Actually, you can use a Tivo without paying the monthly (or lifetime) fee. You don't get the program guides, season pass functionality, and suggestions, but it works as well as a VCR when you schedule to record at a date/time/duration (without tapes), and still lets you pause and replay live TV.
The monthly/lifetime fee gets you the premium services, which are all based on having the program guide available. Well worth the cost, IMO.
AVG antivirus (free)
ZoneAlarm (free for personal use)
Mozilla Firebird (free, tabbed browser, blocks popups, not IE, etc)
Mozilla Thunderbird (free email client)
OpenOffice (yep, it's free)
WinAmp (hmm, also free)
CDEx (free, open-source CD ripping and conversion)
IM client of choice (AIM,Yahoo,etc) or a try-to-do-it-all like Trillian
You make a good point, that the responsibility/blame really falls on the gov't in this case because it's ultimately their decision. However, do you think they would have come to the same conclusion (or even considered the issue in the first place) if the monopolies running the show weren't in their pockets and bitching that their profits were in the shitter?
If they need to resort to anticompetitive practices like raising the barriers to entry, I think that's a strong case that their business model is obsolete.
I would compare this with saying that everyone who uses public transit to commute to work still has to pay the tolls that would have applied if they drove on the highway.
Will IM clients like Yahoo Messenger, AIM, etc, which allow you to talk to someone using VoIP be regulated the same way, and be on the same fee schedule?
This is another case (like the RIAA) of technology rendering certain cash-cow business models obsolete. These industries and the FCC/government (via tax revenue and fees) are accustomed to raking in cash for providing a service whose infrastructure is not only outdated but insufficient in many cases.
I think for the first time in history we are seeing capitalism getting in the way of progress.
IE6 does do a good job with standards-compliant HTML.
The problem is it's often too lenient, letting you get away with missing closing tags, not-quite-right JavsScript, and providing some features not found in any other browser (<marquee>, anyone?)
Very good point. Just because your browser renders the page as intended doesn't automatically mean that navigation will be intuitive, or that the user will stick around.
You mean it's not enough to make sure it works in IE6 on Windows XP??
I wish more web "developers" were concerned with standards. Not only does it make their job easier, it makes it easier to use their sites (assuming the browser developers are equally concerned with standards).
You'd think that venture capitalists would have gotten smarter (and pickier) about where they throw their money.
This sounds like giving the neighborhood bully some money so he can invest in a nice aluminum bat to make it easier to collect from the rest of the kids.
Since I have car insurance, does that mean I am admitting that I am a bad driver? No, it just means that I need to protect my own ass from various idiots and greedy a-holes (ie, SCO).
So if I offer my personal security services to young college girls who don't want to be raped, does that imply that the girls who DON'T hire me WANT to be raped?
Not quite apples and oranges, because many (dare I say MOST) Windows machines are not behind a firewall, especially when you're talking about the targeted "naive" users.
They're sitting on their home PC, downloading pr0n while Osama is using their fat cable pipe to clone MP3's. Damn hackers/music thieves/terrorists/Muslim extremists! Damn them all!
To my knowledge, Windows worms don't attack a specific server. They just try to spread themselves as fast as they want to using whatever means is available to them (email, RPC, etc).
Launching a DDOS attack or attempting to hack a server has nothing to do with worms.
Slashdot Mirror
Crippling attachments? Not really... you are still able to send and open anything your Exchange server allows.
What DRM is in Outlook?
I use the Outlook Web Client in Mozilla Firebird. Works just fine. Next time you need to say "probably", you probably should do some research first.
Fanning is a script kiddie? I didn't realize Napster was written in VBScript... Ah, hyperbole at its worst.
I think the word you're looking for is OXYMORON.
Nothing like a good old conflict of interest! Some people are just douchebags...
Actually, you can use a Tivo without paying the monthly (or lifetime) fee. You don't get the program guides, season pass functionality, and suggestions, but it works as well as a VCR when you schedule to record at a date/time/duration (without tapes), and still lets you pause and replay live TV.
The monthly/lifetime fee gets you the premium services, which are all based on having the program guide available. Well worth the cost, IMO.
AVG antivirus (free)
ZoneAlarm (free for personal use)
Mozilla Firebird (free, tabbed browser, blocks popups, not IE, etc)
Mozilla Thunderbird (free email client)
OpenOffice (yep, it's free)
WinAmp (hmm, also free)
CDEx (free, open-source CD ripping and conversion)
IM client of choice (AIM,Yahoo,etc) or a try-to-do-it-all like Trillian
No, that means that commercial, networked use requires a paid license.
Co... mur.... shull?? Speak English, man!
You make a good point, that the responsibility/blame really falls on the gov't in this case because it's ultimately their decision. However, do you think they would have come to the same conclusion (or even considered the issue in the first place) if the monopolies running the show weren't in their pockets and bitching that their profits were in the shitter?
If they need to resort to anticompetitive practices like raising the barriers to entry, I think that's a strong case that their business model is obsolete. I would compare this with saying that everyone who uses public transit to commute to work still has to pay the tolls that would have applied if they drove on the highway.
How do extra taxes/fees protect us from wiretaps and fraud, and ensure any privacy?
Will IM clients like Yahoo Messenger, AIM, etc, which allow you to talk to someone using VoIP be regulated the same way, and be on the same fee schedule? This is another case (like the RIAA) of technology rendering certain cash-cow business models obsolete. These industries and the FCC/government (via tax revenue and fees) are accustomed to raking in cash for providing a service whose infrastructure is not only outdated but insufficient in many cases. I think for the first time in history we are seeing capitalism getting in the way of progress.
IE6 does do a good job with standards-compliant HTML.
The problem is it's often too lenient, letting you get away with missing closing tags, not-quite-right JavsScript, and providing some features not found in any other browser (<marquee>, anyone?)
Very good point. Just because your browser renders the page as intended doesn't automatically mean that navigation will be intuitive, or that the user will stick around.
Standards aren't for pussies. Weiners are for pussies. Standards are for those of us who aren't weiners, but possibly have one.
You mean it's not enough to make sure it works in IE6 on Windows XP?? I wish more web "developers" were concerned with standards. Not only does it make their job easier, it makes it easier to use their sites (assuming the browser developers are equally concerned with standards).
But there's STILL no cure for cancer. /old fark standby
You'd think that venture capitalists would have gotten smarter (and pickier) about where they throw their money. This sounds like giving the neighborhood bully some money so he can invest in a nice aluminum bat to make it easier to collect from the rest of the kids.
At least I wasn't the only one... This Wednesday on Fox: When Web Designers Attack!
Since I have car insurance, does that mean I am admitting that I am a bad driver? No, it just means that I need to protect my own ass from various idiots and greedy a-holes (ie, SCO).
So if I offer my personal security services to young college girls who don't want to be raped, does that imply that the girls who DON'T hire me WANT to be raped?
Not quite apples and oranges, because many (dare I say MOST) Windows machines are not behind a firewall, especially when you're talking about the targeted "naive" users. They're sitting on their home PC, downloading pr0n while Osama is using their fat cable pipe to clone MP3's. Damn hackers/music thieves/terrorists/Muslim extremists! Damn them all!
Exactly what I was thinking. Sounds to me like a double-standard. By the way, girl-on-girl is awesome. Man-on-man: SICK!
To my knowledge, Windows worms don't attack a specific server. They just try to spread themselves as fast as they want to using whatever means is available to them (email, RPC, etc). Launching a DDOS attack or attempting to hack a server has nothing to do with worms.