Mail uses matrixes from word count vectors and does some funky math, which are hard to represent in a sentence.
Others do 1-dimensional word weighted word counts along the lines of "15 x Viagra; 6 x Amazing; 8 x Deal", assigns it a score, and handles it. They compare word counts against acceptable count thresholds. Mail compares emails directly to each other and says, effectively, "This email is 1.2 % different from the main matrix of known Junk, so it is Junk as well."
I don't think they want to disown it, so much as they aren't going to list every movie every time. They made their name with Toy Story, and Monsters, Inc. and Finding Nemo are both their best performers and most recent films. Assuming this does well, Cars (their next feature) will probably list Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and The Incredibles.
FWIW, I loved A Bug's Llife. Dennis Leary as a ladybug? Brilliant! Dave Foley nailed the free thinking ant. Kevin Spacey, Richard Kind, David Hyde Pierce... There was just lots of under-appreciated voice acting in that movie*. The plot was the thinnest, or at least the most straightforward, since Toy Story, but an enjoyable film nonetheless.
* They've had good voice acting in every movie, but this seems the most underrated.
It might be just a psych-out to get you to specify. If it comes up "Other", people might not bother to change it to what it really was. But if it comes up something definite that is actually wrong it may increase the likeliness that they'll choose a proper answer.
The only thing I have in support of this is that the value for Other is the same, so they wouldn't know which you chose.
Ok, I tried to follow the site, but this isn't my area. If this runs under Apache, wouldn't it be a simple matter to get it in OS X? Every OS X computer has Apache built in.
If it has nothing to do with the web server, fine. It can probably be built directly under X11 (I can't get my work VPN to work in OS X so I haven't tried); I just saw it under Apache and immediately assumed it would be a slam onto my Powerbook. It may still be, I just have to get the VPN working before I try. (I'm guessing it's as much the office's settings as mine, since I know people can connect to MS VPN rather easily usually.)
I looked at my agreement, and that's not in it. They'd have to prove the whole changing the agreement without me agreeing to the new one thing.
Also, the whole 'reflected in your account'. Looking at my original receipt, no computer count was reflected. The two people here to install saw my router and multiple computers. As employees they are representatives of the company, and as they were tasked with counting my TV's and connections I'm allowed, they would also be responsible for counting my computers and informing me if they were too many. So my multiple computers are fine, as they are the account I purchased.
Again though, I'm not overly worried. I pretty much only use one; if I use another it's for a short time. We can go back and forth and come to the agreement that they'd probably win a court battle over the change in their agreement, as they are rich and I am poor, but I'm not going to loose any sleep over it.
At this point, I would hope that either the competent ones have already moved on or have already been exploring their options and saving up for this scenario. I'd be tempted to through out the Clerks 'they knew they were working for the Empire' argument, but with the economy the way it is between a general recession and outsourcing, there aren't too many tech jobs to go for as it is, at least not for those unwilling to uproot. They are people too - hoping for the best, unwilling to upset their lives on what may happen, probably with family that would also be affected if they act prematurely.
That being said, I don't think it likely that they will run into a blacklist situation. While small-minded individuals may not be able to see it, most companies would recognize that the lower echelon rarely has anything to do with a companies direction as a whole.
Are you paying the extra bunch of money to run multiple computers (with, as I understand it, a speed increase) or are you just violating your user agreement?
I don't remember seeing anything of the sort in my user agreement, and it really has no effect on the bandwidth. If I had more faucets I can't magically use water faster than they provide; at some point the average flow at each one goes down.
As for the nasty letters about overuse - I've been using Comcast in Pittsburgh for my work VPN for a year now with out complaint. That's 8 hours each weekday, running one or two Remote Desktop Connections at least 70% of the time, not to mention Outlook, Messenger, and Source Safe. I've never measured it, but I don't think any of that is light use. Add my occasional evening gaming and it gets a reasonable amount of use without any complaint. As far as I can tell people being pegged for use either have massive file shares going (known or unknown), or someone else is spoofing their address to do so and they're getting pegged for near-constant usage, not just momentary highs.
And I have to disagree with the cost complaint. Yeah, I'd like it cheaper, but it's what, 4 times dialup in cost? It's a lot faster and more convenient than 4 times in product. My main complaint about Comcast is the Listing Guide only shows 1/2 hour and has ads on 1/3 of the screen. I'd much prefer the Adelphia layout I saw at my parents - Upper Left Quad info, Upper Right Quad PIP of the current channel, and 1 1/2 hours for the listings.
More on topic: could their intentions be good, and they just want to have a method of preventing neighbors/roamers from jumping on your line? This may not be about what you have a right to do in your own house, but helping you not get stung by someone hijacking your connection for illicit uses.
Do you think it's impossible for them to be redirected/infected?
Ebay and online banking work just fine.
I'm not trying to say people need to do a lot for online to be useful, I was just trying to make the point that some of this stuff is done invisibly. Simply saying 'don't download toolbars' won't work if you don't take other steps. It sounds like you do, which is good but should be stated with your rule.
Don't download anything, don't install anything. Ignore all those taskbars and toolbars and toys.
Then why be online? Do you not use email or browse the web? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. Why not just set your machine up so it will catch problems? It's not like everything announces it will install something.
I'm not saying those taskbars and whatnot make the world go round, but do you visit any sites at all? Do you think it's impossible for them to be redirected/infected?
would be Comic Books and Dungeons & Dragons. Both were chastised for years for their portrayals of sex/violence/whatever, not much any longer because they've been around awhile and have shown to not really have a significant negative effect.
Not to say they don't still get flak, but it's not the news media stopper it once was mainly because they have been around awhile. Yes, partially because they've been replaced, but as the same types who use them play video games it would be zero effort to lump them together if the news media thought it would mean something to anyone.
I think at the beginning they honestly thought they had the rights to some of the code, and that they thought the whole area was fuzzy enough that IBM would either pay them or buy them out rather than push their luck. Whether they started to over believe themselves, or just got so wrapped up in the snowball of lies that they had no way out, I have no idea.
I would agree that patented/proprietary code is far more viral than GPL code could possibly be, since your right to use it is generally tied to contracts which can be cancelled. Having worked in "the industry" for 10 years, I have no conscious idea how I solved problems back then 4 companies ago. However, I have no doubt that if presented with a similar problem now I'd solve it in a similar way. In theory, virtually everything I've written from my second company on might have vestiges of supposedly 'proprietary' code.
About the only defense to this is it's almost universal - anyone who's moved around a lot is likely to be in this position. The next software hurdle will be MS's sudden patent rush, and fighting the 'obvious' patents. Hopefully we can get the Patent Office/system overhauled or at least looked at before Longhorn comes out.
"Free" in this meaning sadly doesn't mean "works on every machine and every OS".
Well, yeah. "Free" as it applies to iTunes means "it didn't cost anything," pretty much a dictionary definition. I think the word you're thinking of is "Open," which no one would attribute to iTunes.
Compatibility. Ease of use. Streaming to an Ethernet-connected device just built for that purpose. With a bit of creativity, you can see a plenty of reasons on a glance.
No, these are reasons to want a tool to share music any way you want. iTunes is not intended to be that tool.
Or modify it. It's a tool. A hammer is a tool, and if I want to do something different with it, I have two choices: use a different tool, or modify the hammer. The choice depends on the situation.
Exactly. But don't complain if the new model hammer you are given can't be modified in exactly the same way.
To stretch the analogy a bit in the physical world, lets say you win a hammer (read: it was free/without cost) that has a wood handle that goes through the metal head. You modify it by drilling into the wood and putting in some kind of screwdriver tip. Now the hammer breaks and you get a replacement based on a lifetime warranty (just to stretch why you'd need a replacement). If the manufacture stops using to wood and switches to sold metal, your method of modifying it will no longer work. But since that wasn't their intent in the first place, nor did they ever state it would be, there's not really a foundation for complaining about it. (To twist the this to fit better we could simply say they sent you the metal hammer unsolicited because it is lighter/has a better grip/whatever, and it's your choice to use your old modified hammer or the new one that you'd have to re-modify.)
Of course, part of my implied point was that by using iTunes you agree to the EULA blah blah blah, but frankly I'm not a fan or defender of those. My main goal was two fold: 1) I don't think breaking this was their main reason for changing things, even if they might be glad it did. 2) There is no reason to hold a grudge against them for doing so, since they never said they wouldn't. I'm not saying you can't be annoyed with the inconvenience, just that they never intended for you to have that convenience so they had no compulsion to maintain it.
Your 'force people to use iTunes on all their machines' argument is a bit specious, since it's free, as is your "upgrade treadmill" comment. If they want to change their hidden protocols between versions they are within their rights to do so, whatever their motives are.
Their are no legitimate reasons to hijack an iTunes stream, for any reason. If you don't agree with how iTunes works, use something else. You're right - it's your music, so you can use whatever the hell you want to share it. iTunes is a tool that makes it easy to share with other computers running iTunes. If you alter how a tool works or use it in an unintended way and then it no longer does what it was originally supposed to, that's not really the tool's fault.
None of us know the exact reason they changed how they communicate so all versions have to be 4.5, but one possible (and IMHO more likely) reason is they've added new sound file types and rather than deal with some machines coughing on them when they are shared they make sure they can all play the files. Makes more sense to me than screwing with people for an "upgrade treadmill" that provides no actual benefit to Apple whatsoever.
Another conceivable reason for encrypting their music sharing stream and changing it each version is about ensuring that they are relatively free from any anti-P2P laws/legal actions. They don't expect to 'win', but being able to show that they do something about it is enough to fight any lawsuits that may popup. Frankly, I doubt this is the reason, but to me it's still more reasonable than your reasons.
This took me a second to place as
"Little GTO", so don't expect too much from the mods. It's actually pretty clever, though it would have fit a little better if it were GM being sued.
Would a digital watch count? I'm pretty sure my first one would do different things from how long the button was pushed. Granted, it was only generally how it knew you wanted to set the time and switched modes, but it was a pretty limited computer.
A better analogy would be you can have the right to reverse engineering how my lock works all you want, but I can still shoot you if you come into my house uninvited.
The more times an iTMS-unavailable artist shows up on user-submitted playlists, the more pressure Apple has to try to sign that artist.
More like the more pressure the artist has to allow their music to be distributed. Apple has an established set of requirements to be hosted; they pretty much no longer have to negotiate for specific artists. If an artist isn't on at this point, it isn't because Apple doesn't want them there.
My one complaint with the service is that you can't download the source file multiple times.
Yeah, the next thing you know music stores won't let you leave with the same CD more then once.
but you have to transport the file itself to those machines
If only there were a way to connect computers together, perhaps with wires or radio signals of some kind, such that they could share files.
[/SARCASM]
And yes, I know that in a digital age it should be easy to see that you are authorized to re-download a given file. However, this could be used as method of getting around sharing restrictions. Realistically, in a contrived manner, but that's enough to scare recording industry suits. In all probability if you call and convince Apple that you need to re-download, you can probably work something out. But having it as a feature would just open it to abuse.
A long time ago I was having trouble with a Windows machine and a coworker told me to reinstall Windows. I said "What?" He said "Oh yes, I do about once a month."
I asked him if he also reinstalled his car engine once a month, but I just got a blank stare.
I mean, back when there were carburetors people would occasionally rebuild them, but it wasn't exactly your standard maintenance.
1) Through my car stereo, via a 1/8"->cassette converter. Given that it's a convertible and Pittsburgh roads are anything but smooth, I'm not exactly looking for the subtle nuances in my driving music.
2) Using the snow-blower or lawnmower, depending on the weather for the week. Sure I'm wearing shooter's ear protection; the music is just to help drown out the monotony of whatever comes through.
Unless you're trying to replace your main stereo with an MP3 player, I don't really see the point of sacrificing space for quality. Most intended uses aren't perfect listening experiences by any definition. Not that I would actively discourage such use - I, for one, would love to see a receiver that besides having normal Line In has an iPod-compatible connection that would let you control your iPod through your remote as part of your sound system. If that happened I would reconsider what quality I'm using, but until then 192 AAC is pretty darn good.
Slashdot Mirror
Mail uses matrixes from word count vectors and does some funky math, which are hard to represent in a sentence. Others do 1-dimensional word weighted word counts along the lines of "15 x Viagra; 6 x Amazing; 8 x Deal", assigns it a score, and handles it. They compare word counts against acceptable count thresholds. Mail compares emails directly to each other and says, effectively, "This email is 1.2 % different from the main matrix of known Junk, so it is Junk as well."
I don't think they want to disown it, so much as they aren't going to list every movie every time. They made their name with Toy Story, and Monsters, Inc. and Finding Nemo are both their best performers and most recent films. Assuming this does well, Cars (their next feature) will probably list Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and The Incredibles.
FWIW, I loved A Bug's Llife. Dennis Leary as a ladybug? Brilliant! Dave Foley nailed the free thinking ant. Kevin Spacey, Richard Kind, David Hyde Pierce... There was just lots of under-appreciated voice acting in that movie*. The plot was the thinnest, or at least the most straightforward, since Toy Story, but an enjoyable film nonetheless.
* They've had good voice acting in every movie, but this seems the most underrated.
It might be just a psych-out to get you to specify. If it comes up "Other", people might not bother to change it to what it really was. But if it comes up something definite that is actually wrong it may increase the likeliness that they'll choose a proper answer.
The only thing I have in support of this is that the value for Other is the same, so they wouldn't know which you chose.
5,233,001 to 1 against... and falling!
Hey! The party I met my wife at had that phone number!
Ok, I tried to follow the site, but this isn't my area. If this runs under Apache, wouldn't it be a simple matter to get it in OS X? Every OS X computer has Apache built in.
If it has nothing to do with the web server, fine. It can probably be built directly under X11 (I can't get my work VPN to work in OS X so I haven't tried); I just saw it under Apache and immediately assumed it would be a slam onto my Powerbook. It may still be, I just have to get the VPN working before I try. (I'm guessing it's as much the office's settings as mine, since I know people can connect to MS VPN rather easily usually.)
Worst. Episode. Ever.
Sorry, had to be said. It's actually way more coherent than many of this season's episodes so far.
I looked at my agreement, and that's not in it. They'd have to prove the whole changing the agreement without me agreeing to the new one thing.
Also, the whole 'reflected in your account'. Looking at my original receipt, no computer count was reflected. The two people here to install saw my router and multiple computers. As employees they are representatives of the company, and as they were tasked with counting my TV's and connections I'm allowed, they would also be responsible for counting my computers and informing me if they were too many. So my multiple computers are fine, as they are the account I purchased.
Again though, I'm not overly worried. I pretty much only use one; if I use another it's for a short time. We can go back and forth and come to the agreement that they'd probably win a court battle over the change in their agreement, as they are rich and I am poor, but I'm not going to loose any sleep over it.
At this point, I would hope that either the competent ones have already moved on or have already been exploring their options and saving up for this scenario. I'd be tempted to through out the Clerks 'they knew they were working for the Empire' argument, but with the economy the way it is between a general recession and outsourcing, there aren't too many tech jobs to go for as it is, at least not for those unwilling to uproot. They are people too - hoping for the best, unwilling to upset their lives on what may happen, probably with family that would also be affected if they act prematurely.
That being said, I don't think it likely that they will run into a blacklist situation. While small-minded individuals may not be able to see it, most companies would recognize that the lower echelon rarely has anything to do with a companies direction as a whole.
Worst. Quote. Ever.
Are you paying the extra bunch of money to run multiple computers (with, as I understand it, a speed increase) or are you just violating your user agreement?
I don't remember seeing anything of the sort in my user agreement, and it really has no effect on the bandwidth. If I had more faucets I can't magically use water faster than they provide; at some point the average flow at each one goes down.
As for the nasty letters about overuse - I've been using Comcast in Pittsburgh for my work VPN for a year now with out complaint. That's 8 hours each weekday, running one or two Remote Desktop Connections at least 70% of the time, not to mention Outlook, Messenger, and Source Safe. I've never measured it, but I don't think any of that is light use. Add my occasional evening gaming and it gets a reasonable amount of use without any complaint. As far as I can tell people being pegged for use either have massive file shares going (known or unknown), or someone else is spoofing their address to do so and they're getting pegged for near-constant usage, not just momentary highs.
And I have to disagree with the cost complaint. Yeah, I'd like it cheaper, but it's what, 4 times dialup in cost? It's a lot faster and more convenient than 4 times in product. My main complaint about Comcast is the Listing Guide only shows 1/2 hour and has ads on 1/3 of the screen. I'd much prefer the Adelphia layout I saw at my parents - Upper Left Quad info, Upper Right Quad PIP of the current channel, and 1 1/2 hours for the listings.
More on topic: could their intentions be good, and they just want to have a method of preventing neighbors/roamers from jumping on your line? This may not be about what you have a right to do in your own house, but helping you not get stung by someone hijacking your connection for illicit uses.
Do you think it's impossible for them to be redirected/infected?
Ebay and online banking work just fine.
I'm not trying to say people need to do a lot for online to be useful, I was just trying to make the point that some of this stuff is done invisibly. Simply saying 'don't download toolbars' won't work if you don't take other steps. It sounds like you do, which is good but should be stated with your rule.
I'm confused - why would O'Reilly be against American Corporations making money? Isn't that their God-given right? Are you some kinda hippie?
[Can you tell sarcasm from flamebait? I knew you could!]
Don't download anything, don't install anything. Ignore all those taskbars and toolbars and toys.
Then why be online? Do you not use email or browse the web? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. Why not just set your machine up so it will catch problems? It's not like everything announces it will install something.
I'm not saying those taskbars and whatnot make the world go round, but do you visit any sites at all? Do you think it's impossible for them to be redirected/infected?
would be Comic Books and Dungeons & Dragons. Both were chastised for years for their portrayals of sex/violence/whatever, not much any longer because they've been around awhile and have shown to not really have a significant negative effect.
Not to say they don't still get flak, but it's not the news media stopper it once was mainly because they have been around awhile. Yes, partially because they've been replaced, but as the same types who use them play video games it would be zero effort to lump them together if the news media thought it would mean something to anyone.
I think at the beginning they honestly thought they had the rights to some of the code, and that they thought the whole area was fuzzy enough that IBM would either pay them or buy them out rather than push their luck. Whether they started to over believe themselves, or just got so wrapped up in the snowball of lies that they had no way out, I have no idea.
I would agree that patented/proprietary code is far more viral than GPL code could possibly be, since your right to use it is generally tied to contracts which can be cancelled. Having worked in "the industry" for 10 years, I have no conscious idea how I solved problems back then 4 companies ago. However, I have no doubt that if presented with a similar problem now I'd solve it in a similar way. In theory, virtually everything I've written from my second company on might have vestiges of supposedly 'proprietary' code.
About the only defense to this is it's almost universal - anyone who's moved around a lot is likely to be in this position. The next software hurdle will be MS's sudden patent rush, and fighting the 'obvious' patents. Hopefully we can get the Patent Office/system overhauled or at least looked at before Longhorn comes out.
"Free" in this meaning sadly doesn't mean "works on every machine and every OS".
Well, yeah. "Free" as it applies to iTunes means "it didn't cost anything," pretty much a dictionary definition. I think the word you're thinking of is "Open," which no one would attribute to iTunes.
Compatibility. Ease of use. Streaming to an Ethernet-connected device just built for that purpose. With a bit of creativity, you can see a plenty of reasons on a glance.
No, these are reasons to want a tool to share music any way you want. iTunes is not intended to be that tool.
Or modify it. It's a tool. A hammer is a tool, and if I want to do something different with it, I have two choices: use a different tool, or modify the hammer. The choice depends on the situation.
Exactly. But don't complain if the new model hammer you are given can't be modified in exactly the same way.
To stretch the analogy a bit in the physical world, lets say you win a hammer (read: it was free/without cost) that has a wood handle that goes through the metal head. You modify it by drilling into the wood and putting in some kind of screwdriver tip. Now the hammer breaks and you get a replacement based on a lifetime warranty (just to stretch why you'd need a replacement). If the manufacture stops using to wood and switches to sold metal, your method of modifying it will no longer work. But since that wasn't their intent in the first place, nor did they ever state it would be, there's not really a foundation for complaining about it. (To twist the this to fit better we could simply say they sent you the metal hammer unsolicited because it is lighter/has a better grip/whatever, and it's your choice to use your old modified hammer or the new one that you'd have to re-modify.)
Of course, part of my implied point was that by using iTunes you agree to the EULA blah blah blah, but frankly I'm not a fan or defender of those. My main goal was two fold: 1) I don't think breaking this was their main reason for changing things, even if they might be glad it did. 2) There is no reason to hold a grudge against them for doing so, since they never said they wouldn't. I'm not saying you can't be annoyed with the inconvenience, just that they never intended for you to have that convenience so they had no compulsion to maintain it.
Your 'force people to use iTunes on all their machines' argument is a bit specious, since it's free, as is your "upgrade treadmill" comment. If they want to change their hidden protocols between versions they are within their rights to do so, whatever their motives are.
Their are no legitimate reasons to hijack an iTunes stream, for any reason. If you don't agree with how iTunes works, use something else. You're right - it's your music, so you can use whatever the hell you want to share it. iTunes is a tool that makes it easy to share with other computers running iTunes. If you alter how a tool works or use it in an unintended way and then it no longer does what it was originally supposed to, that's not really the tool's fault.
None of us know the exact reason they changed how they communicate so all versions have to be 4.5, but one possible (and IMHO more likely) reason is they've added new sound file types and rather than deal with some machines coughing on them when they are shared they make sure they can all play the files. Makes more sense to me than screwing with people for an "upgrade treadmill" that provides no actual benefit to Apple whatsoever.
Another conceivable reason for encrypting their music sharing stream and changing it each version is about ensuring that they are relatively free from any anti-P2P laws/legal actions. They don't expect to 'win', but being able to show that they do something about it is enough to fight any lawsuits that may popup. Frankly, I doubt this is the reason, but to me it's still more reasonable than your reasons.
This took me a second to place as "Little GTO", so don't expect too much from the mods. It's actually pretty clever, though it would have fit a little better if it were GM being sued.
Would a digital watch count? I'm pretty sure my first one would do different things from how long the button was pushed. Granted, it was only generally how it knew you wanted to set the time and switched modes, but it was a pretty limited computer.
A better analogy would be you can have the right to reverse engineering how my lock works all you want, but I can still shoot you if you come into my house uninvited.
The more times an iTMS-unavailable artist shows up on user-submitted playlists, the more pressure Apple has to try to sign that artist.
More like the more pressure the artist has to allow their music to be distributed. Apple has an established set of requirements to be hosted; they pretty much no longer have to negotiate for specific artists. If an artist isn't on at this point, it isn't because Apple doesn't want them there.
My one complaint with the service is that you can't download the source file multiple times.
Yeah, the next thing you know music stores won't let you leave with the same CD more then once.
but you have to transport the file itself to those machines
If only there were a way to connect computers together, perhaps with wires or radio signals of some kind, such that they could share files.
[/SARCASM]
And yes, I know that in a digital age it should be easy to see that you are authorized to re-download a given file. However, this could be used as method of getting around sharing restrictions. Realistically, in a contrived manner, but that's enough to scare recording industry suits. In all probability if you call and convince Apple that you need to re-download, you can probably work something out. But having it as a feature would just open it to abuse.
A long time ago I was having trouble with a Windows machine and a coworker told me to reinstall Windows. I said "What?" He said "Oh yes, I do about once a month."
I asked him if he also reinstalled his car engine once a month, but I just got a blank stare.
I mean, back when there were carburetors people would occasionally rebuild them, but it wasn't exactly your standard maintenance.
In America, you pay for the privelege to be spied on, infiltrated, and abused? wtf?
I suppose you'd rather raise taxes and have the government pay for it.
Communist!
My two main uses for my iPod:
1) Through my car stereo, via a 1/8"->cassette converter. Given that it's a convertible and Pittsburgh roads are anything but smooth, I'm not exactly looking for the subtle nuances in my driving music.
2) Using the snow-blower or lawnmower, depending on the weather for the week. Sure I'm wearing shooter's ear protection; the music is just to help drown out the monotony of whatever comes through.
Unless you're trying to replace your main stereo with an MP3 player, I don't really see the point of sacrificing space for quality. Most intended uses aren't perfect listening experiences by any definition. Not that I would actively discourage such use - I, for one, would love to see a receiver that besides having normal Line In has an iPod-compatible connection that would let you control your iPod through your remote as part of your sound system. If that happened I would reconsider what quality I'm using, but until then 192 AAC is pretty darn good.