WTF, man? It's about ISP contracts! How could this be any more about your rights online, unless you're taking that completely literally?
I don't regard contracts between two unequal parties quite the same as I would a contract between two individuals. If one can find a way to get out of paying this sneak-wrapped exit charges, one should. You're just maximizing return for your shareholder -- you. And don't worry, Baby Jesus doesn't really kill a kitten if you drop your ISP a month early.
Wow, I must be really ignorant, but because every school across the country seemingly pushes TI use in school, I didn't think people used anything else.
Back in the day when HP still made calculators, everyone else -- TI included -- played second fiddle. HPs were the premier pocket (or belt-loop pouch) calculator from the early Seventies to the mid nineties, more capable, more durable and more desirable than TI, Casio, or any other pretender.
Too bad they abandoned the market and now only sell rebranded units from Asia. Check http://www.hpmuseum.org/ for the complete history of the HP calculator.
A small dirigible is silent and I imagine you can make one pretty small given how lightweight today's surveillance tech is.
As cool as that would be, the lighter you get the more easily you can be carried away by a gust of wind. And the lift of a LTA craft varies with the cube of linear dimension. Otherwise, I'd welcome our zeppelin-riding overlords.
The answer is pretty clear. General purpose computers that can have software installed are a tool that must be monitored, controlled and administered. Giving one to a user and leaving them alone with it is a reciepe for disaster. Just like the disaster with spam, botnets and viruses we are seeing right now.
Your solution would take computers out of the hands of every non-expert user who didn't have a systems administrator handy. This would almost completely wipe out the home computer market. I don't disagree that your solution would be effective, but I doubt you could get too many parties (e.g. Dell, Microsoft, Aunt Betty) to accept the cost.
From your own link, wire-fraud necessarily includes, "to defraud, or for obtaining money or property."
Note the 'or' in the phrase. They could be seeking just to defraud. And "defraud", according to the dictionary, is "to deprive of a right, money, or property by fraud". So the losses could be rights, such as protection from self incrimination, or the security of ones papers and effects, that were being deprived by fraud.
I mean, just look at M$'s profits/revenues . . . they appear quite OK to me.
But how long can they coast? What are you looking forward to from Microsoft now? If you had WinXP, did you upgrade to Vista? Do you intend to? Or do you just figure your next Windows computer purchase (if any) will be the current incarnation of Windows? I can't think of an MS initiative that I just can't wait for. What have they even announced recently? Used to be that a product pre-announcement from would kill a small competitor that was working on the same technology. Even if the MS product never emerged from the mists of vapor.
It's not a jingle, it's actually a song by a japanese girl band called the "5 6 7 8's", and it existed long before the commercials. You can also hear it in the movie "Kill Bill".
And that's a cover of the song performed in the 50's by the Rock-A-Teens - no relation to a later band of the same name.
The internet is a packet-switched network designed for computers. ISDN is a circuit-switched network designed to carry calls. They are very different.
ISDN is packet-switched, and is designed to carry multiple types of data, not just calls. All data is carried by asynchronous "cells", as they are called by the guys with bell-shaped-heads. Each cell has a header, with routing information, and a payload of data. Yes, I've seen the Wikipedia article that claims otherwise.
Access, the company now stifling innovation with the dormant BeOS code, is also the Japanese mobile phone corporate giant that bought out PalmOS, lying about offering a smartphone running Linux with a PalmOS GUI/compatibility layer.
This is a good example of why we need a way to pry IP out of the hands of organizations that buy it just to stifle it. One could argue that Intellectual Property is just like any property and an owner can make use of it or not to its own pleasure. However, IP is different. IP not really something you own: it is a license (or privilege) to exclusive production. The term "Intellectual Property" itself is misleading, and cooked up to create the illusion that it is something to be owned like a tool, or a piece of land.
In fact, the U.S. Constitution (e.g.) clearly states the purpose for granting such privileges:
The Congress shall have Power . ..
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
This clearly illustrates the purpose of patents, trademarks and copyrights, which is to encourage publication or production of works and products for the benefit of all by giving the creator the ability to exclusively profit from their publication or production. It's a mutually beneficial deal, an agreement between the general public and creators of useful works. If the creator decides not to produce the protected work, then the public gains nothing. One doesn't get exclusive license just to sit on their discoveries. At some point of non-production, the protection should expire early.
Everyone seems to be missing the fact that this patent is of the type "[existing idea] but on the internet".
Their claim seems to be broader than just "Internet Protocol" -- which is part of what EFF objects to: the breadth of the claim.
From the summary and TFA:
Specifically, the claims describe a system that connects two parties where the receiving party does not need to have a computer or an Internet connection, but the call is routed in part through the Internet or any other 'public computer network'.
So, the Integrated Services Digital Network would fit that description.
Just so we're all clear, digital music player =/= iPod, paper tissue =/= Kleenex and self-adhesive bandage =/= Band-aid.
Although trademark dilution might seem to be a problem for their owners, Apple, Kimberly-Clark and Johnson & Johnson are crying all the way to the bank. I'll let them fight that battle, and I'll try to stop people from calling me 'Bob'.
Don't provide any information to the government you don't feel that you should. Common sense tells us that we have a government run amok. Private citizens should judge the law and resist injustice. The law can be wrong, and it's up to the people to change it.
It is not necessarily in your interests as a (scare quote) journalist (scare quote) to speak up. I can think of no better way than to get treated as a plant than to start narcing on you sources. Then what would get published?
I mean, the Slashdot editroll squad clearly don't, but I was wondering if you're aware that one of the traditional functions of an editor is to check reported stories for accuracy rather than just republishing them verbatim.
I took the liberty of checking this assertion for accuracy (at least in a Slashdot context) and I found this:
Now the Billboard editor's job should have been to check his/her reporter's story. But we're arguing about the accuracy of the Slashdot headline and summary here. To my thinking, they are accurate. The Billboard story really does say what the summary suggests. That makes the summary "accurate". It summarizes that to which it refers.
After reading this scenario I realised that if I saw a stray USB key I would just plug it in to see what was on it - and I would have fallen for the same trap as the bank employees
There's a Windows auto-run feature for USB drives? Great. Still, you gotta admire MS's foresight in making computer infection vectors that model the real-world microbe model. It sort of sucks that you can't put a CD or USB key or other medium in your PC to examine it (unless it's been in your possession since it was in raw-material form).
How is the RIAA attacking sites "participating in it's own campaign"? . . .
Zonk is missing on all cylinders today, why does he still get to be an editor?
How is it the editor's or submitter's fault that you disagree with the gist of TFA? The summary pretty accurately describes it. Take your beef up with billboard.com.
The thought that it would interfere with ground based systems is simply rediculous. What ground based systems? Other cell networks? No.
Perhaps "rediculous", but, yes, that is the valid concern.
There is no difference between being on the ground or in the air. And no -- there is NO problem with communicating with a cell tower several miles DOWN -- with nothing in your way except the airplane fuselage. You'd actually get pretty good reception. Antenna sensitivity is also a function of height (and how much is in the way).
One of the ways that cellular providers reuse the spectrum is by dividing the landscape into . . . "cells". There are arrays of antennas in these cells that communicate with the instruments in the area. Additional spectral efficiency is gained by subdividing the cells and only using the antenna array pointing in your direction to communicate with your phone. The landscape is modeled as a 2-d environment for these purposes. The cell networks take all this landscape into account when they deploy their systems. If you want to use an additional component of altitude to the mix, you'd need different antenna arrays and you'd need to re-layout the whole mess. For these reasons, the FCC does not allow cell phone use in planes, helicopters, balloons, etc. As you say, it's a straight shot from an airplane to cell towers below -- including towers that you couldn't "see" (radio-wise) if you were on the ground directly below.
Slashdot Mirror
WTF, man? It's about ISP contracts! How could this be any more about your rights online, unless you're taking that completely literally?
I don't regard contracts between two unequal parties quite the same as I would a contract between two individuals. If one can find a way to get out of paying this sneak-wrapped exit charges, one should. You're just maximizing return for your shareholder -- you. And don't worry, Baby Jesus doesn't really kill a kitten if you drop your ISP a month early.
Back in the day when HP still made calculators, everyone else -- TI included -- played second fiddle. HPs were the premier pocket (or belt-loop pouch) calculator from the early Seventies to the mid nineties, more capable, more durable and more desirable than TI, Casio, or any other pretender.
Too bad they abandoned the market and now only sell rebranded units from Asia. Check http://www.hpmuseum.org/ for the complete history of the HP calculator.
As cool as that would be, the lighter you get the more easily you can be carried away by a gust of wind. And the lift of a LTA craft varies with the cube of linear dimension. Otherwise, I'd welcome our zeppelin-riding overlords.
Uh, no, no, no. This is a tobacconist's.
Your solution would take computers out of the hands of every non-expert user who didn't have a systems administrator handy. This would almost completely wipe out the home computer market. I don't disagree that your solution would be effective, but I doubt you could get too many parties (e.g. Dell, Microsoft, Aunt Betty) to accept the cost.
Note the 'or' in the phrase. They could be seeking just to defraud. And "defraud", according to the dictionary, is "to deprive of a right, money, or property by fraud". So the losses could be rights, such as protection from self incrimination, or the security of ones papers and effects, that were being deprived by fraud.
Perhaps you can, but bugmenot isn't finding a good login for the latimes.com.
But how long can they coast? What are you looking forward to from Microsoft now? If you had WinXP, did you upgrade to Vista? Do you intend to? Or do you just figure your next Windows computer purchase (if any) will be the current incarnation of Windows? I can't think of an MS initiative that I just can't wait for. What have they even announced recently? Used to be that a product pre-announcement from would kill a small competitor that was working on the same technology. Even if the MS product never emerged from the mists of vapor.
And that's a cover of the song performed in the 50's by the Rock-A-Teens - no relation to a later band of the same name.
ISDN is packet-switched, and is designed to carry multiple types of data, not just calls. All data is carried by asynchronous "cells", as they are called by the guys with bell-shaped-heads. Each cell has a header, with routing information, and a payload of data. Yes, I've seen the Wikipedia article that claims otherwise.
Okay. What's the procedure for getting Internet service?
This is a good example of why we need a way to pry IP out of the hands of organizations that buy it just to stifle it. One could argue that Intellectual Property is just like any property and an owner can make use of it or not to its own pleasure. However, IP is different. IP not really something you own: it is a license (or privilege) to exclusive production. The term "Intellectual Property" itself is misleading, and cooked up to create the illusion that it is something to be owned like a tool, or a piece of land.
In fact, the U.S. Constitution (e.g.) clearly states the purpose for granting such privileges:
This clearly illustrates the purpose of patents, trademarks and copyrights, which is to encourage publication or production of works and products for the benefit of all by giving the creator the ability to exclusively profit from their publication or production. It's a mutually beneficial deal, an agreement between the general public and creators of useful works. If the creator decides not to produce the protected work, then the public gains nothing. One doesn't get exclusive license just to sit on their discoveries. At some point of non-production, the protection should expire early.
Their claim seems to be broader than just "Internet Protocol" -- which is part of what EFF objects to: the breadth of the claim.
From the summary and TFA:
So, the Integrated Services Digital Network would fit that description.
I think the problem is that the PO's already been signed, so the teachers would have to take their bonuses in iPods.
Although trademark dilution might seem to be a problem for their owners, Apple, Kimberly-Clark and Johnson & Johnson are crying all the way to the bank. I'll let them fight that battle, and I'll try to stop people from calling me 'Bob'.
It is not necessarily in your interests as a (scare quote) journalist (scare quote) to speak up. I can think of no better way than to get treated as a plant than to start narcing on you sources. Then what would get published?
Mmmmmmm . . . salty.
"Editing," I guess.
I took the liberty of checking this assertion for accuracy (at least in a Slashdot context) and I found this:
http://slashdot.org/faq/editorial.shtml#ed750
Now the Billboard editor's job should have been to check his/her reporter's story. But we're arguing about the accuracy of the Slashdot headline and summary here. To my thinking, they are accurate. The Billboard story really does say what the summary suggests. That makes the summary "accurate". It summarizes that to which it refers.
There's a Windows auto-run feature for USB drives? Great. Still, you gotta admire MS's foresight in making computer infection vectors that model the real-world microbe model. It sort of sucks that you can't put a CD or USB key or other medium in your PC to examine it (unless it's been in your possession since it was in raw-material form).
At least read TFA:
How is it the editor's or submitter's fault that you disagree with the gist of TFA? The summary pretty accurately describes it. Take your beef up with billboard.com.
Which part was the troll? The Diderot quote?
I don't know why you'd call Knight Rider, "B rated". It's campy and cheesy in retrospect, but it wasn't cheap or unpopular.
Perhaps "rediculous", but, yes, that is the valid concern.
One of the ways that cellular providers reuse the spectrum is by dividing the landscape into . . . "cells". There are arrays of antennas in these cells that communicate with the instruments in the area. Additional spectral efficiency is gained by subdividing the cells and only using the antenna array pointing in your direction to communicate with your phone. The landscape is modeled as a 2-d environment for these purposes. The cell networks take all this landscape into account when they deploy their systems. If you want to use an additional component of altitude to the mix, you'd need different antenna arrays and you'd need to re-layout the whole mess. For these reasons, the FCC does not allow cell phone use in planes, helicopters, balloons, etc. As you say, it's a straight shot from an airplane to cell towers below -- including towers that you couldn't "see" (radio-wise) if you were on the ground directly below.