I never entered into any such agreement. Noone has. The reason almost every DVD player sold in the US has restricitons is because it is law - the DMCA.
Nobody anywhere thinks "I want to initiate some 'dominoes' and make my DVD player be living room policeman". Nobody wants restrictions, nobody wants unskippable bullshit, nobody thinks what you're thinking that they do when they push play on the dvd player. You're totally confusing what people *want* versus what they *tolerate* because they have to. What they want it for it to play when the push play, skip when they push skip. That's it.
If you don't believe me try asking some other people "do you WANT your DVD player to refuse to skip FBI warnings or do you merely tolerate it because you have to?". I bet you not one single honest person tells you they WANT FBI warnings.
As for the page setup dialog being displayed, most of the time I do, as do most people. This concept of studying people to make software that does what they want intuitively is called "usability" (though I don't think it is practiced much anymore, sadly). And as you pointed out, a lot of software allows this to be customized, unlike DVD players in the US.
As for the annoying printer drivers, well good thing it isn't illegal to sell less annoying printers. We can't say the same for DVD players.
I already told you what it was several times what the reasons are for it to NOT exist.
The only thing anyone is commanding their DVD player to do when the push the play or skip buttons is for the player to simply *play the movie* or *skip the scene*. NOBODY sits there and thinks "I want my DVD player to forcibly display FBI copyright warnings when I push the play button". That's ridiculous. The only reason the play buttons and skip buttons do anything else is due to unethical actions on the part of hollywood and lawmakers (i.e. the DMCA).
When I push use the print function in a computer program it does exactly what I want it to do. It doesn't freeze up for 10 seconds warning me not to make illegal copies of what I'm printing. That's not what anyone would ever want their computer to do when they push print. If it did so that program would quickly be replaced... assuming congress wasn't bribed into making such replacements illegal.
What?? Now you're just talking in circles. "The DVD player must do what it does becaues it does what it does"...
There is no ethical or technological reason for that sort of DVD to player to exist. The DVD player should not and need not do anything other than what the person that owns it commands it to do. If a movie studio wants me to possess a DVD player which listens to its commands instead of mine, it is free to purchase such a machine and send it to me. Until then, I'll keep using mplayer and pissing all over hollywood's rights as they piss all over mine.
I commanded it to not let me skip? Total nonsense. I "command" my DVD player not to let me skip in the same way a girl that wears a short skirt "commands" me to rape her. The movie studio commanded it to not let me skip. I obviously commanded it to let me skip when I pushed the skip button. DVDs do not and cannot enforce anything. They are not machines that follow commands. Only the player can try and do that and the player is mine, not the movie studios'.
I am? Then how come I can't skip past the FBI copyright infringement warning on my mom's DVD player? It just displays an open hand icon in the corner resembling a cop ordering me to stop doing what I'm doing. I'm not in ultimate control over it at all.
You are the one telling it to run the DRM'd content.
Which is no reason whatsoever for our own machines to ignore our commands which they are perfectly able to follow.
It has been deemed acceptable by significantly more people than have deemed it unacceptable.
Usually a result of ignorance.
It makes you look like a raving loon.
Yes, my own machines doing what I command them to do instead of what someone who doesn't even own them wants them to do. What an insane concept...
sudo can add convenience in that it can optionally remember your authentication (or not require it at all) so you don't have to re-type a password every time you acquire a root shell with 'sudo -s'.
That's nonsense. CPUs have been able to tell their design clock speed to software for a long time now. Computers have been made for decades such that software cannot unsafely set voltage or clock frequency.
That's quite strange. I wonder why they do that. I don't think most people are totally uninterested others who are beyond +/- 10% their own salary. That isn't the case for me, at least.
I can tell you OKCupid is an infinitely better site interface-wise and functionality-wise, at least. Better than any other site I've tried. In particular, unlike practically every other dating site, they tell you exactly when people last logged in for free instead of playing games hiding that information to make you think there's more activity on the site than there really is.
So if you said your salary was $100K, then whatever programming was done on the backside would limit your results to people who had a salary range of $80K - $110K, for example. Someone who made $50K would not be included.
The results would limit to other people who *themselves* made $80-110K, or to people who *wanted someone else* who makes $80-110K?
I don't have to look at the ads? Where's the option to turn them off, then? I can't seem to find the setting... Yeah, yeah, I know, adblock.
It isn't about why facebook owes anybody any money. Facebook wasn't the victim. Facebook was not compromised. It shouldn't have received the settlement in the first place.
Don't you get a free online photo storage/sharing messaging service that includes a chat messenger and highly functional plugin-like apps/games?
No. I pay for it by having to see ads and having any personal information I use on said service sold to third parties. And not only is it not free but I would hardly call it "highly functional" either.
The FCC rule makes no such distinctions regarding networks that use public land or easements. The rule is a blanket rule that would apply to all networks.
The distinction is irrelevant to networks outside of the FCC's jurisdiction. Its just like how city ordinances in your city don't explicitly mention they don't apply in Timbuktu.
If the government has the authority to tell private companies what their networks must carry, they also have the authority to tell them what they cannot carry. Or soon will.
They already do. Ask anyone who distributed anti-DRM software on a web site (such as myself).
That has nothing to do with tailgating. If there is in fact a law somewhere that says you must move right to let cars behind you pass, it doesn't say you have to break the speed limit, or that they can break the speed limit, or that you must merge too close to traffic in the right lane, or that the people behind you are allowed to tailgate or turn on their high beams.
Slashdot Mirror
I never entered into any such agreement. Noone has. The reason almost every DVD player sold in the US has restricitons is because it is law - the DMCA.
Nobody anywhere thinks "I want to initiate some 'dominoes' and make my DVD player be living room policeman". Nobody wants restrictions, nobody wants unskippable bullshit, nobody thinks what you're thinking that they do when they push play on the dvd player. You're totally confusing what people *want* versus what they *tolerate* because they have to. What they want it for it to play when the push play, skip when they push skip. That's it.
If you don't believe me try asking some other people "do you WANT your DVD player to refuse to skip FBI warnings or do you merely tolerate it because you have to?". I bet you not one single honest person tells you they WANT FBI warnings.
As for the page setup dialog being displayed, most of the time I do, as do most people. This concept of studying people to make software that does what they want intuitively is called "usability" (though I don't think it is practiced much anymore, sadly). And as you pointed out, a lot of software allows this to be customized, unlike DVD players in the US.
As for the annoying printer drivers, well good thing it isn't illegal to sell less annoying printers. We can't say the same for DVD players.
I already told you what it was several times what the reasons are for it to NOT exist.
The only thing anyone is commanding their DVD player to do when the push the play or skip buttons is for the player to simply *play the movie* or *skip the scene*. NOBODY sits there and thinks "I want my DVD player to forcibly display FBI copyright warnings when I push the play button". That's ridiculous. The only reason the play buttons and skip buttons do anything else is due to unethical actions on the part of hollywood and lawmakers (i.e. the DMCA).
When I push use the print function in a computer program it does exactly what I want it to do. It doesn't freeze up for 10 seconds warning me not to make illegal copies of what I'm printing. That's not what anyone would ever want their computer to do when they push print. If it did so that program would quickly be replaced... assuming congress wasn't bribed into making such replacements illegal.
What?? Now you're just talking in circles. "The DVD player must do what it does becaues it does what it does"...
There is no ethical or technological reason for that sort of DVD to player to exist. The DVD player should not and need not do anything other than what the person that owns it commands it to do. If a movie studio wants me to possess a DVD player which listens to its commands instead of mine, it is free to purchase such a machine and send it to me. Until then, I'll keep using mplayer and pissing all over hollywood's rights as they piss all over mine.
No. Playing an MPEG-2 video stream does not, in fact, entail preventing the user from skipping any part of it.
I commanded it to not let me skip? Total nonsense. I "command" my DVD player not to let me skip in the same way a girl that wears a short skirt "commands" me to rape her. The movie studio commanded it to not let me skip. I obviously commanded it to let me skip when I pushed the skip button. DVDs do not and cannot enforce anything. They are not machines that follow commands. Only the player can try and do that and the player is mine, not the movie studios'.
I don't know what "mutually exclusively incompatible" means, but we clearly don't have un-copyable TV broadcasts...
Here's some reality for you.
Because Flash video DRM actually works?
I am? Then how come I can't skip past the FBI copyright infringement warning on my mom's DVD player? It just displays an open hand icon in the corner resembling a cop ordering me to stop doing what I'm doing. I'm not in ultimate control over it at all.
Which is no reason whatsoever for our own machines to ignore our commands which they are perfectly able to follow.
Usually a result of ignorance.
Yes, my own machines doing what I command them to do instead of what someone who doesn't even own them wants them to do. What an insane concept...
You mean if there's no way for movie studios to control everyone's computers? That's what it really is. We are much better off without such adoption.
sudo can add convenience in that it can optionally remember your authentication (or not require it at all) so you don't have to re-type a password every time you acquire a root shell with 'sudo -s'.
That's nonsense. CPUs have been able to tell their design clock speed to software for a long time now. Computers have been made for decades such that software cannot unsafely set voltage or clock frequency.
Prevent SMTP header injection, possibly: user@example.com\nX-Some-Header: blah or injection in the message body (user@example.com\n\nBlah).
Also technically wrong. The right hand side doesn't necessarily need to contain a dot (for example, root@localhost).
Magical snake-oil powered application layer firewalls often do that.
Case in point, that's wrong. The following is a valid email address (from TFA): "Abc\@def"@example.com
That's quite strange. I wonder why they do that. I don't think most people are totally uninterested others who are beyond +/- 10% their own salary. That isn't the case for me, at least.
I can tell you OKCupid is an infinitely better site interface-wise and functionality-wise, at least. Better than any other site I've tried. In particular, unlike practically every other dating site, they tell you exactly when people last logged in for free instead of playing games hiding that information to make you think there's more activity on the site than there really is.
The results would limit to other people who *themselves* made $80-110K, or to people who *wanted someone else* who makes $80-110K?
Ah, ok, so it isn't free then.
No it wasn't. User accounts were compromised by fooling the users. There was no security hole in the site itself. The users themselves were "hacked".
I don't have to look at the ads? Where's the option to turn them off, then? I can't seem to find the setting... Yeah, yeah, I know, adblock.
It isn't about why facebook owes anybody any money. Facebook wasn't the victim. Facebook was not compromised. It shouldn't have received the settlement in the first place.
No. I pay for it by having to see ads and having any personal information I use on said service sold to third parties. And not only is it not free but I would hardly call it "highly functional" either.
Yes he did. He bitches about the rootkits and this geohot restraining order... and then raves about their camera for a paragraph.
Ok, so...
You: "Fuck you Sony! Fuck your DRM, your Other OS removal, your root kits and your lawsuits! I'm not buying anything from you ever again!"
Sony: "Here's a shiny toy."
You: "You're awesome! Here, take my money! It might come in handy while you drag the PS3 homebrew people through the courts."
Thanks.
The distinction is irrelevant to networks outside of the FCC's jurisdiction. Its just like how city ordinances in your city don't explicitly mention they don't apply in Timbuktu.
They already do. Ask anyone who distributed anti-DRM software on a web site (such as myself).
That has nothing to do with tailgating. If there is in fact a law somewhere that says you must move right to let cars behind you pass, it doesn't say you have to break the speed limit, or that they can break the speed limit, or that you must merge too close to traffic in the right lane, or that the people behind you are allowed to tailgate or turn on their high beams.