Wow.. yet another piece of crap legislation. When are they going to learn that measures like these will not work?
What is funny/sad/scary is that if the MPAA/RIAA were medical care providers and used these same philosophy in care that they do in their current business, they would have been sued out of existence a long time ago because of all the mal-practice suits they'd lose. They simply try the same thing over and over again.
Exactly. I mangle my e-mail because when I originally signed up for my domain, the account started filling with spam. I changed it to "username @ domain.com" and the volume dropped dramaticly from 10 a day to 1 at most.
For the rest of the info, I put the host's stuff for everything by the Org Contact. And for that the only difference is my name.
Just because you say something doens't make it true. Go peddle far-left "pure capitalism" theories somewhere else. They have no baisis in reality, and are about as realistic as "pure communism" theories.
Who said anything about polar capitalistic theories? This about consumers dictating the ulimate lifespan of a product. Kind of like how Ford/GM/Chrsytler/Honda/etc have ton of dealers yet we don't see ones for Yugo.
...you are given certain rights and certain protections under the law.
Again, what does this have to do with expecting better coding from people? Motiviation is moot. Cost is moot.
By your logic, it is akin to saying unpaid grad students teaching courses should be excused for bad teaching where as a professor/lecturor should not because they are paid.
The money is moot. That is how capitalism works. The masses speak with their cash. If MS bombed very badly and ultimately screwed their user base over, then the masses would speak with their money and MS would die out as have so many companies before them.
You bitch and moan everytime MS has an exploit. Well here comes one for Mozilla that is practically identicle to the one on Windows reported yesterday and there is this logical world of difference. MS is supposed to fix everything and be perfect; but yet OSS is excused from that.
Sounds like excuses rather than reasons because by your logic free software is OK to be the swiss cheese that MS is called while MS is not.
At the core of it is the coding. Not the motivation/rationale of the developer.
Why not? People trying to compromise systems are logically going to use the pool they can get in the easiest. Some may like the better challenge but most of the ones hacking IE are script kiddies and exploit infants anyways who probably have to rely on simple IE vulnerabilities.
Previous court rulings have allowed for infinite, private use of recorded things like Pay-Per-View events/movies.
If you want it *THAT* bad, then go buy yourself a goddamned VCR/DVD-R and dump it to that. The ones who like to hack theirs, send it to PC and save it there or something.
Inspite of having mammoth HDs andsuch, do you *really* want a huge 2+ hour file recorded at hgh quality just sitting on it for a long period of time? Do you lug your TiVo over to friends' places to do a movie night?
Better yet, as someone else suggested, go out and pay thr $20 or so an buy the DVD so you get a better copy, the special features, and a copy you can use anywhere.
Why should Microsoft bare the burden of making sure other people's code works? It's not like MS isn't helping them by getting SDKs, DDKs, and APIs out there as fast as they are available.
Unless you're a Linux only user, DeCSS was rendered obselete a while ago.
I can rip DVDs to my heart's content.. all I gotta do is play 'em in PowerDVD or some other software for a few seconds. Unlocks the drive and disc and the ripper takes it from there...
I just asked someone I know who actually works for Comcast. The policy on Wireless is this: They shouldn't be able to go out and get on your network. This means WEP and/or access list must be enabled and your WEP key cannot be publicly available.
Also, only one household is able to use it. Meaning You and anybody who visits you. Not your neighbors, not anyone who happens to drive by with an 802.11 device.
Well, that's probably not Comcast doing that. My ISP had a similar problem. The router did not work but plugging a PC directly into the drop (It's a CAN with an ATM backbone and an OC-3 connection point) worked fine. Turns out the switch that was plugged into the backbone was to blame. It would be on anywhere from 24-72 hours then shut off again. This happened with two different brands of equipment.
And unless Comcast flat-out bans use of routing equipment, then if they were doing it they're breaking the law.
If you still feel this is Comcast's doing, escalate the call to a manager, call customer service, call corporate offices, etc.
Ok you guys are just being a little to anal retentive with the words.
First off disguising origin. Anyone with half a brain knows you cannot get a location from an IP address. What they mean by it is IP Spoofing. If I'm a Comcast customer, I can't set my network to trick others into thinking I'm on Verizon, AOL/TW's, etc. If I am a Comcast customer, then I cannot disguise my IP to say otherwise. If the law needs my physical location, they can go through the legal channels and get it from Comcast.
CID blocking is iffy. I do not think this wouild be affected as it would force SBC and such to discontinue services like Privacy Manager. Second the biggest concern is telemarketing. The FCC is setting up the National Do Not Call list in July with enforcement in September. Why worry?
VPNs would be legal at this point because a) No state legislature is going to tell a corporation (Borders, the big 3 auto makers come to mind) that they can no longer use thier legit VPNs. And if they go after legit personal VPNs, one could claim discrimination based on that. Now if your ISP bans VPNs (which is thier right) then this law is moot anyways. b) Comcast et al do not ban VPNs to my knowledge nor do they ban use of NAT. I bet they love NAT because instead of charging you $10-15 for more IPs, they can charge you and others $40/mo for other individuals. Last I heard, Comcast only cares about multiple computers if they are hogging bandwidth or if non-customers are getting regular access (meaning sharing with neighbors via 802.11, etc.)
Can you think of any modern applications that this law is really targeting? Cell phone cloning and cable descramblers come to mind fast.
Not really. Comcast usually spots those people at the NOC. Mostly because the people who share thier access with neighbors and stuff offen end up usiong multiple file sharing and stuff which causes them to stand out. A packet sniffer goes out to determine why your node has so much traffic, they see a couple of simultaneous connections to KaZaA, they .
Now if you'r running a controlled Wireless, Wired, or a combonation LAN with, they'd probably tell you to either lower your consumption or speak to a sales rep about a new plan to fit your needs.
If I remember correctly, Comcast only charges per-machine if you want each machine to have an internet IP.
Besides, all it takes is one yahoo prosecuted wrongly under it and it dies. If it happens in the Southeast corner of the state it's as good as gone.
It's because they (RIAA/MPAA) think they will be able to use this law to aide thier efforts. Just like VA prosecutors are using the Anti-Terrorism laws to aide them in nailing the DC-Area Snipers.
While the language of the law might seem that way, it does look pretty harmless to computer users. It does seem to be aimed at protecting telephone services and such. And as anyone who lives in Michigan (or knows SBC), Michigan's government is not a fan of SBC Ameritech.
Exactly. Not to mention it makes 3rd party vendors update thier code. Microsoft themself can't do it because some stupid company who can't write software *cough*NetScape*cough* will run to Trashcroft and the DoJ and scream anti-trust.
Personally I am glad. I just bought Emperor: Battle for Dune and can't get it to work. Electronics Arts discontinued support so I have to hack-n-slash a way to get a gme I really like to work.
If this is impoirtant stuff, then why are you being cheap and not a) using a mover or b) using Air?
Don't think it's just UPS. FedEx managed to run over an entire Compaq computer with a truck and never bothered to tell us until we called wonder WTF it was.
No, it doesn't because otherwise they in good company with Avid, Discreet, Alias|Wavefront and a host of others.
Comparing tangible, physical constructs to digital ones is Apples vs Oranges.
End *USER* License means use, not sell. If you want to sell Windows, become an MS Reseller.
Slashdot Mirror
...that there is no God.
Wow.. yet another piece of crap legislation. When are they going to learn that measures like these will not work?
What is funny/sad/scary is that if the MPAA/RIAA were medical care providers and used these same philosophy in care that they do in their current business, they would have been sued out of existence a long time ago because of all the mal-practice suits they'd lose. They simply try the same thing over and over again.
Exactly. I mangle my e-mail because when I originally signed up for my domain, the account started filling with spam. I changed it to "username @ domain.com" and the volume dropped dramaticly from 10 a day to 1 at most.
For the rest of the info, I put the host's stuff for everything by the Org Contact. And for that the only difference is my name.
Just because you say something doens't make it true. Go peddle far-left "pure capitalism" theories somewhere else. They have no baisis in reality, and are about as realistic as "pure communism" theories.
Who said anything about polar capitalistic theories? This about consumers dictating the ulimate lifespan of a product. Kind of like how Ford/GM/Chrsytler/Honda/etc have ton of dealers yet we don't see ones for Yugo.
Again, what does this have to do with expecting better coding from people? Motiviation is moot. Cost is moot.
By your logic, it is akin to saying unpaid grad students teaching courses should be excused for bad teaching where as a professor/lecturor should not because they are paid.
The money is moot. That is how capitalism works. The masses speak with their cash. If MS bombed very badly and ultimately screwed their user base over, then the masses would speak with their money and MS would die out as have so many companies before them. You bitch and moan everytime MS has an exploit. Well here comes one for Mozilla that is practically identicle to the one on Windows reported yesterday and there is this logical world of difference. MS is supposed to fix everything and be perfect; but yet OSS is excused from that. Sounds like excuses rather than reasons because by your logic free software is OK to be the swiss cheese that MS is called while MS is not. At the core of it is the coding. Not the motivation/rationale of the developer.
I think it's unfair to hold Microsoft to financial responsibility but not anybody else.
Amen! I think you just hit the center of a major hypocrisy in Open Source.
"there's more people trying to hack MS products"
Why not? People trying to compromise systems are logically going to use the pool they can get in the easiest. Some may like the better challenge but most of the ones hacking IE are script kiddies and exploit infants anyways who probably have to rely on simple IE vulnerabilities.
Thank you! I do not see anyone here bitching about the time limitation Comcast has on its On Demand stuff.
Previous court rulings have allowed for infinite, private use of recorded things like Pay-Per-View events/movies.
If you want it *THAT* bad, then go buy yourself a goddamned VCR/DVD-R and dump it to that. The ones who like to hack theirs, send it to PC and save it there or something.
Inspite of having mammoth HDs andsuch, do you *really* want a huge 2+ hour file recorded at hgh quality just sitting on it for a long period of time? Do you lug your TiVo over to friends' places to do a movie night?
Better yet, as someone else suggested, go out and pay thr $20 or so an buy the DVD so you get a better copy, the special features, and a copy you can use anywhere.
AMEN!!!!!!
Why should Microsoft bare the burden of making sure other people's code works? It's not like MS isn't helping them by getting SDKs, DDKs, and APIs out there as fast as they are available.
Coulda fooled me.....
Unless you're a Linux only user, DeCSS was rendered obselete a while ago. I can rip DVDs to my heart's content.. all I gotta do is play 'em in PowerDVD or some other software for a few seconds. Unlocks the drive and disc and the ripper takes it from there...
I believe Alias provides a service the does the conversion.
Those *SAME* instructions are there. Posted over 2 years ago. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb; en-us;126025
I just asked someone I know who actually works for Comcast. The policy on Wireless is this: They shouldn't be able to go out and get on your network. This means WEP and/or access list must be enabled and your WEP key cannot be publicly available.
Also, only one household is able to use it. Meaning You and anybody who visits you. Not your neighbors, not anyone who happens to drive by with an 802.11 device.
Well, that's probably not Comcast doing that. My ISP had a similar problem. The router did not work but plugging a PC directly into the drop (It's a CAN with an ATM backbone and an OC-3 connection point) worked fine. Turns out the switch that was plugged into the backbone was to blame. It would be on anywhere from 24-72 hours then shut off again. This happened with two different brands of equipment. And unless Comcast flat-out bans use of routing equipment, then if they were doing it they're breaking the law. If you still feel this is Comcast's doing, escalate the call to a manager, call customer service, call corporate offices, etc.
Ok you guys are just being a little to anal retentive with the words.
First off disguising origin. Anyone with half a brain knows you cannot get a location from an IP address. What they mean by it is IP Spoofing. If I'm a Comcast customer, I can't set my network to trick others into thinking I'm on Verizon, AOL/TW's, etc. If I am a Comcast customer, then I cannot disguise my IP to say otherwise. If the law needs my physical location, they can go through the legal channels and get it from Comcast.
CID blocking is iffy. I do not think this wouild be affected as it would force SBC and such to discontinue services like Privacy Manager. Second the biggest concern is telemarketing. The FCC is setting up the National Do Not Call list in July with enforcement in September. Why worry?
VPNs would be legal at this point because a) No state legislature is going to tell a corporation (Borders, the big 3 auto makers come to mind) that they can no longer use thier legit VPNs. And if they go after legit personal VPNs, one could claim discrimination based on that. Now if your ISP bans VPNs (which is thier right) then this law is moot anyways. b) Comcast et al do not ban VPNs to my knowledge nor do they ban use of NAT. I bet they love NAT because instead of charging you $10-15 for more IPs, they can charge you and others $40/mo for other individuals. Last I heard, Comcast only cares about multiple computers if they are hogging bandwidth or if non-customers are getting regular access (meaning sharing with neighbors via 802.11, etc.)
Can you think of any modern applications that this law is really targeting? Cell phone cloning and cable descramblers come to mind fast.
Not really. Comcast usually spots those people at the NOC. Mostly because the people who share thier access with neighbors and stuff offen end up usiong multiple file sharing and stuff which causes them to stand out. A packet sniffer goes out to determine why your node has so much traffic, they see a couple of simultaneous connections to KaZaA, they . Now if you'r running a controlled Wireless, Wired, or a combonation LAN with, they'd probably tell you to either lower your consumption or speak to a sales rep about a new plan to fit your needs. If I remember correctly, Comcast only charges per-machine if you want each machine to have an internet IP. Besides, all it takes is one yahoo prosecuted wrongly under it and it dies. If it happens in the Southeast corner of the state it's as good as gone.
It's because they (RIAA/MPAA) think they will be able to use this law to aide thier efforts. Just like VA prosecutors are using the Anti-Terrorism laws to aide them in nailing the DC-Area Snipers. While the language of the law might seem that way, it does look pretty harmless to computer users. It does seem to be aimed at protecting telephone services and such. And as anyone who lives in Michigan (or knows SBC), Michigan's government is not a fan of SBC Ameritech.
Exactly. Not to mention it makes 3rd party vendors update thier code. Microsoft themself can't do it because some stupid company who can't write software *cough*NetScape*cough* will run to Trashcroft and the DoJ and scream anti-trust. Personally I am glad. I just bought Emperor: Battle for Dune and can't get it to work. Electronics Arts discontinued support so I have to hack-n-slash a way to get a gme I really like to work.
Nah. He's dumber than a box of hair.
I had a thought. Rasky's activities may be in violation of Michigan Law.
g e= getObject&objName=mcl-750-411h&queryid=2419960&hig hlight=stalking
Michigan is one of the states that has ammended harassment/stalking laws to include electronic means of communication.
Anti-Spam lawyers might want to look at MCL 750.411h.
Rasky would definitely fall into the "Unconsented Contact" category.
Full text at:
http://www.michiganlegislature.org/mileg.asp?pa
If this is impoirtant stuff, then why are you being cheap and not a) using a mover or b) using Air? Don't think it's just UPS. FedEx managed to run over an entire Compaq computer with a truck and never bothered to tell us until we called wonder WTF it was.
Wanna bet? Better have your checkbook ready to pay the $600,000+ fine.
No, it doesn't because otherwise they in good company with Avid, Discreet, Alias|Wavefront and a host of others. Comparing tangible, physical constructs to digital ones is Apples vs Oranges. End *USER* License means use, not sell. If you want to sell Windows, become an MS Reseller.