i certainly hope ms. jones (owner of katie.com) doesn't give in and further, i really hope that there's an attorney out there who will step up and defend her property.
this is no different than a company advertising their new business at 123 main st. and you happen to live at 123 main st.
it's been a while since i've had a physics course but isn't everything, including light, magnetic fields, and radio waves, affected by gravity in some way?
but since it's a windows machine at rest perhaps it'd be best if it were acted upon by an outside force...say a hammer?
okay...valid point and i think we all agree that stealing from innocent people is a wrong/bad thing but i host a local musicians exchange board and i'll tell you right off that i beat on doors and i scrounge for my advertising.
i don't rely on companies who have questionable practices to take a cut of my money.
and secondly...i also think that almost all users who block doubleclick ads do so not out of ill will to the site owner but as an almost feeble effort to keep doubleclick's cookies off of our pc's.
as consumers, we've really never had to worry much about formats other than vhs or beta, cd or cassette, and paper or plastic.
but now as companies look for their niche in the media markets, they are creating proprietary devices which will only work with their licensed media.
sony is doing this, apple has done this, and there is one other who's name escapes me.
now more than ever, the end user is going to have to take a long careful look at hardware before they buy it to make sure that the media they put into it will be able to be played.
this is not a bug.
tivo needs users on it's newer models so they can better harvest data on viewers watching habits.
i'm sure the type 2 has the ability to gather more data and keep users from personalizing their machines.
i'm sure they are trying out this "bug" on the directv users first to get a feel for the response to the "problem" and then they will go in for the kill once they know about what percentage of boxes they will have to eventually pay for.
that's why you should build your own pvr to prevent your corporate big brother from peering over your shoulder.
m$ creates a product...albeit a not solid one, which allows the user to interact with their pc's hardware.
the ultimate responsibility lies with the consumer.
it is afterall, their pc. it is their choice not to read about how to properly use and secure it and ultimately, they choose to remain uninformed about it's potential.
that's what's been missing from this equation...responsible computer ownership.
a person shouldn't expect to take a pc home, plug it in, and it does everything on its own...even if its capable of it.
they should learn how to use and update their security software, how to download and install third party software and they should take the time to read the agreements that come with the software that they are using.
my point is simply this...microsoft is responsible for some of the problems users experience but consumers are responsible for what happens on their machines.
and if they don't want to know...then perhaps they shouldn't have one.
ah...programming in assembly on the old vax. how i miss it.
64 bit words...outputting the data to the laser printers...
i miss changing disks....disk$A1:username and using the menu system one of our grad students created to make it easier for incoming freshman...sigh...then the whole school moved over to nt4 and nothing was the same after that.
inflated figures, misrepresenting the amount of product duplicated, overpriced product, and the ridiculous notion that everyone who uses the product would've bought a legit copy.
look...these guys lie about these figures.
they have no real idea about how much software was duplicated.
the formula used to come up with these figures thinks that every copy downloaded would've have been paid at retail price and finally...
80% of the people who download pirated software would never buy it in the first place.
that's the same argument the RIAA had and it's just as false now as it was then.
true but in this case, the court may be seeing the ip as a unique identifier which is uniquely identifying an individual or service.
i haven't read the judge's opinion yet so i cannot ascertain what he's using as his guide.
but i still think this is his way of passing the buck to a higher court.
this falls right into line with the new "take your number with you" initiative.
think about it...
it can be argued that some folks are associated with their ip address (i know it's a bad argument but it can be argued just the same) and as such it stands to reason that the individual should be allowed to carry that ip with him.
is it relevant that the net's infrastructure is not designed for this...yes.
but my thinking is that this judge is just agreeing with the plaintiff in order to let an appeals court (and higher minds) take a stab at this because the plaintiff may not have the means to file and pursue an appeal however an isp is more likely to have the resources and eventually the backing (from other isps and the net community) to challenge this ruling.
"The real good stuff comes in the form of a clean and fast interface, being able to use Google search on your mail, threaded display of your messages, having webmail that doesn't blast you with intrusive ads, and so on."
this is so true...i'm sick of yahoo mail's reliance on doubleclick for ads. i have doubleclick blocked via a hosts file and via privacy blockers.
since i don't allow doubleclick on my pc, the yahoo mail page doesn't display properly and i cannot delete, forward, move, or do much else with that page...except refresh and hope or flat out leave it.
anything from ms...i don't trust. there has got to be something in it for them.
they are not going to spend their dollars and create something like this for the good of the net.
it's just not the ms way.
i have complained...my congressman and senator both strongly support these technologies because their advisors tell them that it's a good thing.
and my congressman's aid went a step further and asked me why i was so opposed to these technologies which protect our entertainment industry from piracy and theft.
i tried to explained because it infringes on my rights as a consumer to which i was told...don't buy the product.
which i thought was absolutely brilliant but there are some products i need to do my job and it's getting to where you cannot buy a product now that doesn't have some sort of drm built into it.
is that fact that the consumer holds no rights over anything anymore.
we have the right to buy the product and that's pretty much it.
when you buy a new car, there is a black box in it that records what you do and it's built into the cars computer systems and cannot be removed. to remove it not only voids your warranty, it renders the car useless.
cd's and dvd's are being made only to play on industry approved machines.
thanks to backwards lawmaking...industry tells the consumer what to do with their product much in the same way a home-owners association can tell you what you can and cannot do with your home.
the only way to fix it is to remove the whole of congress with new elected officials and that's not likely to happen.
so i reckon that we should get used to it.
well if notice something...the chinese gov't doesn't like outside sites and has banned them.
the chinese gov't controls the isps.
the isps host the spam and the emails (not always but bare with me).
doesn't it make sense that this the chinese gov't way of getting the rest of the world to block connections from china?
think about it...if we had a way of blocking all chinese telecoms/isps listed by email and also the ones host the spam-vertised sites, you would effectively be doing the job that the chinese gov't has been wanting...a total blockage of outside information.
it has made an impact on my spam-filled box.
i've watched my spam count drop by about half when they arrested those spammers up in michigan last month or the month before...i forget.
but anyhow...it has helped.
Slashdot Mirror
that air conditioning and a lunch break are not considered perks
how utterly irresponsible of penguin.
this is a case of a marketing dept gone haywire.
i certainly hope ms. jones (owner of katie.com) doesn't give in and further, i really hope that there's an attorney out there who will step up and defend her property.
this is no different than a company advertising their new business at 123 main st. and you happen to live at 123 main st.
actually an idea is nothing more than a chemical reaction in your brain which sends electrical impulses.
those electrical pulses and the chemicals which triggered them all have mass and are acted upon by gravity, regardless of how small they may be.
even though the concept or idea itself is abstract the fundamental blocks which triggered it are elemental and thus subject to the laws of gravity.
i beg to differ...
it's been a while since i've had a physics course but isn't everything, including light, magnetic fields, and radio waves, affected by gravity in some way?
but since it's a windows machine at rest perhaps it'd be best if it were acted upon by an outside force...say a hammer?
okay...valid point and i think we all agree that stealing from innocent people is a wrong/bad thing but i host a local musicians exchange board and i'll tell you right off that i beat on doors and i scrounge for my advertising.
i don't rely on companies who have questionable practices to take a cut of my money.
and secondly...i also think that almost all users who block doubleclick ads do so not out of ill will to the site owner but as an almost feeble effort to keep doubleclick's cookies off of our pc's.
as consumers, we've really never had to worry much about formats other than vhs or beta, cd or cassette, and paper or plastic.
but now as companies look for their niche in the media markets, they are creating proprietary devices which will only work with their licensed media.
sony is doing this, apple has done this, and there is one other who's name escapes me.
now more than ever, the end user is going to have to take a long careful look at hardware before they buy it to make sure that the media they put into it will be able to be played.
okay...but if you add a messina...you gotta add a loggins.
they just go together.
(those who remember 70's musical groups will remember this one)
this is not a bug. tivo needs users on it's newer models so they can better harvest data on viewers watching habits. i'm sure the type 2 has the ability to gather more data and keep users from personalizing their machines. i'm sure they are trying out this "bug" on the directv users first to get a feel for the response to the "problem" and then they will go in for the kill once they know about what percentage of boxes they will have to eventually pay for. that's why you should build your own pvr to prevent your corporate big brother from peering over your shoulder.
one bad malloc can destroy the world
m$ creates a product...albeit a not solid one, which allows the user to interact with their pc's hardware.
the ultimate responsibility lies with the consumer.
it is afterall, their pc. it is their choice not to read about how to properly use and secure it and ultimately, they choose to remain uninformed about it's potential.
that's what's been missing from this equation...responsible computer ownership.
a person shouldn't expect to take a pc home, plug it in, and it does everything on its own...even if its capable of it.
they should learn how to use and update their security software, how to download and install third party software and they should take the time to read the agreements that come with the software that they are using.
my point is simply this...microsoft is responsible for some of the problems users experience but consumers are responsible for what happens on their machines.
and if they don't want to know...then perhaps they shouldn't have one.
ah...programming in assembly on the old vax. how i miss it.
64 bit words...outputting the data to the laser printers...
i miss changing disks....disk$A1:username and
using the menu system one of our grad students created to make it easier for incoming freshman...sigh...then the whole school moved over to nt4 and nothing was the same after that.
inflated figures, misrepresenting the amount of product duplicated, overpriced product, and the ridiculous notion that everyone who uses the product would've bought a legit copy. look...these guys lie about these figures. they have no real idea about how much software was duplicated. the formula used to come up with these figures thinks that every copy downloaded would've have been paid at retail price and finally... 80% of the people who download pirated software would never buy it in the first place. that's the same argument the RIAA had and it's just as false now as it was then.
i never will lose my job over such ridiculousness.
my company is the cheapest that there is...heck...we have to bring in our own pens....
but i have told my employer that i pay for my cell and they have no right to call it.
i have my own servers and my own net connections and since i pay for them, i don't do company work over them.
and i don't want a pager/blackberry. my wireless phone has text messaging capabilities but i haven't given them that info either...
i've been here for five years and i'm a key figure.
hey...if they was me to respond afterhours, then they need to make it worth my while.
true but in this case, the court may be seeing the ip as a unique identifier which is uniquely identifying an individual or service. i haven't read the judge's opinion yet so i cannot ascertain what he's using as his guide. but i still think this is his way of passing the buck to a higher court.
this falls right into line with the new "take your number with you" initiative. think about it... it can be argued that some folks are associated with their ip address (i know it's a bad argument but it can be argued just the same) and as such it stands to reason that the individual should be allowed to carry that ip with him. is it relevant that the net's infrastructure is not designed for this...yes. but my thinking is that this judge is just agreeing with the plaintiff in order to let an appeals court (and higher minds) take a stab at this because the plaintiff may not have the means to file and pursue an appeal however an isp is more likely to have the resources and eventually the backing (from other isps and the net community) to challenge this ruling.
"The real good stuff comes in the form of a clean and fast interface, being able to use Google search on your mail, threaded display of your messages, having webmail that doesn't blast you with intrusive ads, and so on." this is so true...i'm sick of yahoo mail's reliance on doubleclick for ads. i have doubleclick blocked via a hosts file and via privacy blockers. since i don't allow doubleclick on my pc, the yahoo mail page doesn't display properly and i cannot delete, forward, move, or do much else with that page...except refresh and hope or flat out leave it.
the downside to this program is that you have to use the all-intrusive real player.
YEA!!!
anything from ms...i don't trust. there has got to be something in it for them.
they are not going to spend their dollars and create something like this for the good of the net.
it's just not the ms way.
i have complained...my congressman and senator both strongly support these technologies because their advisors tell them that it's a good thing. and my congressman's aid went a step further and asked me why i was so opposed to these technologies which protect our entertainment industry from piracy and theft. i tried to explained because it infringes on my rights as a consumer to which i was told...don't buy the product. which i thought was absolutely brilliant but there are some products i need to do my job and it's getting to where you cannot buy a product now that doesn't have some sort of drm built into it.
is that fact that the consumer holds no rights over anything anymore. we have the right to buy the product and that's pretty much it. when you buy a new car, there is a black box in it that records what you do and it's built into the cars computer systems and cannot be removed. to remove it not only voids your warranty, it renders the car useless. cd's and dvd's are being made only to play on industry approved machines. thanks to backwards lawmaking...industry tells the consumer what to do with their product much in the same way a home-owners association can tell you what you can and cannot do with your home. the only way to fix it is to remove the whole of congress with new elected officials and that's not likely to happen. so i reckon that we should get used to it.
well if notice something...the chinese gov't doesn't like outside sites and has banned them.
the chinese gov't controls the isps.
the isps host the spam and the emails (not always but bare with me).
doesn't it make sense that this the chinese gov't way of getting the rest of the world to block connections from china?
think about it...if we had a way of blocking all chinese telecoms/isps listed by email and also the ones host the spam-vertised sites, you would effectively be doing the job that the chinese gov't has been wanting...a total blockage of outside information.
it has made an impact on my spam-filled box. i've watched my spam count drop by about half when they arrested those spammers up in michigan last month or the month before...i forget. but anyhow...it has helped.
and sure enough...100% of the websites spam-vertised in my daily deluge are hosted in either china or korea.