And this incomplete version could then have very little to do with protection of end users and their data (which they have already with enough common sense), and everything to do with DRM and theft of fair use rights. Lovely.
While "Brian" (my name), on the other hand, has gone downhill since the 70s, from #8 back then to #46 2 years ago. Combine that with the fact that it was #113 or something in the 40s.
Not likely... VPN in this case is banned because it would be considered something not for residential use. Banning of SSH for that reason would be harder to justify.
That's still not a valid reason for VPN, IMHO, because the only thing that would be non-residential would be running a VPN server off of your home connection. Running a client to connect your home machine into a VPN, on the other hand, makes more sense. After all, it's great for telecommuters and most of those (a couple years ago I could have said "us") work from home... residential use by definition of the word.
The popular VPN systems are easy to identify and block. IIRC, Microsoft's PTPP uses an IP-based protocol for its tunneling that isn't implemented on top of TCP (the IP protocol number is different).
One could always invent their own VPN protocol that rides over normal TCP/IP and where you can configure the server's port. That would get around bans like this.
Yes, but if you spoof the user agent, you get around that easily, as is stated in the comments on this page.
If a receiver's only clues as to a client's nature reside in an open protocol, the sender's nature can be faked. Mozilla can look like IE (though I wouldn't know why it'd WANT to), IRC bots can look like mIRC, etc.
1) Windows boots 2) Service Manager notes that Automatic (Spy and) Update service is diabled 3) Windows turns service back on 4) User sues Microsoft for privacy invasion 5) Profit!
That's really what it boils down to, passing off crap as quality stuff. I would think that, between Microsoft and every politician under the sun, enough prior art should have been obvious to keep this one off the shelves.
Considering that most phones (picture phones or no) only have the phone keypad as a keyboard for entering anything, I guess we get to really see if a picture is worth a thousand words:-)
Then again, there's always the SMS extreme shorthand for captions...
Slashdot Mirror
And this incomplete version could then have very little to do with protection of end users and their data (which they have already with enough common sense), and everything to do with DRM and theft of fair use rights. Lovely.
While "Brian" (my name), on the other hand, has gone downhill since the 70s, from #8 back then to #46 2 years ago. Combine that with the fact that it was #113 or something in the 40s.
Just like disco, I guess...
Yeah, but it's a pity that US citizens can't say who without being hauled off into exile.
First uses of biometric authentication...
...
1) Banking
2) Online gaming
3)
I thought it was more along the lines of click-through EULAs, and their legal meaning being reduced to nothing.
Not likely... VPN in this case is banned because it would be considered something not for residential use. Banning of SSH for that reason would be harder to justify.
That's still not a valid reason for VPN, IMHO, because the only thing that would be non-residential would be running a VPN server off of your home connection. Running a client to connect your home machine into a VPN, on the other hand, makes more sense. After all, it's great for telecommuters and most of those (a couple years ago I could have said "us") work from home... residential use by definition of the word.
The popular VPN systems are easy to identify and block. IIRC, Microsoft's PTPP uses an IP-based protocol for its tunneling that isn't implemented on top of TCP (the IP protocol number is different).
One could always invent their own VPN protocol that rides over normal TCP/IP and where you can configure the server's port. That would get around bans like this.
Yes, but if you spoof the user agent, you get around that easily, as is stated in the comments on this page.
If a receiver's only clues as to a client's nature reside in an open protocol, the sender's nature can be faked. Mozilla can look like IE (though I wouldn't know why it'd WANT to), IRC bots can look like mIRC, etc.
Who in their right mind would come to a trivia channel to look for files to download? Hmm?
Bandwidth on the network itself is what would be saved... the number of DCC requests and inane messages from file sharing bots being lowered, etc.
Bandwidth overall will always be taken up by porn sites.
1) Windows boots
2) Service Manager notes that Automatic (Spy and) Update service is diabled
3) Windows turns service back on
4) User sues Microsoft for privacy invasion
5) Profit!
Reminds me of one of the movies on the Bionic couple... "The more complex the are, the easier they are to disrupt" or something to that effect.
They're fighting for their right to spam.
I can't imagine most users actually opting in for advertisement in a file-sharing system, unless it's through some obscure click-through.
They're probably just pissed that things like the distribution of OpenSSL are completely out of their control.
Or has no one checked things out there lately?
From the DALnet server I'm on at the moment:
There are 625 users and 17700 invisible on 22 servers
Buyer says 'feedback' comments damaged his reputation
If he has a prior reputation has an asshole, which I wouldn't doubt, then it's obviously not damaged. It's only reinforced.
That's really what it boils down to, passing off crap as quality stuff. I would think that, between Microsoft and every politician under the sun, enough prior art should have been obvious to keep this one off the shelves.
The "mini RIAAs" wouldn't be anywhere close to a unified body, though. That's the whole POINT behind the RIAA, or so I thought.
Just organize an effort to send them back (a la AOL).
Considering that most phones (picture phones or no) only have the phone keypad as a keyboard for entering anything, I guess we get to really see if a picture is worth a thousand words :-)
Then again, there's always the SMS extreme shorthand for captions...
But, then you'd see the formation of MANeRS (Mothers Against News Related Sites). There's no way to win :-)
One more weird acronym for everyone else to make fun of.
The first time you taste a tarball, you won't be so happy.
...one's missing from the list. That one would be PanIP v. everybody.
I was thinking, "GOD it's cold out here... maybe I'll cry about it."