I understand completely -- but they have no right to pull the rug out from under people who already paid in advance for issues of a real, paper magazine. That, and even if I were happy with having the rest of my subscription filled with something that has no value to me (I can read about Linux on a computer all day long on lots of websites without paying for a subscription to anything) there are enough people who are going to cancel or not subscribe to begin with that "going digital" is just the first droplets of the magazine circling the drain. It's the beginning of the end, because not enough people are willing to pay for what is made redundant by the web.
Good point -- I signed up with a mail service provider for IMAP/POP/webmail and SMTP after leaving Speakeasy -- the one I signed up with doesn't unbundle outbound MX but see upon looking that at least one offers the service for $20/year.
Two things that neither IMAP download nor Google's data liberation tools can't grab: chats (I saw some did a hack for this awhile back based on libgmail, but I doubt the code still works) or voice/SMS message archives from Google Voice) en masse. Losing those wouldn't be the end of the world, but if those could be backed up too, Google could shut me off and I'd be back in business inside the few hours it took to promulgate a new email address to friends and family.
That, and IPs identified as part of residential blocks (e.g. cable/DSL) are in DNS blacklists and a good number of mail servers will reject incoming mail from you even if you're doing everything right. So he needs to factor in the cost of a "business" account when making the decision. (I used to host my own MX on Speakeasy back before they started to suck about five years ago--at the time, they offered static IPs and update RDNS for their residential services.)
I think a more common name (e.g. John Smith, Jim Jones) would be a more effective means of maintaining privacy in the face of the current and future mass personal information harvesting regimes than would an even more unique name.
By your own argument, I assume you support government regulation on food intake and exercise, since those could also cause early deaths leaving widows and children for the poor insurance companies/the state to support? And no, I don't live with my parents, thank you very much.
The only thing the TSA (and our government as a whole in the same vein) has done is to encourage the terrorists even more.
While you can. The TSA has already set up shop at train and bus stations to test the waters. Driving is safe from groping and the nude-o-scope. For now.
On the right track, but requires URLs rather than being able to block whole domains (e.g..info -- and yes, I know there are two or three legit sites with.info domains).
Exactly -- while a mandatory "do not track" seems all well and good, I'm sure that compliance hurdles that shut out small players could be of benefit in certain quarters. That, and without a "Great Firewall of 'Merica," it would be unenforceable because the companies that wanted to track could just use offshore servers.
Interesting -- thanks! I have a FB profile that's pretty minimal, and have assiduously avoided friending those above me in the hierarchy although I know other folks who do not. I work in higher education (not a prof, a lowly staff person) and would have been aghast at having been told I needed to as a condition of employment--and am surprised that HR people would use a vehicle that might give them access to information like familial status, religion, etc. that could get them sued.
Specialization keeps people employed. For example, I know guys still doing SAP Basis administration. Unless the company they work for wants to completely chunk most of its internal workings, those guys are not going anywhere.
Isn't SAP Basis (and PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, and the like) I administration fairly easily outsourced, especially with consolidated data centers and companies moving their databases to "the cloud"? I would be afraid of being commoditized and to that end be working on becoming a line-of-business expert (which the folks you know might already well be).
I started this after I graduated college because virtually every employer I applied for demanded friend access to FB.
I find this utterly amazing. Can you say what career field this was happening to you in? And were they not savvy enough to know they weren't seeing your full profile?
I don't know -- I think a common name would be of benefit from hiding among the results in search engines, etc. There aren't many Mr. Base3s in the world, and someone searching up my information pretty much gets me. I was never under the illusion that everything online wouldn't be archived and searchable, so it's not a problem--but it would be nice to give children a name that made it hard to dig up dirt on them later.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand completely -- but they have no right to pull the rug out from under people who already paid in advance for issues of a real, paper magazine. That, and even if I were happy with having the rest of my subscription filled with something that has no value to me (I can read about Linux on a computer all day long on lots of websites without paying for a subscription to anything) there are enough people who are going to cancel or not subscribe to begin with that "going digital" is just the first droplets of the magazine circling the drain. It's the beginning of the end, because not enough people are willing to pay for what is made redundant by the web.
Except that China has the advantage that they can shoot their rapacious capitalists if they threaten to crater the economy.
Good point -- I signed up with a mail service provider for IMAP/POP/webmail and SMTP after leaving Speakeasy -- the one I signed up with doesn't unbundle outbound MX but see upon looking that at least one offers the service for $20/year.
Two things that neither IMAP download nor Google's data liberation tools can't grab: chats (I saw some did a hack for this awhile back based on libgmail, but I doubt the code still works) or voice/SMS message archives from Google Voice) en masse. Losing those wouldn't be the end of the world, but if those could be backed up too, Google could shut me off and I'd be back in business inside the few hours it took to promulgate a new email address to friends and family.
That, and IPs identified as part of residential blocks (e.g. cable/DSL) are in DNS blacklists and a good number of mail servers will reject incoming mail from you even if you're doing everything right. So he needs to factor in the cost of a "business" account when making the decision. (I used to host my own MX on Speakeasy back before they started to suck about five years ago--at the time, they offered static IPs and update RDNS for their residential services.)
I think a more common name (e.g. John Smith, Jim Jones) would be a more effective means of maintaining privacy in the face of the current and future mass personal information harvesting regimes than would an even more unique name.
Hey, it rained yesterday -- did you get sea pay? (Just kidding--tremendous respect for the USCG here!)
By your own argument, I assume you support government regulation on food intake and exercise, since those could also cause early deaths leaving widows and children for the poor insurance companies/the state to support? And no, I don't live with my parents, thank you very much.
While you can. The TSA has already set up shop at train and bus stations to test the waters. Driving is safe from groping and the nude-o-scope. For now.
And get sued by Nestle for copying the Baby Ruth :).
Either one would be interesting news!
Correction to above -- "being able to block whole domains and/or TLDs"
On the right track, but requires URLs rather than being able to block whole domains (e.g. .info -- and yes, I know there are two or three legit sites with .info domains).
. . . they have a patent on censoring content farms and expert sexchange.
Thanks :)!
I bet he would have settled for being on the "Do Not Shoot" list.
Exactly -- while a mandatory "do not track" seems all well and good, I'm sure that compliance hurdles that shut out small players could be of benefit in certain quarters. That, and without a "Great Firewall of 'Merica," it would be unenforceable because the companies that wanted to track could just use offshore servers.
You mean he wanted his mother to see that?! :)
And they'll actually spend that money going after kids sharing whatever garbage the entertainment industry is putting out. What a country!
Interesting -- thanks! I have a FB profile that's pretty minimal, and have assiduously avoided friending those above me in the hierarchy although I know other folks who do not. I work in higher education (not a prof, a lowly staff person) and would have been aghast at having been told I needed to as a condition of employment--and am surprised that HR people would use a vehicle that might give them access to information like familial status, religion, etc. that could get them sued.
Isn't SAP Basis (and PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, and the like) I administration fairly easily outsourced, especially with consolidated data centers and companies moving their databases to "the cloud"? I would be afraid of being commoditized and to that end be working on becoming a line-of-business expert (which the folks you know might already well be).
God, I wish I had points so I could mod you up for that Tandy Deskmate reference :).
I find this utterly amazing. Can you say what career field this was happening to you in? And were they not savvy enough to know they weren't seeing your full profile?
Pretty sure he will, now.
I don't know -- I think a common name would be of benefit from hiding among the results in search engines, etc. There aren't many Mr. Base3s in the world, and someone searching up my information pretty much gets me. I was never under the illusion that everything online wouldn't be archived and searchable, so it's not a problem--but it would be nice to give children a name that made it hard to dig up dirt on them later.