They could be very scrupulous, or they could be smart enough not to sell or spam addresses in the spamgourmet domain.
The problem with giving fake information is that by giving any information at all, citizens are conditioned that these entities have a "right" to ask for it, and it's just a tradeoff. Then, once there's a way of actually authenticating identity (as Microsoft (e.g. Passport) and others (e.g. Liberty Alliance) have tried to create, there will be no option of giving bogus information.
Hey, if the NYT would like to use a locked-up distribution channel and charge people for viewing their online paper, that's fine. They just need to create their own, rather than piggybacking on the taxpayer-created Internet. Otherwise, no one has any right to bitch when their registration schemes are circumvented.
We'd like to lock up a video stream and charge for it. I figured Slashdot would be the perfect place to ask how to use DRM, and that I'd receive lots of free advice to benefit my corporate masters.
One possibility that comes to mind is that the codec might use a different psychoacoustic model that would filter out more than the first compression did. Whether it would or wouldn't take a golden ear to notice this, I don't know, but there is a wide perception that a degredation in quality would occur.
. . . if this will use a DRM laden, proprietary format like NPR does. Am I the only one that sees something wrong with donation and tax-subsidized radio being locked up in these sorts of formats?
What you're describing is transcoding via recompression, and causes more loss. Hymn strips the DRM while leaving an unencrypted AAC without loss of (any more) audio information.
. . . that Apple isn't all that "different," except in terms of cost. They're sellout DMCA-wielding jackbooted thugs just like any closed-source vendor can be expected to be, their appropriation of the work of Open Source programmers notwithstanding.
Bull. They charge no less than they would the DVD players were made in the states--they just pocket the profits. What I look forward to is these third world countries figuring this out, then cutting the "American" companies that just buy stuff and market it out and sell it themselves.
That's how it starts. Then it'll be sold to new parents as a way to "protect" their newborn children. Prisoners will be forced to accept the mark. Then the rest of the world.
And the great side effect of that is that if any company pisses me off, all I have to is launch a spam run pointing to their order page, and let the FTC/FBI do my dirty work for me. I like that plan!
Seems like if there were actually the will on the part of the government to crack down, that the funds would be traced to those commissioning the spams. You can bet if this were a problem affecting, say, the copyright cartel, that they'd follow the money and open cases.
1. Read every contract you sign, even the fine print, even the one at Blockbuster Video. The folks in line behind you can deal with it and might learn something.
And when you decide you'd like to amend that contract, and they tell you to take it or leave it, as does every similar business, perhaps you'll understand the need for regulation.
They might be able to offshore their labor, but aren't going to be able to escape California's laws at the point of sale to the public. Good for California, and I hope this law will serve as a model for a federal law to clamp down on the rampant abuse of "recovery fees," etc. in the cellular industry.
The cops are busy enforcing intellectual "property" laws for campaign contributors and the government has hocked future generations to pay for corporate welfare for outsourcers. The best you can do is to try to play the game and make enough money to get into a lily-white, gated community, because it's not getting any better for ordinary people anytime soon.
It's not legal. The proof of this is that if you or I wrote an application to do the same thing, we would be thrown in prison. But corporations can push this crap with impunity for some (cough, bribes, cough) reason.
This assumes that the anal security weenies aren't checking similarity (maybe by Hamming distance) to previous passwords. Someday, maybe these people will learn that onerous password requirements only cause people to write them on Post-Its or on slips of paper under their keyboards.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with giving fake information is that by giving any information at all, citizens are conditioned that these entities have a "right" to ask for it, and it's just a tradeoff. Then, once there's a way of actually authenticating identity (as Microsoft (e.g. Passport) and others (e.g. Liberty Alliance) have tried to create, there will be no option of giving bogus information.
Hey, if the NYT would like to use a locked-up distribution channel and charge people for viewing their online paper, that's fine. They just need to create their own, rather than piggybacking on the taxpayer-created Internet. Otherwise, no one has any right to bitch when their registration schemes are circumvented.
PLONK.
One possibility that comes to mind is that the codec might use a different psychoacoustic model that would filter out more than the first compression did. Whether it would or wouldn't take a golden ear to notice this, I don't know, but there is a wide perception that a degredation in quality would occur.
. . . if this will use a DRM laden, proprietary format like NPR does. Am I the only one that sees something wrong with donation and tax-subsidized radio being locked up in these sorts of formats?
What you're describing is transcoding via recompression, and causes more loss. Hymn strips the DRM while leaving an unencrypted AAC without loss of (any more) audio information.
. . . that Apple isn't all that "different," except in terms of cost. They're sellout DMCA-wielding jackbooted thugs just like any closed-source vendor can be expected to be, their appropriation of the work of Open Source programmers notwithstanding.
Oh yes, Mr. Pseudonym that can't be traced to a real identity, please continue to enlighten us by holding forth on the evils of anonymity.
Precisely.
Bull. They charge no less than they would the DVD players were made in the states--they just pocket the profits. What I look forward to is these third world countries figuring this out, then cutting the "American" companies that just buy stuff and market it out and sell it themselves.
That's how it starts. Then it'll be sold to new parents as a way to "protect" their newborn children. Prisoners will be forced to accept the mark. Then the rest of the world.
And the great side effect of that is that if any company pisses me off, all I have to is launch a spam run pointing to their order page, and let the FTC/FBI do my dirty work for me. I like that plan!
Seems like if there were actually the will on the part of the government to crack down, that the funds would be traced to those commissioning the spams. You can bet if this were a problem affecting, say, the copyright cartel, that they'd follow the money and open cases.
Actually, assualt would be the more appropriate charge, although I guess if you pissed the right person off, it could be spun as "bioterrorism."
So Blaster throttled the spam output from Korea for a short time? Guess it wasn't all bad, then.
Would your toaster perchance support the POP protocol ?
Or they could be taking the high road and being tactful, rather than coming right out and saying it's because of the license changes.
I'm sure I'm not the only one that'd be grateful if you'd post up copies of your letters (with details omitted for privacy, naturally).
And when you decide you'd like to amend that contract, and they tell you to take it or leave it, as does every similar business, perhaps you'll understand the need for regulation.
That would make sense, except all the vendors do the same nasty tricks. Regulation follows abuses, and here's another example.
They might be able to offshore their labor, but aren't going to be able to escape California's laws at the point of sale to the public. Good for California, and I hope this law will serve as a model for a federal law to clamp down on the rampant abuse of "recovery fees," etc. in the cellular industry.
The cops are busy enforcing intellectual "property" laws for campaign contributors and the government has hocked future generations to pay for corporate welfare for outsourcers. The best you can do is to try to play the game and make enough money to get into a lily-white, gated community, because it's not getting any better for ordinary people anytime soon.
Were any C-4 boats in service? Were they retrofitted?
It's not legal. The proof of this is that if you or I wrote an application to do the same thing, we would be thrown in prison. But corporations can push this crap with impunity for some (cough, bribes, cough) reason.
if suffix_character
newpassword = previouspassword & suffix_character + 1
else
newpassword = previouspassword & 1
endif
This assumes that the anal security weenies aren't checking similarity (maybe by Hamming distance) to previous passwords. Someday, maybe these people will learn that onerous password requirements only cause people to write them on Post-Its or on slips of paper under their keyboards.