Except for everybody who exactly followed the instructions in How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs and used these terms:
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
First point stipulated. However the Sacagawea a.k.a Golden dollar:
Was easily distiguishable from the quarter by size, weight, color, and texture (specifically, having smooth sides in contrast to the quarter's ridges);
Was quickly adopted by vending machines. For example, all of the vending machines on my campus were able to take them before I could even get one. After all, coins are much easier to take than bills. The SBA had failed before vending machine started to take dollars at all--I'm sure the vending machine companies would really have prefered SBAs to inventing bill scanners;
Was promoted much more strongly than any newly introduced money before it, although I have to admit to getting some dirty looks for tipping with golden dollars at first.
On the other hand, there was really poor distribution. I had to go to my bank to get them, and often they did not have even a single full roll on hand (!). These days, my only source for dollars is the vending machines at the post office. And I don't buy nearly enough stamps to make that a viable option.
Well, it's also just not that good. People are really starved for good science-fiction on TV. Do yourself a favor and catch the reruns of Andromeda and (to a lesser extent) the current season of Andromeda.
I don't care about "all of the spam in the world today". I only care about all of the spam that evades my current filter, which is already being sent by the most sophisticated spammers who are the most likely to be using zombie networks and most likely to not have a problem employing special hardware, but only account for maybe 5% of the spam I actually have to look at. If we assume that my mailbox is representative, the question is whether there are enough zombies to generate stamps for 5% of all the spam in the world.
Seriously how many times do you want to copy the same program from TV?
Does it prevent you from recording the "same" program twice? I doubt it, but trivially if somebody wants to timeshift a show they might very well like to timeshift a rerun a year later.
As for copying a copy, I do that all the time. I like to (try to) cook at home, and I use cooking shows to teach me how (I know). Anyway, watching a show and taking notes or something is just stupid, but I can't save all the shows I want on my ReplayTV, so I offload them onto my PC and stream them back to the ReplayTV using the formerly-OSS DVArchive.
This is actually a move operation, but there is nothing to enforce that. The problem for me, and the problem with DRM schemes in general, is that the designers aren't going to bother to think about my case, just like they won't bother to think of a lot of things that other people do. We'll just be screwed. In fact, it's not really that much of a stretch to say that they want to screw us more than they want to screw pirates. They don't want us to timeshift. They want us to sit in demographically neat little zombie packages and shut up. They have a great disincentive to make recording convenient.
Incidentally, (1) You don't "pay for TV" by watching commercials, you pay with everything you buy that is advertised, (2) If they take away my rights to watch my way, I just won't watch. It's not like TV is that good anymore.
You do not remember correctly. OS/2 for Windows was just a different package that didn't have Windows bundled. A cheaper OS/2 with all the functionality no Windows license was something that basically everybody wanted.
A lot of people around that time we claiming that IBM's Windows was faster because they compiled with WATCOM instead of MSC. I and most reasonable people didn't give a shit about running Windows applications and we still don't.
The policy states that Google will not guarantee the deletion of emails that are archived even if you cancel your account.
Ugh. Guys, they are just being up front about what has always been true. E.g. do you think admins at your university went through old backup tapes expunging your account when you graduated? No.
When there is 1 single provider in your area, how exactly do you have a choice?
You don't, hence ``almost certainly''. The `almost' is there to cover the very unlikely cases where: (1) some person can only get email service from a single entity, and (2) the entity is pro-spam enough to be added to a block list. Feel free to contradict my statement by providing some huge list of areas for which both of those are true.
I certainly take exception to your claim that `many' people fit that criteria, and as evidence I site the fact that once you are online, sources of cheap or even free email are legion.
Not only is the parent not "Insightful", but it misses the point.
The `innocent' people who are on the list almost certainly have a choice in ISPs. Maybe, they get service cheaper by using an ISP who makes most of their money by ignoring clear standards of civility and allows a menace like spamming to continue.
There are a lot of people who don't care that these `innocent' people can't email them. Just how many people does the average individual correspond with anyway?
Whether or not SPEWS `goes too far' (Oooo) may or may not be debatable, but fuck spam, fuck spammers, fuck ISPs who support spammers, and fuck people who support ISPs who support spammers. I happen to be genuinely innocent of contributing to the menace of spam, and I need a list that will let me say `fuck people who support ISPs who support spammers'. Who are you to deny me that?
not everyone (or even a large enough percentage of internet users to make your statement in any way meaningful as a solution) can run their own mail server, but surely you knew that.
spammers do dictionary attacks against any of the large email providers. create a yahoo address, forget about it for a few weeks, log in and see thousands of spams.
Digital cable/DSS is just MPEG, so you'll see artifacts regardless. At least here, you can see artifacts even on analog cable because the cable company receives their data digitally too.
It wasn't that long ago you could search for 'Lumos' and get one hit (me). Then it was some company, then a Harry-Potter-ish font, (then a hundred other Harry Potter things) and now I'm a spam registry.
Anybody else out there with extremely rare last names but the domains are all taken by companies anyway?
I guess I should be grateful that they opened up.us and I was able to jam myself in there before somebody else did.
Re:May as well be the first to say it
on
AOL Sues Spammers
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You aren't paying extra for trash pickup to deal with the pound or two of junkmail that you get each week.
Sure you are. Junk mail is not just close to 100% of my total mail, it's a significant part of my total trash from all sources. Garbage trucks have a finite size, so as the amount of trash each household throws out increases, the only choice is to shrink existing routes and add new ones to compensate.
When that happens, do you suppose the company:
a) allows their bottom line to decrease, or
b) raises your rates
?
The worst part is that while AOL has to pay, the spammers don't.
Huh? It certainly doesn't cost less to send a billion messages than it does to receive a billion messages. I'm sure it costs more.
If AOL has something to defend against, it's people who sign up, start getting 100 spams for every actual message immediately, and cancel. I happen to believe this is the single largest problem facing Internet penetration in comsumer markets today.
The last several movies I went too were ruined by the kiddies and idiots yacking away. I don't even consider going to movies that aren't at least R anymore.
I'm depending on my new home theater to make movies enjoyable again and I'll just learn to live with the difference in fidelity.
Well, one point of view is that I know my name won't be in the data because SonicBlue doesn't have it! The only way for a company to truly protect their customers is to not demand and record personal information in the first place, and I greatly respect SonicBlue for operating that way. (Who else does? An online bookstore that did not retain a record of my purchases would get a lot of business from me.)
The most interesting part of the article for me was:
SonicBlue said it stopped collecting anonymous user data in May 2001, after a furor erupted over competitor TiVo's practice of secretly gathering information about its users' viewing habits. TiVo's machine would collect viewing data and send it over a phone line back to the company.
Until now I had assumed that ReplayTV was "just as sleazy as TiVo, but at least they don't have my name". They just went up a notch in my book.
Slashdot Mirror
Frank. Ping. Good god you're hard to find. You only exist on slashdot. Go check your LinkedIn mail aready. Or something.
It fails the very first part of the Open Source Definition because non-open-source products have to buy a (rather expensive) license.
A lot of companies stand to get caught in the crossfire between Oracle and MySQL.
> This license will not be foisted on anyone.
Except for everybody who exactly followed the instructions in How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs and used these terms:
First point stipulated. However the Sacagawea a.k.a Golden dollar:
On the other hand, there was really poor distribution. I had to go to my bank to get them, and often they did not have even a single full roll on hand (!). These days, my only source for dollars is the vending machines at the post office. And I don't buy nearly enough stamps to make that a viable option.
Well, it's also just not that good . People are really starved for good science-fiction on TV. Do yourself a favor and catch the reruns of Andromeda and (to a lesser extent) the current season of Andromeda.
I don't care about "all of the spam in the world today". I only care about all of the spam that evades my current filter, which is already being sent by the most sophisticated spammers who are the most likely to be using zombie networks and most likely to not have a problem employing special hardware, but only account for maybe 5% of the spam I actually have to look at. If we assume that my mailbox is representative, the question is whether there are enough zombies to generate stamps for 5% of all the spam in the world.
Does it prevent you from recording the "same" program twice? I doubt it, but trivially if somebody wants to timeshift a show they might very well like to timeshift a rerun a year later.
As for copying a copy, I do that all the time. I like to (try to) cook at home, and I use cooking shows to teach me how (I know). Anyway, watching a show and taking notes or something is just stupid, but I can't save all the shows I want on my ReplayTV, so I offload them onto my PC and stream them back to the ReplayTV using the formerly-OSS DVArchive.
This is actually a move operation, but there is nothing to enforce that. The problem for me, and the problem with DRM schemes in general, is that the designers aren't going to bother to think about my case, just like they won't bother to think of a lot of things that other people do. We'll just be screwed. In fact, it's not really that much of a stretch to say that they want to screw us more than they want to screw pirates. They don't want us to timeshift. They want us to sit in demographically neat little zombie packages and shut up. They have a great disincentive to make recording convenient.
Incidentally, (1) You don't "pay for TV" by watching commercials, you pay with everything you buy that is advertised, (2) If they take away my rights to watch my way, I just won't watch. It's not like TV is that good anymore.
You do not remember correctly. OS/2 for Windows was just a different package that didn't have Windows bundled. A cheaper OS/2 with all the functionality no Windows license was something that basically everybody wanted.
A lot of people around that time we claiming that IBM's Windows was faster because they compiled with WATCOM instead of MSC. I and most reasonable people didn't give a shit about running Windows applications and we still don't.
Ugh. Guys, they are just being up front about what has always been true. E.g. do you think admins at your university went through old backup tapes expunging your account when you graduated? No.
When there is 1 single provider in your area, how exactly do you have a choice?
You don't, hence ``almost certainly''. The `almost' is there to cover the very unlikely cases where: (1) some person can only get email service from a single entity, and (2) the entity is pro-spam enough to be added to a block list. Feel free to contradict my statement by providing some huge list of areas for which both of those are true.
I certainly take exception to your claim that `many' people fit that criteria, and as evidence I site the fact that once you are online, sources of cheap or even free email are legion.
Not only is the parent not "Insightful", but it misses the point.
The `innocent' people who are on the list almost certainly have a choice in ISPs. Maybe, they get service cheaper by using an ISP who makes most of their money by ignoring clear standards of civility and allows a menace like spamming to continue.
There are a lot of people who don't care that these `innocent' people can't email them. Just how many people does the average individual correspond with anyway?
Whether or not SPEWS `goes too far' (Oooo) may or may not be debatable, but fuck spam, fuck spammers, fuck ISPs who support spammers, and fuck people who support ISPs who support spammers. I happen to be genuinely innocent of contributing to the menace of spam, and I need a list that will let me say `fuck people who support ISPs who support spammers'. Who are you to deny me that?
Clustering algorithms are well known in the information retrieval field (try searching for "clustering" on CiteSeer for example).
Google has more than enough expertise to roll out clustering if they want it.
Digital cable/DSS is just MPEG, so you'll see artifacts regardless. At least here, you can see artifacts even on analog cable because the cable company receives their data digitally too.
It wasn't that long ago you could search for 'Lumos' and get one hit (me). Then it was some company, then a Harry-Potter-ish font, (then a hundred other Harry Potter things) and now I'm a spam registry.
Anybody else out there with extremely rare last names but the domains are all taken by companies anyway?
I guess I should be grateful that they opened up .us and I was able to jam myself in there before somebody else did.
Sure you are. Junk mail is not just close to 100% of my total mail, it's a significant part of my total trash from all sources. Garbage trucks have a finite size, so as the amount of trash each household throws out increases, the only choice is to shrink existing routes and add new ones to compensate.
When that happens, do you suppose the company:
- a) allows their bottom line to decrease, or
- b) raises your rates
?Huh? It certainly doesn't cost less to send a billion messages than it does to receive a billion messages. I'm sure it costs more.
If AOL has something to defend against, it's people who sign up, start getting 100 spams for every actual message immediately, and cancel. I happen to believe this is the single largest problem facing Internet penetration in comsumer markets today.
--- anti-spam and anti-BS.Of course there's always Sun's online store for those who can decide what they want without hand-holding.
The last several movies I went too were ruined by the kiddies and idiots yacking away. I don't even consider going to movies that aren't at least R anymore.
I'm depending on my new home theater to make movies enjoyable again and I'll just learn to live with the difference in fidelity.
"Have a big pipe? Blah blah blah," that SF has been placing at the bottom of developer mailing list messages.
Well, one point of view is that I know my name won't be in the data because SonicBlue doesn't have it! The only way for a company to truly protect their customers is to not demand and record personal information in the first place, and I greatly respect SonicBlue for operating that way. (Who else does? An online bookstore that did not retain a record of my purchases would get a lot of business from me.)
The most interesting part of the article for me was:
Until now I had assumed that ReplayTV was "just as sleazy as TiVo, but at least they don't have my name". They just went up a notch in my book.