Is why anyone would ever bother to do this. I mean, one guy mentioned confrence calls, but the calls should end up stored on the answering machine so you couldn't talk about anything identifying... It seems amazingly pointless to me.
I can't belive ATT really wants to soak these people for $8k or whatever. it's idiotic.
A comment complaning about slashdot's rather careless linking policy gets -1. A comment with a link the FAQ gets a 4. A comment refuting the FAQ gets -1. How nice.
Slashdot editors are a bunch of thin-skinned jackasses.
I don't have a problem with caching, rather the slashdot editors said that they didn't want to cache sites to protect against the slashdot effect because it might piss off webmasters. I said that if you thought caching was bad, you could still notify people, especially since slashdot posts stuff so late anyway. I saw this linked on fark days ago.
There's a huge difference between notifying someone and caching their page without permission. And besides, a lot of times the full text to slashdotted stories shows up in the comments anyway.
I know being slashdotted can certainly piss off a webmaster as much, or more so then, losing impressions. Something Awful actually redirected hits from/. to goatse.cx once when they were linked to by the front page.
You shouldn't need permission to link, but given the ability of slashdot to totally kill things, it certainly would be nice, now wouldn't it.
If I'm not willing to pay for something, but I download it anyway, no harm is done. If you steal gas from the gas station, then the gas station has X number of gallons less that it can no longer sell.
Here are three examples to illustrate my point.
1) I like the music, and I am willing to pay for it. The RIAA gets $15. The RIAA is happy.
2) I don't like the music, but I'm not willing to pay for it. I don't download it. The RIAA does not have $15, the RIAA is sad.
3) I like the music, but I'm not willing to pay for it. I download it. The RIAA does not have $15, the RIAA is sad.
The outcome for the RIAA is the same either way. If I'm not willing to pay for something (say, because I can't stand the artist as a person, such as Eminem) then the RIAA loses absolutely nothing. No harm is done to them in any way.
I don't know what value system you're using, but in mine immoral acts are acts that harm people. Since no harm is done, the act of downloading music I'm to cheap to pay for is not immoral.
"BuddyZoo". The term "buddy list" is in and of itself annoying, and quite patronizing. What the hell would have been wrong with "contacts" or something. Leave it to AOL to force asinine terminology down our collective throats.
But this is just beyond the pail. BuddyZoo!? wtf. Its so insipid!
but beyond the name, and relatively amateur site design, it's an interesting concept. I wish they would have thought up a better name, though.
Re:Just for comparison's sake...
on
Genome Surprise
·
· Score: 1
Nobody would say that the colour of a car should have anything to do with its handling. It's just paint, and has nothing to do with the insides. On the other hand, there are far more red sportscars than there are powder-blue ones.
That's because people can chose the color of their car. People cannot chose the color of their skin.
Also, my car is light blue and it could kick your cars ass.
There is no way to Spam from AOL/Yahoo or Hotmail. It's physically impossible for a common user to do it.
What is possible to do to forge a 'from' address in an email header. Look again at the emails you have in your spam bucket and look at the recived-from: header. I'll bet you $100 they didn't come from anywhere with a '.yahoo.com' at the end.
I'm assuming it's 70mbps/channel. But for 31 miles there had better be a lot of channels. Could you imagine 9,500 square miles (pi*31^2) of people all sharing the same 10 or so wifi channels? It could suck.
No way am I giving up media player 6! That was the last good windows media player:P. Maybe I'll check these out on my laptop sometime, which is already burdened with media player 8:(
I've been wondering how long it was going to take for the Tech companies, which are far huger then the music companies trying to ruin them to simply buy the music companies outright.
It'll be intresting to see what happens if Apple succeds in this. Hopefully they'll boot out all the old chronies and get rid of a lot of the exploitation. Not that I'm holding my breath...
Uh, one particular harebrained idea of using magnetic fields rather then actually electrical signals was debunked, not the idea of power-line IP service.
Seriously though, why on earth should.iq get to be handled by a British ISP. I'm sure there are plenty of people in Iraq capable of running a name service. This British firm taking a resource from Iraq (it's TLD) in order to 'help' it (and skim a little off the top) is terrible, especially that money from Iraqis wanting a domain in their own country will have their money leave and then only have a part of it come back, and for what? Running a few name servers?
I'm sure this is only a small part of what's going to happen to Iraq's resources (namely, oil), and it's very disappointing.
I've never seen a browser that didn't allow the option of 'prompting' the user for each cookie thats set. Do these guy's want web pages to be reqired to say they use cookies?
People will use whatever search engine they think is best. It makes zero diffrence if you can access your favorite search from one place, or 200.
Unless the chinese outright ban google after proclaming their solution 'better', this won't affect them at all. besides, who would use a search they *know* is being filtered by the government when they can use something that's *not*? (even if they get booted off the net for using politicaly sensitive terms)
Slashdot Mirror
Is why anyone would ever bother to do this. I mean, one guy mentioned confrence calls, but the calls should end up stored on the answering machine so you couldn't talk about anything identifying... It seems amazingly pointless to me.
I can't belive ATT really wants to soak these people for $8k or whatever. it's idiotic.
Why the hell would you install something on 80k machines without testing it first!?
What an informative little blurb.
Let Ralsky be amoung the sued!
This is not saying there are multiple universes, but rather that the universe 'loops around' like in old arcade games.
A comment complaning about slashdot's rather careless linking policy gets -1. A comment with a link the FAQ gets a 4. A comment refuting the FAQ gets -1. How nice.
Slashdot editors are a bunch of thin-skinned jackasses.
I don't have a problem with caching, rather the slashdot editors said that they didn't want to cache sites to protect against the slashdot effect because it might piss off webmasters. I said that if you thought caching was bad, you could still notify people, especially since slashdot posts stuff so late anyway. I saw this linked on fark days ago.
There's a huge difference between notifying someone and caching their page without permission. And besides, a lot of times the full text to slashdotted stories shows up in the comments anyway.
/. to goatse.cx once when they were linked to by the front page.
I know being slashdotted can certainly piss off a webmaster as much, or more so then, losing impressions. Something Awful actually redirected hits from
You shouldn't need permission to link, but given the ability of slashdot to totally kill things, it certainly would be nice, now wouldn't it.
If I'm not willing to pay for something, but I download it anyway, no harm is done. If you steal gas from the gas station, then the gas station has X number of gallons less that it can no longer sell.
Here are three examples to illustrate my point.
1) I like the music, and I am willing to pay for it. The RIAA gets $15. The RIAA is happy.
2) I don't like the music, but I'm not willing to pay for it. I don't download it. The RIAA does not have $15, the RIAA is sad.
3) I like the music, but I'm not willing to pay for it. I download it. The RIAA does not have $15, the RIAA is sad.
The outcome for the RIAA is the same either way. If I'm not willing to pay for something (say, because I can't stand the artist as a person, such as Eminem) then the RIAA loses absolutely nothing. No harm is done to them in any way.
I don't know what value system you're using, but in mine immoral acts are acts that harm people. Since no harm is done, the act of downloading music I'm to cheap to pay for is not immoral.
"BuddyZoo". The term "buddy list" is in and of itself annoying, and quite patronizing. What the hell would have been wrong with "contacts" or something. Leave it to AOL to force asinine terminology down our collective throats.
But this is just beyond the pail. BuddyZoo!? wtf. Its so insipid!
but beyond the name, and relatively amateur site design, it's an interesting concept. I wish they would have thought up a better name, though.
Nobody would say that the colour of a car should have anything to do with its handling. It's just paint, and has nothing to do with the insides. On the other hand, there are far more red sportscars than there are powder-blue ones.
That's because people can chose the color of their car. People cannot chose the color of their skin.
Also, my car is light blue and it could kick your cars ass.
they don't build cathedrals or rocket ships, but what the heck does evolution care?
It cares quite a bit, as these tools help us get the basics of life, like food watter and sex.
it's your right as a citizen to get mail!
There is no way to Spam from AOL/Yahoo or Hotmail. It's physically impossible for a common user to do it.
What is possible to do to forge a 'from' address in an email header. Look again at the emails you have in your spam bucket and look at the recived-from: header. I'll bet you $100 they didn't come from anywhere with a '.yahoo.com' at the end.
I doubt this'll do much to stop spam, and certanly won't prevent many abuses.
But at least all those arogant wankers who ban china and korea's IP space and the like can maybe get a taste of their own medicine.
I'm assuming it's 70mbps/channel. But for 31 miles there had better be a lot of channels. Could you imagine 9,500 square miles (pi*31^2) of people all sharing the same 10 or so wifi channels? It could suck.
I mean, really. Who the hell would want that? "Look at this, its just like a regular word processor, but extra laggy!!!"
It would definetly be a lot more laggy then a pure-java word processor, thats for sure.
No way am I giving up media player 6! That was the last good windows media player :P. Maybe I'll check these out on my laptop sometime, which is already burdened with media player 8 :(
I've been wondering how long it was going to take for the Tech companies, which are far huger then the music companies trying to ruin them to simply buy the music companies outright.
It'll be intresting to see what happens if Apple succeds in this. Hopefully they'll boot out all the old chronies and get rid of a lot of the exploitation. Not that I'm holding my breath...
This guy says he think's java is an 'evolutionary dead end', which is to say no programming other languages will be inspired by.
Has he even heard of C#?!
I'm getting 200k/sec from progressive1.stream.aol.com...
Uh, one particular harebrained idea of using magnetic fields rather then actually electrical signals was debunked, not the idea of power-line IP service.
Seriously though, why on earth should .iq get to be handled by a British ISP. I'm sure there are plenty of people in Iraq capable of running a name service. This British firm taking a resource from Iraq (it's TLD) in order to 'help' it (and skim a little off the top) is terrible, especially that money from Iraqis wanting a domain in their own country will have their money leave and then only have a part of it come back, and for what? Running a few name servers?
I'm sure this is only a small part of what's going to happen to Iraq's resources (namely, oil), and it's very disappointing.
I've never seen a browser that didn't allow the option of 'prompting' the user for each cookie thats set. Do these guy's want web pages to be reqired to say they use cookies?
People will use whatever search engine they think is best. It makes zero diffrence if you can access your favorite search from one place, or 200.
Unless the chinese outright ban google after proclaming their solution 'better', this won't affect them at all. besides, who would use a search they *know* is being filtered by the government when they can use something that's *not*? (even if they get booted off the net for using politicaly sensitive terms)