Like I said, ISPS frequently do not enforce this rule. ICQ is a server because it does open up the port. P2P networks generally have the person sharing the files as a server because in order to get the file you have to send a REQUEST to the user for a connection on a standard listening port. The reason Optimum is cracking down on P2P instead of ICQ is that ICQ sends a bunch of text messages and does not clog the bandwidth. Sending files to multiple users hogs the bandwidth. Ie you have the latest star wars film, 8 or 9 users download it from you at any one time. That clogs the bandwidth...especially if 3 or 4 different people have it.
I'm just saying that when you signed up for a residential account at optimum, you agreed to not run servers and so they are free to use it at any time legally. Ethically, since they advertised making you feel a reason to sign up is for P2P networks they are not so justified.
Along with your attorney comment cluge, another important thing to remember is that historically, the law has been open to many interpretations. If it wasn't, we wouldn't need judges. The difference between winning and losing is who can sell the judge on their interpretation of the law. And the higher priced lawyers can often do that better.
The DMCA, while ridiculous in many of its provisions is open to much interpretation and that is why companies are crying "DMCA" all the time. The DMCA is becoming a Swiss army knife: to go after hackers and their software, P2P networks, companies who do not put protections on products. This is because lawyers and companies(including the MPAA and RIAA) are successfully pushing their interpretation of the DMCA.
Additionally, money is also a big help in pushing your interpretation to the government. The constitution of the US itself was created to protect wealth. In many countries, money can buy the politicians. Even countries under the command of a dictator can be influenced by money, or "favors".
Slight clarification.
When you don't share the files you aren't acting as a server in some cases. In some networks you always act as a search server(ie early versions of GNUTella, not sure if this is the case anymore as I haven't used it in a while). When you share files users connect to your computer and REQUEST files, then you REPLY and send them the file. When you download music from other users you are functioning more as a client.
Additionally, some networks have all the users process search requests. Someone submits a search REQUEST and connects on a standard port to your computer, then you search your files and list of computers known to you and send out a REPLY if you have any files along with forwarding the request. There are different variations on exactly what happens with the search. Kazaa does something similar, but slightly different with supernodes. Napster's weakness was that your list of files would be sent to a central server, and all user searches were done on a central server.
Hope this clarifies my weird ideas somewhat. The key thing that differentiates clients from servers is that clients send requests and receive replies. While the server accepts requests from multiple users and sends out the replies. This is mostly informal language, but it should get the idea across.
The ban is against servers. Most ISPs ban this for residential accounts. When surfing on the web you are a client to the various web servers. You sent them an HTTP Request for the web page(A URL essentially) and they send you an HTTP reply which includes the web page. So that is not in violation of the no server ban. Now running your own web server, that is in violation.
Technically many service providers can ban the use P2P applications on this condition. Although rarely do ISPS enforce this rule. But for a cable customer, the bandwith is shared and the upstream is really easy to congest. One valid argument agaisnt peer to peer networking services is that users from all over the world in downloading files from users of the service clog up the upstream bandwith for valid users of the service.
Now why should you be mad at Optimum Online? Because they didn't enforce their rule on no servers to BAN P2P networks a long time ago. In fact their advertising implicitly specified that P2P networks were one reason for signing up with their service. Maybe if they banned them from the beginning as violating their server rules they wouldn't be such hyppocrites.
I admit I haven't done more research so I do not know if they sent it out to all users of their service or just the residential cable users. Commercial accounts of most services do NOT have a restriction against using servers. Because most commercial users of high bandwith service want to run web servers or other things for their businesses. Therefore there is no basis for using the no server rule to ban P2P networks since there isn't a no server rule. Additionally invoking a no server rule against commercial customers would be extremely ineffective since most sign up to run servers.
Viewing the eclipse is dangerous.
Here is a dated article about the solar eclipse, most relevant is the material towards the bottom of the page on how to build A Projection Camera or a Solar Filter to view the eclipse safely. Furthermore there are other methods discussed above on viewing the eclipse safety. It also states the Sun causes the eye damage and emits the radiation, not the eclipse.
This article would seem to indicate that the sun does not emit more radiation as eluded to by other posts during the eclipse, but rather it is dangerous because you can look at it longer. If you stare at the normal sun your eyes start to hurt from the brightness, and you either close them or turn away after a short time. During the eclipse it isn't as bright so you can keep looking and the normal radiation emitted by the sun is exposed to your eyes for longer. This is from the black part that your eyes can fixate at. This is also the partial eclipse when part of the sun is still exposed.
Additionally the topic of eclipses was discussed not too long ago on slashdot here And there are comments on the same thing of the eclipse burning the retina and so fourth. Consensus seems to be that the sun is no more dangerous during the partial eclipse, but we just look at it more than usual because it is an eclipse.
You mention that you are unemployed. Besides just the money that you would be making, it is a great opportunity to network as well as to improve your references.
Even if you and your boss aren't on good terms, maybe another employee there knows someone who knows someone..who can help you to get a job. If you and your boss are on good terms, this extra help might just motivate him or her to press his/her contacts harder to try and find you a job.
One of the best references you can have when looking for a job is a glowing review from your previous supervisor. Rendering this help would definitely shine through when he/she provides a reference. If not the supervisor, maybe some of your other co-workers are your references, in which case this is something else to work in your favor for a new job.
While it would be foolish to not get paid (as has been mentioned over and over again including methods for deciding how much) it would also be foolish to overlook the less concerete benefits of assisting. A network is super important when the economy is bad, so don't ever overlook it.
Some good job hunting books: Job Hunting For Dummies by Max Messmer ACE the IT Job Interview! by Paula Moreira
At no point did I assert the site was Texas Tech I only asserted the report was from Texas Tech which it is if you look on the first page of the report. Sorry for the confusion.
Re:Ants and electronics
on
Ants Invade iBook
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Report
Has a report from the department of Engineering Technology at Texas Tech about ways to stop fire ant damage. The first few pages discuss the problem:
Basically it says that the alternating magnetic fields generated by and within the electronic equipment attract the ants from short distances. When the ant dies the electricity causes strange reactions, including the release of pheromones which attract other ants. And it seems that in some places this is a serious problem as was said with some figures quoted. However this report is about fire ants and I am too lazy to research more to see if it generalizes to all aunt species so good luck:)
Slashdot Mirror
Like I said, ISPS frequently do not enforce this rule. ICQ is a server because it does open up the port. P2P networks generally have the person sharing the files as a server because in order to get the file you have to send a REQUEST to the user for a connection on a standard listening port. The reason Optimum is cracking down on P2P instead of ICQ is that ICQ sends a bunch of text messages and does not clog the bandwidth. Sending files to multiple users hogs the bandwidth. Ie you have the latest star wars film, 8 or 9 users download it from you at any one time. That clogs the bandwidth...especially if 3 or 4 different people have it.
I'm just saying that when you signed up for a residential account at optimum, you agreed to not run servers and so they are free to use it at any time legally. Ethically, since they advertised making you feel a reason to sign up is for P2P networks they are not so justified.
Along with your attorney comment cluge, another important thing to remember is that historically, the law has been open to many interpretations. If it wasn't, we wouldn't need judges. The difference between winning and losing is who can sell the judge on their interpretation of the law. And the higher priced lawyers can often do that better.
The DMCA, while ridiculous in many of its provisions is open to much interpretation and that is why companies are crying "DMCA" all the time. The DMCA is becoming a Swiss army knife: to go after hackers and their software, P2P networks, companies who do not put protections on products. This is because lawyers and companies(including the MPAA and RIAA) are successfully pushing their interpretation of the DMCA.
Additionally, money is also a big help in pushing your interpretation to the government. The constitution of the US itself was created to protect wealth. In many countries, money can buy the politicians. Even countries under the command of a dictator can be influenced by money, or "favors".
Slight clarification.
When you don't share the files you aren't acting as a server in some cases. In some networks you always act as a search server(ie early versions of GNUTella, not sure if this is the case anymore as I haven't used it in a while). When you share files users connect to your computer and REQUEST files, then you REPLY and send them the file. When you download music from other users you are functioning more as a client.
Additionally, some networks have all the users process search requests. Someone submits a search REQUEST and connects on a standard port to your computer, then you search your files and list of computers known to you and send out a REPLY if you have any files along with forwarding the request. There are different variations on exactly what happens with the search. Kazaa does something similar, but slightly different with supernodes. Napster's weakness was that your list of files would be sent to a central server, and all user searches were done on a central server. Hope this clarifies my weird ideas somewhat. The key thing that differentiates clients from servers is that clients send requests and receive replies. While the server accepts requests from multiple users and sends out the replies. This is mostly informal language, but it should get the idea across.
The ban is against servers. Most ISPs ban this for residential accounts. When surfing on the web you are a client to the various web servers. You sent them an HTTP Request for the web page(A URL essentially) and they send you an HTTP reply which includes the web page. So that is not in violation of the no server ban. Now running your own web server, that is in violation.
Technically many service providers can ban the use P2P applications on this condition. Although rarely do ISPS enforce this rule. But for a cable customer, the bandwith is shared and the upstream is really easy to congest. One valid argument agaisnt peer to peer networking services is that users from all over the world in downloading files from users of the service clog up the upstream bandwith for valid users of the service.
Now why should you be mad at Optimum Online? Because they didn't enforce their rule on no servers to BAN P2P networks a long time ago. In fact their advertising implicitly specified that P2P networks were one reason for signing up with their service. Maybe if they banned them from the beginning as violating their server rules they wouldn't be such hyppocrites.
I admit I haven't done more research so I do not know if they sent it out to all users of their service or just the residential cable users. Commercial accounts of most services do NOT have a restriction against using servers. Because most commercial users of high bandwith service want to run web servers or other things for their businesses. Therefore there is no basis for using the no server rule to ban P2P networks since there isn't a no server rule. Additionally invoking a no server rule against commercial customers would be extremely ineffective since most sign up to run servers.
Viewing the eclipse is dangerous. Here is a dated article about the solar eclipse, most relevant is the material towards the bottom of the page on how to build A Projection Camera or a Solar Filter to view the eclipse safely. Furthermore there are other methods discussed above on viewing the eclipse safety. It also states the Sun causes the eye damage and emits the radiation, not the eclipse.
This article would seem to indicate that the sun does not emit more radiation as eluded to by other posts during the eclipse, but rather it is dangerous because you can look at it longer. If you stare at the normal sun your eyes start to hurt from the brightness, and you either close them or turn away after a short time. During the eclipse it isn't as bright so you can keep looking and the normal radiation emitted by the sun is exposed to your eyes for longer. This is from the black part that your eyes can fixate at. This is also the partial eclipse when part of the sun is still exposed.
Additionally the topic of eclipses was discussed not too long ago on slashdot here And there are comments on the same thing of the eclipse burning the retina and so fourth. Consensus seems to be that the sun is no more dangerous during the partial eclipse, but we just look at it more than usual because it is an eclipse.
You mention that you are unemployed. Besides just the money that you would be making, it is a great opportunity to network as well as to improve your references.
Even if you and your boss aren't on good terms, maybe another employee there knows someone who knows someone..who can help you to get a job. If you and your boss are on good terms, this extra help might just motivate him or her to press his/her contacts harder to try and find you a job.
One of the best references you can have when looking for a job is a glowing review from your previous supervisor. Rendering this help would definitely shine through when he/she provides a reference. If not the supervisor, maybe some of your other co-workers are your references, in which case this is something else to work in your favor for a new job.
While it would be foolish to not get paid (as has been mentioned over and over again including methods for deciding how much) it would also be foolish to overlook the less concerete benefits of assisting. A network is super important when the economy is bad, so don't ever overlook it.
Some good job hunting books:
Job Hunting For Dummies by Max Messmer
ACE the IT Job Interview! by Paula Moreira
At no point did I assert the site was Texas Tech I only asserted the report was from Texas Tech which it is if you look on the first page of the report. Sorry for the confusion.
Report Has a report from the department of Engineering Technology at Texas Tech about ways to stop fire ant damage. The first few pages discuss the problem: Basically it says that the alternating magnetic fields generated by and within the electronic equipment attract the ants from short distances. When the ant dies the electricity causes strange reactions, including the release of pheromones which attract other ants. And it seems that in some places this is a serious problem as was said with some figures quoted. However this report is about fire ants and I am too lazy to research more to see if it generalizes to all aunt species so good luck :)