I hadn't ever thought of it either until some security brainiacs at a client's headquarters refused to allow me to connect my laptop to their network unless I could demonstrate that a reputable virus scanner was checking my machine at least daily.
Which is exactly why Microsoft bought and shut down RAV.
Which is important - because everybody knows email addresses are a great authoritative identity source...
If you read carefully, you will note that I did not write "email address". That's because the law requires both a physical and email address (and a name, of course).
Maybe it is not constitutional, but check out the actual text for yourself. It looks pretty clear to me that there is no exception for files that you have permission to trade.
I mean, I really really don't it. It's already illegal share movies. Now in order for them to allow me to commit an illegal act I have to share my email address?
According to my understanding, even if you have permission to share the file, you still have to provide an address.
This week, while flying, I saw: 1. Windows-based terminal used by the public to print tickets (I think) with a "you have chosen to download a file, what do you want to do with it: save, open" or similar (I don't recall the exact wording).
2. A windows-based machine that was part of the baggage scanning setup at Chicago-O'Hare going through a scandisk process. OK, this may have been due to operators turing the machine off using the power switch, but should not such a machine use a read-only boot drive/partition?
I don't know about other VoIP providers, but Packet8.net has been great for me.
I have also tried using Packet8. While I agree that calls to US numbers are great, calls to India are abysmal. Packet8's quality for calls to India is so bad that it is virtually unusable.
Modded funny, but the fact is the US government (at least state governments) have a *monopoly* on gambling.
I think your statement is inaccurate. State govenrnments have chosen to either regulate or ban gambling outright. Through this mechanism, they can create a monopoly. I don't think a monopoly on gambling exists in Nevada, but it is highly regulated.
The situation with Indian Tribes is interesting. Since those tribes have sovereignty, I don't see how the states can regulate or ban gambling on tribal lands, but apparently those states with Indian reservations have done just that. Given the money flowing into gambling on tribal lands (the definition of which appears to be rather loose these days -- witness new casinos being built in the heart of the SF Bay area), I am surprised none of the tribes have challenges the States' ability to regulate gambling on Indian lands
Hunh? I run a server on a network with port 25 blocked. Outbound mail smart hosted thru my ISP, inbound direct to my server. What's the problem with that?
You mean, apart from the fact that some large ISP's have trouble reliably delivering email? Or that you can't see the logs so you don't know why your email did not arrive?
When I first got cable Internet (@home), I set my mailserver to relay through the ISP's mailservers. Email did not get delivered for 3 days. Now maybe not all ISPs are as bad. Who knows, but why risk it?
Last year, someone brought a prototype into the office where I work. It was postcard sized, but the screen covered the entire face. The screen also hinged out to reveal a keyboard.
It had a hard disk and a Transmeta processor (about 1GHz, I think). It was fast enough to run WinXP.
The whole device was a prototype, but it seems to me that it blew away the PC described in the article. They were taking it to a show (Comdex?).
...Given the sheer number of spurious lawsuits I've been seeing on here, this comes as a great relief to me that one large one is being thrown out of court. Thank you, US justice system!
Unfortunately, your happiness with the US justice system is ill-founded. From the article:
"What this means is the case will be heard in a California state court," said Tom Galvin, vice president of VeriSign's government relations group. "And while the venue will change, our objective to gain clarity regarding ICANN's appropriate role and the process for the introduction of new services does not."
So, apparently, on this occasion, having Verisign's case thrown out of court does not appear to stop them attempting to have a second bite of the apple. To me, this seems ridiculous -- just as the federal cases in the Rodney King incident seemed to be an end-run around the principles regarding of dual-jeopardy and thus in my opinion should not have been allowed.
(relatively small) fee is paid for the song to be used commercially and repeatedly.
If all users just grabbed their songs off broadcasts, then either artists wouldn't make any money (since there'd be a small handful of stations paying paltry payments for each album) or the cost of running a radio station would become higher than would ever be feasible to sustain (as each song would cost $1,000's to license to play on the air).
Haven't you got that the wrong way round? Since the labels pay the radio stations to play their music (albeit indirectly), shouldn't the labels be paying the radio stations much more if the songs are played multiple times? </irony>
Sony vs. Betamax's "substantial non-infringing use" test should be invalid, because there was no way a recording/copying device could ever fail the test.
I've been beating my head against a wall trying to come up with a counter-example. Any ideas?
Why does there have to be an example of a device that would fail in order for the test to be invalid? Just because all recording devices would pass does not make it a bad test, it just means that any recording device is legal.
One should be rather suspicious about them after looking at their finacials -- they spent relatively nothing on R&D. I think they spent more on their website than on console h/w and s/w development.
It's hard to see how you build a defensible business with almost no R&D! Not impossible: I think if one can develop a brand name or community that can provide an advantage, but I don't see either of these from Phantom.
Microsoft has shown very often that it is king of good enough. Microsoft does not strive to be the best, just good enough to stop the majority of people from searching out and installing alternatives. Microsoft does not strive to satisfy the average/. reader.
I'm with you here. My car does not have a single transistor and maybe not even a diode -- it has a generator, not an alternator and the diode (if it exists) is in the fuel pump.
I've driven it for 7 years now. It's never stranded me. It's fun to drive. It's cheap, but it was made in Britain, not Germany and a decade before your Porsche.
What's more, parts are very easy to find and cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
Would I be risking my karma if I asked if anyone is welcoming our new chimp overlords?
Which is exactly why Microsoft bought and shut down RAV.
If you read carefully, you will note that I did not write "email address". That's because the law requires both a physical and email address (and a name, of course).
Maybe it is not constitutional, but check out the actual text for yourself. It looks pretty clear to me that there is no exception for files that you have permission to trade.
According to my understanding, even if you have permission to share the file, you still have to provide an address.
This week, while flying, I saw:
1. Windows-based terminal used by the public to print tickets (I think) with a "you have chosen to download a file, what do you want to do with it: save, open" or similar (I don't recall the exact wording).
2. A windows-based machine that was part of the baggage scanning setup at Chicago-O'Hare going through a scandisk process. OK, this may have been due to operators turing the machine off using the power switch, but should not such a machine use a read-only boot drive/partition?
Do you feel more secure?
I make lots of POTS calls to India. Packet8's quality is far worse than POTS for calls to India.
I have also tried using Packet8. While I agree that calls to US numbers are great, calls to India are abysmal. Packet8's quality for calls to India is so bad that it is virtually unusable.
I completely agree with you.
I can imagine the average Senator's response: why do I care about saving an obsolete type of VCR?
It should be called: "Save the VCR day"h, or something similar that makes it clear that the problem is far wider than Sony Betamax VCRs.
I think your statement is inaccurate. State govenrnments have chosen to either regulate or ban gambling outright. Through this mechanism, they can create a monopoly. I don't think a monopoly on gambling exists in Nevada, but it is highly regulated.
The situation with Indian Tribes is interesting. Since those tribes have sovereignty, I don't see how the states can regulate or ban gambling on tribal lands, but apparently those states with Indian reservations have done just that. Given the money flowing into gambling on tribal lands (the definition of which appears to be rather loose these days -- witness new casinos being built in the heart of the SF Bay area), I am surprised none of the tribes have challenges the States' ability to regulate gambling on Indian lands
I suspect that PayPal is very cooperative with authorities so that it can keep its "not-a-bank" status. Being treated as a bank would involve PayPal in all kinds of unpleasantness (for PayPal) like not arbitrarily freezing people's money, arbitrarily withdrawing money from their checking accounts, etc.
Don't you run a proxy that blocks REFERRER headers? I do and I expect many other /. readers do.
When I first got cable Internet (@home), I set my mailserver to relay through the ISP's mailservers. Email did not get delivered for 3 days. Now maybe not all ISPs are as bad. Who knows, but why risk it?
I believe you are correct. The pictures and spec look exactly like the device I saw.
Last year, someone brought a prototype into the office where I work. It was postcard sized, but the screen covered the entire face. The screen also hinged out to reveal a keyboard.
It had a hard disk and a Transmeta processor (about 1GHz, I think). It was fast enough to run WinXP.
The whole device was a prototype, but it seems to me that it blew away the PC described in the article. They were taking it to a show (Comdex?).
You have fallen for his strawman!
One should be rather suspicious about them after looking at their finacials -- they spent relatively nothing on R&D. I think they spent more on their website than on console h/w and s/w development.
It's hard to see how you build a defensible business with almost no R&D! Not impossible: I think if one can develop a brand name or community that can provide an advantage, but I don't see either of these from Phantom.
Microsoft has shown very often that it is king of good enough. Microsoft does not strive to be the best, just good enough to stop the majority of people from searching out and installing alternatives. Microsoft does not strive to satisfy the average /. reader.
I have found at least one online newpaper that won't accept 1900 as a date of birth (can't recall which one now).
Apparently, elderly people are not allowed to use the Internet!
I'm with you here. My car does not have a single transistor and maybe not even a diode -- it has a generator, not an alternator and the diode (if it exists) is in the fuel pump. I've driven it for 7 years now. It's never stranded me. It's fun to drive. It's cheap, but it was made in Britain, not Germany and a decade before your Porsche. What's more, parts are very easy to find and cheap.
... where are the other "raunchy" photos?