HDTiVo is supposed to be coming out sooner than later for a retail price of $999, dish only.
It won't be "dish only" -- it will have 2 DirecTV tuners, plus 2 over-the-air HD tuners, any 2 of which may be recording at the same time.
Details here.
Filtering does not stop the spammer from using your (and your ISP's) network bandwidth and server resources. It adds up. How well will your filter work when you get 72634 spams a day?
The theory, I guess, is that really effective filtering will so reduce the efficacy of spamming as to make it economically pointless. Eventually, then, the volume should drop off.
I'm not sure that will ever happen completely, but I give a combination of technological solutions (open relay blacklisting; Bayesian filtering built seamlessly into clients) much better odds of success than a "legal" solution. I live in a state that's had anti-spam legislation since 1998 -- to no perceptible effect.
While your aim is commendable, you've confused the issue. . . . Copyright protection and IP rights are moral questions, not technical ones -- as is occasionally pointed out on slashdot -- and thus need moral, not technical solutions.
Intellectual property rights are not "moral questions," but issues of policy. Though Hatch and his ilk are always claiming the so-called "moral" high ground, all he really is is a politician. The decisions we make about how far to extend IP rights and remedies is political (and, I suppose, economic), and has nothing to do with morality.
Slashdot Mirror
It won't be "dish only" -- it will have 2 DirecTV tuners, plus 2 over-the-air HD tuners, any 2 of which may be recording at the same time. Details here.
The theory, I guess, is that really effective filtering will so reduce the efficacy of spamming as to make it economically pointless. Eventually, then, the volume should drop off.
I'm not sure that will ever happen completely, but I give a combination of technological solutions (open relay blacklisting; Bayesian filtering built seamlessly into clients) much better odds of success than a "legal" solution. I live in a state that's had anti-spam legislation since 1998 -- to no perceptible effect.
Intellectual property rights are not "moral questions," but issues of policy. Though Hatch and his ilk are always claiming the so-called "moral" high ground, all he really is is a politician. The decisions we make about how far to extend IP rights and remedies is political (and, I suppose, economic), and has nothing to do with morality.