TFA (The Guardian) said "But its patent portfolio is dwarfed by those of its competitor". So it was fucked up first by the submitter, and of course Taco who "edited" it. I don't know why you say "anymore", Slashdot editors never have given a shit about spelling, grammar, factual accuracy.
The reason for the notability requirement is because otherwise the good information gets lost in the chaff of articles
"Lost"? There are billions of webpages on the Internet, more every day, and yet none of the pages I want to access get "lost". You see only one page at a time. It doesn't get squashed if there are 10 million other articles on the same server.
Let say 5 years from now the forum is dead and no other info can be found.
No online reference can be considered permanent. But with luck the Wayback Machine will have archived it. If I find a dead link in Wikipedia I may look there and update it with the Wayback link.
IMHO it's a challenge to the various climate models - put up or shut up.
And which side is likely to have money to "put up"? The fossil fuel industry makes untold billions for every year we delay taking action to ameliorate their destruction of our environment.
Read up about the 80-20 rule. A very small percentage of all files on rapidshare constitutes a large percentage of all downloads.
You're just assuming that rule of thumb applies with no justification. Well, I'll see that and raise you .
Equally sweeping unjustified.
You are arguing about something else other than wheter it is technically possible for rapidshare to curb most piracy on their site.
Of course it's possible. They just have to manually review every single file. The question is not whether it's "possible", it's whether it is reasonable to ask anyone to do that, and what the consequences would be to not just that company, but everyone who uses the Internet for anything. Because such a regime would not stop at that one company, they would have to monitor every file transfer, however made, all the time.
The system can do a simple google search and see which domains it is placed on. Yes, you can create lots of accounts, you can also record how many accounts a single ip creates and ban them for abuse if they create to many.
Most warez forums already aren't open to non-members, so Google and others can't search them at all. And banning "IPs"? Never heard of proxies? Dynamic IPs?
And how about Joe jobs? Some asshole doesn't like the whistleblowing video you are uploading , or just wants to fuck with your business, gets the filenames you use and puts them on warez boards describing it as whatever movie or kiddie porn.
It'd take a week for your methods to be completely futile. Except for the massive hassles and expense you've imposed on everyone who is legitimately trying to get their file from A to B. If you just want to outlaw all file transfers, just do it up front.
Then you hire 10 Indians for $5/hour who go through the most suspicious and most downloaded files and check them for obvious copyright infringements.
Right. So you get a bunch of Indians working for a few cents an hour to monitor all the files people upload. That won't cause any confidentiality problems, will it?
So anyone who cares about privacy will use encryption. I guess you'd delete or report them on the grounds that "You have something to hide, you must be a pirate/terrorist/pedophile"?
Or they could just check the 100 most downloaded rapidshare files. Likely, all of which are warez or movies.
Even if you're right, that's about.0001% of the files. Not much of a deterrent.
And when warez still gets through, what then? Who's responsible? Is RS going to be fined? If so, they'll just go out of business. And with this threat, no one will dare to offer any file transfer service: no email, no web forums, no Facebook, no Usenet, no Internet. We'll just all go back to 1980 and transfer files by FedEx -- or will your Indians be empowered to open mail and check any media for "obvious copyright infringements".
. if RapidShare is in any way affiliated with rapidlibrary or other similar sites,
And RS has lawyers and knows that full well. So of course they keep themselves well away from indexing sites. They would hardly have issued this challenge if it were possible to trip them up so easily.
By the way, if you look at many of these sites that promise to find stuff on Rapidshare, what they are is simply a customised Google search, plus a crapload of porn ads. DIY and Google for "moviename + Rapidshare" and you'll find thousands of hits, some of them even work.
Furthermore, if they never open up the files put on their servers, how the hell would they know whether there's copyright infringement going on in the first place?
They don't. I'm sure they never said that they could. Can GMail/Yahoo/Hotmail... all guarantee that their services aren't used to transfer files in violation of copyright? Can AOL? The post office?
What they're saying is that they do not take any interest in what is being transferred. They're not like eBay, taking a cut of any transaction, they simply transfer blocks of data. Unless you want to mandate that every service, ISP, etc, that does this is responsible for the legality of every file that passes through their system, you can't insist that Rapidshare does.
Incorrect, here is a simple explanation of how RapidShare could,with a very high degree of success, detect piracy on their site that even a toddler can understand
And that a toddler could circumvent if you actually put it into practice. Plus you would have a HUGE amount of false positives. Basically, you are assuming "Guilty until proven innocent" and deleting any "popular" file on suspicion.
The accuracy, efficiency, and robustness of the IBM Trackpoint is already the perfect HID. Why do people persist with the folly of trying to improve on this perfection?
If you're making conference calls and sending emails while "barreling down the highway" you should be lcoked up. And try to cut down on the cocaine too, while you're at it.
Australia and especially conservative Queenslanders are amongst the staunchest climate change denialists
You can find plenty of idiots in Australia, as you can everywhere, but to blandly declare that Australians as a whole believe that is bullshit. And no, the couple of quotes you gave are just anecdotal and opinions. Of course, the coal industry exerts immense pressure. And governments give way to that. As they do everywhere.
The Wikileak story you link to is about how the USA blackmailed other countries into watering down Copenhagen. Yet this is somehow proof of "Australian complacency"?.
When Google applies Gmail spam detection technology to blogger that will be the end of blog spam.
They have done absolutely nothing to stop spammers using Google Groups from spewing all over Usenet. They obviously could easily detect and block 99% of spam, but choose not to.
some guy had talked about taking a screen shot of a captcha and displaying it on his free porn site...
Yeah, yeah. People have been talklng about that for years. Never actually put it into practice.
So if it really did work he got 1000's of captchas solved by humans for free.
Not "free". You'd need a pretty high traffic site to get responses quick enough. But there's so much free porn on the web that no ne will be bothered to do them. It'd probably cost you more to run and host the porn site than just paying a sweatshop.
Google will give you links to all the absolutely free porn you want, no captchas required.
But if you're on the phone and they say "Sending you the email now", you're boned. You'll have to hang up, allow the data transmission, and then call them back.
Boned? As you said, you hang up, get the mail, redial. Costs you about three extra clicks and 5 seconds.
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit. I've bought lots of bootleg software from China, nver seen any malware.
Cue "You're too dumb to know" comments....
Who needed Google? That's linked from TFA. In fact, TFA is a slashvertisement for their screwdriver for $10. If you actually had looked beyond the first hit, you would have found ones for 1/4 the price. eg, http://www.sw-box.com/Professional-Screw-Driver-Opening-Tool-For-Iphone-4.html : $2.35
I read your post. "It gets lost because having an article on Wikipedia is no longer a sign that the topic is notable." It's a non sequitur.
TFA (The Guardian) said "But its patent portfolio is dwarfed by those of its competitor". So it was fucked up first by the submitter, and of course Taco who "edited" it. I don't know why you say "anymore", Slashdot editors never have given a shit about spelling, grammar, factual accuracy.
"Lost"? There are billions of webpages on the Internet, more every day, and yet none of the pages I want to access get "lost". You see only one page at a time. It doesn't get squashed if there are 10 million other articles on the same server.
No online reference can be considered permanent. But with luck the Wayback Machine will have archived it. If I find a dead link in Wikipedia I may look there and update it with the Wayback link.
An "unnamed third party service" is an explanation? As much as "a dog ate my homework".
I often get people who send me a 1 MB email attachment that is just a paragraph of text wrapped up in the absurdly inflated Doc format.
And which side is likely to have money to "put up"? The fossil fuel industry makes untold billions for every year we delay taking action to ameliorate their destruction of our environment.
What? Allowing the question to decided by who has the more money?
And we're supposed to wait for 10 years before making a decision.. whose agenda does that serve, I wonder?
You're just assuming that rule of thumb applies with no justification. Well, I'll see that and raise you . Equally sweeping unjustified.
You are arguing about something else other than wheter it is technically possible for rapidshare to curb most piracy on their site.
Of course it's possible. They just have to manually review every single file. The question is not whether it's "possible", it's whether it is reasonable to ask anyone to do that, and what the consequences would be to not just that company, but everyone who uses the Internet for anything. Because such a regime would not stop at that one company, they would have to monitor every file transfer, however made, all the time.
Most warez forums already aren't open to non-members, so Google and others can't search them at all. And banning "IPs"? Never heard of proxies? Dynamic IPs?
And how about Joe jobs? Some asshole doesn't like the whistleblowing video you are uploading , or just wants to fuck with your business, gets the filenames you use and puts them on warez boards describing it as whatever movie or kiddie porn.
It'd take a week for your methods to be completely futile. Except for the massive hassles and expense you've imposed on everyone who is legitimately trying to get their file from A to B. If you just want to outlaw all file transfers, just do it up front.
Right. So you get a bunch of Indians working for a few cents an hour to monitor all the files people upload. That won't cause any confidentiality problems, will it? So anyone who cares about privacy will use encryption. I guess you'd delete or report them on the grounds that "You have something to hide, you must be a pirate/terrorist/pedophile"?
Or they could just check the 100 most downloaded rapidshare files. Likely, all of which are warez or movies.
Even if you're right, that's about .0001% of the files. Not much of a deterrent.
And when warez still gets through, what then? Who's responsible? Is RS going to be fined? If so, they'll just go out of business. And with this threat, no one will dare to offer any file transfer service: no email, no web forums, no Facebook, no Usenet, no Internet. We'll just all go back to 1980 and transfer files by FedEx -- or will your Indians be empowered to open mail and check any media for "obvious copyright infringements".
And RS has lawyers and knows that full well. So of course they keep themselves well away from indexing sites. They would hardly have issued this challenge if it were possible to trip them up so easily.
By the way, if you look at many of these sites that promise to find stuff on Rapidshare, what they are is simply a customised Google search, plus a crapload of porn ads. DIY and Google for "moviename + Rapidshare" and you'll find thousands of hits, some of them even work.
They don't. I'm sure they never said that they could. Can GMail/Yahoo/Hotmail... all guarantee that their services aren't used to transfer files in violation of copyright? Can AOL? The post office?
What they're saying is that they do not take any interest in what is being transferred. They're not like eBay, taking a cut of any transaction, they simply transfer blocks of data. Unless you want to mandate that every service, ISP, etc, that does this is responsible for the legality of every file that passes through their system, you can't insist that Rapidshare does.
And that a toddler could circumvent if you actually put it into practice. Plus you would have a HUGE amount of false positives. Basically, you are assuming "Guilty until proven innocent" and deleting any "popular" file on suspicion.
The accuracy, efficiency, and robustness of the IBM Trackpoint is already the perfect HID. Why do people persist with the folly of trying to improve on this perfection?
Wow, emails from the future. No wonder you're impatient with our primitive 21st century technology.
If you're making conference calls and sending emails while "barreling down the highway" you should be lcoked up. And try to cut down on the cocaine too, while you're at it.
You can find plenty of idiots in Australia, as you can everywhere, but to blandly declare that Australians as a whole believe that is bullshit. And no, the couple of quotes you gave are just anecdotal and opinions. Of course, the coal industry exerts immense pressure. And governments give way to that. As they do everywhere.
The Wikileak story you link to is about how the USA blackmailed other countries into watering down Copenhagen. Yet this is somehow proof of "Australian complacency"?.
They have done absolutely nothing to stop spammers using Google Groups from spewing all over Usenet. They obviously could easily detect and block 99% of spam, but choose not to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_job
Yeah, yeah. People have been talklng about that for years. Never actually put it into practice.
So if it really did work he got 1000's of captchas solved by humans for free.
Not "free". You'd need a pretty high traffic site to get responses quick enough. But there's so much free porn on the web that no ne will be bothered to do them. It'd probably cost you more to run and host the porn site than just paying a sweatshop.
Google will give you links to all the absolutely free porn you want, no captchas required.
Boned? As you said, you hang up, get the mail, redial. Costs you about three extra clicks and 5 seconds.
First I have to invest in the 50" screen, and then the Lazik surgery. A little more than $30 there to make Bluray useful to me.