If it's harassment or sexual harassment, it's still a problem. Two wrongs don't make a right. Even if they didn't have the right to call you, doing so didn't give you the right to impugn theirs.
I might be wrong, but I don't think you'd have much of a harassment case, sexual or otherwise. You aren't the one making contact, and the person has no obligation to you (they aren't an employee, they aren't physically restricted from leaving, and you're on your own private property)
Perhaps it would help if you answered your phone with "This call may contain language unsuitable for some callers"
It doesn't need to sting to the company as a whole, it just needs to be sufficiently high that it overshadows the benefits of telemarketing.
Unless they can make $780,000 back from those 29 people, then they're losing money. Why should they continue a form of marketing when they're basically guaranteed of never recovering the marketing costs?
How long does it take you to spend $26896 on telco bills?
about the don't call me again thing. i had ADT call me 3 times a week when i first moved into my condo. after about 3 weeks i told the guy to come down and would always schedule a time i wasn't home. funny thing was they kept calling back.
Answer their next call with "Back for more, huh?" and go from there.
The amount comparsed to gross/net/whatever doesn't matter -- As long as telemarketing costs more (in fines) then the profit from sales, then the fines will be effective, it just might take a little longer.
True... You could do the same with a payment in advance format.
Of course, this assumes the product is released already, and while I realize that isn't always the case, by the time the review gets printed in many cases it seems that I can buy the product on my wholesale lists. If I can buy it wholesale, you can bet it's been available retail at least a month.
From my reading of DFS prior to W2K/AD's release, it was mainly built for large mostly static data which needs to be replicated across multiple sites and needs high uptime, but very specifically does not need to be updated frequently.
The concept of giving all users read/write access was thought up later on and it happens to work, but as you say, if two users update the same file, you may/will lose data.
Possibly, but that's a low enough volume customer that the manufacturer probably doesn't care.
The warrenty doesn't need to be time limited either, it could based on the ink running out, or per page or something similar, with an eventual expiry date.
It could be so simple. Reviewer contacts company and says "I'd like to review your product", company says "Sure, pick it up at a retailer, submit your receipt, and we'll reemburse you"
There are other ways to handle this situation too, especially with more expensive equipment.
Rather then voiding the warrenty, offer a 30 day warrenty and a support contract tied to the ink -- If you stop buying the ink, the support contract drys up.
You could probably build the car such that removing it would violate the DMCA though, if you wanted.
Tie the system into the onboard computer such that if you disable the recorder, you disable the entire ignition and fuel injection systems, and enforce the copyrights on the software running on the onboard computer.
As long as the software is digitally signed and cannot be run without signing, you could probably secure it reasonably well.
In a two wheel drive, this makes perfect sense no matter how old the car is.
Alternatively, in a typical/modern car with traction control the onboard computer can tell you're not really doing 100mph, and it likely adjusts the speedometer appropriately.
I can see it now... Shrinkwrapped licenses on bullets...
By allowing this bullet to enter your property or person, or accepting delivery of said bullet, you hereby agree to the following last will and testament:
-I hereby wish my estate and all holdings to be liquidated and transferred to off-short holdings savings account number #
Slashdot Mirror
If it's harassment or sexual harassment, it's still a problem. Two wrongs don't make a right. Even if they didn't have the right to call you, doing so didn't give you the right to impugn theirs.
I might be wrong, but I don't think you'd have much of a harassment case, sexual or otherwise. You aren't the one making contact, and the person has no obligation to you (they aren't an employee, they aren't physically restricted from leaving, and you're on your own private property)
Perhaps it would help if you answered your phone with "This call may contain language unsuitable for some callers"
It doesn't need to sting to the company as a whole, it just needs to be sufficiently high that it overshadows the benefits of telemarketing.
Unless they can make $780,000 back from those 29 people, then they're losing money. Why should they continue a form of marketing when they're basically guaranteed of never recovering the marketing costs?
How long does it take you to spend $26896 on telco bills?
You can? Reference?
It is there responsibility to get access to the list, and to honour it.
It is your responsiblity to report their sorry arses to have them fined.
Consider the profit margin that telemarketing calls must achieve in order to pay for that $780,000.
Personally, I'd be happy to say "no thanks" to all the telemarketing calls you can throw at me if I could collect $10/call.
about the don't call me again thing. i had ADT call me 3 times a week when i first moved into my condo. after about 3 weeks i told the guy to come down and would always schedule a time i wasn't home. funny thing was they kept calling back.
Answer their next call with "Back for more, huh?" and go from there.
The amount comparsed to gross/net/whatever doesn't matter -- As long as telemarketing costs more (in fines) then the profit from sales, then the fines will be effective, it just might take a little longer.
I was told to "make something up" one time. I picked up one of the stacks of business cards they have on the counter, and read off that information.
:)
The guy just about pissed himself laughing, typed it in, and all was well in the world. I should have asked for the flyer
Yeah... "Even though we had nothing to do with it, we'll make sure it doesn't happen again"
Why can I see that?
Why not? The US gov't got to vote on the leader in Iraq (as proof: they apparently voted Saddam OUT)
True... You could do the same with a payment in advance format.
Of course, this assumes the product is released already, and while I realize that isn't always the case, by the time the review gets printed in many cases it seems that I can buy the product on my wholesale lists. If I can buy it wholesale, you can bet it's been available retail at least a month.
Yeah, I can just see that... "Sorry, we have an anti-nuclear policy, so you can't bomb us unless we vote out the anti-nuclear laws)
From my reading of DFS prior to W2K/AD's release, it was mainly built for large mostly static data which needs to be replicated across multiple sites and needs high uptime, but very specifically does not need to be updated frequently.
The concept of giving all users read/write access was thought up later on and it happens to work, but as you say, if two users update the same file, you may/will lose data.
Possibly, but that's a low enough volume customer that the manufacturer probably doesn't care.
The warrenty doesn't need to be time limited either, it could based on the ink running out, or per page or something similar, with an eventual expiry date.
It could be so simple. Reviewer contacts company and says "I'd like to review your product", company says "Sure, pick it up at a retailer, submit your receipt, and we'll reemburse you"
This isn't difficult.
There are other ways to handle this situation too, especially with more expensive equipment.
Rather then voiding the warrenty, offer a 30 day warrenty and a support contract tied to the ink -- If you stop buying the ink, the support contract drys up.
You like sucking ass?
And regrettably, you're probably unable to shoot their ass if you're unconscious.
However, how about to prevent a felony? "I thought he was going to break my arm"?
If you hit me with your fists, I am 100% justified to hit you back with my fists.
If you hit me with a bat, I am 100% justified in removing the bat from your possession.
I wouldn't suggest making an "attack" damage the machine, just stop the active attack in progress.
"ROUTE DELETE *" should do the trick.
Drop all routes, or drop the default gateway... ?
Is this any different then setting up an HTTP system that returns a chunk of code?
As long as the system only responds to requests, in a bandwidth reasonable way (not a DoS of any sort), then are you really breaking any law?
I doubt this would get far in civil court either, since the "victom"'s computer initiated a hack attempt first.
You could probably build the car such that removing it would violate the DMCA though, if you wanted.
Tie the system into the onboard computer such that if you disable the recorder, you disable the entire ignition and fuel injection systems, and enforce the copyrights on the software running on the onboard computer.
As long as the software is digitally signed and cannot be run without signing, you could probably secure it reasonably well.
In a two wheel drive, this makes perfect sense no matter how old the car is.
Alternatively, in a typical/modern car with traction control the onboard computer can tell you're not really doing 100mph, and it likely adjusts the speedometer appropriately.
I can see it now... Shrinkwrapped licenses on bullets...
By allowing this bullet to enter your property or person, or accepting delivery of said bullet, you hereby agree to the following last will and testament:
-I hereby wish my estate and all holdings to be liquidated and transferred to off-short holdings savings account number #
Could you claim you lent the bullet out, and they refused to return it?