I don't agree that the company should be held liable. It is the actions of the MPAA and RIAA which cause precedence in the courts to hold the company liable if they don't have a policy and take action to prevent file sharing.
You can't explain away fiscal irresponsibility. What the Government did in the Clinton era is force fiscal irresponsibility on Fannie and Freddie. In other words they forced them to have a certain percentage of loans to low income applicants. These were the first loans to default and get foreclosed upon. It doesn't account for the entire problem. It actually was much larger and did include private companies who were greedy. But the kick-start of this problem was the enforcement of bad business practices upon the big lenders by the federal government under the Clinton Administration.
I just bought an iPrism to block P2P protocols at work. The reason is that it is a potential legal liability for the company if employees are downloading movies at work and the company does nothing to stop it. I also blocked most video websites to save on bandwidth.
However this filtering is not about productivity. I actually explicitly allowed sports websites among other things. People need to give their brain a rest sometimes as long as they know how to balance that then everything is fine.
I agree. Sadly the Apple fanboys got to your post and moded you down. I'll never pay the Apple premium. It just doesn't get you as much as it should. You get a PC and you can put Linux on it or XP or that godforsaken Vista but the choice is yours. Not Apple's.
Nobody pays retail! You go down to your local community college and register for a class which will cost you like $90 and then you save almost 50% off the retail price of Creative Suite.
I don't program SIP phones so I don't know exactly what that means. I do know that out phones work behind a NAT. They also function even better if you use a device like an EdgeMarc router which handles some of the functions like the phones registering with the system.
Inbound and Outbound traffic is an important concept to understand even if all devices were with public IP addresses but behind a firewall? Know why? Malware! It tends to infect machines and SPAM. So knowing this I can stop all outbound port 25 traffic from everything except certain IP addresses on my router. Doesn't matter if the IPs are public or not.
Second of all, I agree life without NAT would be easier but your analogy doesn't hold up to scrutiny. I still do business and get along just fine with NAT. Life goes on. It doesn't break anything. It just adds some hurdles I have to jump over.
The basic argument is that it never rained before the flood. The theory being that some force of nature prevented precipitation before that time or God prevented it.
This is Slashdot. Do you realize that if I had to answer every skeptic on here I would never sleep, eat or leave my desk for months and still not finish? I can't force you to see God's existence. You have to seek him yourself. I can only point you in the right direction.
Actually I have two SMTP servers behind NAT. Both send out but only one received email and the it's routed to the other one when needed. I could set it up for both to receive if I wanted though because I have an extra IP address and my router supports passing more then one IP address and port combination through.
Slashdot Mirror
Both parties are to blame. Don't be so blind as to not see that.
I don't agree that the company should be held liable. It is the actions of the MPAA and RIAA which cause precedence in the courts to hold the company liable if they don't have a policy and take action to prevent file sharing.
If you would learn how to read I just said it was the Government's fault? Geeze.
You can't explain away fiscal irresponsibility. What the Government did in the Clinton era is force fiscal irresponsibility on Fannie and Freddie. In other words they forced them to have a certain percentage of loans to low income applicants. These were the first loans to default and get foreclosed upon. It doesn't account for the entire problem. It actually was much larger and did include private companies who were greedy. But the kick-start of this problem was the enforcement of bad business practices upon the big lenders by the federal government under the Clinton Administration.
I was a joke. I know it is FUD.
Quick everybody call that number!
They don't even have beaks and claws. Didn't you hear? They genetically mutated the chickens to get rid of them.
So don't check the box.
Uhm, because there is a box you have to check to OPT-IN to the program to send them that information.
Somebody confused their Television terms with their Technical terms.
And yes you have to be fanatical to care about privacy THAT much.
Actually socialistic policies CAUSED the meltdown. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28714
I just bought an iPrism to block P2P protocols at work. The reason is that it is a potential legal liability for the company if employees are downloading movies at work and the company does nothing to stop it. I also blocked most video websites to save on bandwidth.
However this filtering is not about productivity. I actually explicitly allowed sports websites among other things. People need to give their brain a rest sometimes as long as they know how to balance that then everything is fine.
slap on some e-SATA ports and I'd call it ready for primetime.
I agree. Sadly the Apple fanboys got to your post and moded you down. I'll never pay the Apple premium. It just doesn't get you as much as it should. You get a PC and you can put Linux on it or XP or that godforsaken Vista but the choice is yours. Not Apple's.
Nobody pays retail! You go down to your local community college and register for a class which will cost you like $90 and then you save almost 50% off the retail price of Creative Suite.
That kind of defeats the purpose of an iMac. Just get a MacMini then.
What are you talking about. No they can't.
I used IPTABLES and wrote a custom rule.
iptables -I FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m iprange ! --src-range 192.168.1.251-192.168.1.253 -p tcp --dport 25 -j DROP
I don't program SIP phones so I don't know exactly what that means. I do know that out phones work behind a NAT. They also function even better if you use a device like an EdgeMarc router which handles some of the functions like the phones registering with the system.
Inbound and Outbound traffic is an important concept to understand even if all devices were with public IP addresses but behind a firewall? Know why? Malware! It tends to infect machines and SPAM. So knowing this I can stop all outbound port 25 traffic from everything except certain IP addresses on my router. Doesn't matter if the IPs are public or not.
Second of all, I agree life without NAT would be easier but your analogy doesn't hold up to scrutiny. I still do business and get along just fine with NAT. Life goes on. It doesn't break anything. It just adds some hurdles I have to jump over.
The basic argument is that it never rained before the flood. The theory being that some force of nature prevented precipitation before that time or God prevented it.
This is Slashdot. Do you realize that if I had to answer every skeptic on here I would never sleep, eat or leave my desk for months and still not finish? I can't force you to see God's existence. You have to seek him yourself. I can only point you in the right direction.
You are not taking into effect the orders of magnitude here. IPv6 has many orders of magnitude more addresses available to it.
Yes, please make some sense. What are you talking about?
Actually I have two SMTP servers behind NAT. Both send out but only one received email and the it's routed to the other one when needed. I could set it up for both to receive if I wanted though because I have an extra IP address and my router supports passing more then one IP address and port combination through.