Something like WiMax would address the "every streetlamp" problem. In fact, combine WiMax with BPL and any given electric company could conceivable have an instant grid.
Sony's DRM has caused the shit to be sued out of them. What's your point?
My point is, Sony's DRM kit was Microsoft-verified software, as another person who replied to my original post pointed out - it was "guaranteed" by Microsoft to be safe software. So much for that promise. Believe what you will about "increased security" that prevents applications from getting into the system, because Microsoft apparently has a different definition from the rest of the world for backdoors and security breaches.
Because mom and pop really give two fucks about TCP security, right?
No, of course they don't, which is why presenting all these options for how to limit and allow and permit and deny and temporarilly allow or deny will do nothing but confuse users, to the point where they'll just turn everything on, making all these great strides in configurable security pointless. See another poster's comment about the guy following you around all the time yelling "Don't Drop That!".
They can use the normal non-accelerated desktop then.
When one of the major selling points of this new version is the new accelerated desktop, such requirements kill off one of the major upgrade reasons. Not much of a feature if only a handful of people currently have the hardware to make use of it.
login: root
password: foo
None. But how many Linux users do you know of that run their everyday account from root and complain about how much things break, or how often a virus comes through their email and deletes everything on the system, etc etc etc?
...the Vista "suggested hardware" from Microsoft's site. We'll do with their "excellent" type choices, since unless you're going to go all-out, there's no point in expecting all the flashy new features to work right.
You make it sound like it won't shrink the cache when it needs the ram for something else. Which is absurd.
I'm suer it will, but that defeats the purpose of having free memory in the first place - if I have to run a cache flush every time I try to load something from disk that wasn't preloaded, because the memory is full of programs I don't want to run, then there's no performance benefit to me, and as one other poster already pointed out, unless they changed the way they figure out which programs you "frequently" use, this will cause more cache flushing and swapping out than I already get.
So just because something's new it's bloated? Even when they say the new stack has better performance you say it will be worse? You should tell me where you got your crystal ball because I need a new one.
From the tech people at Microsoft that have started talking to the press. For example, over on Bit-Tech, they're talking about recommended specs of dual+ cored CPUs, 2G RAM, DX9 256M PCI-Express video cards, new HDCP-compliant monitors (which, as of the writing of that articlt this past September, don't exist yet).
Yeah, I can see where it seems like we're just making this stuff up...
Again, you're assuming that these caching and (extremely useful) version control systems will work in the foreground and make the user keep track of available space. Don't be so blinkered. If OSX put this in their next version you'd be singing it's praises.
No, I assume they'll work in the background, and work about as well as the Virtual memory manager in XP. And I don't use a Mac, so I don't care, but I bet the Mac people won't like the OS randomly gobbling up drive space either.
The same as linux noobs who run as root (Linspire?) - is that Microsoft's fault too?
No, it's the user's fault, but suggesting that by limiting the default access of user accounts makes the system more secure, you're ignoring the fact that the problem isn't default-level-user-access, it's people who don't run with default-level-user-access that are more dangerous, and limiting the default settings doesn't address the problem.
The amount of misinformed FUD in your post equals anything to ever come out of Microsoft's PR department.
I addressed my "FUD", if you don't agree with it, that's fine, but it's not like there isn't evidence to support my points.
My new company has been doing this for a while. I don't think they're going to get companies like Cingular, Alltel, Palm, BET, and a bunch of others to change platforms for the sake of a MLM gambit.
The whole kernel has been reorganized and rewritten to help prevent software from affecting the system in unsavory ways. In Vista, it should be much more difficult for unauthorized programs (like Viruses and Trojans) to affect the core of the OS and secretly harm your system.
As opposed to authorized programs, like the Sony backdoor, which used Microsoft-supplied methods to create the program to hide from the users.
SuperFetch learns which applications and bits and pieces of the OS you use most and preloads them into memory, so you don't have to wait for a bunch of hard drive paging before your apps or documents load.
Great, the new OS is going to be bigger and bloated just from the OS, and now SuperFetch is going to suck up even more free memory with programs that I may or may not load, but that my computer thinks I'd like to be able to access quickly. Like Windows Media Player, and MSN, and Internet Explorer. And Kazaa. Sorry, was that my outside voice?
...Vista should be far more secure by design, so hopefully we'll see almost no viruses or Trojans, or at least not any that affect a large number of users...
Oh, so we won't use Outlook any more, that's a plus at least.
The new networking stack has a much bigger focus on security, working better with firewalls to allow much finer granularity of which applications can use network resources in which ways, and it's made to stand up a lot better to network attacks.
Great. Now when your parents get the popup that some application wants to access the network, and are presented with all these options for "finer granularity of which applications can use network resources", they'll just turn them all on and go instead of actually learning the ins and outs of TCP security. That's much more secure.
Besides improved security, the most noticeable difference in Vista's networking will be its greatly improved performance.
With the kernel sucking up all my memory by preloading applications, a brand new networking stack, and all these operations going on in the background to maximize my heap, I'll not be holding my breath.
That's right, Vista will include a built-in speech recognition engine, and new and improved speech synthesis.
Vista will have per-application volume control.
Now a new feature called SafeDoc will let you automatically create shadow copies of files as you work on them, so if you accidentally delete a file or need to go back to a previous revision, you can restore the shadow copy of just the file you need.
If you've got a DirectX 9 graphics card with 128MB of RAM or more, you'll be able to enable the "Aero Glass" desktop in Vista.
More, more, more, and more performance-sucking and hardware-gobbling "features". I don't know anyone outside of hardcore gamers that currently has a DX9-compliant, 128MB video card - my parents surely don't. I just last month bought one so that I could play Fable on my comp while I'm away from home for a few months. And I guess I better get that double-500G hard drive option in my new computer so that all my SafeDoc backups don't make all my disk space go the way of my free memory used by SuperFetch.
Users, by default, operate in a mode with fewer privileges than before, which means that "noobs" who don't know any better can't accidentally install software full of spyware.
And "noobs" who do know just a little better will give themselves administrator accounts so that they can install software whenever they want without changing roles, completely mooting any "default user level access" security changes being made.
Unfortunately, there is no built-in virus protection software.
The whole "users drive content"/"content drives users" (straw man) and "use CSS" (more in depth question) arguments aside, the larger question for me would be, is your site such in the marketplace that John Smith mobile user would come to it in his web browsing? If you're a company with something to offer John while he's driving down the freeway, maybe it's something you look into. If you're, say, a media development company, maybe John should go to his desktop, since a mobile version of your site wouldn't be either very effective, or of much use to someone browsing it.
If your client's CEO is the only person in the world who seems to be interested in browsing your company's site on a mobile device, then the cost factor makes the issue a non-starter. Even using CSS, someone has to develop the handheld CSS, then regression test your site against both the regular and the handheld versions. Now, if you have weblogs which indicate that you're getting X number of requests for your main site page, where X is some percentage that seems of interest to your IT group, then maybe you should consider it.
Final answer - is the mobile segment something that would bring users to your site?
K-Street became popular and really pushed the bounds of access for money during the previous administration.
The previous administration also ended up with a Republican-controlled House and Republican-controlled Senate before that adminsitration ended its second term. Which is why very little legislation got passed after '94, when Gingrich and his friends in the pre-K Street groups pretty much ended any chance of Republicans and Democrats working side by side.
Saying K-Street started pushing the bounds in the previous administration, and implying that it's the fault of Clinton, when both sides of the Congress were under Republican control (which is where K Street focuses its efforts), is like me thanking my principal for me graduating high school; he was connected, but in no way had any influence...something that seems to have been forgotten as of late, that the Congress and President are co-equal branches of government.
X10, and a couple of other companies, make X10-type protocol thermostats. X10's appears to be just a setback controller, but it's only about $20. A company called RCS seems to make a full-fledged X10-controlled thermostat for around $250.
Yeah, they were obnoxious with their popup stuff, but their products work well enough, and there's other people who make boxes that work over the protocol. Fire up a linux box with a Firecracker on it, and use at/cron/whatever ot control your thermostat. Or go all the way and do the whole home automation deal.
Google is your friend. Search for x10 and thermostat, X10's are near the top and there's a couple of links to the RCS version in the first page.
At a cost of over $4 Billion, is this system really going to offer any major advantages over GPS, or is it merely a politicised 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency?
...then it's an accessability issue, but not the way some posters are coming at it.
These forms are, for all intents and purposes (even if not in reality) for use for everyone. They are a standard form, with a standard setup. They may be laid out in such a manner that a scanning program in the offices can parse the data. For Federal government agencies, forms have to comply with...some regulation that requires forms makers to determine how long will be required to fill out said form.
If the PDF weren't locked, then the potential exists for "rogue" versions of the form to get out to the public. The agencies have no ability to control those forms. While someone may just be pre-populating a blank form with pertinent information like names or numbers, the possibilty would exist for the layout to be compromised as well.
We're still not a digital society. The forms are online, and you can type into them, but the choice of storage for those filled-out forms is still paper. Yeah, it's a hassle, but until technology advances to the point where we can really do paperless offices (if you started holding your breath since that started being talked about, you're a pertty shade of blue by now), there really isn't an option - your PDFs can't easily (i.e., government bureaucrat level) be opened enough to let you do what you want without compromising the integrity of the document.
It's not a "zero tolerance" issue, the kid, in a low-tech, manual way, instigated a Distributed Denial of Service attack against his school's computers.
The only difference here is this kid used a bunch of friend's fingers on the F5 key instead of a BotNet to get the job done.
...how many of the UNIX/Linux vulnerabilities were found (and then subsequently patched) because someone simply found a buffer overflow or the like in a code review.
How many code reviews find and fix bugs for which no exploit exists in the wild for *ix?
How many patched fixed bugs for which there was no exploit in the wild for Windows?
If she's getting a PhD specialized HID, and she can't figure out how to work up interface usability tests, then either she's a poor student, or she had bad teachers.
What exactly are they teaching her in her HID-related classes, if not HID?
...you missed the "poor man's" part of the question.
The guy wants to buy some wire and speaker terminals, not a centrallized full-house entertainment system, which I'm sure Google returns hundreds of. He wants to know the best way of going about this without installing a prefissional sound system.
I had to pick one to reply to in all the replies....
OK, so let's assume you have a setup to let you hook your video iPod up to your TV. You're paying $2 per show to watch it when you want. That's $26 a half season, $52 for the year, per show. Let's take the most expensive PVR option, a single TiVo paying monthly, $13 a month. If you watch more than 3 shows "on demand" from your iPod, you just crossed the break-even point where the TiVo becomes cheaper. And you don't get _any_ other shows for that money - just the 3 you watch, and maybe freebie stuff; no suggestion lists, no searches, none of the program options that things like TiVo's HMO ( and I'm sure Myth and FreeVo will have if they don't already) provide. And that doesn't even count people using free PVR systems, like FreeVo and MythTV, who don't pay any monthly service charge, though they have problems like the next people do.
As far as using iTunes on your PC to run to TV out - seriously, now many people do you know that have their computer in their living/family room, where the 50 inch TV and $4,000 sound system is? It's probably not a trivial number, but I bet it's far outnumbered by the people who have the computer in the office/bedroom, and have no inclination to run 100 feet of DV wire between their computer and the TV.
And I'm looking at the numbers on the Video iPod - 60G -> 150 hours of video? There's no way that's HDTV quality video at full screen size - with my TiVo modded to 160G, I can hold about 40 hours of High quality video. Te video quality on the iPod just can't be that high.
So, if you still think buying a $400 pocket device with unexpandable storage that you can manage to hack into a home entertainment system is a better deal than a dedicated PC sitting off to the side that can already interface with your home network and other PCs, or a commodity hardware PVR that you can get for about $50 bucks which also already interfaces with your home network and other PCs, then by all means, join the cutting edge.
But this new toy is hardly going to revolutionize the way people watch TV. As other people said in other threads, for a lot of people at a lot of times, the TV is a noise machine - people listen to the TV without being physically in front of it, and a little box in your pocket just isn't the same thing. And for those that do watch it, they just want it to work at the time they want to watch something - they don't want to have to go download the latest episode then move it to their iPod and hook it up to the wires on the back of their entertainment system.
...you're going to tell me how Apple is going to cram a 35 inch screen inside your iPod case.
OK, so you can take your episode of Lost with you, and watch it on your pocket TV. Pocket TVs have been around for...what, more than a decade? How many people do you know stopped buying 25, 32, 50 inch TVs for their house, and multi-thousand dollar sound systems to plug those TVs into, because, well golly gee, now they can put their TV in their pocket.
iPod TV downloads and TiVo solve different problems related to TV viewing. The new iPod service lets you take portable TV shows with you. TiVo lets you time shift, search and archive, and if you have the personal motivation to set up TivoToGo and upgrade your PocketPC handheld with the right WMP software, take portable TV shows with you.
So really, the only thing the new iPod/ABC service does is remove the requirement that your TiVo be available at the time the show comes on the TV. Of course, it's not like you actually have to do anything to make your TiVo record...just set up the season pass, and they'll be there, assuming the show aired in the first place.
All the iPod/ABC service does is remove the requirement for the show to have aired at its original time. And it still has the shortcoming of only being watchable on a screen that, at it's best, is less than a quarter the size of the smallest laptop I've used in the last 5 years.
I wouldn't start the funeral dirge for PVRs and PVR services yet. Not unless that's a TV in your pocket, and not just that you're happy to see me.
OSS as a "movement" has nothing to do with programming per se, and everything to do with who owns the software and what rights others have to it.
If this class were offered at a school I were attending, I would expect it to be a "topics" type class, not a programming class where we sat in front of a computer, but a lecture based class where we talked about issues.
RIAA sues anyone they think may possibly have seen an infringing file. They sued your daughter, the case was dismissed, so now they're suing you. Do you pirate copyrighted files? No? Dismissed with reasonable doubt.
Suing the mother now that the initial case against the 13 year old daughter was dismissed is a no-brainer defense for her.
Haha...and to think, in his Sophmore year when I was his roommate in 301 Allen, he barely used the computer.
I'm not sure if that's cause I was on it All.The.Time., or if all the chicks from downstairs and gthe guys next door used our room as the communal lounge:)
Hey Scott, if you read these, drop me a line sometime...
...that a company which offers a free service - completely free to both retrieve and list caches - has a TOS that prevents you from using their data outside of your personal and non-distributed use and plasters their name all over the place?
It's free. The only features you get if you pay are convenience features, like the ability to generate cache lists to move into mobile devices and GPSr's. The most restrictive parts of their TOS refer to two parts - the site engine/layout/content itself with the exception of the third-party submissions, and the method of access (no spidering).
Seriously, if that's such a draconian TOS for you, you probably need to cancel your Yahoo!, GMail, LiveJournal, MSN, and internet accounts, and any of thos other "free" services that use your web habits as trade.
Slashdot Mirror
Something like WiMax would address the "every streetlamp" problem. In fact, combine WiMax with BPL and any given electric company could conceivable have an instant grid.
- Dual-core processor
- 1G+ RAM
- DX9, 64M video card
That's not much better...Yeah, I can see where it seems like we're just making this stuff up...
No, I assume they'll work in the background, and work about as well as the Virtual memory manager in XP. And I don't use a Mac, so I don't care, but I bet the Mac people won't like the OS randomly gobbling up drive space either. No, it's the user's fault, but suggesting that by limiting the default access of user accounts makes the system more secure, you're ignoring the fact that the problem isn't default-level-user-access, it's people who don't run with default-level-user-access that are more dangerous, and limiting the default settings doesn't address the problem. I addressed my "FUD", if you don't agree with it, that's fine, but it's not like there isn't evidence to support my points.My new company has been doing this for a while. I don't think they're going to get companies like Cingular, Alltel, Palm, BET, and a bunch of others to change platforms for the sake of a MLM gambit.
Motricity
As opposed to authorized programs, like the Sony backdoor, which used Microsoft-supplied methods to create the program to hide from the users.
Great, the new OS is going to be bigger and bloated just from the OS, and now SuperFetch is going to suck up even more free memory with programs that I may or may not load, but that my computer thinks I'd like to be able to access quickly. Like Windows Media Player, and MSN, and Internet Explorer. And Kazaa. Sorry, was that my outside voice?
Oh, so we won't use Outlook any more, that's a plus at least.
Great. Now when your parents get the popup that some application wants to access the network, and are presented with all these options for "finer granularity of which applications can use network resources", they'll just turn them all on and go instead of actually learning the ins and outs of TCP security. That's much more secure.
With the kernel sucking up all my memory by preloading applications, a brand new networking stack, and all these operations going on in the background to maximize my heap, I'll not be holding my breath.
More, more, more, and more performance-sucking and hardware-gobbling "features". I don't know anyone outside of hardcore gamers that currently has a DX9-compliant, 128MB video card - my parents surely don't. I just last month bought one so that I could play Fable on my comp while I'm away from home for a few months. And I guess I better get that double-500G hard drive option in my new computer so that all my SafeDoc backups don't make all my disk space go the way of my free memory used by SuperFetch.
And "noobs" who do know just a little better will give themselves administrator accounts so that they can install software whenever they want without changing roles, completely mooting any "default user level access" security changes being made.
Why do we need virus softwar
The whole "users drive content"/"content drives users" (straw man) and "use CSS" (more in depth question) arguments aside, the larger question for me would be, is your site such in the marketplace that John Smith mobile user would come to it in his web browsing? If you're a company with something to offer John while he's driving down the freeway, maybe it's something you look into. If you're, say, a media development company, maybe John should go to his desktop, since a mobile version of your site wouldn't be either very effective, or of much use to someone browsing it.
If your client's CEO is the only person in the world who seems to be interested in browsing your company's site on a mobile device, then the cost factor makes the issue a non-starter. Even using CSS, someone has to develop the handheld CSS, then regression test your site against both the regular and the handheld versions. Now, if you have weblogs which indicate that you're getting X number of requests for your main site page, where X is some percentage that seems of interest to your IT group, then maybe you should consider it.
Final answer - is the mobile segment something that would bring users to your site?
The previous administration also ended up with a Republican-controlled House and Republican-controlled Senate before that adminsitration ended its second term. Which is why very little legislation got passed after '94, when Gingrich and his friends in the pre-K Street groups pretty much ended any chance of Republicans and Democrats working side by side.
Saying K-Street started pushing the bounds in the previous administration, and implying that it's the fault of Clinton, when both sides of the Congress were under Republican control (which is where K Street focuses its efforts), is like me thanking my principal for me graduating high school; he was connected, but in no way had any influence...something that seems to have been forgotten as of late, that the Congress and President are co-equal branches of government.
...there won't be an immediate slashdotting, since MajorGeek has a Torrent of the download posted already
X10, and a couple of other companies, make X10-type protocol thermostats. X10's appears to be just a setback controller, but it's only about $20. A company called RCS seems to make a full-fledged X10-controlled thermostat for around $250.
Yeah, they were obnoxious with their popup stuff, but their products work well enough, and there's other people who make boxes that work over the protocol. Fire up a linux box with a Firecracker on it, and use at/cron/whatever ot control your thermostat. Or go all the way and do the whole home automation deal.
Google is your friend. Search for x10 and thermostat, X10's are near the top and there's a couple of links to the RCS version in the first page.
- Galileo should offer greater accuracy - down to a metre and less
- Greater penetration - in urban centres, inside buildings, and under trees
- Faster coordinate fix
- It will be able to tell users if there are major errors that could compromise performance.
- Users will also benefit enormously from the agreement between Europe and the US to make their sat-nav systems compatible and "interoperable"
No, it's just political maneuvering.......then it's an accessability issue, but not the way some posters are coming at it.
These forms are, for all intents and purposes (even if not in reality) for use for everyone. They are a standard form, with a standard setup. They may be laid out in such a manner that a scanning program in the offices can parse the data. For Federal government agencies, forms have to comply with...some regulation that requires forms makers to determine how long will be required to fill out said form.
If the PDF weren't locked, then the potential exists for "rogue" versions of the form to get out to the public. The agencies have no ability to control those forms. While someone may just be pre-populating a blank form with pertinent information like names or numbers, the possibilty would exist for the layout to be compromised as well.
We're still not a digital society. The forms are online, and you can type into them, but the choice of storage for those filled-out forms is still paper. Yeah, it's a hassle, but until technology advances to the point where we can really do paperless offices (if you started holding your breath since that started being talked about, you're a pertty shade of blue by now), there really isn't an option - your PDFs can't easily (i.e., government bureaucrat level) be opened enough to let you do what you want without compromising the integrity of the document.
It's not a "zero tolerance" issue, the kid, in a low-tech, manual way, instigated a Distributed Denial of Service attack against his school's computers.
The only difference here is this kid used a bunch of friend's fingers on the F5 key instead of a BotNet to get the job done.
...Dupe posting tops the SlashDot vulnerability list for the 8th year in a row.
When are we going to hear from the people responsible about getting this vulnerability fixed?
...how many of the UNIX/Linux vulnerabilities were found (and then subsequently patched) because someone simply found a buffer overflow or the like in a code review.
How many code reviews find and fix bugs for which no exploit exists in the wild for *ix?
How many patched fixed bugs for which there was no exploit in the wild for Windows?
...your friend change majors.
If she's getting a PhD specialized HID, and she can't figure out how to work up interface usability tests, then either she's a poor student, or she had bad teachers.
What exactly are they teaching her in her HID-related classes, if not HID?
...you missed the "poor man's" part of the question.
The guy wants to buy some wire and speaker terminals, not a centrallized full-house entertainment system, which I'm sure Google returns hundreds of. He wants to know the best way of going about this without installing a prefissional sound system.
I had to pick one to reply to in all the replies....
OK, so let's assume you have a setup to let you hook your video iPod up to your TV. You're paying $2 per show to watch it when you want. That's $26 a half season, $52 for the year, per show. Let's take the most expensive PVR option, a single TiVo paying monthly, $13 a month. If you watch more than 3 shows "on demand" from your iPod, you just crossed the break-even point where the TiVo becomes cheaper. And you don't get _any_ other shows for that money - just the 3 you watch, and maybe freebie stuff; no suggestion lists, no searches, none of the program options that things like TiVo's HMO ( and I'm sure Myth and FreeVo will have if they don't already) provide. And that doesn't even count people using free PVR systems, like FreeVo and MythTV, who don't pay any monthly service charge, though they have problems like the next people do.
As far as using iTunes on your PC to run to TV out - seriously, now many people do you know that have their computer in their living/family room, where the 50 inch TV and $4,000 sound system is? It's probably not a trivial number, but I bet it's far outnumbered by the people who have the computer in the office/bedroom, and have no inclination to run 100 feet of DV wire between their computer and the TV.
And I'm looking at the numbers on the Video iPod - 60G -> 150 hours of video? There's no way that's HDTV quality video at full screen size - with my TiVo modded to 160G, I can hold about 40 hours of High quality video. Te video quality on the iPod just can't be that high.
So, if you still think buying a $400 pocket device with unexpandable storage that you can manage to hack into a home entertainment system is a better deal than a dedicated PC sitting off to the side that can already interface with your home network and other PCs, or a commodity hardware PVR that you can get for about $50 bucks which also already interfaces with your home network and other PCs, then by all means, join the cutting edge.
But this new toy is hardly going to revolutionize the way people watch TV. As other people said in other threads, for a lot of people at a lot of times, the TV is a noise machine - people listen to the TV without being physically in front of it, and a little box in your pocket just isn't the same thing. And for those that do watch it, they just want it to work at the time they want to watch something - they don't want to have to go download the latest episode then move it to their iPod and hook it up to the wires on the back of their entertainment system.
...you're going to tell me how Apple is going to cram a 35 inch screen inside your iPod case.
OK, so you can take your episode of Lost with you, and watch it on your pocket TV. Pocket TVs have been around for...what, more than a decade? How many people do you know stopped buying 25, 32, 50 inch TVs for their house, and multi-thousand dollar sound systems to plug those TVs into, because, well golly gee, now they can put their TV in their pocket.
iPod TV downloads and TiVo solve different problems related to TV viewing. The new iPod service lets you take portable TV shows with you. TiVo lets you time shift, search and archive, and if you have the personal motivation to set up TivoToGo and upgrade your PocketPC handheld with the right WMP software, take portable TV shows with you.
So really, the only thing the new iPod/ABC service does is remove the requirement that your TiVo be available at the time the show comes on the TV. Of course, it's not like you actually have to do anything to make your TiVo record...just set up the season pass, and they'll be there, assuming the show aired in the first place.
All the iPod/ABC service does is remove the requirement for the show to have aired at its original time. And it still has the shortcoming of only being watchable on a screen that, at it's best, is less than a quarter the size of the smallest laptop I've used in the last 5 years.
I wouldn't start the funeral dirge for PVRs and PVR services yet. Not unless that's a TV in your pocket, and not just that you're happy to see me.
Yep yep.
OSS as a "movement" has nothing to do with programming per se, and everything to do with who owns the software and what rights others have to it.
If this class were offered at a school I were attending, I would expect it to be a "topics" type class, not a programming class where we sat in front of a computer, but a lecture based class where we talked about issues.
And the defense will go something like...
RIAA sues anyone they think may possibly have seen an infringing file. They sued your daughter, the case was dismissed, so now they're suing you. Do you pirate copyrighted files? No? Dismissed with reasonable doubt.
Suing the mother now that the initial case against the 13 year old daughter was dismissed is a no-brainer defense for her.
Haha...and to think, in his Sophmore year when I was his roommate in 301 Allen, he barely used the computer.
I'm not sure if that's cause I was on it All.The.Time., or if all the chicks from downstairs and gthe guys next door used our room as the communal lounge :)
Hey Scott, if you read these, drop me a line sometime...
The point isn't that the shortcomings can't be fixed - it's that they shouldn't be shortcomings in the first place.
...that a company which offers a free service - completely free to both retrieve and list caches - has a TOS that prevents you from using their data outside of your personal and non-distributed use and plasters their name all over the place?
It's free. The only features you get if you pay are convenience features, like the ability to generate cache lists to move into mobile devices and GPSr's. The most restrictive parts of their TOS refer to two parts - the site engine/layout/content itself with the exception of the third-party submissions, and the method of access (no spidering).
Seriously, if that's such a draconian TOS for you, you probably need to cancel your Yahoo!, GMail, LiveJournal, MSN, and internet accounts, and any of thos other "free" services that use your web habits as trade.