My real name (diminuitive) found refs to my site, my entry on the "Convetion Members List" I signed up for, and a "Have Your Say" comment on BBCi I didn't even know they'd put up. (Quoting a Slashdot signature in a revelant conversation, of all things)
Oh, and several hits for some otehr guy with my name who runs a Dr Who site.
My real name (full) picked up nowt on me, but I found that not only do I share my name with a doctor and an architect, but there's a guy in my area with the same name who runs some sort of emplyment agency.
Oh and my screenname picked up my website, some Slashdot quotes, IRC logs... ...oh and some cheeky bugegr who'd posted a Usenet posting to a link-farm. (Seeing an except from the Stats on a page titled "Anime Music Videos" is a bit of a giveaway)
You do raise a very good point. And it's a hard one to stick to - which makes it all the more important.
Do not cheer on attacks on the SCO site.
Personally I ain't cheering it on. I don't (seriously) advocate DDoS as a method of showing displeasure at something. And I believe that this was probably written by some pillock with misguided intentions who has no idea (or care) about the potential backlash towards the OSS community.
After all, with all the death-threats and crack-smoking comments here on Slashdot, it doesn't exactly show thye Linux/FOSS community in a good light.
The real problem, however, is it's kind of hard to care about SCO now. Even though it's obvious (or should be...) that DDoSing them into oblivion is not the right way to deal with them, it's still difficult to want to be pro-SCO.
Whether it was done by someone pro-OSS or anti-OSS trying to defame the community, SCO did basically set themselves up as a massive target here. And much as I deplore the activity of the virus writers, it's hard not to want to say that SCO walked into it.
And that makes it all the worse for us. It's hard to want to care about SCO, but it we don't stand by them in this instance we're tarring ourselves with the same brush a the virus authors.
Tiggs
Kind of amused that when the author of an item linked in the Original Post reprints his own words to save his server from being slashdotted (too late from the looks of things), someone mods it "10% Redundant".
Easy. We're separated from the nearest major English-speaking countries by huge expanses of sea, and separated from the rest of our continent by both a physica (water) and language barrier.
We need to be a part of something bigger or else face the risk of being even more isolated as we already are. And as a tech-aware geek, I'd rather not have that. The world has shrunk, and trying to keep us apart from the rest of the world can only be a bad thing.
I don't think that the EU is perfect, but I don't see keeping seperate as a viable alternative.
The trick is to build for compliance, have a nice clean design and test cross platform and cross browser as much as possible. Iron out the bugs and make comprimises (usually graphic design) where there are style problems you cant fix.(Degrade gracefully)
(emphasis mine - see bottom)
I defintiely agree with the parent here. Try to make sure it's viewable on as many browser/platform combinations as possible. Yes, maybe the newer ones will still look prettier, but as long as older browsers at least display the basics.
Testing under IE, NS/Moz (multiple platforms), Opera (if possible, and even Lynx means you can see which ones display it as you want, which fail but still display the text, and which bomb out totally (see bottom).
If using CSS, testing how it looks when you eliminate the stylesheet is always a good idea. In fact, designing the layout before even adding the Styles means you know that it's at least legible in "plain" format (the "KISS"/"Get it Right in Black & White" methods)
Oh and personal peeve. Never hardcode your font-sizes and the absolute width of your pages. There's nothing worse than a page which takes up about half of your 1280x1024 screen and displays in a tiny little 10pt font.
Yes some browsers cab nabdate a minumum font-size, but too many sites also implicitly state sizes of tables and positionsing - and therefore readable font0sizes start to ovelap badly.
I will say though its about time people gave up on NS4.7 it is the browser from hell!
Oh yes. I gave up on Netcape 4.x on my site a couple years ago. Not only did it not display my styles properly, but it couldn't even fail cleanly.
Even Lynx would show a style-free version of my pages, whereas NS4.x actually lost half the text.
Well, given that Windows won't do it for you, there's nothing keeping you from reorganizing your Start Menu as a series of cascading menus by creating submenus by functional category, then moving the entries into the appropriate menus.
Unfortunately Winaodws (and it's applications) do have several "helpful functions that get in the way here.
Firstly, it doesn't track any moves of program groups. So if you reorganise your menus then subsequently de/re-install the application it makes a mess of your menus as it can't find the original to delete.
Yes, it is possible to set the menu location at install-time, but not all programs bother with this - choosing instead to install there they want to go.
NT-based installations are a pain to track down menu items. Some applications install to "All Users", and others install to the current profile. But not always with rhyme or reason - installing your system-tweaking apps to everyone's menus, and your "free for all" software only showing up in your own.
If anything what's really needed (under Windows, anyway - it's already been mentioned that KDE handles it somewhat better) is a more standard way of doing things.
If nothing else a "per user/all users menu" option at install would be nice. But a decent (and agreed) heirarchical menu structure would be nice. Like if there were at least default categories (Media, Net, System, Office, Games) which were not only in the menu, but somehow flagged by the installer software - so that if the menu system supported it it would default to putting the menu in a more intuitive place.
That and I don't appreciate software like WMP and RealOne installing to "Top of Start Menu" as well as "Programs root", "Multimedia" and "Software company" locations all at once.
The idea that Righteous Babe is a RIAA member was beyond laughable.
especially seeing that the tagline on many of Ani DiFranco's albums is unauthorized duplication, whilst sometimes necessary, is never as good as the real thing.
If they really were RIAA-affiliated, I can't see that little line of text remaining.
It just seems wrong somehow. Surely anyone with an ounce of common-sense would throw out a patent application for making a variation of an "open standard format" into a proprietary one.
Unfortunately we all know how much "common sense" goes into authorising patents.
The annoying thing about this is it seems that MS are copping out and trying to use the law to lock their format where programming has failed. Seeing that there's always someone who can reverse-engineer a file-format for interoperability (and a clause in the DMCA to allow same, ISTR), they're going for a physically open format but parenting it so no-one else can actually utilise the data without paying MS.
"Bollocks to that"
Shit. If this gets through I'll polish my sorely lacking geek-skills and write a perl script to convert from MS-XML to pure XML. (Never thought a Microsoft product would ever inspire me to actually learn something useful)
X has the most elegant cut-and-paste scheme I've ever seen, certainly vastly superior to Mac OS X and Windows.
To a point, yes. The problem is that it won't always work under an X-Server running in Windows. (And when your Primary PC has a better monitor than your Linux box, who wouldn't?)
Becuase Windows applications rarely have native middle-button support, Mouse Drivers have been allowing you to map middle-button to various functions for almost a decade now. I, for one, couldn't manage under Windows if I couldn't double-click with one press of the middle button. (Too many years of that particular mapping has spoilt me)
And I'm sure I'm not the only person who makes use of button-mapping like that. This then causes problems when X-Server software still interprets said middle-click as a double-left-click. Having to change the button mapping every half an hour depending on whether you're using an X-Server or Windows Software is a pain!
So certainly when running an X-Server from Windows, a consistant way to copy/paste is really important. Especially if the X-Server's clipboard was the same as the main Windows one. (Copy/pasting between sessions is sometimes useful)
My tasteful, non-obnoxious banner did worse by a fair amount.
Actually, I can kind of guess why it would be.
Morbid curiosity.
The majority of people who would click the banner anyway would do so whatever. So, up to a point, "more obnoxious" won't make any difference.
The majority of people who never click banners would ignore even a less-obnoxious version. They probably filter banners either at the brower or that the eyes level.
(Oh, it's a banner. How pretty. Now on with the site.)
It's the Might/Mightn't crowd that would be most affected by this. Chances are the less obnoxious version got overlooked as it didn't grab attention. But the obnoxious one will have had the OMGWTF reaction - which does occasionally make people follow the link - if for nothing else otehr than morbid curiosity.
What can I say. We humans are a twisted race. "tasteful and non-obnoxious" just isn't interesting!
(On the flipside, though, I don't think Goatse Man would work very well as an advertising mascot - sick humanity or no.)
It's similar to SPAM, although some (definitely not all) popup-ads are legitimate - albeit infuriating.
They just don't seem to "get" that people block these things for a reason.
Plus popup companies have one major disadvantage over most spammers. An easy point of origin. Meaning that if they irritate too many people, there is a definite target for retaliation. Whether legal (suing, etc) or not (DDoS).
They also block the reply windows in some versions of Outlook Web Access. When you clock reply in a mail message, it closes the mail and brings up a reply window. Popup-blockers register this as being a popup, and blocks it. Then again, Google and Mozilla allow you to set per-site overrides.
The best way to do this, really, is to put a note somewhere on your page saying that your site utilises popups, and for best results to set their software to allow popups from this site only.
True, I'm not sure how Earthlink/AOL will handle it. But I know that Mozilla and Google both allow you to do this, so that if a site's legitimate popup windows get blocked (e.g. "Reply to message" in Outlook Web Access[*]) then you can add it to the per-site settings to allow them.
I know you were giving a flippant comment, but you've managed to highlight the crux of the whole DRM issue...
You are a niche, insignificant market. Stop wasting our time.
The Music industry in general treat the niche markets as "insignificant", and fob us off with DRM and/or platform-locked audio formats.
But they over look that a lot of said "niche markets" include the geeks who have the skills and time to find a way around it. And by not giving these people what many would probably pay for, they're giving them a reason to put their skills to use.
Yes, maybe the non-mainstream music and non-Windows/Mac markets are small. Maybe they wouldn't make a huge amount of profit from them. But by catering to those markets they'd decrease the amount of people coding ways to allow them to play music they way they want to.
It's good to see that Warp (and others) are finally getting the picture.
I've never heard of most of Warp's artists, and don't much care for the ones that I have heard. Nevertheless, I shall be buying a bunch of tracks on principle.
And that always runs with the chance of you finding another artist you hadn't heard of but actually rather like. And at that point, another potential customer is born.
I echo the sentiment that Warp actually seem to have picked up the clue here. Some people will still be put off by the prices (you can't please everyone), but others will gladly pay for less than a standard CD for the MP3s which they can then back up, copy to their other PCs, and play on damn near anything.
They also seem to have picked up that they'll probably never totally stamp out people copying music, but they can at least use the internet and the MP3 file format to make a few more sales.
The only language the people at the RIAA and similar organisations understand is money. Here's a golden opportunity to spell out to them that the community will reward those that treat them fairly.
I'm all for the record companies making money out of me if it's money for something I actually want. And I certainly intend to put my money where my mouth is and buy from Warp/Bleep.
New York still had the untaxed prices displayed everywhere when I was there last year
It's as bad as the computer shops here in the UK.
They proudly display rather reasonable looking prices in HUGE BLACK TYPE, putting the VAT-inclusive price in very small type underneath.
That's fine for business customers. But when the adverts in consumer-targetted magazines advertises like that, they don't exactly get me on side, ya?
Not always. Things are still misnamed. Either totally, or with spelling errors. And even in the ID3 Tags. And the latter means that with Tag-based tools you have to edit the tags before it can rename the files.
At least Warp give full properly-formatted ID3 tags, meaning most renamers can deal with the files all in one go.
Besides, they're new to it, and doing something that few other record companies seem willing to do.
From the USA (and anywhere else in the World) they will be displayed in US$, and the prices do not include any sales taxes so are considerably lower than their Sterling or Euro equivalent
Plus until someone from outside UK/Europe comments, I have no idea whether Sales Tax gets added, increasing the actual price of the shown amount.
Much as I hate VAT, at least it's included in the pulished price. I know that, at least back in 1989, in some parts of the US the sales tax wasn't shown in the marked price, so you ended up paying more than the stickered price. Maybe things've changed now.
Yes, I know their website's not exactly well-designed, but it's not that hard to find the information.
Obviously another person who hasn't visited Bleep/Warp's site and read their FAQ.
As I stated in another reply earlier, not only do they seem to be a UK-based outfit, but they openly state they'll sell to any country as long as you have net access and a compatible browser.
(The prices being listed in GBP if you're in the UK should be a bit of a giveaway - now if only other sites would also aotumatically adjust the currency their prices are displayed in depending on locaiton accessed-from)
Frankly, if it prevents another 9/11, i'm happy to provide our government protectors full access to my mind.
Frankly, I'm not.Not until they could distinguish between subconscioud thought and consciout decision. Just 'cos someone contemplates (or even thinks about) blowing up a building doesn't necessarily mean they're a terrorist.
Never mind the people who just consider this non-seriously, what about police, architects, structural engineers, explosives experts, SFX designers. All of these kind of people may have legitimate reasons for wondering exactly how a building may be blown up or similarly destroyed. (Either for prevention, risk assessment, or simulation)
The way I see it, whilst thought are in my head, and only in my head then it's no-one's business what those thoughts are unless I want people to know.
The moment it ceases to be just "in my head" and starts to be hostile action, that would be the time whe I hould be "considered dangerous". But not whilst it's mere speculation.
Bleep doesn't. Follow the link in the OP and check out their FAQ.
Q: I AM IN SOUTH AMERICA/ALASKA/THE NORTH POLE, DOES THAT MATTER?
A: As long as you have an internet connection and a fairly modern browser (Internet Explorer 6, Safari 1.0, Firebird 0.7) you can access and use Bleep.com anywhere in the world, whether using an Apple Mac or a Windows based PC. Lots of bandwidth and a fast connection obviously helps too!
I've not tried it out myself yet, but I'm guessing the web-based nature means that it will also work under any OS with an up-to-date browser.
Well, crap. The preachers of Kazaa and its ilk have been saying these things need to be done before they'll switch. Now lets see if they actually do.
Well I certainly know what I'll be browsing when I'm back home at my boradband connection after work.:)
Not yet sure if there's any music there I'd want, but now I've a legit way of finding out.
And it would appear to be fine with UK payments. Bonus!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, chances are that unless she, herlelf, is a geek, she won't know what slashdot is.
Then again, you might get the "Oh so you're the guy I modded '-1 offtopic' last week" treatment.
TiggsMy real name (diminuitive) found refs to my site, my entry on the "Convetion Members List" I signed up for, and a "Have Your Say" comment on BBCi I didn't even know they'd put up. (Quoting a Slashdot signature in a revelant conversation, of all things)
Oh, and several hits for some otehr guy with my name who runs a Dr Who site.
My real name (full) picked up nowt on me, but I found that not only do I share my name with a doctor and an architect, but there's a guy in my area with the same name who runs some sort of emplyment agency.
Oh and my screenname picked up my website, some Slashdot quotes, IRC logs...
...oh and some cheeky bugegr who'd posted a Usenet posting to a link-farm. (Seeing an except from the Stats on a page titled "Anime Music Videos" is a bit of a giveaway)
TiggsYou do raise a very good point. And it's a hard one to stick to - which makes it all the more important.
Personally I ain't cheering it on. I don't (seriously) advocate DDoS as a method of showing displeasure at something. And I believe that this was probably written by some pillock with misguided intentions who has no idea (or care) about the potential backlash towards the OSS community.
After all, with all the death-threats and crack-smoking comments here on Slashdot, it doesn't exactly show thye Linux/FOSS community in a good light.
The real problem, however, is it's kind of hard to care about SCO now. Even though it's obvious (or should be...) that DDoSing them into oblivion is not the right way to deal with them, it's still difficult to want to be pro-SCO.
Whether it was done by someone pro-OSS or anti-OSS trying to defame the community, SCO did basically set themselves up as a massive target here. And much as I deplore the activity of the virus writers, it's hard not to want to say that SCO walked into it.
And that makes it all the worse for us. It's hard to want to care about SCO, but it we don't stand by them in this instance we're tarring ourselves with the same brush a the virus authors.
Tiggs
Kind of amused that when the author of an item linked in the Original Post reprints his own words to save his server from being slashdotted (too late from the looks of things), someone mods it "10% Redundant".Easy. We're separated from the nearest major English-speaking countries by huge expanses of sea, and separated from the rest of our continent by both a physica (water) and language barrier.
We need to be a part of something bigger or else face the risk of being even more isolated as we already are. And as a tech-aware geek, I'd rather not have that. The world has shrunk, and trying to keep us apart from the rest of the world can only be a bad thing.
I don't think that the EU is perfect, but I don't see keeping seperate as a viable alternative.
Tiggs(emphasis mine - see bottom)
I defintiely agree with the parent here. Try to make sure it's viewable on as many browser/platform combinations as possible. Yes, maybe the newer ones will still look prettier, but as long as older browsers at least display the basics.
Testing under IE, NS/Moz (multiple platforms), Opera (if possible, and even Lynx means you can see which ones display it as you want, which fail but still display the text, and which bomb out totally (see bottom).
If using CSS, testing how it looks when you eliminate the stylesheet is always a good idea. In fact, designing the layout before even adding the Styles means you know that it's at least legible in "plain" format (the "KISS"/"Get it Right in Black & White" methods)
Oh and personal peeve. Never hardcode your font-sizes and the absolute width of your pages. There's nothing worse than a page which takes up about half of your 1280x1024 screen and displays in a tiny little 10pt font.
Yes some browsers cab nabdate a minumum font-size, but too many sites also implicitly state sizes of tables and positionsing - and therefore readable font0sizes start to ovelap badly.
Oh yes. I gave up on Netcape 4.x on my site a couple years ago. Not only did it not display my styles properly, but it couldn't even fail cleanly.
TiggsEven Lynx would show a style-free version of my pages, whereas NS4.x actually lost half the text.
Unfortunately Winaodws (and it's applications) do have several "helpful functions that get in the way here.
Firstly, it doesn't track any moves of program groups. So if you reorganise your menus then subsequently de/re-install the application it makes a mess of your menus as it can't find the original to delete.
Yes, it is possible to set the menu location at install-time, but not all programs bother with this - choosing instead to install there they want to go.
NT-based installations are a pain to track down menu items. Some applications install to "All Users", and others install to the current profile. But not always with rhyme or reason - installing your system-tweaking apps to everyone's menus, and your "free for all" software only showing up in your own.
If anything what's really needed (under Windows, anyway - it's already been mentioned that KDE handles it somewhat better) is a more standard way of doing things.
If nothing else a "per user/all users menu" option at install would be nice. But a decent (and agreed) heirarchical menu structure would be nice. Like if there were at least default categories (Media, Net, System, Office, Games) which were not only in the menu, but somehow flagged by the installer software - so that if the menu system supported it it would default to putting the menu in a more intuitive place.
That and I don't appreciate software like WMP and RealOne installing to "Top of Start Menu" as well as "Programs root", "Multimedia" and "Software company" locations all at once.
Tiggsespecially seeing that the tagline on many of Ani DiFranco's albums is unauthorized duplication, whilst sometimes necessary, is never as good as the real thing.
If they really were RIAA-affiliated, I can't see that little line of text remaining.
TiggsCan they do this?
It just seems wrong somehow. Surely anyone with an ounce of common-sense would throw out a patent application for making a variation of an "open standard format" into a proprietary one.
Unfortunately we all know how much "common sense" goes into authorising patents.
The annoying thing about this is it seems that MS are copping out and trying to use the law to lock their format where programming has failed. Seeing that there's always someone who can reverse-engineer a file-format for interoperability (and a clause in the DMCA to allow same, ISTR), they're going for a physically open format but parenting it so no-one else can actually utilise the data without paying MS.
"Bollocks to that"
Shit. If this gets through I'll polish my sorely lacking geek-skills and write a perl script to convert from MS-XML to pure XML. (Never thought a Microsoft product would ever inspire me to actually learn something useful)
Tiggs
To a point, yes. The problem is that it won't always work under an X-Server running in Windows. (And when your Primary PC has a better monitor than your Linux box, who wouldn't?)
Becuase Windows applications rarely have native middle-button support, Mouse Drivers have been allowing you to map middle-button to various functions for almost a decade now. I, for one, couldn't manage under Windows if I couldn't double-click with one press of the middle button. (Too many years of that particular mapping has spoilt me)
And I'm sure I'm not the only person who makes use of button-mapping like that. This then causes problems when X-Server software still interprets said middle-click as a double-left-click. Having to change the button mapping every half an hour depending on whether you're using an X-Server or Windows Software is a pain!
So certainly when running an X-Server from Windows, a consistant way to copy/paste is really important. Especially if the X-Server's clipboard was the same as the main Windows one. (Copy/pasting between sessions is sometimes useful)
TiggsActually, I can kind of guess why it would be.
Morbid curiosity.
The majority of people who would click the banner anyway would do so whatever. So, up to a point, "more obnoxious" won't make any difference.
The majority of people who never click banners would ignore even a less-obnoxious version. They probably filter banners either at the brower or that the eyes level.
(Oh, it's a banner. How pretty. Now on with the site.)
It's the Might/Mightn't crowd that would be most affected by this. Chances are the less obnoxious version got overlooked as it didn't grab attention. But the obnoxious one will have had the OMGWTF reaction - which does occasionally make people follow the link - if for nothing else otehr than morbid curiosity.
What can I say. We humans are a twisted race. "tasteful and non-obnoxious" just isn't interesting!
Tiggs(On the flipside, though, I don't think Goatse Man would work very well as an advertising mascot - sick humanity or no.)
It's similar to SPAM, although some (definitely not all) popup-ads are legitimate - albeit infuriating.
They just don't seem to "get" that people block these things for a reason.
Plus popup companies have one major disadvantage over most spammers. An easy point of origin. Meaning that if they irritate too many people, there is a definite target for retaliation. Whether legal (suing, etc) or not (DDoS).
TiggsThey also block the reply windows in some versions of Outlook Web Access. When you clock reply in a mail message, it closes the mail and brings up a reply window. Popup-blockers register this as being a popup, and blocks it. Then again, Google and Mozilla allow you to set per-site overrides.
The best way to do this, really, is to put a note somewhere on your page saying that your site utilises popups, and for best results to set their software to allow popups from this site only.
True, I'm not sure how Earthlink/AOL will handle it. But I know that Mozilla and Google both allow you to do this, so that if a site's legitimate popup windows get blocked (e.g. "Reply to message" in Outlook Web Access[*]) then you can add it to the per-site settings to allow them.
[*] Not my choice. Work uses it.
If you look carfully at the original post, you'll notice it links to the same article.
TiggsMy webcam always shows up infrared as a blue-white glow around the emitter. Kind of amusing.
I know you were giving a flippant comment, but you've managed to highlight the crux of the whole DRM issue...
The Music industry in general treat the niche markets as "insignificant", and fob us off with DRM and/or platform-locked audio formats.
But they over look that a lot of said "niche markets" include the geeks who have the skills and time to find a way around it. And by not giving these people what many would probably pay for, they're giving them a reason to put their skills to use.
Yes, maybe the non-mainstream music and non-Windows/Mac markets are small. Maybe they wouldn't make a huge amount of profit from them. But by catering to those markets they'd decrease the amount of people coding ways to allow them to play music they way they want to.
It's good to see that Warp (and others) are finally getting the picture.
TiggsWell, if you've not heard of them yet, try the track preview function.
I'd never heard of Black Dog before, but I bought one of their EPs alognside some Aphex Twin last night.
And that always runs with the chance of you finding another artist you hadn't heard of but actually rather like. And at that point, another potential customer is born.
I echo the sentiment that Warp actually seem to have picked up the clue here. Some people will still be put off by the prices (you can't please everyone), but others will gladly pay for less than a standard CD for the MP3s which they can then back up, copy to their other PCs, and play on damn near anything.
They also seem to have picked up that they'll probably never totally stamp out people copying music, but they can at least use the internet and the MP3 file format to make a few more sales.
I'm all for the record companies making money out of me if it's money for something I actually want. And I certainly intend to put my money where my mouth is and buy from Warp/Bleep.
TiggsIt's as bad as the computer shops here in the UK.
They proudly display rather reasonable looking prices in HUGE BLACK TYPE, putting the VAT-inclusive price in very small type underneath.
That's fine for business customers. But when the adverts in consumer-targetted magazines advertises like that, they don't exactly get me on side, ya?
TiggsNot always. Things are still misnamed. Either totally, or with spelling errors. And even in the ID3 Tags. And the latter means that with Tag-based tools you have to edit the tags before it can rename the files.
At least Warp give full properly-formatted ID3 tags, meaning most renamers can deal with the files all in one go.
Besides, they're new to it, and doing something that few other record companies seem willing to do.
TiggsOK. From their own website's FAQ:
Plus until someone from outside UK/Europe comments, I have no idea whether Sales Tax gets added, increasing the actual price of the shown amount.
Much as I hate VAT, at least it's included in the pulished price. I know that, at least back in 1989, in some parts of the US the sales tax wasn't shown in the marked price, so you ended up paying more than the stickered price. Maybe things've changed now.
Yes, I know their website's not exactly well-designed, but it's not that hard to find the information.
Obviously another person who hasn't visited Bleep/Warp's site and read their FAQ.
As I stated in another reply earlier, not only do they seem to be a UK-based outfit, but they openly state they'll sell to any country as long as you have net access and a compatible browser.
(The prices being listed in GBP if you're in the UK should be a bit of a giveaway - now if only other sites would also aotumatically adjust the currency their prices are displayed in depending on locaiton accessed-from)
TiggsFrankly, I'm not.Not until they could distinguish between subconscioud thought and consciout decision. Just 'cos someone contemplates (or even thinks about) blowing up a building doesn't necessarily mean they're a terrorist.
Never mind the people who just consider this non-seriously, what about police, architects, structural engineers, explosives experts, SFX designers. All of these kind of people may have legitimate reasons for wondering exactly how a building may be blown up or similarly destroyed. (Either for prevention, risk assessment, or simulation)
The way I see it, whilst thought are in my head, and only in my head then it's no-one's business what those thoughts are unless I want people to know.
TiggsThe moment it ceases to be just "in my head" and starts to be hostile action, that would be the time whe I hould be "considered dangerous". But not whilst it's mere speculation.
Bleep doesn't. Follow the link in the OP and check out their FAQ.
I've not tried it out myself yet, but I'm guessing the web-based nature means that it will also work under any OS with an up-to-date browser.
TiggsWell I certainly know what I'll be browsing when I'm back home at my boradband connection after work. :)
TiggsNot yet sure if there's any music there I'd want, but now I've a legit way of finding out.
And it would appear to be fine with UK payments. Bonus!