Sharing (that is, making a copy available in your shared items folder for someone else to download) was explicitly noted as non-infringing by the original Copyright Board decision
I'd like to see a reference to that.
The actual decision seems to say exactly the opposite at http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/decisions/c12122003-b.pdf
"The exemption in section 80 applies only when a copy is made for the private use of the person making it. This expressly excludes selling, renting out, exposing for trade or rental, distributing, communicating to the public by telecommunication, or performing in public the copy made."
I'd question if it's more efficient though. There is still the same amount of heat energy that needs to be cooled, it is just more concentrated. Ie, instead of having to cool 100 sq feet by 1 degree, you have to cool 10 sq ft by 10 degrees. This of course assumes there is no temperature influence from other forces such as solar energy coming through windows, etc.
Venting through the bottom is typically done to ensure there are no hot-spots created by lack of airflow, not to concentrate the heat exchange.
No you don't. An ISP never has as many IP's in their pool at they have customers
That was true in dialup but not highspeed as most people leave their modems on 24/7 even when their computer is off. Right now 91% of our users are online, however only about 10% are actually using the Internet.
Insightful 4??! You're so wrong on practically everything you've said I don't know where to begin. First, ADSL is "Asymmetrical" (that's the "A" part) -- they steal frequency from the upload channel to increase the download speed as that is what most consumers want. Most of the time a user has to get their speed profile dropped is because they are too tight on the upload capacity to maintain sync. As for symmetrical, SDSL speed is about 1Mbps around 8000 feet and can stretch to about 20,000 feet at 128Kbps. ADSL can do up to 8Mbps to over a mile, and 3 or 4Mbps towards 3 miles. Which do you think has more consumer interest? As for PPPoE, it's for management, it's a hell of a lot more work to cut off service at the DSLAM than it is at the central authentication servers, plus it makes accounting possible as well as sharing infrastructure giving you the choice of ISP's in several areas. As for the static IP it's not the IP you're paying for, it's a tax in terms of demand on both the system and support. DSL is priced artificially low at a price point where customers will buy, but on the assumption of personal use, not providing the rest of the world with access. Network circuits, bandwidth, equipment, support and administrative costs does not work out to less than $10/Mbps. If you want a dedicated line you can pay the same rates the ISP does, otherwise expect to share fairly and pay a fraction of the real cost.
> So, picking up a "Free after rebate" deal is now worthless according to their program
Shouldn't it be though? If you're not really paying for something why would you earn rewards on it? What would stop people from just collecting every single "free after rebate" even if they didn't want it, just to get their reward points?
I am one of the developers for a SMTP server for a free mail provider so I have a bit of experience with this. In our case you can exceed your quota slightly in a couple of ways:
1) Sometimes a message comes in and the sending SMTP server didn't advertise the size of the message ahead of time, so it goes through the RCPT stage of sending a list of recipients for that message and you need to decide whether to accept or decline the message for each receiving user. In this case, because the length of the message is unknown until after the list is sent you don't know if it will cause the new message to exceed a particular users quota and therefore it is best to only reject delivery to people that have *already exceeded* their quota. This prevents you from having to accept the message and then queue up a bounce to send back to the sender. So for example someone with a 10MB quota and 8MB in their mailbox already, if they receive a 3MB attachment, could have 11MB of mail before the next message is rejected -- rather than accepting the message, seeing that it would exceed and having to ship it back to the sender.
2) In a distributed environment it is more efficient to update the mailbox size in batches rather than real-time, so there may be a few seconds or minutes lag between the time a message is received and the time it is incremented in their profile. Therefore someone with 8MB of mail might receive five 1MB attachments within a few seconds and have them all accepted before their totals are updated to show them as exceeding their quota.
Honestly, most use a pager. Being a one-way device, it solves all the problems of personal use issues, security issues (camera phones) and radio interference issues in restricted environments such as hospitals.
Why stop with 'subject to your maximum bandwidth'? If it's what the customer wants to believe, then why not expand your definition of unlimited to mean speed too?
I think the reason for the high-price is actually hiding in your post. Lego is virtually indestructable. I have lego kits from 25 years ago that look to be in as good condition as they were the day I got them. Take any other toy, and it wears out, gets faded, clothes rip, wheels fall off, etc, and they end up going in the garbage or needing replacement. Lego never seems to get lost or thrown out, it is handed down and as a result the market for Lego dwindles each year. I think they realized this quite quickly when the $1 kits jumped to $5 the next year and it's been priced high ever since.
No worries about flamewars, I enjoy hearing others opinions and can certainly understand where you're coming from.
It's one of those things however that is going to exist anyway and has a very minimal cost overall. The equivalent of 10 full-time employees maybe and it's not like they are paying for the broadcasting licenses or antenna space on buildings the government already owns.
There are always going to be things that the government provides that are not of use to every single Canadian, but I'm sure there are services that I pay for that you use and I don't. For example, I'm pretty sure that I'll never have a need for a breast examination nor will my wife require a prostrate test.
There are some other benefits to the CBC other than obsecure Canadian artists though, I particularly like to hear about what is happening across the nation from a Canadian standpoint, not something you can hear on any other radio station in the Americanized media that is otherwise prevalent.
In Canada, we have a national radio broadcaster called the CBC which has several radio stations for different regions in the country, and doesn't have sponsorships, advertisements, pledge drives or anything else. Of course we pay for it with tax dollars, but it's nice to be able to listen to interesting stories and music without ads.
If you saturate a TCP connection in one direction, it will effectively kill the traffic in the other direction too because legitimate ACK's in response to the outgoing traffic will not be received.
Not to disagree with anything you said, but one small correction. SOCAN (Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada) does have a cross-collection agreement with the US-counterpart ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers) -- and likely many other similar organizations in other countries. Such As These
No, it's the other way around - the "Audio CD's" (ie minidiscs I believe) are somewhere around 75 cents per disc, but the regular CD-R/CD-RW are taxed lower, somewhere around 22-25 cents if memory serves.
I think you have it backwards. You just have to have something valuable elsewhere, and Bush will then declare WMD are there to take it over in the name of profi^H^H^H^Heace.
If they claimed rights to the source code, presumably they have a copy, likely from his workstation -- meaning one would expect he was using their resources to develop it, in which case it is their code. Now if they burst into his home and hijacked the code there, then I think he has a case:-)...otherwise he's lucky he isn't unemployed yet.
Sparkle isn't a generic enough name. It will probably go to market as "Animator 2004" which of course will cause all kinds of other legal name issues which will be dealt with after the fact.
You don't need the overhead of SSL, just the registry itself will do. If every mail server was on a mail server registry then you'd simply only accept mail from listed IP's (or give preference to this IP's).
You would manage the list with real-world verifiable credentials and a liability form. The registry would ideally be managed by a non-profit, and charge something like $100 for being on the list. This money collected would be used to sue those that violated the terms of the registry.
It would be very easy to implement, we already have the negative version (ie which IP's to block), so instead it would be a whitelist of IP's. It would only take AOL/MSN/Earthlink to support it to catch on...
And now you're profiling customers based on the services they use. "What, you're watching what I'm doing?!?!?!" --- yeah, that will go over really well.
Huh? NAT has nothing to do with email worms -- NAT is a network layer protocl -- email is an application layer protocol. Comparing the two issues is like saying "my car isn't protected from accidents because someone might shoot my through my front window"
Slashdot Mirror
Sharing (that is, making a copy available in your shared items folder for someone else to download) was explicitly noted as non-infringing by the original Copyright Board decision
I'd like to see a reference to that.
The actual decision seems to say exactly the opposite at http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/decisions/c12122003-b.pdf
"The exemption in section 80 applies only when a copy is made for the private use of the person making it. This expressly excludes selling, renting out, exposing for trade or rental, distributing, communicating to the public by telecommunication, or performing in public the copy made."
I'd question if it's more efficient though. There is still the same amount of heat energy that needs to be cooled, it is just more concentrated. Ie, instead of having to cool 100 sq feet by 1 degree, you have to cool 10 sq ft by 10 degrees. This of course assumes there is no temperature influence from other forces such as solar energy coming through windows, etc.
Venting through the bottom is typically done to ensure there are no hot-spots created by lack of airflow, not to concentrate the heat exchange.
No you don't. An ISP never has as many IP's in their pool at they have customers
That was true in dialup but not highspeed as most people leave their modems on 24/7 even when their computer is off. Right now 91% of our users are online, however only about 10% are actually using the Internet.
Insightful 4??! You're so wrong on practically everything you've said I don't know where to begin. First, ADSL is "Asymmetrical" (that's the "A" part) -- they steal frequency from the upload channel to increase the download speed as that is what most consumers want. Most of the time a user has to get their speed profile dropped is because they are too tight on the upload capacity to maintain sync. As for symmetrical, SDSL speed is about 1Mbps around 8000 feet and can stretch to about 20,000 feet at 128Kbps. ADSL can do up to 8Mbps to over a mile, and 3 or 4Mbps towards 3 miles. Which do you think has more consumer interest? As for PPPoE, it's for management, it's a hell of a lot more work to cut off service at the DSLAM than it is at the central authentication servers, plus it makes accounting possible as well as sharing infrastructure giving you the choice of ISP's in several areas. As for the static IP it's not the IP you're paying for, it's a tax in terms of demand on both the system and support. DSL is priced artificially low at a price point where customers will buy, but on the assumption of personal use, not providing the rest of the world with access. Network circuits, bandwidth, equipment, support and administrative costs does not work out to less than $10/Mbps. If you want a dedicated line you can pay the same rates the ISP does, otherwise expect to share fairly and pay a fraction of the real cost.
> So, picking up a "Free after rebate" deal is now worthless according to their program
Shouldn't it be though? If you're not really paying for something why would you earn rewards on it? What would stop people from just collecting every single "free after rebate" even if they didn't want it, just to get their reward points?
I am one of the developers for a SMTP server for a free mail provider so I have a bit of experience with this. In our case you can exceed your quota slightly in a couple of ways:
1) Sometimes a message comes in and the sending SMTP server didn't advertise the size of the message ahead of time, so it goes through the RCPT stage of sending a list of recipients for that message and you need to decide whether to accept or decline the message for each receiving user. In this case, because the length of the message is unknown until after the list is sent you don't know if it will cause the new message to exceed a particular users quota and therefore it is best to only reject delivery to people that have *already exceeded* their quota. This prevents you from having to accept the message and then queue up a bounce to send back to the sender. So for example someone with a 10MB quota and 8MB in their mailbox already, if they receive a 3MB attachment, could have 11MB of mail before the next message is rejected -- rather than accepting the message, seeing that it would exceed and having to ship it back to the sender.
2) In a distributed environment it is more efficient to update the mailbox size in batches rather than real-time, so there may be a few seconds or minutes lag between the time a message is received and the time it is incremented in their profile. Therefore someone with 8MB of mail might receive five 1MB attachments within a few seconds and have them all accepted before their totals are updated to show them as exceeding their quota.
Or what if you could test-drive that car forever and never have to return it. Would you go back and drop $30,000 on it?
No, most call their ISP for stuff like that unfortunately.
...and it's easier just to sue for search results that match your name.
Honestly, most use a pager. Being a one-way device, it solves all the problems of personal use issues, security issues (camera phones) and radio interference issues in restricted environments such as hospitals.
Why stop with 'subject to your maximum bandwidth'? If it's what the customer wants to believe, then why not expand your definition of unlimited to mean speed too?
Here is the term most of these replies are probably looking for... JBOD (Just a Bunch Of Disks).
I think the reason for the high-price is actually hiding in your post. Lego is virtually indestructable. I have lego kits from 25 years ago that look to be in as good condition as they were the day I got them. Take any other toy, and it wears out, gets faded, clothes rip, wheels fall off, etc, and they end up going in the garbage or needing replacement. Lego never seems to get lost or thrown out, it is handed down and as a result the market for Lego dwindles each year. I think they realized this quite quickly when the $1 kits jumped to $5 the next year and it's been priced high ever since.
No worries about flamewars, I enjoy hearing others opinions and can certainly understand where you're coming from.
:-)
It's one of those things however that is going to exist anyway and has a very minimal cost overall. The equivalent of 10 full-time employees maybe and it's not like they are paying for the broadcasting licenses or antenna space on buildings the government already owns.
There are always going to be things that the government provides that are not of use to every single Canadian, but I'm sure there are services that I pay for that you use and I don't. For example, I'm pretty sure that I'll never have a need for a breast examination nor will my wife require a prostrate test.
There are some other benefits to the CBC other than obsecure Canadian artists though, I particularly like to hear about what is happening across the nation from a Canadian standpoint, not something you can hear on any other radio station in the Americanized media that is otherwise prevalent.
It's one of those 'National Identity' things.
In Canada, we have a national radio broadcaster called the CBC which has several radio stations for different regions in the country, and doesn't have sponsorships, advertisements, pledge drives or anything else. Of course we pay for it with tax dollars, but it's nice to be able to listen to interesting stories and music without ads.
Hmmm, I shouldn't post late at night -- I missed the comment about leaving ACK space. :-) Ignore my message.
If you saturate a TCP connection in one direction, it will effectively kill the traffic in the other direction too because legitimate ACK's in response to the outgoing traffic will not be received.
Not to disagree with anything you said, but one small correction. SOCAN (Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada) does have a cross-collection agreement with the US-counterpart ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers) -- and likely many other similar organizations in other countries. Such As These
No, it's the other way around - the "Audio CD's" (ie minidiscs I believe) are somewhere around 75 cents per disc, but the regular CD-R/CD-RW are taxed lower, somewhere around 22-25 cents if memory serves.
I think you have it backwards. You just have to have something valuable elsewhere, and Bush will then declare WMD are there to take it over in the name of profi^H^H^H^Heace.
If they claimed rights to the source code, presumably they have a copy, likely from his workstation -- meaning one would expect he was using their resources to develop it, in which case it is their code. Now if they burst into his home and hijacked the code there, then I think he has a case :-) ...otherwise he's lucky he isn't unemployed yet.
Sparkle isn't a generic enough name. It will probably go to market as "Animator 2004" which of course will cause all kinds of other legal name issues which will be dealt with after the fact.
You don't need the overhead of SSL, just the registry itself will do. If every mail server was on a mail server registry then you'd simply only accept mail from listed IP's (or give preference to this IP's).
You would manage the list with real-world verifiable credentials and a liability form. The registry would ideally be managed by a non-profit, and charge something like $100 for being on the list. This money collected would be used to sue those that violated the terms of the registry.
It would be very easy to implement, we already have the negative version (ie which IP's to block), so instead it would be a whitelist of IP's. It would only take AOL/MSN/Earthlink to support it to catch on...
And now you're profiling customers based on the services they use. "What, you're watching what I'm doing?!?!?!" --- yeah, that will go over really well.
Huh? NAT has nothing to do with email worms -- NAT is a network layer protocl -- email is an application layer protocol. Comparing the two issues is like saying "my car isn't protected from accidents because someone might shoot my through my front window"