Personally I loved the 1.X series as the application bar/switcher was seperated from the menus/menu-ing system.
You could have menues and virtual desktop's buttons on the top (as it should be:) ) and application switcher on the bottom (I suppose why I never saw the fuss about the dock in OS X) that would even *switch* between apps on different desktops! Cool.
Now the "K" bar (or whatever it is called, I forget) is so damn crowded and the move to 2.X or so took the ability to seperate the app switcher bar from the "K" bar... major suckage and I switched to Gnome/sawfish and wanted to go back for that simple functionality.
Did it ever reappear? I'd consider going back to KDE for its visual appeal and added abilities, but the loss of that one function was enough to make me defect.
Oh, and someone asked about the "OS X-ness" being noticed...yes.
I'd venture to call it KDEOSXXP 3.0.
Rounded buttons of Aqua, flat brite menus of XP.
Also, I a not an interface designer, but for some odd reason I want/need/wish for would be to have the max/min button on the left (a la Aqua) and the close button/box on the right of a window (a la windows/KDE).
I could have sword "The Old Man down the road" and "Green River" had similar chords/tunes.
Ironic isn't it? The Old Man and Green River *both* (IIRC) were written *and* composed by John Fogarty. Even to a teenager such as myself (at the time) the lawsuit was the stupidest damn thing I had ever heard of.
Ponder for a second: both songs were composed by JF, the lyrics for both were written by him and the label is suing him? For what? Ripping himself off? Huh? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...he's flattering himself?
(bear in mind this was my train of thought as a teenager with *all the details*, now, with less details and being older it is strangely the same thought that comes up).
Humm, to take the "elephant" example and twist and warp it into something else that is no less true, consider:
What the RIAA is doing with IP is being "Intellectual Pooperscoopers". You know the guy that follows the elephants at the circus and collects the droppings? That would be the RIAA to a "T". The elephant/artist's byproducts of thier talents (music, movies, ect) are collected by the IP's (RIAA, MPAA).
Great bands/artist "in the olden days" more than likely hand more control over this "kind of shit" and the consumers more than likely had better tastes. Which strengthens the conclusion that N'Sink and Brit. Spuds are more and more the IP's doings of polishing a turd to a glowing finish.
Ok, apologies as that fell apart in my mind at the end, but is no less valid, I think.
Allow me to mix metaphores for a second:
Perhaps "back then" values were different and the "elephants laid golden eggs" occasionally.
As well, the "Intel. Pooperscoopers" knew the value of when to use a regular shovel from a snow shovel...now they just use the snowshovel and call it "even".
Tired brain, sorry, dunno what else to say besides extending the metaphore: "The 'shit' is hitting the fan {courts state/fed/pub opinion}, so the only thing left to answer is who comes up smelling like a rose and who's going to get pricked? Meantime the consumers are all mushrooms...and we all know what happens with mushroom.
GB.
Gift for understatement...
on
XBox Released
·
· Score: 1
All I could think when I say the Gotham Racing commercial was "Need For Speed 2/3" with Voodoo2 acceleration.
That is my observation/summation/knee jerk reaction.
Innovation, hardly.
Revolutionary..murrmph..snort..hahahaha.
Interesting...ok, I'll admit I'm intrigued.
Must have? Have not bought a console since the original Nintendo/discovering PC's...not going to start again unless I see a 50$ console and 5$ games.
Very good point, mainly at the very end, because it is true. My son has enjoyed CCR since before he could speak, I still enjoy it to this day.
Humm, standing the test of Time. Unix is 30-something, CCR is 30-something, for that matter, I am too.
Maybe "Proud Mary" is more telling than we think it is:
Left a good job in the city/working for the man every nite and day/but I never lost a minute of sleep/worryin' bout the way things might have been.
I've read the lyrics over and over....
(yes, the lyrics are printed inside the front jacket, but I don't have it handy...that is from memory. Oh MY GOD, my brain is a circumvention device...oh shit, don't tell anyone...)
....Do the artists have it better now than 30 years ago?
I honestly don't know, but my opinion, at least as far as bands such as CCR go: It was all about the music...fame be damned, the recording industry was just a vehicle of delivery.
Huh, The RIAA is a representative of "glorified" delivery boys?
the RIAA represents the companies, not the artists
So, they are representing themselves (thru/with lawyers, no doubt).
The addage, any lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client.
There are little snippets that catch my attention:
Under existing law, a ``work for hire'' is considered the property of the employer - the record company - and not the artist, preventing artists from reclaiming their copyrights 35 years after recordings are made.
And the incentive to create comes from where?
Pardon me if I am being dense, but, why does it seem that artist are feeding the monster that they know is going to devour them?
Or is it this contention a hopes of sticking in the craw of the beast?
It's irrelevant because there can be no doubt that the record companies own or control the copyrights at issue here.
Uh, huh..."Feed me Semour, Feed me NOW!"...is all I keep hearing.
Therefore, the work-for-hire provisions of most recording contracts are void and unenforceable.
So let me get this straight:
The artist pays the RIAA/Label to make the:
Album(cd/tape), the cover art, most if not all of the costs and don't own the "music" on the disk.
The Fans pay the RIAA/Label for the cd/tape, cover art, distribution and middlemen and don't own the "music" on the disk and in some cases are not allowed to excercise their fair use.
(dripping sarcasm)
OH, yeah, right, that sounds very fair.
(/DS off)
Work for Hire At Will Employee Slavery (legitimized, if not legalized)
Unless I am missing something that is what is coming across, or I've XP'd it already.
a virtual mouse is a no-no...I imagine like an optical mouse you can't do a flic-shot in Quake3.
Virtual joy stick...humm, perhaps with interactive porn that is where their hand would be anyway...(ahem, uhhh, so I've heard)...and the "twist action"....oye.
Reminds me of a friend of mine:
"Well, my wife gave me a Thrustmaster for my birthday. It is a really stiff stick. (pause)
But what would you expect from a company called Thrustmaster!.
Pardon my sillyness, but I can't seem to get this image out of my head.
If you remember the "Beggin' Strips" commercial: I kept picturing that dog's nose saying "It's DATA! data-data over here, data-data over there...What's this?! I can't read!
The MP/RI-AA is the "dog" chasing the smell of bacon/data (i.e. wielding the DMCA, lawsuits and general nastiness) and "they can't read" the writing on the wall, as it were, with code being free speech (or falling under the 1st Amen.)
Honestly, I think the idea applies more to the MPAA than the RIAA, because of DeCSS's implications.
Napster issues aside (and I am not touching that one) consider mp3, though.
Mp3's are not illegal. Consider taping a program to ripping an mp3 being approximately the same.
You are not stealing your own music, but you are "shifting" its form for later/different use.
(I hope that made sense. Enterprise is on, gotta go)
The Internet has not only inspired invention, it has also inspired publication in a way that would never have been produced by the world of existing publishers.
F'n A!
This is what I have been saying for the longest time, even in several discussions elsewhere.
One particular reply said, in effect: "So, broadband/the interentet is good only for stealing".
Ummm, no. I suppose in a way I alluded to that is one "infringing use" but the rapid dissemination of *information* and *content* is what the net is all about.
Now my brain is kinda fried after a long day, but the article said exactly what I am saying now.
Information/content has to be thought of in nebulous terms, unfortunately, and that throws people off (and pisses them off, too. Referring, of course to the RI/MP-AA).
If my train of thought leaves the station, the point is a network does not care "what is transmitted" only that a 'reasonable effort is made to get it to it's destination'.
Therein lies the danger to the MP/RI-AA...content and information in the form of video, audio, text, images, html, voice, data of all kinds.
Data is data. Binary, text...all data, correct?
Video? Data. Audio? Data. Text? Data.
All of the MP/RI-AA's "precious resources" are becoming commodities, plain and simple, just like air and sunshine, but, they are fighting like hell to "cut off our air supply" and keep people in the dark to keep themselves in business.
As Niccolò Machiavelli described long before the Internet, "Innovation makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old regime, and only lukewarm support is forthcoming from those who would prosper under the new."
Price gouging, foisting inferior products/bands on consumers, ripping off artist, directors, consumers.
Explains so much...when you fear for your life and livelyhood because you can't compete anymore you fight like hell with words and deeds.
I suppose with out getting overly philisophical it is about freedom of choice.
Most (I think) would choose not to even bother with this kind of junk software.
Why? I can only list personal reasons such as the movie "Saving Private Ryan" in an example.
I thought it was a very good movie for it's genre and its portrait of the senselessness of war.
By "masking" out the violent content of a war film you essentially have an episode of the "A-team".
Take "Natural Born Killers"...while not a deeply involved film, it was a deeply disturbing film in its own right.
Take out the violence and you might as well name the film "Natural Born Kidders".
Maybe they should invent a "Back Masking" technology that takes out the stupid crap from movies.
Like the dialogue in pr0n...we are not watching it to hear the actors speak.
Jar-Jar Binks was given as an example many times in previous posts. I think character itself was ok, but the characteristics was too much.
Rastafarian-whiney-mush-mouthed baby talk? Please, pick one, or none.
As far as nudity being in films...save for porn, yes, it is hard to think of when it is necessary.
However, I've heard that the "European way" of thinking is summed up by "Pick ONE and ONE only".
We are not talking about "Two great tastes that go great together"...sex and violence should be seperate for consumer grade films.
But, that is *my* opinion and some may share it others may not.
I honestly can't think of many movies where both sex and violence are "needed" save for perhaps NBK and Interview with a Vampire. And that is stretching it a bit thin.
So it is still, to me that is, the "Right Idea, Wrong Direction"...how about removing the tripe, piffle and refuse from movies?
Wait a minute...the do that already...it's called the ending credits.
How about players that autoskip/mask:
1) FBI warning (Film Buisness Investigations?)
2) Those annoying commercials at the beginning
of the movie.
3) The "Feature presentation" crap...let me watch the fricking movie already!
Pardon me for pointing out the blatantly obvious, but did anyone notice that saving private ryan was on the front of the page?
Kind of silly as it have to simply eject the disk once it was put in. Good movie, but deeply distrubing.
They owe me a penny for every stupid page with ads.
And is it me who just saw the Delta ad with the turkey getting cooked?
I'm sorry, but that is the wrong image to associate with an airline at the present time.
Seriously this is almost at the level of the "free ISP" scheme where they pay you to look at ads during your surfing.
Lets see, the os shows you ads, the browser shows you ads and now a penny per page.
Humm. "here's a quarter call someone who cares".
I may be a dinosaur, but I thought that the entire purpose of the internet was research, the dissemenation of information and communication, not a get rich quick scheme.
Internet Panhandeling (IP?, oye, now it makes sense).
Maybe there should be a T-shirt that says:
"I got broadband and all I got was a large pr0n collection..."
Wait. What was the downside again?
I forgot to mention that @home scans your machine daily to make sure you are not running a news server.
Never mind they *don't provide the bandwith* to run a news server and more often than not the *scans* will disrupt your downloads!
As for my previous post and your question I think the "hint" of fraud is just one more example of @home's...what is the word I'm looking for...incompetance, stupidity, (again) fraud, backward-assed-ness?
I'm sure someone else could think of a more eloquent way to put it, but this kind of reverse logic escapes me.
Seriously, look at the heart of what I am saying: you are paying the same, or more, and getting less and less as @home can take from you. Is this the way to run a business?
If this is the kind of "e-commerce" we can expect?
This kind of business "hari-kari" lends new meaning to "e-viscerated", does it not?
(I apologise for avoiding your question as to moderation. It was intentional. I've never moderated and I'm sure there are guidelines.
Heck I got a chuckle out of the moderations of this comment.
What is even funnier is that I agreed with the totals because it was too far over the top.
Don't get me wrong. Getting karma points is nice, but I prefer to be challenged on my thinking not on how I'm moderated.
That might be the another point you missed, perhaps?)
Slashdot Mirror
a look and feel lawsuit on the ping command (or PiNG) because it looks and 'feels' like the png suffix and is remarkably close to the command "ping".
Nature aborrs (sp?) a vaccuum, so put the drill to your right temple and....
Not only am I at work trying to view a trailer but the "must have pro version" crap mad me think "where can I get a serial".
But maybe that is just me, dunno.
Personally I loved the 1.X series as the application bar/switcher was seperated from the menus/menu-ing system.
:) ) and application switcher on the bottom (I suppose why I never saw the fuss about the dock in OS X) that would even *switch* between apps on different desktops! Cool.
You could have menues and virtual desktop's buttons on the top (as it should be
Now the "K" bar (or whatever it is called, I forget) is so damn crowded and the move to 2.X or so took the ability to seperate the app switcher bar from the "K" bar... major suckage and I switched to Gnome/sawfish and wanted to go back for that simple functionality.
Did it ever reappear? I'd consider going back to KDE for its visual appeal and added abilities, but the loss of that one function was enough to make me defect.
Oh, and someone asked about the "OS X-ness" being noticed...yes.
I'd venture to call it KDEOSXXP 3.0.
Rounded buttons of Aqua, flat brite menus of XP.
Also, I a not an interface designer, but for some odd reason I want/need/wish for would be to have the max/min button on the left (a la Aqua) and the close button/box on the right of a window (a la windows/KDE).
Maybe this just makes sense to me, dunno.
A baby seal walks into a club.
(Insert 3 second pause and *If* raucous laughter/groan does not ensue once you get it... I don't know what to tell you)
Yeah, I remember that.
I could have sword "The Old Man down the road" and "Green River" had similar chords/tunes.
Ironic isn't it? The Old Man and Green River *both* (IIRC) were written *and* composed by John Fogarty. Even to a teenager such as myself (at the time) the lawsuit was the stupidest damn thing I had ever heard of.
Ponder for a second: both songs were composed by JF, the lyrics for both were written by him and the label is suing him? For what? Ripping himself off? Huh? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...he's flattering himself?
(bear in mind this was my train of thought as a teenager with *all the details*, now, with less details and being older it is strangely the same thought that comes up).
Humm, to take the "elephant" example and twist and warp it into something else that is no less true, consider:
What the RIAA is doing with IP is being "Intellectual Pooperscoopers". You know the guy that follows the elephants at the circus and collects the droppings? That would be the RIAA to a "T". The elephant/artist's byproducts of thier talents (music, movies, ect) are collected by the IP's (RIAA, MPAA).
Great bands/artist "in the olden days" more than likely hand more control over this "kind of shit" and the consumers more than likely had better tastes. Which strengthens the conclusion that N'Sink and Brit. Spuds are more and more the IP's doings of polishing a turd to a glowing finish.
Ok, apologies as that fell apart in my mind at the end, but is no less valid, I think.
Allow me to mix metaphores for a second:
Perhaps "back then" values were different and the "elephants laid golden eggs" occasionally.
As well, the "Intel. Pooperscoopers" knew the value of when to use a regular shovel from a snow shovel...now they just use the snowshovel and call it "even".
Tired brain, sorry, dunno what else to say besides extending the metaphore: "The 'shit' is hitting the fan {courts state/fed/pub opinion}, so the only thing left to answer is who comes up smelling like a rose and who's going to get pricked? Meantime the consumers are all mushrooms...and we all know what happens with mushroom.
GB.
All I could think when I say the Gotham Racing commercial was "Need For Speed 2/3" with Voodoo2 acceleration.
That is my observation/summation/knee jerk reaction.
Innovation, hardly.
Revolutionary..murrmph..snort..hahahaha.
Interesting...ok, I'll admit I'm intrigued.
Must have? Have not bought a console since the original Nintendo/discovering PC's...not going to start again unless I see a 50$ console and 5$ games.
My Opinion, no more no less.
Very good point, mainly at the very end, because it is true. My son has enjoyed CCR since before he could speak, I still enjoy it to this day.
Humm, standing the test of Time. Unix is 30-something, CCR is 30-something, for that matter, I am too.
Maybe "Proud Mary" is more telling than we think it is:
Left a good job in the city/working for the man every nite and day/but I never lost a minute of sleep/worryin' bout the way things might have been.
I've read the lyrics over and over....
(yes, the lyrics are printed inside the front jacket, but I don't have it handy...that is from memory. Oh MY GOD, my brain is a circumvention device...oh shit, don't tell anyone...)
....Do the artists have it better now than 30 years ago?
I honestly don't know, but my opinion, at least as far as bands such as CCR go: It was all about the music...fame be damned, the recording industry was just a vehicle of delivery.
Huh, The RIAA is a representative of "glorified" delivery boys?
{snort...guffaw}
the RIAA represents the companies, not the artists
So, they are representing themselves (thru/with lawyers, no doubt).
The addage, any lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client.
There are little snippets that catch my attention:
Under existing law, a ``work for hire'' is considered the property of the employer - the record company - and not the artist, preventing artists from reclaiming their copyrights 35 years after recordings are made.
And the incentive to create comes from where?
Pardon me if I am being dense, but, why does it seem that artist are feeding the monster that they know is going to devour them?
Or is it this contention a hopes of sticking in the craw of the beast?
It's irrelevant because there can be no doubt that the record companies own or control the copyrights at issue here.
Uh, huh..."Feed me Semour, Feed me NOW!"...is all I keep hearing.
Therefore, the work-for-hire provisions of most recording contracts are void and unenforceable.
So let me get this straight:
The artist pays the RIAA/Label to make the:
Album(cd/tape), the cover art, most if not all of the costs and don't own the "music" on the disk.
The Fans pay the RIAA/Label for the cd/tape, cover art, distribution and middlemen and don't own the "music" on the disk and in some cases are not allowed to excercise their fair use.
(dripping sarcasm)
OH, yeah, right, that sounds very fair.
(/DS off)
Work for Hire At Will Employee Slavery (legitimized, if not legalized)
Unless I am missing something that is what is coming across, or I've XP'd it already.
a virtual mouse is a no-no...I imagine like an optical mouse you can't do a flic-shot in Quake3.
Virtual joy stick...humm, perhaps with interactive porn that is where their hand would be anyway...(ahem, uhhh, so I've heard)...and the "twist action"....oye.
Reminds me of a friend of mine:
"Well, my wife gave me a Thrustmaster for my birthday. It is a really stiff stick. (pause)
But what would you expect from a company called Thrustmaster!.
the daemon's in the details, too.
(shurg) Very nice and interesting article anyone else care to verify or dispute the findings?
And a serious question; does linux and bsd scale well across various architectures?
I suppose if people get riled up about any comparison maybe there should be a catagory such as "from the benchmark or skidmark dept."
Heh.
Pardon my sillyness, but I can't seem to get this image out of my head.
If you remember the "Beggin' Strips" commercial: I kept picturing that dog's nose saying "It's DATA! data-data over here, data-data over there...What's this?! I can't read!
The MP/RI-AA is the "dog" chasing the smell of bacon/data (i.e. wielding the DMCA, lawsuits and general nastiness) and "they can't read" the writing on the wall, as it were, with code being free speech (or falling under the 1st Amen.)
Honestly, I think the idea applies more to the MPAA than the RIAA, because of DeCSS's implications.
Napster issues aside (and I am not touching that one) consider mp3, though.
Mp3's are not illegal. Consider taping a program to ripping an mp3 being approximately the same.
You are not stealing your own music, but you are "shifting" its form for later/different use.
(I hope that made sense. Enterprise is on, gotta go)
The Internet has not only inspired invention, it has also inspired publication in a way that would never have been produced by the world of existing publishers.
F'n A!
This is what I have been saying for the longest time, even in several discussions elsewhere.
One particular reply said, in effect: "So, broadband/the interentet is good only for stealing".
Ummm, no. I suppose in a way I alluded to that is one "infringing use" but the rapid dissemination of *information* and *content* is what the net is all about.
Now my brain is kinda fried after a long day, but the article said exactly what I am saying now.
Information/content has to be thought of in nebulous terms, unfortunately, and that throws people off (and pisses them off, too. Referring, of course to the RI/MP-AA).
If my train of thought leaves the station, the point is a network does not care "what is transmitted" only that a 'reasonable effort is made to get it to it's destination'.
Therein lies the danger to the MP/RI-AA...content and information in the form of video, audio, text, images, html, voice, data of all kinds.
Data is data. Binary, text...all data, correct?
Video? Data. Audio? Data. Text? Data.
All of the MP/RI-AA's "precious resources" are becoming commodities, plain and simple, just like air and sunshine, but, they are fighting like hell to "cut off our air supply" and keep people in the dark to keep themselves in business.
Like I said before, it explains a lot.
As Niccolò Machiavelli described long before the Internet, "Innovation makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old regime, and only lukewarm support is forthcoming from those who would prosper under the new."
Price gouging, foisting inferior products/bands on consumers, ripping off artist, directors, consumers.
Explains so much...when you fear for your life and livelyhood because you can't compete anymore you fight like hell with words and deeds.
(Jafar voice)Hummm, Interesting (/off).
if we spill coffee/soda or some sort of beverage on our hand/invisible kbd/table will we still freak out?
I can see it now..."AAAAaaaa...oh, wait, nevermind".
As one who remembers fondly the HP workstations when going thru CS, this bums me out.
Killing off the 3000's by HP, Q killing off the Alpha (grrr) what is next?
Actually, I don't want to know, so, forget I asked. We have a depressed economy, I/we don't need depressed techs.
(sigh), at least they are still supporting it for a while, that is something, right?
See Dick. Indeed!
Excellent replies.
I suppose with out getting overly philisophical it is about freedom of choice.
Most (I think) would choose not to even bother with this kind of junk software.
Why? I can only list personal reasons such as the movie "Saving Private Ryan" in an example.
I thought it was a very good movie for it's genre and its portrait of the senselessness of war.
By "masking" out the violent content of a war film you essentially have an episode of the "A-team".
Take "Natural Born Killers"...while not a deeply involved film, it was a deeply disturbing film in its own right.
Take out the violence and you might as well name the film "Natural Born Kidders".
Maybe they should invent a "Back Masking" technology that takes out the stupid crap from movies.
Like the dialogue in pr0n...we are not watching it to hear the actors speak.
Jar-Jar Binks was given as an example many times in previous posts. I think character itself was ok, but the characteristics was too much.
Rastafarian-whiney-mush-mouthed baby talk? Please, pick one, or none.
As far as nudity being in films...save for porn, yes, it is hard to think of when it is necessary.
However, I've heard that the "European way" of thinking is summed up by "Pick ONE and ONE only".
We are not talking about "Two great tastes that go great together"...sex and violence should be seperate for consumer grade films.
But, that is *my* opinion and some may share it others may not.
I honestly can't think of many movies where both sex and violence are "needed" save for perhaps NBK and Interview with a Vampire. And that is stretching it a bit thin.
So it is still, to me that is, the "Right Idea, Wrong Direction"...how about removing the tripe, piffle and refuse from movies?
Wait a minute...the do that already...it's called the ending credits.
{SEG}
How about players that autoskip/mask:
1) FBI warning (Film Buisness Investigations?)
2) Those annoying commercials at the beginning
of the movie.
3) The "Feature presentation" crap...let me watch the fricking movie already!
Pardon me for pointing out the blatantly obvious, but did anyone notice that saving private ryan was on the front of the page?
Kind of silly as it have to simply eject the disk once it was put in. Good movie, but deeply distrubing.
cheers
There is no content on the Web that is worth a penny a page.
Agreed for the most part.
Present company most definitely included.
Ouch.
I moderate at +3, Highest Scores, and I always mod down.
If you don't like it, vote me off the island.
ROTFLMAO...now that deserves the 'good morning vietnam' comment of "most dire need of a BJ than any white man in history".
But I digress...times like these where I wish there was a seperate moderation of comments and sigs.
Actually, the penny a page scheme might work as long as the meathod of payment is a railgun
Uninstall your browser? Hahahah, thats soooo funny everyone knows you can't... Oh, wait.
"Oh, what a tangled Web we weave..." when we try to implement Passport and .Net
"A penney saved is a penny earned..." unless you surf the web.
Seeing as the content on the web is in part or in whole "borrowed" it lends new meaning to "penny pinchers".
Whoever came up with this idea probably wanted the money to "come rolling in" that is most likely not what they meant.
Ok, I'm done.
They owe me a penny for every stupid page with ads.
And is it me who just saw the Delta ad with the turkey getting cooked?
I'm sorry, but that is the wrong image to associate with an airline at the present time.
Seriously this is almost at the level of the "free ISP" scheme where they pay you to look at ads during your surfing.
Lets see, the os shows you ads, the browser shows you ads and now a penny per page.
Humm. "here's a quarter call someone who cares".
I may be a dinosaur, but I thought that the entire purpose of the internet was research, the dissemenation of information and communication, not a get rich quick scheme.
Internet Panhandeling (IP?, oye, now it makes sense).
ICANN would like to replace the root DNS systems with secured servers.
Step 1) install XP.
Step 2) Activate Raw Sockets
Step 3) Give everyone the IP address 0.0.0.0
Step 4) Shut the machine off.
It is now secure.
The purpose of broadband is stealing?
ROTFL.
Stealing is such an ugly word...how about "creative (re)distribution techniques".
In some respects, yes, that is what I was saying.
Maybe there should be a T-shirt that says:
"I got broadband and all I got was a large pr0n collection..."
Wait. What was the downside again?
I forgot to mention that @home scans your machine daily to make sure you are not running a news server.
Never mind they *don't provide the bandwith* to run a news server and more often than not the *scans* will disrupt your downloads!
As for my previous post and your question I think the "hint" of fraud is just one more example of @home's...what is the word I'm looking for...incompetance, stupidity, (again) fraud, backward-assed-ness?
I'm sure someone else could think of a more eloquent way to put it, but this kind of reverse logic escapes me.
Seriously, look at the heart of what I am saying: you are paying the same, or more, and getting less and less as @home can take from you. Is this the way to run a business?
If this is the kind of "e-commerce" we can expect?
This kind of business "hari-kari" lends new meaning to "e-viscerated", does it not?
(I apologise for avoiding your question as to moderation. It was intentional. I've never moderated and I'm sure there are guidelines.
Heck I got a chuckle out of the moderations of this comment.
What is even funnier is that I agreed with the totals because it was too far over the top.
Don't get me wrong. Getting karma points is nice, but I prefer to be challenged on my thinking not on how I'm moderated.
That might be the another point you missed, perhaps?)
cheers