This is a big win for Linux, but is making it mandatory going too far? It would seem wiser to support a solution that favors the best tool for the job, which may not always be an open source product.
Actually, the best tool for the job always is an open source product. It just might not have been created yet.
If using all open-source products (with very few exceptions) is good enough for the FSF (now where's that link), why shouldn't it be good enough for Brazil? Err... Umm... Sure, why not? After all, they're just a non-profit organization of a larger size.
The complaints allege that all five distributors have engaged in acts and practices that have unreasonably restrained competition in the market for prerecorded music in the United States through their adoption, implementation and enforcement of Minimum Advertised Price ("MAP") provisions of their Cooperative Advertising Programs.
These five companies, which collectively dominate this market, adopted significantly stricter MAP programs between late 1995 and 1996. Under the new MAP provisions, retailers seeking any cooperative advertising funds were required to observe the distributors' minimum advertised prices in all media advertisements, even in advertisements funded solely by the retailers. Retailers seeking any cooperative funds were also required to adhere to the distributors' minimum advertised prices on all in-store signs and displays, regardless of whether the distributor contributed to their cost.
I see. I guess that makes sense.
Now if I can only figure out how to buy DVDs wholesale...
With
the exception of a few software suites, anything
you can find for 'doze has an analog on the Mac.
I prefer digital.
There might not be as much, but it's there. Same
goes for hardwae.
Hmm, and I thought the whole point of this article was that IE was dropping support for Mac. So that means there will be no support for any website which requires IE.
As for hardware, there is currently no support for any of the wireless cards for Verizon Wireless on the Mac.
Yeah but they're not very good at installing an IPv6 gateway. Hell, I can't even figure it out (because I'm behind a firewall).
They wouldn't switch if they could still use google, or mp3.com.
But effectively, they can't.
They would demand that they get google back.
Yeah, they would demand that google, or mp3.com, turn back on IPv4.
There are areas in Asia and Europe sitting there twiddling their fingers waiting to be able to use IPv6. It's no biggie to us home-grown, beef-eatin' Americans, because the majority of IP addresses are ours.
Bleh, then we shouldn't be worrying about solving it. Let the Asians and Europeans solve their own IP address problems, or pay us to help them.
That comment has the same effect as a rich man next to a poor woman holding her starving child going "Yeah, welfare isn't that important right now."
Except that one involves someone starving to death, and the other involves someone using NAT.
My point was that every major commercial, consumer-based organization until now has not made a move.
Sure, because there's no incentive. From the perspective of good old American companies, they can choose to spend money implementing something out of generosity for those in other countries, or they can sit on their asses and do nothing for free. I think the choice they're going to make is clear.
I can see it now: "3 million consumers settled a lawsuit initiated by the RIAA which claimed that they lied about whether or not they had bought CDs. The defendants denied all wrongdoing, and settled the claim for $0.13 each, payable in free advertising on their fan websites." If only justice could be that fair.
Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants conspired to illegally raise the prices of prerecorded Music Products by implementing Minimum Advertised Price policies, in violation of State and Federal laws.
I thought that was illegal... Now someone explain to me, why is it that I still hear so many commercials saying "prices so low we're not even allowed to say them here!" And then someone else tell me, where can I buy popular dvds wholesale?
Not just search engines. Yahoo! could start serving their mail, chat, and games through IPv6 exclusively.
People would switch to MSN.
MP3.com could only stream via IPv6
People would stop using mp3.com
hardware corp's could stop producing IPv4 hubs and routers
All of them, at once?
People aren't going to know how to do make the switch. You have to give incentive for the ISPs to switch, and so many of them are monopolies (cable, DSL) that that's going to be hard.
Besides, IPv6 just isn't that important at the moment. It needs a killer app first, then people will switch to the ISPs that support it, and the other ISPs will have to support it to get back/stop losing customers.
My guess is the killer app is going to have nothing to do with the large number of IP addresses. It'll probably deal with multicasting.
What if some hollywood type came out with a popular free (commercial supported) multicast television show? That alone might not be enough, but a whole station probably would be.
After seeing that they "can't compete with Apple":
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Yeah, but they're not complaining about it. They're not starting a lawsuit about it. They're just removing their product from it. I'm sure Microsoft would have no problem whatsoever with anyone who wants to remove Windows support for their software.
90+% of all web browsing is IE on Windows, Therefore IE on windows IS the standard regardless of whatever standards comittee may do.
The problem is, it's not a published standard. Sure, it may be published as far as doing things the right way goes, but as soon as you start breaking the rules you're using accidental parts of the IE standard.
They forgot to mention multicasting. Without multicasting, I'd agree that IPv6 was just "nice to have." After all, the IP address shortage isn't really a problem as long as we stop wasting IP addresses. How many IP addresses does slashdot have? How many do they really need (1, maybe 2)?
Multicasting, on the other hand, will cause a revolution. No more need to wait in line to download the lastest linux kernel. Just join the channel distributing it at your bandwidth, listen until it starts repeating itself, and then download via unicast those few packets you missed. We're talking about a huge bandwidth savings here. Not just bandwidth redistribution (like Bittorrent or Kazaa), overall bandwidth savings.
Sure, I guess that too falls under the "nice to have" category, but to be more specific I'd say it's "really really nice to have."
But IPv6 would be a great way to implement a P2P sharing network. It supports multicasting and portable IP addressing, for instance. If the Pentagon (or anyone for that matter) really wants IPv6 by 2008, all they have to do is release a P2P program which utilizes the 6bone. Let all the copyright infringers do the work of testing and transitioning.
The situation is too artificial for the brain to take seriously.
Or maybe it's just that emotion takes over before the brain has a chance to think.
After all, the situation isn't as artificial as you make it out to be. The phrase "cut off your nose to spite your face" didn't come from nowhere, after all.
Someone who disregards a rule usually does it because they don't think the rule is valid, and it just "gets in the way".
Which is why I suggest making it crystal clear that this particular rule is one which is very serious, and will result in criminal charges for unauthorized access to a system being pressed against anyone who breaks it.
The public, on the other hand, has plenty of malice and destructive intent. I don't trust them with my data as far as I can throw 'em.
Frankly, the only real difference is accountability. The public is more likely to do something malicious, because the public is less likely to get caught.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd like to see you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that I haven't bought a CD in the last 6 years.
This is a big win for Linux, but is making it mandatory going too far? It would seem wiser to support a solution that favors the best tool for the job, which may not always be an open source product.
Actually, the best tool for the job always is an open source product. It just might not have been created yet.
If using all open-source products (with very few exceptions) is good enough for the FSF (now where's that link), why shouldn't it be good enough for Brazil? Err... Umm... Sure, why not? After all, they're just a non-profit organization of a larger size.
I see. I guess that makes sense.
Now if I can only figure out how to buy DVDs wholesale...
With the exception of a few software suites, anything you can find for 'doze has an analog on the Mac.
I prefer digital.
There might not be as much, but it's there. Same goes for hardwae.
Hmm, and I thought the whole point of this article was that IE was dropping support for Mac. So that means there will be no support for any website which requires IE.
As for hardware, there is currently no support for any of the wireless cards for Verizon Wireless on the Mac.
Turnabout is fair play, isn't it?
Consumers aren't idiots.
Yeah but they're not very good at installing an IPv6 gateway. Hell, I can't even figure it out (because I'm behind a firewall).
They wouldn't switch if they could still use google, or mp3.com.
But effectively, they can't.
They would demand that they get google back.
Yeah, they would demand that google, or mp3.com, turn back on IPv4.
There are areas in Asia and Europe sitting there twiddling their fingers waiting to be able to use IPv6. It's no biggie to us home-grown, beef-eatin' Americans, because the majority of IP addresses are ours.
Bleh, then we shouldn't be worrying about solving it. Let the Asians and Europeans solve their own IP address problems, or pay us to help them.
That comment has the same effect as a rich man next to a poor woman holding her starving child going "Yeah, welfare isn't that important right now."
Except that one involves someone starving to death, and the other involves someone using NAT.
My point was that every major commercial, consumer-based organization until now has not made a move.
Sure, because there's no incentive. From the perspective of good old American companies, they can choose to spend money implementing something out of generosity for those in other countries, or they can sit on their asses and do nothing for free. I think the choice they're going to make is clear.
I can see it now: "3 million consumers settled a lawsuit initiated by the RIAA which claimed that they lied about whether or not they had bought CDs. The defendants denied all wrongdoing, and settled the claim for $0.13 each, payable in free advertising on their fan websites." If only justice could be that fair.
Or you could have just said you bought a CD 4 years ago, even though you didn't.
Free music and $13.
(Did they actually ask for receipts? Not that receipts are hard to obtain...)
Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants conspired to illegally raise the prices of prerecorded Music Products by implementing Minimum Advertised Price policies, in violation of State and Federal laws.
I thought that was illegal... Now someone explain to me, why is it that I still hear so many commercials saying "prices so low we're not even allowed to say them here!" And then someone else tell me, where can I buy popular dvds wholesale?
It's funny how when you say something true, it's considered a troll, but when you say something false, it's considered a joke.
Define "less useful".
Having fewer uses. For instance, having much less software available for it. Having much less hardware available for it.
Sure, but tons of IP addresses aren't very useful if no one can talk to you.
After all, if all you want is lots of IP addresses which can't talk to anyone else, 10.X.X.X is available.
Not just search engines. Yahoo! could start serving their mail, chat, and games through IPv6 exclusively.
People would switch to MSN.
MP3.com could only stream via IPv6
People would stop using mp3.com
hardware corp's could stop producing IPv4 hubs and routers
All of them, at once?
People aren't going to know how to do make the switch. You have to give incentive for the ISPs to switch, and so many of them are monopolies (cable, DSL) that that's going to be hard.
Besides, IPv6 just isn't that important at the moment. It needs a killer app first, then people will switch to the ISPs that support it, and the other ISPs will have to support it to get back/stop losing customers.
My guess is the killer app is going to have nothing to do with the large number of IP addresses. It'll probably deal with multicasting.
What if some hollywood type came out with a popular free (commercial supported) multicast television show? That alone might not be enough, but a whole station probably would be.
After seeing that they "can't compete with Apple":
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Yeah, but they're not complaining about it. They're not starting a lawsuit about it. They're just removing their product from it. I'm sure Microsoft would have no problem whatsoever with anyone who wants to remove Windows support for their software.
90+% of all web browsing is IE on Windows, Therefore IE on windows IS the standard regardless of whatever standards comittee may do.
The problem is, it's not a published standard. Sure, it may be published as far as doing things the right way goes, but as soon as you start breaking the rules you're using accidental parts of the IE standard.
Market share or not, Apple people BUY software!
Good point. Apple people are willing to pay more for a less useful product. They should start an advertising campaign around that.
They forgot to mention multicasting. Without multicasting, I'd agree that IPv6 was just "nice to have." After all, the IP address shortage isn't really a problem as long as we stop wasting IP addresses. How many IP addresses does slashdot have? How many do they really need (1, maybe 2)?
Multicasting, on the other hand, will cause a revolution. No more need to wait in line to download the lastest linux kernel. Just join the channel distributing it at your bandwidth, listen until it starts repeating itself, and then download via unicast those few packets you missed. We're talking about a huge bandwidth savings here. Not just bandwidth redistribution (like Bittorrent or Kazaa), overall bandwidth savings.
Sure, I guess that too falls under the "nice to have" category, but to be more specific I'd say it's "really really nice to have."
But IPv6 would be a great way to implement a P2P sharing network. It supports multicasting and portable IP addressing, for instance. If the Pentagon (or anyone for that matter) really wants IPv6 by 2008, all they have to do is release a P2P program which utilizes the 6bone. Let all the copyright infringers do the work of testing and transitioning.
IPv7 won't be about IP addresses, it'll be about something else :P
I assume the players are kept anonymous from one another, though.
You're aware that MAC addresses are spoofed almost as easily as IPs, aren't you?
1) Only if you know what the MAC address is. And 2) The same could be said about the detection method.
I never said it was a fool-proof solution, just that it was better than detection.
9 out of 10 slashdotters said they would be willing to pay $1 to watch Bill Gates lose $9.
"The game is played with the explicit stipulation that it is a one-time interaction."
The situation is too artificial for the brain to take seriously.
Or maybe it's just that emotion takes over before the brain has a chance to think.
After all, the situation isn't as artificial as you make it out to be. The phrase "cut off your nose to spite your face" didn't come from nowhere, after all.
Someone who disregards a rule usually does it because they don't think the rule is valid, and it just "gets in the way".
Which is why I suggest making it crystal clear that this particular rule is one which is very serious, and will result in criminal charges for unauthorized access to a system being pressed against anyone who breaks it.
The public, on the other hand, has plenty of malice and destructive intent. I don't trust them with my data as far as I can throw 'em.
Frankly, the only real difference is accountability. The public is more likely to do something malicious, because the public is less likely to get caught.