But it is a continuing relationship. Either can terminate at will. Signing up a long time ago just means you've been more-or-less satisfied with the service and terms for a long time.
Put it another way: assume cableco violated the contract. How much damages do they owe you? Maybe a refund for the month? No court will compel them to serve you as you think you should be served.
Of course Gates & MS disagree with the GPL. They have since the 1978 computer-club letter because it undermines their entire business model. MS wants to sell standard programs. They've made a large business of it.
But all businesses face competition, and the most devastating tends to be from competitors who follow different business models. Clones are much easier to see off.
The most interesting thing here is Gates acknowledges the competition and is starting to fight [more]. Entirely following Ghandi's script: "First they ignore you, then they laught at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Vuze has exposed a rather high fraction of RSTs. I would expect normal surfers to be complaining loudly. Not easy for cableco to ignore (unlike 733t whiners).
I just wonder if some of those RSTs might not be coming from bandwidth hogs -- users who disrupt other users service to capture more bandwidth for themselves. cable is shared medium.
It's not quite so easy -- first, most contracts contain a clause that the contract is the complete contract and other materials are not binding. Also notice disclaimers in advertising "where available", which may not be in many places. Third, the service advertised and shown as unlimited _home_ use may not match yours: a bit of surfing and sis watching a cartoon is not the same as 24/7 DL.
As for contract modification, these are not "one-time" contracts but continuing agreements. You can terminate at any time and so can they. Where there is an equipment lock-in, then substantial changes should give you the right to terminate without payback. I doubt a court would disagree.
Nothing against VUze, they've done about as best as they could. But all "pulled" surveys have the same problem: most of the people responding are attracted to the issue by a personal stance. In this case, it is likely that many of the Vuze plug-in [virus?] users were having bandwidth problems and wanted to find out or help fix it.
Measuring RST is an interesting approach, but is hardly the only or even preferred solution to TCP/IP congestion control. Delaying [queuing] ACK packets is more transparent and should trigger source reductions.
Retention is a very big privacy deal. Think about exactly when abuses like fishing trips happen -- long after the fact when it is desired to tar the target.
Law enforcement is about discovering criminal perpetrators and increasingly (horrors in certain violation of civil rights and dilution of the law) in preventing certain criminal activities. For this they certainly needs _some_ records to do detective work after a complaint. But crimes are generally discovered quickly, and police are well aware that detective work has to be fairly prompt or it is likely to be ineffective. So no reason for long retention.
IANA astrophysicist, but a black hole might be said to be bright if it gives off radiation outside it's event horizon.
I suspect this mostly happens when normal or superdense (neutronic) matter nears and passes the event horizon. The bigger/better question is: Any estimate on the amount of matter ingested to produce the fireworks? How many solar masses? Just what is going on around that drainhole?
Of course age is no guarnatee of wisdom. Nor is youth. However, age does bring experience, and there is no substitute for data. Certainly no amout of analysis. Take the data an analyse to whatever extent you are capable.
I'm not at all concerned about your opinion of my intelligence. It has an independant existence, and assuming slights or taking insult amounts to revealing insecurity.
One party can certainly be pedantic while another informal, especially in written communications. There is no requirement or even mechanism for agreement on form save some social norms when others are listening.
Even in cases were the content is minor, the discussion process is important. You young bucks don't know what the old ones do. When we're generous, we'll teach you. Maybe at a price. Or we flock off.
??? what leads you to believe I equate pedantry with intelligence? When correctly used, pedantic forms can be more precise, and avoid confusion albeit at a cost in reading speed.
I doubt any assumption that turns out false can be termed "entirely appropriate". It is usually better to question than assume.
Why do you equate "less sophisticated" with any sort of depracation? It is a reflection of a state of knowledge, not any reflection of intelligence nor the propriety of that state of knowledge nor any moral failing. In general, less sophisticated is better because whatever task can be accomplished with less mental effort. MS-Windows certainly is appropriate for users with very simple requirements.
BTW, a "Fsck you" on any subject is functionally identical to a concession that you possess no further logical argument, and likely indicates you lack the grace or strength to stand by a personal perference and must instead verbally attack.
This logic is sound and it reveals that MS execs thing sophisticated users can be attracted to MS-Windows-Vista.
I would contend the more sophisticated the user, the further they are from attractable to Vista: the most sophisticated users do not use MS products, preferring Linux or *BSD. Less sophisticated users who use MS-Windows (with greater reluctance at greater sophistication) prefer different versions of MS-Windows -- 3.51 revered by those who still run it, 2001 cherished in spite of few updates, and XP clung to as a lifesaver.
Only masochists and reviewers migrate to Vista. Many peole suffer with it bundled.
Yes, I can see how some narrow-minded lawyer might say "we're going in, and it will only cost us fruit-of-the-poisoned-vine". That somebody shoulda flunked law skule.
Historically, the 4th Am got inserted because one of the favorite pre-revolutionary English harassement techniques was to tear apart homes (often using soldiers) of disfavored people under the guise of "searching for evidence" of some wrongdoing. A search can be extremely distruptive and disgusting. So they were made subject to checks and balances.
It is this revulsion that eventually matured into the fruit-of-the-poisoned vine doctrine, but that is merely one consequence. The principal to make people safe remains, and I fully expect some M$ lawsuits.
Since warrents can be very quickly and easily obtained (even by phone) with good evidence, I seriously wonder why various administrations and police see any need to bypass the system. It might have more to do with avoiding meta-analysis and criticism "They did 4,000 searches and only charged 1,000 people". But this oversight is an essential check-and-balance in a democracy. The electorate _must_ be informed, most specifically on govt actions, and even more specifically on govt actions that might be considered improper.
First and foremost, I'm not sure it is moral or ethical to block any form of communications, crypto or stego. One might well claim certain communications are illegal and facilitate harm. But that is for already-illegal and incontrovertibly harmful activities apart from the communications. Police authorities are grasping at communications because they are otherwise impotent (by design). Fighting against stego or crypto seriously risks causing greater, even if less-spectacular, harm. Baby out with the bathwater.
That said, it is relatively easy to disrupt stego by lossy compression/decompression or vice-versa if the source is compressed. Low-order bits will get stripped in JPEGs & MP3s. This obviously doesn't work for loss-less compression as is needed for binaries. If hash or other non-compressibles found, just rehash. Once you've decided to meddle inthe datastream, some eggs will get broken. You'll have both alpha and beta errors (misses and false postives).
I do not understand. It is impossible to reveal or be forced to disclose that which you never retained or had distroyed in the normal course of business. Otherwise, your records are entirely at the mercy of a judge who almost certainly wants more evidence, not less, the better to judge. The assumption of an impartial or at least privacy-respecting judiciary does not hold.
Do phone companies record phone calls? Of course not? So why should text companies record content? Even recording traffic should only be where that is required for billing purposes. IE, not for unlimited plans or perhaps where the subsriber has waived detailed billing.
The FCC has been trying to impose logging and retention rules for the convenience of law enforcement, but I don't know how many of these have come into force.
A very good point, consumers should know what they are buying. In a competitive market, you can expect and rely on competitors to advertise salient features.
However, the cable market is far from competitive and is best described as regionalized monopolies with competition from substitutes (sat/phone). Faced with the reduced competition, modest [informative] regulation may be the best response.
The bypassing/competition reason for RIAA antipathy towards downloads might be true if the RIAA members actually behaved as if they believed they had an ongoing business they needed to maintain by being gatekeepers.
They don't. The bean counters have taken over, and A&R budgets were slashed so deep and so long that even lame TV could stage a [Ed Sullivan] come-back as artistic gatekeepers!
The RIAA members are just milking their back catalogs. They do not believe they can do A&R development, and we must take them at their word.
'scuse my likely ignorance, but when someone alters a transmission, aren't they creating a derivative work for which the copyright holder's permission is needed?
I know a lot of [better] H'wood directors get very upset at the reformatting of their movies created 16:9 trimmed down to 4:3.
A very good point. Likely what didn't succeed should not have succeeded. Sieve function. Women (and to a lesser extent men) are subject to a series of conflicting motivations. See Robin Baker's "Sperm Wars" but the lurid vignettes may be offensive.
While it is nice to have "scientific confirmation" of a common belief/prejudice, analysis should not stop there. Communication is a shared responsibility between the sender and the receiver. Absent some formal standard, it is impossible to determine where the failure lies. For comparison, it might have been nice to also poll men to see how often their intentions were mis-read.
In this case, unreasonable expectations probably play a huge part: Since the advent of modern [reliable] birth control in the past century, first womens' roles in society have been changing and our whole society will continue to change IMHO tremendously in unstudied and unexpected ways. Under this flux [noise], miscommunication must be expected.
You think that's dizzying? Just consider the groundstation will have to be located exactly on the equator. There is no stable geosynchronous unpowered orbits at higher latitudes. Forget one in the US. It's have to be in Ecuador, upper Columbia, Brazil, Africa (Kenya) or Indonesia.
Less than 9,000 km of land out of 41,000 km of equator.
Slashdot Mirror
Put it another way: assume cableco violated the contract. How much damages do they owe you? Maybe a refund for the month? No court will compel them to serve you as you think you should be served.
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is in the process of making a mistake" [Napoleon]
But all businesses face competition, and the most devastating tends to be from competitors who follow different business models. Clones are much easier to see off.
The most interesting thing here is Gates acknowledges the competition and is starting to fight [more]. Entirely following Ghandi's script: "First they ignore you, then they laught at you, then they fight you, then you win."
I just wonder if some of those RSTs might not be coming from bandwidth hogs -- users who disrupt other users service to capture more bandwidth for themselves. cable is shared medium.
As for contract modification, these are not "one-time" contracts but continuing agreements. You can terminate at any time and so can they. Where there is an equipment lock-in, then substantial changes should give you the right to terminate without payback. I doubt a court would disagree.
Measuring RST is an interesting approach, but is hardly the only or even preferred solution to TCP/IP congestion control. Delaying [queuing] ACK packets is more transparent and should trigger source reductions.
Law enforcement is about discovering criminal perpetrators and increasingly (horrors in certain violation of civil rights and dilution of the law) in preventing certain criminal activities. For this they certainly needs _some_ records to do detective work after a complaint. But crimes are generally discovered quickly, and police are well aware that detective work has to be fairly prompt or it is likely to be ineffective. So no reason for long retention.
Their lawyers must work out the royalties, but consumers get a very nice copyright exemption. Dunno about P2P, but it might also be covered.
I suspect this mostly happens when normal or superdense (neutronic) matter nears and passes the event horizon. The bigger/better question is: Any estimate on the amount of matter ingested to produce the fireworks? How many solar masses? Just what is going on around that drainhole?
"Good judgement comes with experience. And experience, well, that comes from bad judgement"
Of course age is no guarnatee of wisdom. Nor is youth. However, age does bring experience, and there is no substitute for data. Certainly no amout of analysis. Take the data an analyse to whatever extent you are capable.
One party can certainly be pedantic while another informal, especially in written communications. There is no requirement or even mechanism for agreement on form save some social norms when others are listening.
Even in cases were the content is minor, the discussion process is important. You young bucks don't know what the old ones do. When we're generous, we'll teach you. Maybe at a price. Or we flock off.
I doubt any assumption that turns out false can be termed "entirely appropriate". It is usually better to question than assume.
BTW, a "Fsck you" on any subject is functionally identical to a concession that you possess no further logical argument, and likely indicates you lack the grace or strength to stand by a personal perference and must instead verbally attack.
I would contend the more sophisticated the user, the further they are from attractable to Vista: the most sophisticated users do not use MS products, preferring Linux or *BSD. Less sophisticated users who use MS-Windows (with greater reluctance at greater sophistication) prefer different versions of MS-Windows -- 3.51 revered by those who still run it, 2001 cherished in spite of few updates, and XP clung to as a lifesaver.
Only masochists and reviewers migrate to Vista. Many peole suffer with it bundled.
Historically, the 4th Am got inserted because one of the favorite pre-revolutionary English harassement techniques was to tear apart homes (often using soldiers) of disfavored people under the guise of "searching for evidence" of some wrongdoing. A search can be extremely distruptive and disgusting. So they were made subject to checks and balances.
It is this revulsion that eventually matured into the fruit-of-the-poisoned vine doctrine, but that is merely one consequence. The principal to make people safe remains, and I fully expect some M$ lawsuits.
Since warrents can be very quickly and easily obtained (even by phone) with good evidence, I seriously wonder why various administrations and police see any need to bypass the system. It might have more to do with avoiding meta-analysis and criticism "They did 4,000 searches and only charged 1,000 people". But this oversight is an essential check-and-balance in a democracy. The electorate _must_ be informed, most specifically on govt actions, and even more specifically on govt actions that might be considered improper.
That said, it is relatively easy to disrupt stego by lossy compression/decompression or vice-versa if the source is compressed. Low-order bits will get stripped in JPEGs & MP3s. This obviously doesn't work for loss-less compression as is needed for binaries. If hash or other non-compressibles found, just rehash. Once you've decided to meddle inthe datastream, some eggs will get broken. You'll have both alpha and beta errors (misses and false postives).
Do phone companies record phone calls? Of course not? So why should text companies record content? Even recording traffic should only be where that is required for billing purposes. IE, not for unlimited plans or perhaps where the subsriber has waived detailed billing.
The FCC has been trying to impose logging and retention rules for the convenience of law enforcement, but I don't know how many of these have come into force.
However, the cable market is far from competitive and is best described as regionalized monopolies with competition from substitutes (sat/phone). Faced with the reduced competition, modest [informative] regulation may be the best response.
They don't. The bean counters have taken over, and A&R budgets were slashed so deep and so long that even lame TV could stage a [Ed Sullivan] come-back as artistic gatekeepers!
The RIAA members are just milking their back catalogs. They do not believe they can do A&R development, and we must take them at their word.
I know a lot of [better] H'wood directors get very upset at the reformatting of their movies created 16:9 trimmed down to 4:3.
In this case, unreasonable expectations probably play a huge part: Since the advent of modern [reliable] birth control in the past century, first womens' roles in society have been changing and our whole society will continue to change IMHO tremendously in unstudied and unexpected ways. Under this flux [noise], miscommunication must be expected.
Less than 9,000 km of land out of 41,000 km of equator.