them. Spamhaus *really* dislikes it when an ISP doesn't blindly follow their 'opinions' and most ISPs do because if they don't they get blackmailed like Cyberbunker was before and A2B is now.
But if this opinion is automatically taken as fact by 2/3rds of the Internet's email servers and you go to an ISP and say: "We want you to remove this and this customer from the Internet or we will be of the opinion that all your outgoing email is unwanted SPAM." the this kind of changes the picture.
This isn't about some SBL, Spamhaus is not taking anything less than Complete removal from the Internet for CB3ROB I think that this goes slightly further than an 'opinion'