It/was/ set to auto-renew. They/charged/ me the auto-renew fee. But then they let it expire anyway, and parked it at their site, claiming it was "deleted" and they could do nothing about it for another year. Whois shows GoDaddy as the owner of the domain name, and the domain points to their servers, advertising their website.
A few things have happened to make me hate GoDaddy:
I transferred a domain to them and they let it expire, charged my account anyway, and re-registerred it to themselves. This was one of those names that would have been worth thousands in the dot-com era, and they essentially stole it (the domain generates 5,000 hits per day based off of its name alone, and it now points to GoDaddy's domain registration page)
Secondly, this company is local to me, and they interviewed me for a job but then lied to me after the fact about the reason why I wasn't selected. They did this to many of my highly qualified associates as well. Their excuse: I supposedly didn't pass their super-cheezy "IQ" test...which was significantly easier than Mensa's test which I did pass.
The other issue is of course marketing. If two stores on either side of the street advertise the same product and one costs $99.99 and the other charges $100, more people will buy the $99.99 dollar product, because it seems like you're getting a deal. It feels like you're spending less even though both price points probably add up to the same dollar amount after sales tax.
While it is possible for the copyright owner to lose money due to infringement, the infringement in and of itself does not destroy the owner's ability to continue selling the product. Therefore, it should not be considered the same thing as theft.
By your definition, you are implying that taking a photograph of a painting in an art museum is the same thing as stealing the painting. If you go so far as to take the photograph in a super megapixel digital camera and use it to start selling prints online, then it may have an economic impact on the owner of the painting.
However, is it wrong if you don't want or can't afford to spend $15 on an official print to simply take the picture for your own viewing purposes? What if you pass that picture out to friends? Most likely, your friends would just look at it to sample the art. In some cases if they really liked it they might even go so far as to see the exhibit themselves, purhaps even purchasing an official print. In either case, the museum still can show off the painting, no harm done. So tell me why someone who takes a photograph should be viewed as a thief.
Re:Like Most Other Hacking Competitions
on
Get Paid To Crack?
·
· Score: 1
Funny, and I thought it was about getting paid to sell crack.
I think the author declaring P2P as "terrorism" is a bit harsh. While he has some interesting points, copyright violation is not theft, as it does not take away the the ability of the original owner to use the product. Also many who download on P2P download things they never would actually spend money purchasing, and there are many examples where downloads actually lead to purchase. I can see where copyright violation can be a bad thing, however the actual damage caused has been seriously blown out of proportion.
His other point in comparing linux to communism is really silly. Those who participate freely give their time to the project, and very few actually are trying to "break" capitalism in some way; they simply want an alternative. It is about freedom to choose another solution to a problem, it does not force people to stop using other software.
it's more like 50% when you add all the other taxes, such as social security, workman's comp, sales tax on everything you buy, telephone taxes, "911 fund" for airlines, etc.
The real factor is if you have less than 35% of your available credit currently in use. So if you have racked up a lot of debt, closing accounts will drop your score if the ratio (credit used vs. credit available) goes up a level (I think there is a 50% and 75% mark as well)
Close your old accounts only if your credit ratio will not be greatly affected, otherwise wait until you pay off enough debt to make it worthwhile.
I got the new Meteora CD with bonus DVD for about $13. It is one of the few modern CD's worth the money, as the entire album is excellent and top-notch production, and the DVD bonus is really cool. Also the CD has a music video of "Somewhere I Belong"
I personally stopped buying CD's, but this one is worth buying and you should get it (you don't have to pay $20 for it)
It looks like they are being reasonable with the prices. $3.99 for a cell phone game is a lot cheaper than $39.99 for a GBA game. Sure GBA is a lot better, but it isn't 10x better.
if you set up Squid on your linux box, and configure it properly, then you can actually set up Trillian (Jabber, etc.) and connect to all of the IM services thru SSH.
This is what I do at my job, to protect my personal privacy. The company has blocked all of the IM ports and logs all web activity, but thanks to SSH tunnelling, I can do what I want and have all the traffic encrypted.
One of the big reasons to use.NET is that it supports many languages, while still using the same set of libraries. So you can have VB talking to C# talking to Fortran, yadda yadda, all running under the same roof.
Slashdot Mirror
A kick-ass movie...on par with Matrix 1
It /was/ set to auto-renew. They /charged/ me the auto-renew fee. But then they let it expire anyway, and parked it at their site, claiming it was "deleted" and they could do nothing about it for another year. Whois shows GoDaddy as the owner of the domain name, and the domain points to their servers, advertising their website.
A few things have happened to make me hate GoDaddy:
I transferred a domain to them and they let it expire, charged my account anyway, and re-registerred it to themselves. This was one of those names that would have been worth thousands in the dot-com era, and they essentially stole it (the domain generates 5,000 hits per day based off of its name alone, and it now points to GoDaddy's domain registration page)
Secondly, this company is local to me, and they interviewed me for a job but then lied to me after the fact about the reason why I wasn't selected. They did this to many of my highly qualified associates as well. Their excuse: I supposedly didn't pass their super-cheezy "IQ" test...which was significantly easier than Mensa's test which I did pass.
My recommendation: BulkRegister
This is perfectly explained here
On the other hand, I'm glad the kid isn't going to get shafted by this.
in this case he may have gotten shifted.
The other issue is of course marketing. If two stores on either side of the street advertise the same product and one costs $99.99 and the other charges $100, more people will buy the $99.99 dollar product, because it seems like you're getting a deal. It feels like you're spending less even though both price points probably add up to the same dollar amount after sales tax.
While it is possible for the copyright owner to lose money due to infringement, the infringement in and of itself does not destroy the owner's ability to continue selling the product. Therefore, it should not be considered the same thing as theft.
By your definition, you are implying that taking a photograph of a painting in an art museum is the same thing as stealing the painting. If you go so far as to take the photograph in a super megapixel digital camera and use it to start selling prints online, then it may have an economic impact on the owner of the painting.
However, is it wrong if you don't want or can't afford to spend $15 on an official print to simply take the picture for your own viewing purposes? What if you pass that picture out to friends? Most likely, your friends would just look at it to sample the art. In some cases if they really liked it they might even go so far as to see the exhibit themselves, purhaps even purchasing an official print. In either case, the museum still can show off the painting, no harm done. So tell me why someone who takes a photograph should be viewed as a thief.
Funny, and I thought it was about getting paid to sell crack.
I think the author declaring P2P as "terrorism" is a bit harsh. While he has some interesting points, copyright violation is not theft, as it does not take away the the ability of the original owner to use the product. Also many who download on P2P download things they never would actually spend money purchasing, and there are many examples where downloads actually lead to purchase. I can see where copyright violation can be a bad thing, however the actual damage caused has been seriously blown out of proportion.
His other point in comparing linux to communism is really silly. Those who participate freely give their time to the project, and very few actually are trying to "break" capitalism in some way; they simply want an alternative. It is about freedom to choose another solution to a problem, it does not force people to stop using other software.
it's more like 50% when you add all the other taxes, such as social security, workman's comp, sales tax on everything you buy, telephone taxes, "911 fund" for airlines, etc.
The real factor is if you have less than 35% of your available credit currently in use. So if you have racked up a lot of debt, closing accounts will drop your score if the ratio (credit used vs. credit available) goes up a level (I think there is a 50% and 75% mark as well)
Close your old accounts only if your credit ratio will not be greatly affected, otherwise wait until you pay off enough debt to make it worthwhile.
I got the new Meteora CD with bonus DVD for about $13. It is one of the few modern CD's worth the money, as the entire album is excellent and top-notch production, and the DVD bonus is really cool. Also the CD has a music video of "Somewhere I Belong"
I personally stopped buying CD's, but this one is worth buying and you should get it (you don't have to pay $20 for it)
You really think the U.S. government would allow flying cars after the 9/11 incident? So much for the Back to the Future reality.
It's not too bad if you encode at 192 or above...
According to this the lottery is rigged anyway.
It looks like they are being reasonable with the prices. $3.99 for a cell phone game is a lot cheaper than $39.99 for a GBA game. Sure GBA is a lot better, but it isn't 10x better.
"sexy" is a good nickname for any RPG.
"hi sexy, would you like to buy a tunic?"
if you set up Squid on your linux box, and configure it properly, then you can actually set up Trillian (Jabber, etc.) and connect to all of the IM services thru SSH.
This is what I do at my job, to protect my personal privacy. The company has blocked all of the IM ports and logs all web activity, but thanks to SSH tunnelling, I can do what I want and have all the traffic encrypted.
Or one really nice digital video production station.
I only let my son do his homework after he's finished playing violent video games.
One of the big reasons to use .NET is that it supports many languages, while still using the same set of libraries. So you can have VB talking to C# talking to Fortran, yadda yadda, all running under the same roof.
It's not lack of standards that is the problem. It is lack of compliance to the existing standards.
you could try some software .
Check out Eudora Pro and the plugin Spamnix. Both are free to use, but if you register you don't get adware or annoyances.
Crouching Porno, Hidden Cliche
Too Funny!