The real problem in my mind is that really, it's either the user *or* the supplier that will benefit, but not both.
The transaction won't happen unless both parties benefit. It's not an either or proposition.
This model has the advantage that if you just use Word once in a while you can use it without paying the $$$ that you now have to do. Just need it to open that job application. That's just $1.15.
Supplies will benefit b/c more people will be able to afford their product and they'll sell more.
Personally, to me it is worth it to put up with the disaster known as Open Office just to avoid MS. However most people don't have that hangup and will love the new model.
According to
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/sea_level_calc.html
you're looking at like a 23 degree Celsius average temperature increase to raise sea level by 59cm.
This is just an excuse to take more money from the people in the form of taxes.
Yes the spam harvesters helped kill Usenet, but the real death was from the spammers flooding your favorite groups with their completely off topic posts. When 90-99% of the posts in a programming group are for enhancing certain parts of your anatomy, what's the point of reading the group.
While it is "painfully obvious you're [the parent poster] a highschooler trying to get around some stupid proxy," I think they have a point.
After this censorship thing is implemented lets say you're in Australia just an average bloke (is that what they call a Joe there?). You can't look up proxy lists. Even if you did the proxies listed will probably be blocked by their updating stuff.
So being unable to look up one or use any that are advertised in any public way, you have to set one up. But how are you going to do that? You've got to get on a network outside of the censorship thing. That meas you've got to leave the country and set one up or at least make contact with a foreigner and make arrangements for this. Not only is this unlikely to happen, but it will probably get you on some terrorist watch list or worse.
So you can't get a foreign proxy set up. So now what do you do?
Eh you probably won't have time to even spend on your censored Internet since you'll be working all the time to pay your taxes for this stupid thing.
Actually, giving a single company this kind of authority is usually not a bad idea. Spamhaus and email, for example.
Here's a suggestion that might help you in future debates. If you're going to provide an example to support your argument, it shouldn't be one that proves the other side's point.
Spamhaus and all email blacklists are a bunch of power hungry nerds and should never be used. Giving any single organization that much control over your Internet is just setting your self up to be abused.
A valid DCMA notice will already have that information:
http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/question.cgi?QuestionID=440Section 512(c)(3) sets out the elements for notification under the DMCA. Subsection A (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)) states that to be effective a notification must include: 1) a physical/electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the infringed right; 2) identification of the copyrighted works claimed to have been infringed; 3) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed; 4) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party (e.g., the address, telephone number, or email address); 5) a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material is not authorized by the copyright owner; and 6) a statement that information in the complaint is accurate and that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner. Subsection B (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(B)) states that if the complaining party does not substantially comply with these requirements the notice will not serve as actual notice for the purpose of Section 512.
Section 512(d)(3), which applies to "information location tools" such as search engines and directories, incorporates the above requirements; however, instead of the identification of the allegedly infringing material, the notification must identify the reference or link to the material claimed to be infringing.
I'm sorry but why can't people just let their answering machine pick up these calls?
Is it dinner time? Are all the loved ones at home? If yes to both turn down the answering machine volume and cut the ringer of the phone off.
After dinner check the answering machine and quickly delete the unwanted called. There's never more than one or two.
Any other time, when the phone rings, just check the caller ID and if it isn't a number you recognize let them talk to the machine. Actually I think this is the main reason I've been taken off most telemarketing lists. I never answer the phone and I never give them money.
Really folks we don't need a whole government agency to handle something like this.
Wal-mart doesn't bring money into your community, it pays minimum wage and the money goes to the shareholders. A purchase at wal-mart is a geographically local purchase... but not an economic one.
Those people earning minimum wage would most likely be unemployed and not getting any income. By shopping your local Wal-mart you are supporting these folks by giving Wal-mart a reason to keep that store open and staffed.
It's not a law it's a regulation and it has been challenged. Way back when NBC started airing Dateline, they had the perfect test case (IMHO).
A single black woman traveling alone who had never been in trouble with the law, had all of her belongings confiscated and she was strip searched and held for days for no reason. She was given some paper basically saying you have no rights and we're doing this b/c we can.
The court upheld these outrageous actions saying something along the lines of the borders have to be secure and the Constitution doesn't apply until you're in the country. Even sadder was that this was before 9/11, so who knows what they can get away with now.
Don't worry they will. e-gold was just smaller and didn't have good enough lawyers. Now that they've got a precedent set, the government will turn its attention towards paypal. The government can't stand to have any "unregulated" exchange of goods, services, or capital.
The last comment on that guy's blog, hit the nail on the head. Email google now, won't do anything to protect us from the judge's insane ruling. Someone needs to go to court and get an injunction. It is going to take money and a lawyer (and an implicit admission that you were probably looking at something you shouldn't have been). I hope someone will do this, b/c otherwise no one's privacy will mean anything.
Sorry you are one. Fortunately that doesn't make what you said any less valid.
Anyway; I much prefer PayPal to bank transfer because in case of fraudolent, forged or non working product (or simply if the item was never sent), I have an avenue for recourse.
Yes I've been burned twice with sending money orders and wire transfers. I will never buy anything on ebay again unless I can use my credit card. With paypal, I've got the paypal process to protect me as well as my credit card's own process.
Of course even with these protections, getting your money back from a fraudulent seller, you're going to be dealing with paypal or your credit card company for at least a month. It's very heavily weighted towards the sellers.
This plus the fact that 9 out of 10 sellers seem to be scams is my reason for not buying anything on ebay in the last year.
Funny, the most competent IT people I've met don't have degrees or certs. In fact usually a degree or cert means they're likely to do some of the idiotic things mentioned in TFA.
Getting that piece of paper just means you've jumped through whatever hoops the testers wanted. Usually you just have to take a multiple choice test. Rarely does it require any real world experience. I'll take the mailroom clerk who runs his own server at home and knows how to clean the malware off the office computers, over the guy with a billizon certifications who took the cram course and learned how to answer a multiple choice test.
Re:Another near-useless book review.
on
Running Xen
·
· Score: 1
I don't know why I keeping reading/. book reviews; I never feel like I get much information in exchange for my two minutes. I must agree on this. While certainly any review should tell us how the reviewer "felt" about the book, there needs to be some hard facts too.
In my personal experience, Xen isn't that hard to get working. I think I read a single HOWTO and was up and running in an afternoon. Very similar to my experience. The HowTo over as xensource was quite adequate.
I subscribe to the mailing list which is a great resource for the more arcane problems (passing a PCI telephony card to an Asterisk domU, for instance). The developers and veterans are very patient and quite helpful. Now here is where I disagree. Most of my questions go unanswered or if I do get a reply it is more like the blind leading the blind. What I've read on the list indicates that the folks are more friendly and helpful than the typical opensource list. So I suspect my questions are just getting lost in the huge volumne of the list or maybe I'm just doing stuff that is more arcane than most people. Regardless, the mailing list has been almost useless for me and I'm desperately seeing another resorce.
I was hoping this review would tell me why I should or should not spend money on another Xen resource. Since I feel like I still don't know anything about the book, it has failed to do so. Yep I agree. The review left a lot to be desired. I hope my local BN or Borders will have it on the shelf so I can skim it before buying it.
He has been resistant the entire time to say a single word about his own guilt. That is the action of a man who either thinks he did no wrong, or who knows he did wrong but thinks he is clever enough to get away with it. or that he is actually innocent.
Actually Comcast has been demanding SSN for at least 10 years. I've been trying that long to get my grandmothers SSN removed from their system.
At this point, Comcast is the only company I do business with that demands SSN (and I only do business with them to pay my grandmother's cable bill which she refuses to cancel). I've had the opposite experience than you as the number of places demanding SSN has dropped significantly in the last decade or so.
At the very least you did the right thing by not giving into their demand. To make companies play ball, you have to hit them where it hurts -- decrease their customer base. It may take a while, but if people keep refusing their demand they'll catch on like all the other companies I do business with.
I'd like to know how many of the projects fall into the "Hey look my project which no one other than myself contributes to and uses, is now using GPL3" Until the kernel switches from GPLv2 it won't really be considered a success in many people's eyes.
However I have a more important question. Why is this written like it is a war between GPLv3 and other licenses? If the virus of GPLv3 doesn't spread we're all doomed. No folks that's not the case. Don't get so wrapped up in this stuff. So what no one uses GPLv3? So what if everyone uses it? If software doesn't meet one's needs (and that includes having cumbersome provisions in your license) one will either write their own or use someone else's software. Really this all works out in the end. Don't have so much emotion invested in things that you can't really affect the outcome.
You obviously need to get more friends if your study group is that small. When I was in college, the physics study group I was part of met every week and almost every physics major from freshman to senior was there. Not quite 100 but more on the order of 50 people taking over the commons area of one dorm. Unless the prof said not to get help on the assignment, I don't see how a study group either online or in person is cheating.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who has trouble with Yahoo!'s captcha. I wish I only got it wrong 20% of the time. My error rate is closer to 50%. And this isn't just Yahoo!. I don't know what the answer is, but these captchas have to go. It makes using your account quite annoying.
and here we have the/. captcha below. It's not as bad as Yahoo!, but I still get it wrong about 33% of the time.
Slashdot Mirror
The real problem in my mind is that really, it's either the user *or* the supplier that will benefit, but not both.
The transaction won't happen unless both parties benefit. It's not an either or proposition.
This model has the advantage that if you just use Word once in a while you can use it without paying the $$$ that you now have to do. Just need it to open that job application. That's just $1.15.
Supplies will benefit b/c more people will be able to afford their product and they'll sell more.
Personally, to me it is worth it to put up with the disaster known as Open Office just to avoid MS. However most people don't have that hangup and will love the new model.
Yeah how could anyone forget their infamous surplus sale?
According to http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/sea_level_calc.html you're looking at like a 23 degree Celsius average temperature increase to raise sea level by 59cm. This is just an excuse to take more money from the people in the form of taxes.
Yes the spam harvesters helped kill Usenet, but the real death was from the spammers flooding your favorite groups with their completely off topic posts. When 90-99% of the posts in a programming group are for enhancing certain parts of your anatomy, what's the point of reading the group.
While it is "painfully obvious you're [the parent poster] a highschooler trying to get around some stupid proxy," I think they have a point.
After this censorship thing is implemented lets say you're in Australia just an average bloke (is that what they call a Joe there?). You can't look up proxy lists. Even if you did the proxies listed will probably be blocked by their updating stuff.
So being unable to look up one or use any that are advertised in any public way, you have to set one up. But how are you going to do that? You've got to get on a network outside of the censorship thing. That meas you've got to leave the country and set one up or at least make contact with a foreigner and make arrangements for this. Not only is this unlikely to happen, but it will probably get you on some terrorist watch list or worse.
So you can't get a foreign proxy set up. So now what do you do?
Eh you probably won't have time to even spend on your censored Internet since you'll be working all the time to pay your taxes for this stupid thing.
Well we haven't had Conservatives in power since the 19th century. NeoCons are not Conservative.
Actually, giving a single company this kind of authority is usually not a bad idea. Spamhaus and email, for example.
Here's a suggestion that might help you in future debates. If you're going to provide an example to support your argument, it shouldn't be one that proves the other side's point. Spamhaus and all email blacklists are a bunch of power hungry nerds and should never be used. Giving any single organization that much control over your Internet is just setting your self up to be abused.
A valid DCMA notice will already have that information: http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/question.cgi?QuestionID=440Section 512(c)(3) sets out the elements for notification under the DMCA. Subsection A (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)) states that to be effective a notification must include: 1) a physical/electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the infringed right; 2) identification of the copyrighted works claimed to have been infringed; 3) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed; 4) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party (e.g., the address, telephone number, or email address); 5) a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material is not authorized by the copyright owner; and 6) a statement that information in the complaint is accurate and that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner. Subsection B (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(B)) states that if the complaining party does not substantially comply with these requirements the notice will not serve as actual notice for the purpose of Section 512. Section 512(d)(3), which applies to "information location tools" such as search engines and directories, incorporates the above requirements; however, instead of the identification of the allegedly infringing material, the notification must identify the reference or link to the material claimed to be infringing.
What are you going to do when you're in the hospital (or jail) and your family needs to access your accounts?
I'm sorry but why can't people just let their answering machine pick up these calls?
Is it dinner time? Are all the loved ones at home? If yes to both turn down the answering machine volume and cut the ringer of the phone off.
After dinner check the answering machine and quickly delete the unwanted called. There's never more than one or two.
Any other time, when the phone rings, just check the caller ID and if it isn't a number you recognize let them talk to the machine. Actually I think this is the main reason I've been taken off most telemarketing lists. I never answer the phone and I never give them money.
Really folks we don't need a whole government agency to handle something like this.
I'm sure it is too late for anyone to read my comment but...
Other than being a pain to install on linux (and it has to be reinstalled every time you upgrade your browser), Flash 9 works fine.
The real problem is that there is no linux version of Shockwave. So i can't play most "flash" games b/c they actually use Shockwave.
Q: "How are the voters of Seattle going to reward that terrible waste?"
A: By reelecting them in a landslide.
No I don't understand why, but its pretty common all across America.
I think you're missed something.
Actually you're missing something
Wal-mart doesn't bring money into your community, it pays minimum wage and the money goes to the shareholders. A purchase at wal-mart is a geographically local purchase ... but not an economic one.
Those people earning minimum wage would most likely be unemployed and not getting any income. By shopping your local Wal-mart you are supporting these folks by giving Wal-mart a reason to keep that store open and staffed.
It's not a law it's a regulation and it has been challenged. Way back when NBC started airing Dateline, they had the perfect test case (IMHO).
A single black woman traveling alone who had never been in trouble with the law, had all of her belongings confiscated and she was strip searched and held for days for no reason. She was given some paper basically saying you have no rights and we're doing this b/c we can.
The court upheld these outrageous actions saying something along the lines of the borders have to be secure and the Constitution doesn't apply until you're in the country. Even sadder was that this was before 9/11, so who knows what they can get away with now.
Don't worry they will. e-gold was just smaller and didn't have good enough lawyers. Now that they've got a precedent set, the government will turn its attention towards paypal. The government can't stand to have any "unregulated" exchange of goods, services, or capital.
The last comment on that guy's blog, hit the nail on the head. Email google now, won't do anything to protect us from the judge's insane ruling. Someone needs to go to court and get an injunction. It is going to take money and a lawyer (and an implicit admission that you were probably looking at something you shouldn't have been). I hope someone will do this, b/c otherwise no one's privacy will mean anything.
I am a European eBay buyer.
Sorry you are one. Fortunately that doesn't make what you said any less valid.
Anyway; I much prefer PayPal to bank transfer because in case of fraudolent, forged or non working product (or simply if the item was never sent), I have an avenue for recourse.
Yes I've been burned twice with sending money orders and wire transfers. I will never buy anything on ebay again unless I can use my credit card. With paypal, I've got the paypal process to protect me as well as my credit card's own process.
Of course even with these protections, getting your money back from a fraudulent seller, you're going to be dealing with paypal or your credit card company for at least a month. It's very heavily weighted towards the sellers.
This plus the fact that 9 out of 10 sellers seem to be scams is my reason for not buying anything on ebay in the last year.
Funny, the most competent IT people I've met don't have degrees or certs. In fact usually a degree or cert means they're likely to do some of the idiotic things mentioned in TFA.
Getting that piece of paper just means you've jumped through whatever hoops the testers wanted. Usually you just have to take a multiple choice test. Rarely does it require any real world experience. I'll take the mailroom clerk who runs his own server at home and knows how to clean the malware off the office computers, over the guy with a billizon certifications who took the cram course and learned how to answer a multiple choice test.
Actually Comcast has been demanding SSN for at least 10 years. I've been trying that long to get my grandmothers SSN removed from their system.
At this point, Comcast is the only company I do business with that demands SSN (and I only do business with them to pay my grandmother's cable bill which she refuses to cancel). I've had the opposite experience than you as the number of places demanding SSN has dropped significantly in the last decade or so.
At the very least you did the right thing by not giving into their demand. To make companies play ball, you have to hit them where it hurts -- decrease their customer base. It may take a while, but if people keep refusing their demand they'll catch on like all the other companies I do business with.
http://www.corecodec.com/forums/index.php?topic=981.0
I'm not sure exactly who is being arrogant, but I'd hope we'd all stand down now that this issue has been apparently resolved.
I'd like to know how many of the projects fall into the "Hey look my project which no one other than myself contributes to and uses, is now using GPL3" Until the kernel switches from GPLv2 it won't really be considered a success in many people's eyes.
However I have a more important question. Why is this written like it is a war between GPLv3 and other licenses? If the virus of GPLv3 doesn't spread we're all doomed. No folks that's not the case. Don't get so wrapped up in this stuff. So what no one uses GPLv3? So what if everyone uses it? If software doesn't meet one's needs (and that includes having cumbersome provisions in your license) one will either write their own or use someone else's software. Really this all works out in the end. Don't have so much emotion invested in things that you can't really affect the outcome.
You obviously need to get more friends if your study group is that small. When I was in college, the physics study group I was part of met every week and almost every physics major from freshman to senior was there. Not quite 100 but more on the order of 50 people taking over the commons area of one dorm. Unless the prof said not to get help on the assignment, I don't see how a study group either online or in person is cheating.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who has trouble with Yahoo!'s captcha. I wish I only got it wrong 20% of the time. My error rate is closer to 50%. And this isn't just Yahoo!. I don't know what the answer is, but these captchas have to go. It makes using your account quite annoying.
/. captcha below. It's not as bad as Yahoo!, but I still get it wrong about 33% of the time.
and here we have the