The RIAA's position on this issue is like auto makers trying to outlaw do it yourself oil changes since they take revenue from the dealership service departments. Although you can do many automotive service tasks yourself, repair and service shops have no problem finding people willing to pay to have them done. Likewise, if ring tones are sold, people will still buy them for the convenience factor rather than creating their own.
Although the CAN-SPAM act basically defines how someone should spam, I can't understand why people are saying that it allows any type of activity that was previously not allowed. If it calls for a working unsubscribe link, that does not mean that my mail system must accept mail from someone who has met this requirement. If a spammer is blasting my server with dictionary attacks and/or underhanded tricks designed to get around a spam filter, there's nothing in this law that says I have to permit it. Richter of course does not have a leg to stand on in court, so I assume he filed this suit to try to intimidate anti-spam activists, as if it would make them go away.
I don't know why anti-virus companies would worry about being sued by some sleazy marketer. If Symantec were to start building spyware prevention and removal tools into Norton Internet Security, they would gain a lot of business from companies that are tired of having spyware destroy their computer systems. Even if Gator/Claria filed suit, Symantec's legal department is probably bigger than all of Claria, so we know what that means in the U.S. justice system. Bye bye Claria. When a program is designed to replicate itself when someone attempts to uninstall it, then it is a virus by definition, so by all means a proper anti-virus tool should remove all traces of it.
I've always believed that when people in rural areas are taxed in order to provide rent/mortgage subsidies for people in urban areas, then I will feel that their subsidized phone service is fair. Seriously, we've had phones for about 100 years now, the lines are all in place, and the rural phone systems have had all the subsidies they need in order to provide adequate service. If it costs more to provide rural phone service on a continuing basis, people who live in rural areas need to pay it. Almost everything else is cheaper in rural areas anyway, so its not going to kill them to pay a little more for communications.
The Universal Service Fund is the biggest scam. Much of the money is wasted. Schools in poor areas need to focus on academics and maintaining a safe environment, not connecting every student to the internet so they can play Yahoo games, which is about all we ever used the internet for when I was in school. Getting crap like this taken off of our regular phone bills will help a lot more than trying to expand the socialism to VOIP.
I don't see how this could work, even if they had a case. By the time this lawsuit works its way through the courts, the IPO would have long been over. The price would probably have spiked and fallen already. What would they expect, to be given shares at the original IPO price and then have Google buy them back at the highest price the shares ever reached? Knowing these dreamers, this is exactly what they would ask for.
Nobody is trying to tell you what you personally can put on your screen. If you want to have Eddie Bauer's website open at the same time as LL Bean's, they won't know or care. When someone has built a business around the idea of leeching customers directly from another business's storefront, that's when they care. That being said, I think the burden of proof here will be fairly high, and I'm not sure that LL Bean can meet it, although I certainly hope they do.
As a side note, these summer blends are made largely from Ethanol, which has questionable environmental benefits but is heavily favored by farmers since it takes a lot of corn to make. Since there are a lot of corn farmers in Illinois and they have a powerful lobby, this requirement is not about to go away anytime soon.
Re:Inflation.
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I love the excuses they come up with. A refinery closes right before the high demand summer driving season. Last year, the excuse was a shortage of the summer blend, never mind that summer doesn't exactly come by surprise. Do they really think people are stupid enough to not see the price gouging? If it were a competitive market, I would be more understanding, but since all oil companies buy oil through the same channels which are run by cartels, its definitely gouging. The oil companies' record profits seem to back this up.
This is incredibly stupid. Disabling the catch makes things no safer, only inconvenient as hell. Pumps automatically shut off when the nozzle detects fuel at the spout, usually well before the tank is completely full. This happens with or without a hold latch. If I find a gas station that has disabled their holds, I never return. And if somebody wants to get inside their vehicle while the pump is running, they'll find a way. And they won't blow up when they get back out, either. As a side note, there was once a time when people had real problems to worry about and didn't have time to think about things that have a one in 10 billion chance of happening. How many people get gas each day and how many pumps explode?
What I noticed about AT&T advertising is that they advertise a really low rate, like $19.95 a month. But then when you look to see what this includes, it is a very stripped down plan (crappy phone, 100 minutes a month, small local area with roaming charges if you go out of it, you get the idea). If you actually want a plan from AT&T that would be useable for the average person, it ends up costing much more than their competitors. I guess they are just counting on people not to notice and compare. And they wonder why they suffer from an endless exodus of customers.
I don't believe a phone company can add fees to your monthly bill if you are under contract. Otherwise, what would stop them from charging you $100 a month on a plan advertised for $39.95 just by adding more fees? If they add a new fee, that should only apply to new accounts, or those whose contracts have expired. Common contract law says that you can't change the terms of the agreement without the consent of the other party.
In many states, you need to photograph the face of the person driving in addition to the license plate.
I've never understood this. A photograph is not positive ID. Many people have a twin brother/sister or even a cousin who looks like them, and they may not even know exactly when this person may have driven their car. Of course this would be a non-issue if the tickets were issued to the vehicle rather than the driver, like parking tickets are.
Re:Thrilling, kinda like adding millions of cops..
on
Road Marker Marks You
·
· Score: 1
This is why it will never happen. People would actually quit speeding if they know they will be caught every time, and cities will start to lose that revenue stream. Also, cops would much rather spend time busting harmless speeders rather than confronting dangerous criminals. Too many peoples' livelihoods (and police retirement funds) would be at stake with a system like this.
The cause of this problem is parents who are willing to pay any amount of money for their little darlings to have a chance to get ahead in life. If there were more parents telling admissions officials "I like your school, but it costs too much, so I'm sending Johnny to State U. instead where its almost half the price", they would listen. University budgets would no longer be growing at an uncontrolled rate.
In this case, the insurance agency could be doing it for good reasons, although you are definitely correct to question it. Most agents write policies for several different carriers. If they get a quote from a company that is really high, they can try to rate you with another company to see if the rate is better. Obviously they are more likely to get your business with a good rate, so they have incentive to shop around for you. If you give them permission to share your information with other companies, it is easier for them to do this. However, there can be downsides to this approach, such as having each company run your credit report before giving you a quote. So be cautious, but keep in mind that this type of thing is not always done to give the merchant a way to scam you.
I can't say that I'm surprised to see Orbitz doing this. With their relentless popups and too good to be true fares that are in fact too good to be true, this just seems like something they would do. When I look for airline tickets, I use anyone but Orbitz. Saving an extra $10 on a $300 ticket just isn't worth putting up with all the hassles that this unethical company forces on people.
Nothing wrong with this. If the companies that are soliciting the spammer's services are paying lots of money only to have people bitch at them about junk faxes, they will probably demand a refund from the spammer. When they don't get it, they'll stop using the spammer. The end result: spamming is less profitable, and therefore not used as often.
Outlook 2003 over the web is certainly better than the older web client, and quite easy to use. However, the web UI is not quite as functional or easy to use as the actual desktop client. This is the case for every web app I've ever seen and will be the case for the forseeable future. In fact, I've seen some websites, such as digital photography sites, that have a client you can download to help upload pictures to the site. Why would this be available if web clients were better? This is simply a fad that will hopefully pass soon.
Are there any towns that have actual competition among cable providers? Seriously, I'd like to know. Chicago has RCN which resells on top of Comcast's lines, but Comcast charges them so much that they are now bankrupt, so I don't think this counts as competitive cable service.
All it takes is for an ISP to come along with no policies restricting what you can connect to the network and everyone with more than one machine or a wireless LAN will switch. The only way a cable/DSL provider can prohibit more than one machine on their system is if they have an absolute monopoly on broadband connections in their area (or super low prices).
With so many organizations having their own branded credit cards, Apple could always do this as a way of reducing their processing fees. They would have to have some sort of incentive (sign up for our card and get 10 free downloads) to get people to go for it, and then their most frequent users would be using their own credit card.
Making it illegal to advertise via companies that use scummy business practices like this is, in my opinion, the only way to get rid of spyware. Not that this would guarantee that all spyware disappears overnight, but it would substantially cut down on the profits when only the scummiest companies advertise via spyware.
Slashdot Mirror
The RIAA's position on this issue is like auto makers trying to outlaw do it yourself oil changes since they take revenue from the dealership service departments. Although you can do many automotive service tasks yourself, repair and service shops have no problem finding people willing to pay to have them done. Likewise, if ring tones are sold, people will still buy them for the convenience factor rather than creating their own.
Although the CAN-SPAM act basically defines how someone should spam, I can't understand why people are saying that it allows any type of activity that was previously not allowed. If it calls for a working unsubscribe link, that does not mean that my mail system must accept mail from someone who has met this requirement. If a spammer is blasting my server with dictionary attacks and/or underhanded tricks designed to get around a spam filter, there's nothing in this law that says I have to permit it. Richter of course does not have a leg to stand on in court, so I assume he filed this suit to try to intimidate anti-spam activists, as if it would make them go away.
I don't know why anti-virus companies would worry about being sued by some sleazy marketer. If Symantec were to start building spyware prevention and removal tools into Norton Internet Security, they would gain a lot of business from companies that are tired of having spyware destroy their computer systems. Even if Gator/Claria filed suit, Symantec's legal department is probably bigger than all of Claria, so we know what that means in the U.S. justice system. Bye bye Claria. When a program is designed to replicate itself when someone attempts to uninstall it, then it is a virus by definition, so by all means a proper anti-virus tool should remove all traces of it.
I've always believed that when people in rural areas are taxed in order to provide rent/mortgage subsidies for people in urban areas, then I will feel that their subsidized phone service is fair. Seriously, we've had phones for about 100 years now, the lines are all in place, and the rural phone systems have had all the subsidies they need in order to provide adequate service. If it costs more to provide rural phone service on a continuing basis, people who live in rural areas need to pay it. Almost everything else is cheaper in rural areas anyway, so its not going to kill them to pay a little more for communications.
The Universal Service Fund is the biggest scam. Much of the money is wasted. Schools in poor areas need to focus on academics and maintaining a safe environment, not connecting every student to the internet so they can play Yahoo games, which is about all we ever used the internet for when I was in school. Getting crap like this taken off of our regular phone bills will help a lot more than trying to expand the socialism to VOIP.
I don't see how this could work, even if they had a case. By the time this lawsuit works its way through the courts, the IPO would have long been over. The price would probably have spiked and fallen already. What would they expect, to be given shares at the original IPO price and then have Google buy them back at the highest price the shares ever reached? Knowing these dreamers, this is exactly what they would ask for.
Nobody is trying to tell you what you personally can put on your screen. If you want to have Eddie Bauer's website open at the same time as LL Bean's, they won't know or care. When someone has built a business around the idea of leeching customers directly from another business's storefront, that's when they care. That being said, I think the burden of proof here will be fairly high, and I'm not sure that LL Bean can meet it, although I certainly hope they do.
As a side note, these summer blends are made largely from Ethanol, which has questionable environmental benefits but is heavily favored by farmers since it takes a lot of corn to make. Since there are a lot of corn farmers in Illinois and they have a powerful lobby, this requirement is not about to go away anytime soon.
I love the excuses they come up with. A refinery closes right before the high demand summer driving season. Last year, the excuse was a shortage of the summer blend, never mind that summer doesn't exactly come by surprise. Do they really think people are stupid enough to not see the price gouging? If it were a competitive market, I would be more understanding, but since all oil companies buy oil through the same channels which are run by cartels, its definitely gouging. The oil companies' record profits seem to back this up.
Are there any more laws you would like to see passed to guarantee you the 'right' to never be annoyed?
This is incredibly stupid. Disabling the catch makes things no safer, only inconvenient as hell. Pumps automatically shut off when the nozzle detects fuel at the spout, usually well before the tank is completely full. This happens with or without a hold latch. If I find a gas station that has disabled their holds, I never return. And if somebody wants to get inside their vehicle while the pump is running, they'll find a way. And they won't blow up when they get back out, either. As a side note, there was once a time when people had real problems to worry about and didn't have time to think about things that have a one in 10 billion chance of happening. How many people get gas each day and how many pumps explode?
What I noticed about AT&T advertising is that they advertise a really low rate, like $19.95 a month. But then when you look to see what this includes, it is a very stripped down plan (crappy phone, 100 minutes a month, small local area with roaming charges if you go out of it, you get the idea). If you actually want a plan from AT&T that would be useable for the average person, it ends up costing much more than their competitors. I guess they are just counting on people not to notice and compare. And they wonder why they suffer from an endless exodus of customers.
I don't believe a phone company can add fees to your monthly bill if you are under contract. Otherwise, what would stop them from charging you $100 a month on a plan advertised for $39.95 just by adding more fees? If they add a new fee, that should only apply to new accounts, or those whose contracts have expired. Common contract law says that you can't change the terms of the agreement without the consent of the other party.
In many states, you need to photograph the face of the person driving in addition to the license plate.
I've never understood this. A photograph is not positive ID. Many people have a twin brother/sister or even a cousin who looks like them, and they may not even know exactly when this person may have driven their car. Of course this would be a non-issue if the tickets were issued to the vehicle rather than the driver, like parking tickets are.
This is why it will never happen. People would actually quit speeding if they know they will be caught every time, and cities will start to lose that revenue stream. Also, cops would much rather spend time busting harmless speeders rather than confronting dangerous criminals. Too many peoples' livelihoods (and police retirement funds) would be at stake with a system like this.
when their insurance starts going down
Yea, that'll happen. I'm sure I'm not the only one willing to bet my life savings that this type of thing will only raise rates.
The cause of this problem is parents who are willing to pay any amount of money for their little darlings to have a chance to get ahead in life. If there were more parents telling admissions officials "I like your school, but it costs too much, so I'm sending Johnny to State U. instead where its almost half the price", they would listen. University budgets would no longer be growing at an uncontrolled rate.
In this case, the insurance agency could be doing it for good reasons, although you are definitely correct to question it. Most agents write policies for several different carriers. If they get a quote from a company that is really high, they can try to rate you with another company to see if the rate is better. Obviously they are more likely to get your business with a good rate, so they have incentive to shop around for you. If you give them permission to share your information with other companies, it is easier for them to do this. However, there can be downsides to this approach, such as having each company run your credit report before giving you a quote. So be cautious, but keep in mind that this type of thing is not always done to give the merchant a way to scam you.
I can't say that I'm surprised to see Orbitz doing this. With their relentless popups and too good to be true fares that are in fact too good to be true, this just seems like something they would do. When I look for airline tickets, I use anyone but Orbitz. Saving an extra $10 on a $300 ticket just isn't worth putting up with all the hassles that this unethical company forces on people.
Nothing wrong with this. If the companies that are soliciting the spammer's services are paying lots of money only to have people bitch at them about junk faxes, they will probably demand a refund from the spammer. When they don't get it, they'll stop using the spammer. The end result: spamming is less profitable, and therefore not used as often.
Outlook 2003 over the web is certainly better than the older web client, and quite easy to use. However, the web UI is not quite as functional or easy to use as the actual desktop client. This is the case for every web app I've ever seen and will be the case for the forseeable future. In fact, I've seen some websites, such as digital photography sites, that have a client you can download to help upload pictures to the site. Why would this be available if web clients were better? This is simply a fad that will hopefully pass soon.
Are there any towns that have actual competition among cable providers? Seriously, I'd like to know. Chicago has RCN which resells on top of Comcast's lines, but Comcast charges them so much that they are now bankrupt, so I don't think this counts as competitive cable service.
All it takes is for an ISP to come along with no policies restricting what you can connect to the network and everyone with more than one machine or a wireless LAN will switch. The only way a cable/DSL provider can prohibit more than one machine on their system is if they have an absolute monopoly on broadband connections in their area (or super low prices).
With so many organizations having their own branded credit cards, Apple could always do this as a way of reducing their processing fees. They would have to have some sort of incentive (sign up for our card and get 10 free downloads) to get people to go for it, and then their most frequent users would be using their own credit card.
Making it illegal to advertise via companies that use scummy business practices like this is, in my opinion, the only way to get rid of spyware. Not that this would guarantee that all spyware disappears overnight, but it would substantially cut down on the profits when only the scummiest companies advertise via spyware.