I don't think it's "worth discrediting the BBB over this Apple matter." Rather, the BBB has already done a fine job of discrediting itself, geeksqeualing about Apple's advertising puffery notwithstanding.
Good going. Now you've just given him another arrow in his demonization quiver. As the AC pointed out, the act of running a Freenet node itself will be next to be outlawed.
Diebold in particlar has had its credibility and business harmed badly. Granted, the MPAA is still doing just fine, but Valenti is being forced out because his radicalism has turned enough public opinion against the MPAA that they had to launch a counter-PR offensive.
Perhaps you misunderstand. My post was about the BBB in general, in response to a post which also had nothing to do with the specific instance of Dell using the BBB. In any case, Apple calling itself the "first" or "fastest" is merely "puffery," and is acceptable in advertising whether it is true or not.
The beautiful thing is that even if they managed to get HardOCP shuttered, and financially ruin the site's operators, they'll have gotten so much attention for suing that average folks will reason that "where there's smoke, there's fire," and Infinium is even more screwed. The fastest way to get an idea to spread like wildfire on the Internet is to try to suppress it. The courts are particularly effective in this regard. Witness the MPAA's battle to suppress DeCSS and Diebold's attempts to keep evidence of their duplicity and incompetence quiet.
Those "blemishes" are complaints from customers who tried to get help from a business, and ended up pissed off enough to go through the tedious process of filing a BBB complaint. Even then, to get a "blemish," the business in question esentially has to blow off the complaint. If the establishment responds at all--even if it doesn't satisfy the customer--the BBB considers that "satisfactory" resolution.
The BBB is nothing but a protection racket for businesses that traditionally garner lots of complaints (e.g. door-to-door sales, home improvement, predatory lending) to avoid escalation of a large number of complaints to people who would actually take some enforcement action.
The BBB is esentially useless after the fact if you've been screwed, but I personally check any local tradesman, etc. If I see a "blemish," knowing how easy they are to avoid, I do no business with that company. It's the same kind of due diligence as checking Google for references to a mail order company before you place an order.
Protection racket is more like it. They're an organization that exists solely to lend an air of legitimacy to questionable business and to mollify customers with complaints to delay their escalation to the courts or politicians.
I regard the display of a BBB plaque in a place of business as a warning label similar to the Trust-E seal.
Influence is transitive. Corporate interests influence political parties. Political parties elect presidents. Presidents appoint justices. Sure, the president can't "unappoint" a justice, but it would be truly naive to think that these human beings are without allegiance to those who gave them the jobs.
Look at all the pro-Palladium/TCPA/NGCSB shills that have come out to defend this. Folks, this kind of lockdown stuff is doomed in the marketplace unless the SPA/BSA/*AA are able to buy legislation to require it.
I know you're trolling, but this crap doesn't have a prayer of gaining political mass. Hell, even Microsoft had to change the name of Palladium once people figured out it was DRM for PCs. This will suffer the same fate at the hands of the marketplace, unless the content "industry" succeeds in buying legislation requiring it.
To answer your question, consider a network of container trucks/mobile warehouses.
1) Each truck reserves some space in its trailer.
2) The trucker has no knowledge or control of the contents, which are sealed from view and examination.
3) It's impossible to:
a) Determine who inserted material into the secret compartment
b) Determine who requested delivery from the network of trucks
c) Determine who provided material in the trucks
The only only reasonable thing you can prove, is that one truck was the last hauler - it hauled material to you. It does not know the contents, and only did so on your warehouse's request.
Saying it's not a blacklist doesn't mean it isn't a blacklist. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck . . .
Calling it what it is, a blacklist, would be horrible PR. They are, though, a consumer reporting agency, and will see some regulation post haste, probably as a result of a complaint from one of the "excessively litigious" persons they stuck in the database for daring to use the courts for redress of medical malpractice.
With regard to the "public" being free to do the same thing, I contend that a private individual or small groups would find themselves C&Dd and their ISP having been threatened and having caved within days of setting up such a database.
NATIONAL PLAINTIFF DATABASE. THIS IS NOT A BLACKLIST. MANY PATIENTS HAVE MERITORIOUS CASES.
Yeah, Spamhaus isn't a blacklist either. Where's my centralized site to check to see what doctors have been sued or cited by their state board of healing arts for malpractice or misconduct?
If it's public record, it's public record. There should be no effort to make public information hard to get at for those "not in the know" or "not willing to put forth the effort." If it merits that kind of "protection," perhaps the laws should be changed so that it's no longer public record.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think it's "worth discrediting the BBB over this Apple matter." Rather, the BBB has already done a fine job of discrediting itself, geeksqeualing about Apple's advertising puffery notwithstanding.
Good going. Now you've just given him another arrow in his demonization quiver. As the AC pointed out, the act of running a Freenet node itself will be next to be outlawed.
Diebold in particlar has had its credibility and business harmed badly. Granted, the MPAA is still doing just fine, but Valenti is being forced out because his radicalism has turned enough public opinion against the MPAA that they had to launch a counter-PR offensive.
Perhaps you misunderstand. My post was about the BBB in general, in response to a post which also had nothing to do with the specific instance of Dell using the BBB. In any case, Apple calling itself the "first" or "fastest" is merely "puffery," and is acceptable in advertising whether it is true or not.
The beautiful thing is that even if they managed to get HardOCP shuttered, and financially ruin the site's operators, they'll have gotten so much attention for suing that average folks will reason that "where there's smoke, there's fire," and Infinium is even more screwed. The fastest way to get an idea to spread like wildfire on the Internet is to try to suppress it. The courts are particularly effective in this regard. Witness the MPAA's battle to suppress DeCSS and Diebold's attempts to keep evidence of their duplicity and incompetence quiet.
The BBB is nothing but a protection racket for businesses that traditionally garner lots of complaints (e.g. door-to-door sales, home improvement, predatory lending) to avoid escalation of a large number of complaints to people who would actually take some enforcement action.
The BBB is esentially useless after the fact if you've been screwed, but I personally check any local tradesman, etc. If I see a "blemish," knowing how easy they are to avoid, I do no business with that company. It's the same kind of due diligence as checking Google for references to a mail order company before you place an order.
I regard the display of a BBB plaque in a place of business as a warning label similar to the Trust-E seal.
Don't you have some high chlorides in the port main condensate header to attend to :)?
Influence is transitive. Corporate interests influence political parties. Political parties elect presidents. Presidents appoint justices. Sure, the president can't "unappoint" a justice, but it would be truly naive to think that these human beings are without allegiance to those who gave them the jobs.
. . . it'll be more like Busted Computing.
Whoa--at first, I thought you were saying that emacs had a flight sim in it. And I didn't dismiss the idea out of hand :)!
Because they didn't want the metadata showing that it was written on a Mac with OOO to leak :).
If the court were more consistent in its respect for states rights, I'd see the decision as more than mere toadyism to corporate interests.
And when they didn't, the people who didn't want to "be disappeared" were smart enough not to say so.
Eldred v. Ashcroft. And now this. So much for confidence in the Supreme Court "justices" as a brake on corporate control of the Republic.
Look at all the pro-Palladium/TCPA/NGCSB shills that have come out to defend this. Folks, this kind of lockdown stuff is doomed in the marketplace unless the SPA/BSA/*AA are able to buy legislation to require it.
I know you're trolling, but this crap doesn't have a prayer of gaining political mass. Hell, even Microsoft had to change the name of Palladium once people figured out it was DRM for PCs. This will suffer the same fate at the hands of the marketplace, unless the content "industry" succeeds in buying legislation requiring it.
To answer your question, consider a network of container trucks/mobile warehouses. 1) Each truck reserves some space in its trailer. 2) The trucker has no knowledge or control of the contents, which are sealed from view and examination. 3) It's impossible to: a) Determine who inserted material into the secret compartment b) Determine who requested delivery from the network of trucks c) Determine who provided material in the trucks The only only reasonable thing you can prove, is that one truck was the last hauler - it hauled material to you. It does not know the contents, and only did so on your warehouse's request.
That would have been beautiful. They'd have been looking amongst their pol buddies and themselves for the leaker :).
Heh. Even we Yanks don't express electrical power in HP.
They may not need to comply with HIPAA, but as a consumer reporting agency, they need to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Calling it what it is, a blacklist, would be horrible PR. They are, though, a consumer reporting agency, and will see some regulation post haste, probably as a result of a complaint from one of the "excessively litigious" persons they stuck in the database for daring to use the courts for redress of medical malpractice.
With regard to the "public" being free to do the same thing, I contend that a private individual or small groups would find themselves C&Dd and their ISP having been threatened and having caved within days of setting up such a database.
They say it isn't a blacklist to avoid inviting regulation. That doesn't mean it isn't a blacklist.
Yeah, Spamhaus isn't a blacklist either. Where's my centralized site to check to see what doctors have been sued or cited by their state board of healing arts for malpractice or misconduct?
If it's public record, it's public record. There should be no effort to make public information hard to get at for those "not in the know" or "not willing to put forth the effort." If it merits that kind of "protection," perhaps the laws should be changed so that it's no longer public record.