I'm currently in the market for a DVR, and was looking into this exact function. Haven't been able to find any info about yanking programs off the tivo, though. In fact the tivocommunity.com message boards appear to have explicit prohibition against even discussing the topic on that site. A (brief) google search hasn't turned up much yet. Any advice on where to look for HOWTOs?
Also, you mention the TurboNet card. Is the same possible using a USB network card on a series 2 tivo?
I wonder if the quicken errors you're seeing are a result of Quicken's seemingly tight integration with IE for page views. How well does IE run on Crossover Office?
I may be completely off base here. Anyone that know's better, please speak up.
I typically receive about 750 spams a week. The combination of SpamAssasin on the mail server and the new Junk Mail controls in Moz. 1.3 have nearly eliminated the amount of junk mail that shows up in my Inbox. No false positives so far, and I haven't had a spam in my inbox in two days.
Please start your ISP so that I can sign up for the Tier 3 service. It's much cheaper than the $225/month my company is paying to covad for the 384KB SDSL connection at my house.
Let me get this straight: You attempted to contact copyright holders, and when you didn't receive a response from them, you assumed it was okay to continue to offer their works for download? In other words:
Dear Copyright Holder:
We are offering your works for download on the internet for free. If you would like to Opt-Out of this arrangement, please let us know by clicking the link below. Otherwise we will continue to offer this service, even though we don't actually have your permission.
Yeah, that would probably work, and Ford would be happy that he could still get the latest version of OOo. But it reduces the usability of the server, don't you think? And to stop the server from being spidered by the BSA? Better to send them a letter back saying "you f**ked up, now leave us alone or we'll sue you" than to go to all the trouble of setting up a new ftp server.
All you'd have to do to get around that is set up your own, private, search engine. That is, rather than having your spiders searching for a specific file, you have it search for everything, put the info in a db, and search the resulting db for specific files. Technically, you haven't spidered the site for a specific file.
Okay, here's the part I don't understand - how do they end up losing money on the lines they lease out to the CLECs? If (as another poster has postulated) they were required to lease to a CLEC at the same cost they lease to their DSL subsidiary, how could they have lost money?
I'm not being deliberately obtuse - I work in the mortage industry, so don't really understand the economics of the telecom industry.
"Without all this overregulation, Pacific Bell would have been able to implement "Fasttrack" DSL (Now called Project Pronto, it's the DSL on fiber infrastructure project which was supposed to put DSL in every pac bell home by 2002) already and everyone would be able to get DSL. THAT would be the point to start talking about forcing them to resell capacity, not now, and certainly not when you forced the issue in the first place."
I'm on the east coast, so am not familiar with PacBell issues. What was it about the regulations that prevented PacBell from deploying their "Fasttrack" service?
"An early version of this manual was allegedly made available to Linux developers once a Confidential Disclosure Agreement was signed (Sun's version of a Non-Disclosure Agreement), however no such offer has been made to the OpenBSD team, an offer that if made is likely counter to the project's goals."
I agree that Theo probably wouldn't want to agree to the terms of the NDA, but we don't know what he'll actually do, because, according to the article, the offer hasn't been made to him (or the OpenBSD project).
Just curious - did you follow up w/ him to see *why* he thought you signed up to receive the spam? Is it possible that you inadvertantly allowed them to send you spam the last time you renewed your driver's license? I ask because most of the spams I get say "you signed up with one our partner sites" and i've always wanted to (but have been too lazy to) go back and see how far up the chain I could get.
Of course, the trick with filesharing is how to validate that both the person making the mp3s and the one downloading them actually have the CD.
I don't think you can, because there's no easy way for you to prevent someone from being "validated" as owning the cd, downloading the mp3s, then selling/giving away the cd to someone who repeats the process. I suppose it could work if each individual cd had some sort of unique identifier - not like the cddb identifier, but one that identified *each disk* as a unique copy of that cd - that would limit you to one download/burn of the mp3s, but that seems awfully cumbersome, and fraught with problems.
No, but it's illegal for people to allow you to download it from them, so it amounts to the same thing.
Okay, that's the part I don't get. Why is it illegal for you to let me download an mp3 of a song I already own? Let's say that you & I both own a copy of, say, "Appetite for Destruction" and you've ripped it and I haven't. What difference does it make whether you send me the mp3s or I rip it myself? In the end, we both have the CD, and we both have a set of mp3s made from the CD.
My apologies if this is a rehash of old discussions. I got the wife an mp3 player for christmas, so this issue is suddenly on my mind.
I could be wrong, but I thought the issue there was that mp3.com made "unauthorized" copies of the songs and was profiting from the (according to RIAA) illegal distribution of said songs.
If that's the case, then that's a lot different than me downloading a copy of a song I already own.
What if I own the CD and am too lazy/unable to rip it myself, but want to listen to it on my PC? If I *only* download mp3s of songs from CDs that I actually own, is that illegal?
... he saw that some of the checkboxes to receive spam were not selected, so he *assumed* that all of the checkboxes were not selected? Hmmm. My grandma had one piece of advice when it came to assuming:
DON'T!
And BTW, someone who reads/posts to lawmeme ought to know better.
Re:And here's the crux of the matter...
on
The Humane Environment
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Actually, as anyone who has had a child can attest, the nipple is not intuitive. The breastfeeding process has to be learned both by the mother, and the child.
Now, maybe you weren't referring to breastfeeding, in which case I may agree with you....;)
Slashdot Mirror
Cool. Thanks for the info. I'll check it out.
Would you supply more details about how you are doing this? I'm interested in the same thing.
I'm currently in the market for a DVR, and was looking into this exact function. Haven't been able to find any info about yanking programs off the tivo, though. In fact the tivocommunity.com message boards appear to have explicit prohibition against even discussing the topic on that site. A (brief) google search hasn't turned up much yet. Any advice on where to look for HOWTOs?
Also, you mention the TurboNet card. Is the same possible using a USB network card on a series 2 tivo?
I wonder if the quicken errors you're seeing are a result of Quicken's seemingly tight integration with IE for page views. How well does IE run on Crossover Office?
I may be completely off base here. Anyone that know's better, please speak up.
I typically receive about 750 spams a week. The combination of SpamAssasin on the mail server and the new Junk Mail controls in Moz. 1.3 have nearly eliminated the amount of junk mail that shows up in my Inbox. No false positives so far, and I haven't had a spam in my inbox in two days.
Just a quick FYI. You do not need to be a subscriber to get the C&H strips. They've been running for a copule of years now.
Please start your ISP so that I can sign up for the Tier 3 service. It's much cheaper than the $225/month my company is paying to covad for the 384KB SDSL connection at my house.
Let me get this straight: You attempted to contact copyright holders, and when you didn't receive a response from them, you assumed it was okay to continue to offer their works for download? In other words:
Dear Copyright Holder:
We are offering your works for download on the internet for free. If you would like to Opt-Out of this arrangement, please let us know by clicking the link below. Otherwise we will continue to offer this service, even though we don't actually have your permission.
Cheers,
The WoS team.
Yeah, that would probably work, and Ford would be happy that he could still get the latest version of OOo. But it reduces the usability of the server, don't you think? And to stop the server from being spidered by the BSA? Better to send them a letter back saying "you f**ked up, now leave us alone or we'll sue you" than to go to all the trouble of setting up a new ftp server.
All you'd have to do to get around that is set up your own, private, search engine. That is, rather than having your spiders searching for a specific file, you have it search for everything, put the info in a db, and search the resulting db for specific files. Technically, you haven't spidered the site for a specific file.
Okay, here's the part I don't understand - how do they end up losing money on the lines they lease out to the CLECs? If (as another poster has postulated) they were required to lease to a CLEC at the same cost they lease to their DSL subsidiary, how could they have lost money?
I'm not being deliberately obtuse - I work in the mortage industry, so don't really understand the economics of the telecom industry.
"Without all this overregulation, Pacific Bell would have been able to implement "Fasttrack" DSL (Now called Project Pronto, it's the DSL on fiber infrastructure project which was supposed to put DSL in every pac bell home by 2002) already and everyone would be able to get DSL. THAT would be the point to start talking about forcing them to resell capacity, not now, and certainly not when you forced the issue in the first place." I'm on the east coast, so am not familiar with PacBell issues. What was it about the regulations that prevented PacBell from deploying their "Fasttrack" service?
Um, RTFA:
"An early version of this manual was allegedly made available to Linux developers once a Confidential Disclosure Agreement was signed (Sun's version of a Non-Disclosure Agreement), however no such offer has been made to the OpenBSD team, an offer that if made is likely counter to the project's goals."
I agree that Theo probably wouldn't want to agree to the terms of the NDA, but we don't know what he'll actually do, because, according to the article, the offer hasn't been made to him (or the OpenBSD project).
I would imagine that Google would delete the "offending" pages from their cache when presented with a request by the DOD to do so.
Just curious - did you follow up w/ him to see *why* he thought you signed up to receive the spam? Is it possible that you inadvertantly allowed them to send you spam the last time you renewed your driver's license? I ask because most of the spams I get say "you signed up with one our partner sites" and i've always wanted to (but have been too lazy to) go back and see how far up the chain I could get.
Okay, I get it now.
Of course, the trick with filesharing is how to validate that both the person making the mp3s and the one downloading them actually have the CD.
I don't think you can, because there's no easy way for you to prevent someone from being "validated" as owning the cd, downloading the mp3s, then selling/giving away the cd to someone who repeats the process. I suppose it could work if each individual cd had some sort of unique identifier - not like the cddb identifier, but one that identified *each disk* as a unique copy of that cd - that would limit you to one download/burn of the mp3s, but that seems awfully cumbersome, and fraught with problems.
No, but it's illegal for people to allow you to download it from them, so it amounts to the same thing.
Okay, that's the part I don't get. Why is it illegal for you to let me download an mp3 of a song I already own? Let's say that you & I both own a copy of, say, "Appetite for Destruction" and you've ripped it and I haven't. What difference does it make whether you send me the mp3s or I rip it myself? In the end, we both have the CD, and we both have a set of mp3s made from the CD.
My apologies if this is a rehash of old discussions. I got the wife an mp3 player for christmas, so this issue is suddenly on my mind.
I could be wrong, but I thought the issue there was that mp3.com made "unauthorized" copies of the songs and was profiting from the (according to RIAA) illegal distribution of said songs.
If that's the case, then that's a lot different than me downloading a copy of a song I already own.
What if I own the CD and am too lazy/unable to rip it myself, but want to listen to it on my PC? If I *only* download mp3s of songs from CDs that I actually own, is that illegal?
... he saw that some of the checkboxes to receive spam were not selected, so he *assumed* that all of the checkboxes were not selected? Hmmm. My grandma had one piece of advice when it came to assuming:
DON'T!
And BTW, someone who reads/posts to lawmeme ought to know better.
Actually, as anyone who has had a child can attest, the nipple is not intuitive. The breastfeeding process has to be learned both by the mother, and the child.
;)
Now, maybe you weren't referring to breastfeeding, in which case I may agree with you....
The random quotation at the bottom of the comments when I first read this story was:
"He's dead, Jim."
Kinda cool, I thought.
Dude, switch to decaf.
I know OOo has compression, not sure about Staroffice.
Actually, *all* of the MS Word Docs i've converted to OOo format have ended up smaller.