the audio to text is not there yet. even the best dictation softwares out there are only about 80-90% and leave you to proof the transcript before you give it the thumbs up. working for a VoIP company I've tested these products, but they do not claim to be 100%. my step father is a director over at chevron and they have many (200+) that use similar software and it does save them time, but bottom line, I don't think Skype would be able to offer him (or anyone) audio to text anytime soon.
don't most mail proggies give you this flexibility? I know thunderbird does, just setup the smtp.server:port
maybe it's outlook express [that you are referring to] without this ability?
yea I agree to this. and as I replied to another's comment, this has happened already, however, the client had the option to choose a different ISP. With this setup, small businesses would have to spend more money, and set up an SMTP on another port or setup a remote company webmail box.
but you don't have to be running a SMTP server, you could be using port 25 to another server, like another commenter stated, a friend with a datacenter.
had a buddy with a client whose ISP blocked 25 and they had to use their ISP's SMTP server to send out, which they really hated to do since they wanted only their company name to be in the mail headers (which is understandable).
I have been with approximately 15 different ISPs in the past 10 years. Needless to say, all but 2 had horrid SMTP servers (same goes for their POP3's). Which is why so many choose to use webmail providers such as http://fastmail.fm/ and http://shinyfeet.com/ for their day to day stuff, and only use the ISP given email for very little correspondance.
so I keep thunderbird open for the ISP addy and firefox open for the webmail.
I do like that the FTC is getting other governments involved.
do you get the snippet that contained your search result? you could (possibly, I am sure it would come up) search all night and get enough of the book without having to purchase.
this would be abused mostly for research of course, anyone wanting reading material would most likely buy the book.
but I do agree that if they limit, it should be considered fair use.
from what I know about the brain, it would be near impossible to store all the data, as we do not use most of our brain and every cell gets replaced after X amount of time. it is amazing that we are able to retain the data (maybe the majority of our brain is making copies before the cells die).
I read the article and its comments. check out the comment labeled "Holographic brain", it almost sounds like it will work.
what I don't get, is it sounds like you will be 'body dead' and only be able to live in a computer and from parts of that article, I got that you would end up doing some shitty call center job - and I doubt you'd have much control (especially when a larger/faster computer process would control your life).
the best is one thing, security is another. if they don't go with US based companies, *and* ensure that those companies are not outsourcing priority or work that 'should it fall into the wrong hands' out of the country, then that is high risk.
number one at the box office and what NN million by the end of the weekend is just not enough?
if it was a shitty movie (have not seen the theater nor priated version), then I applaud those that p2p'd it, found out it was crap and saved their money for something else, like shinyfeet.com perhaps (oh wait, that's free)
once again, MPAA just abused the media for some more free advertising for their current blockbuster
oh, I forgot about that one. who pays for email services now a-days anyway?
I'm just looking to offer a little insight and get a few ads knocked out of my emailer. I don't need no shinyfeet money....
uh, but if you do sign up for one of those paid subscriptions... (check the sig)
ok being serious (no more shinyfeet plugs), I used to work as an admin where the retention policy was 1 year. however, that just meant you rotated the tapes for 1 year. the email growth rate was very small (even though there was 1,000s each day), it was the files that grew beyond the retention. even the attachments and email boxes with 1+GB were safe, as 20 years of email fit onto a single DLT4.
granted, MS, er Morgan Stanley is a much bigger company, but I find it very hard to believe that any retention policy would include email, that has got to be their smallest backup.
They should have simply supplied the link in a non-discrinating sort (such as alpabetical) and a very brief description of the site's theme. The ranking should not have been displayed until after the contest was completed.
agree on the ranking being displayed at the end, however, alphasort would also be a bust as the winner would create the site AAABCDEFixingToWin.com or something else starting with A's, then you have the same result as the top spot getting the most hits.
I don't see much going on with viral marketing from those sites though - not that I looked at enough of them.
When I think of viral marketing I think of http://hotmail.com/, http://shinyfeet.com/ or http://yahoo.com/ as they all have the tags in your email with urls, and some, like shinyfeet have ad free contests that involves viral marketing.
I think our government does keep that in mind, and that is why they find every loophole possible to ensure they get taken care of.
I am not big on politics, so I don't know what the limit is, if any. I believe there are, but again, loopholes exist as well. And you won't find anyone lobbing to get those loopholes fixed (unless a few officials get that greedy, but most are too smart for that [the getting themsevles screwed part])
without question they [MPAA/Lucas] just got 100,000 free hits and X amount of free advertising. MPAA will cry about loosing some money, but all it does it help make everyone aware (or those whom might have forgotten, missed the commercials, etc) that SW3 was released today.
If anything, they are complaining because their lawyers are jumping all over this and charging them (as you stated) more than what the perceived, guesstimated, loss of revenue.
anyway, someone with a shinyfeet.com premium account needs to share it to me:-} here's my id:downsize_sf
I believe it is not because it is too difficult for the average user. Until someone comes up with a proxy service (like someone commented a few mins earlier) and focuses on ease of use.
they could probably still install spyware, keyloggers, trojans and more - but get paid directly from the user:-}
or maybe CAN's official's palms are not as well greased like there are here [US].
RIAA (and MPAA) need to get some criminal proof so they can use subpenoa's, otherwise, just pointing and saying 'gimmie' is not going to make the courts jump on their side.
P2P does not appear to be dying, as long as you lump bittorrent under that umbrella.
I'm suprised more people are not using services like http://fastmail.fm/ and http://www.shinyfeet.com/file sharing (well fastmail does not have sharing, but you can put small files into a public folder - shinyfeet is unlimited space/storage but no public, must be shinyfeetshinyfeet)
but I guess those services are too much like the old napster.
I agree, but I do not think it will have much of an impact on MS/OSS since it is the government, not all chinese companies.
so while all of our US companies are trying to squeeze that $2 wage for 10 workers India into 50 Chinese, those companies will end up buying (most likely) Microsoft.
we are getting OT, but WTH...
I don't care for most of gmail's interface. and I have found that lots of spam gets through. Yahoo's is great but no non-IE support to speak of and way too much spam for me.
what I really love is my unlimited shinyfeet account. their servers tag, but they also give you 2 spam filters to use at your discretion. Most of the tagged stuff gets put into the junk folder from the bays filtering I have enabled, but if it gets through, it is tagged:-} then bays gets trained and I never see it again.
you would think you could search out legits from your gmail spam folder:-}
it takes all kinds...and my apologies, I did not mean to offend other admins out there
a [horrid] company I worked for wanted it all, tagged or not. they said they would rather spend hours/day shifting through spam than miss 1.
but again, that was a horrid company and hurting, soon to die, etc. of course if I was running it, getting people off their asses shifting through SPAM and sell something instead of waiting for 1 to come in, is a much better approach.
now, it sounds to me you could work out a deal with vanquish:-}
looking over vanquish's feature page, it seems very cool and sure hope it works. they claim HIP involvement (human interaction), but to me, that almost seems worse than having a scanner rip through potentially delivered email and flagging it or not.
yes spam is a problem, but only poorly setup web-based email apps or client apps (or bad sysadmins) keep email from you, you should get all of it and setup your own filters - kinda like the crap you can filter here at/.:-}
plus that could be very difficult to track, unless file sharing uses some other type of ID that sticks with you. even high speed conx could have dynamic IPs
the hardest part would be to do as you say, go after the people that share and the parent people that shared to them and so forth.
what will probably happen, is a judge will soon rule that $5/mo *is* the maximum levy and RIAA will simply spend a few million to find a loophole.
Yea it is sort of, the blog is basically saying that the person RIAA is going after = Yahoo's service (at least that is my interpretation). but that user does not have a contract or pay X amount to whomever for the licensing to share the music.
but what I do like, is that we are getting closer (or should I say further away from) to the facts/truth instead of BS numbers. It always kills me how suits can sit in an office and estimate up their $$$ billions of losses from pirating. Those new cigarette commercials (guys in suits talking about how the tricked the public) makes me think of these RIAA/MPAA guys. The spend more time trying to SPIN every dollar into their pocket than they do in building something more successful.
but perhaps we should not complain, as their mistakes are giving us better services without having to deal with them directly anymore (napster, etc. and now yahoo).
now as for the $5/mo max or as you are saying $5/mo/person - well that is still cheaper than $5,000 per song or whatever tag they were trying to pin.
Slashdot Mirror
the audio to text is not there yet. even the best dictation softwares out there are only about 80-90% and leave you to proof the transcript before you give it the thumbs up.
working for a VoIP company I've tested these products, but they do not claim to be 100%. my step father is a director over at chevron and they have many (200+) that use similar software and it does save them time, but bottom line, I don't think Skype would be able to offer him (or anyone) audio to text anytime soon.
don't most mail proggies give you this flexibility? I know thunderbird does, just setup the smtp.server:port
maybe it's outlook express [that you are referring to] without this ability?
yea I agree to this. and as I replied to another's comment, this has happened already, however, the client had the option to choose a different ISP. With this setup, small businesses would have to spend more money, and set up an SMTP on another port or setup a remote company webmail box.
but you don't have to be running a SMTP server, you could be using port 25 to another server, like another commenter stated, a friend with a datacenter.
had a buddy with a client whose ISP blocked 25 and they had to use their ISP's SMTP server to send out, which they really hated to do since they wanted only their company name to be in the mail headers (which is understandable).
I have been with approximately 15 different ISPs in the past 10 years. Needless to say, all but 2 had horrid SMTP servers (same goes for their POP3's).
Which is why so many choose to use webmail providers such as http://fastmail.fm/ and http://shinyfeet.com/ for their day to day stuff, and only use the ISP given email for very little correspondance.
so I keep thunderbird open for the ISP addy and firefox open for the webmail.
I do like that the FTC is getting other governments involved.
do you get the snippet that contained your search result? you could (possibly, I am sure it would come up) search all night and get enough of the book without having to purchase.
this would be abused mostly for research of course, anyone wanting reading material would most likely buy the book.
but I do agree that if they limit, it should be considered fair use.
from what I know about the brain, it would be near impossible to store all the data, as we do not use most of our brain and every cell gets replaced after X amount of time. it is amazing that we are able to retain the data (maybe the majority of our brain is making copies before the cells die).
I read the article and its comments. check out the comment labeled "Holographic brain", it almost sounds like it will work.
what I don't get, is it sounds like you will be 'body dead' and only be able to live in a computer and from parts of that article, I got that you would end up doing some shitty call center job - and I doubt you'd have much control (especially when a larger/faster computer process would control your life).
the best is one thing, security is another. if they don't go with US based companies, *and* ensure that those companies are not outsourcing priority or work that 'should it fall into the wrong hands' out of the country, then that is high risk.
number one at the box office and what NN million by the end of the weekend is just not enough?
if it was a shitty movie (have not seen the theater nor priated version), then I applaud those that p2p'd it, found out it was crap and saved their money for something else, like shinyfeet.com perhaps (oh wait, that's free)
once again, MPAA just abused the media for some more free advertising for their current blockbuster
oh, I forgot about that one. who pays for email services now a-days anyway?
I'm just looking to offer a little insight and get a few ads knocked out of my emailer. I don't need no shinyfeet money....
uh, but if you do sign up for one of those paid subscriptions... (check the sig)
ok being serious (no more shinyfeet plugs), I used to work as an admin where the retention policy was 1 year. however, that just meant you rotated the tapes for 1 year. the email growth rate was very small (even though there was 1,000s each day), it was the files that grew beyond the retention. even the attachments and email boxes with 1+GB were safe, as 20 years of email fit onto a single DLT4.
granted, MS, er Morgan Stanley is a much bigger company, but I find it very hard to believe that any retention policy would include email, that has got to be their smallest backup.
now see, if they used http://shinyfeet.com/ (ref not disclosed to keep the whiners happy), non of their email would have been deleted :-}
I guess millions? dunno, but I remember everyone saying that about yahoo and others thinking hotmail was perverted sounding.
seems *very* insecure to me. they have no ssl login, they might be doing something securely under the hood, but I doubt they'd put money into that.
so I guess I would ask them about their email security, even Outlook/Exchange seems to be extremely weak.
and compared to http://shinyfeet.com/ (secure, unlimited space and online file storage) I'll never use hotmail again.
I don't see much going on with viral marketing from those sites though - not that I looked at enough of them.
When I think of viral marketing I think of http://hotmail.com/, http://shinyfeet.com/ or http://yahoo.com/ as they all have the tags in your email with urls, and some, like shinyfeet have ad free contests that involves viral marketing.
I think our government does keep that in mind, and that is why they find every loophole possible to ensure they get taken care of.
I am not big on politics, so I don't know what the limit is, if any. I believe there are, but again, loopholes exist as well. And you won't find anyone lobbing to get those loopholes fixed (unless a few officials get that greedy, but most are too smart for that [the getting themsevles screwed part])
without question they [MPAA/Lucas] just got 100,000 free hits and X amount of free advertising. MPAA will cry about loosing some money, but all it does it help make everyone aware (or those whom might have forgotten, missed the commercials, etc) that SW3 was released today.
:-} here's my id:downsize_sf
If anything, they are complaining because their lawyers are jumping all over this and charging them (as you stated) more than what the perceived, guesstimated, loss of revenue.
anyway, someone with a shinyfeet.com premium account needs to share it to me
how do you know it is not being done already..
:-}
I believe it is not because it is too difficult for the average user. Until someone comes up with a proxy service (like someone commented a few mins earlier) and focuses on ease of use.
they could probably still install spyware, keyloggers, trojans and more - but get paid directly from the user
or maybe CAN's official's palms are not as well greased like there are here [US].
RIAA (and MPAA) need to get some criminal proof so they can use subpenoa's, otherwise, just pointing and saying 'gimmie' is not going to make the courts jump on their side.
P2P does not appear to be dying, as long as you lump bittorrent under that umbrella.
I'm suprised more people are not using services like http://fastmail.fm/ and http://www.shinyfeet.com/file sharing (well fastmail does not have sharing, but you can put small files into a public folder - shinyfeet is unlimited space/storage but no public, must be shinyfeetshinyfeet)
but I guess those services are too much like the old napster.
I agree, but I do not think it will have much of an impact on MS/OSS since it is the government, not all chinese companies.
so while all of our US companies are trying to squeeze that $2 wage for 10 workers India into 50 Chinese, those companies will end up buying (most likely) Microsoft.
we are getting OT, but WTH... I don't care for most of gmail's interface. and I have found that lots of spam gets through. Yahoo's is great but no non-IE support to speak of and way too much spam for me. :-} then bays gets trained and I never see it again.
:-}
what I really love is my unlimited shinyfeet account. their servers tag, but they also give you 2 spam filters to use at your discretion. Most of the tagged stuff gets put into the junk folder from the bays filtering I have enabled, but if it gets through, it is tagged
you would think you could search out legits from your gmail spam folder
it takes all kinds...and my apologies, I did not mean to offend other admins out there
:-}
a [horrid] company I worked for wanted it all, tagged or not. they said they would rather spend hours/day shifting through spam than miss 1.
but again, that was a horrid company and hurting, soon to die, etc. of course if I was running it, getting people off their asses shifting through SPAM and sell something instead of waiting for 1 to come in, is a much better approach.
now, it sounds to me you could work out a deal with vanquish
looking over vanquish's feature page, it seems very cool and sure hope it works. they claim HIP involvement (human interaction), but to me, that almost seems worse than having a scanner rip through potentially delivered email and flagging it or not. /. :-}
yes spam is a problem, but only poorly setup web-based email apps or client apps (or bad sysadmins) keep email from you, you should get all of it and setup your own filters - kinda like the crap you can filter here at
plus that could be very difficult to track, unless file sharing uses some other type of ID that sticks with you. even high speed conx could have dynamic IPs
the hardest part would be to do as you say, go after the people that share and the parent people that shared to them and so forth.
what will probably happen, is a judge will soon rule that $5/mo *is* the maximum levy and RIAA will simply spend a few million to find a loophole.
Yea it is sort of, the blog is basically saying that the person RIAA is going after = Yahoo's service (at least that is my interpretation). but that user does not have a contract or pay X amount to whomever for the licensing to share the music.
but what I do like, is that we are getting closer (or should I say further away from) to the facts/truth instead of BS numbers. It always kills me how suits can sit in an office and estimate up their $$$ billions of losses from pirating. Those new cigarette commercials (guys in suits talking about how the tricked the public) makes me think of these RIAA/MPAA guys. The spend more time trying to SPIN every dollar into their pocket than they do in building something more successful.
but perhaps we should not complain, as their mistakes are giving us better services without having to deal with them directly anymore (napster, etc. and now yahoo).
now as for the $5/mo max or as you are saying $5/mo/person - well that is still cheaper than $5,000 per song or whatever tag they were trying to pin.