Problem is, where can you make the designation of who left it open and not without encryption? Some will say "oh, I accidentally left it open". Router logs are not enabled by default and the people who know better typically have it encrypted already or some equivalent. Except that with this wacky ass law people would be sued for auto connecting, another example of some fine politics work as usual.
Yes, because nobody like FON might actually have a legitimate business out of that or anything, right? Or that systems tend to connect to wireless by default? Or what about places that offer free wireless such as a starbucks? Is it grab a coffee, surf the web, go to jail?
Not to be personally attacking you but come on dude. Any amount of logic should show the absence of logic from the MD.
Oh whups, that 5 second key, not so easy. That would be a very easily crackable form of wireless, yet again. More complicated types take more setup. Or, lets use your example. You saying you can sue someone taking one of the donuts you left out and/or that said person is a criminal?
Methods that would fool more people (and be more simple) = Mac address filtering. Someone will not be able to figure out why they simply can't connect to your router, etc.
I do agree we have different preferences and as said. No need to beat the already dead horse on that one.
Wikipedia indeed does have a similar number mentioned, although I wonder how many are because best buy automatically signs people up for rhapsody trials in their stores.
Other than artists I choose I pretty much stick to Pandora and try out music that is similar to my preferences when they suggest, and hit the bay up to see if an artist is worthwhile/worth contributing funds to. This is my form of listening streamed, and it's free with a lack of control (which was shoved down Pandoras throat if you read up on their press releases). So yeah, we have different preferences:) I don't want a collection, but if 10 years from now I want to look back on all my music I've listened to and play a shuffle to see what I liked back then and/or just enjoy, I intend to do that.
Nobody can say they don't have a music collection, it's just a matter of question of what form it's in. You have your own music collection, albeit somewhat mental on artist preference and not so much stored on data.
I meant to reply earlier, but I got a funky 550 error on my mobile device. I had a really long written thought out response.
First, I want to thank you for your reply. Rhapsody is exactly what I had been thinking of, I just didn't want to mention it because I forgot if it's even legit or not.
Your 2 million number, where exactly does this come from? I seem to remember rhapsody having problems getting people to sign up at first and I never tracked it after that because it seemed the same as napster and everywhere else. Sure, pay monthly, but when it stops you're cut off and you don't keep what you have let alone the DRM in the process. Lets face truth here. Just because the RIAA and other music industries refuse to change on this topic does not mean its a good way to do business.
Cable/satellite TV does not use that model. How can you compare a subscription service to music, to cable/satellite's on demand? They do it as a complementary part of their digital service. It does not encompass their entire service. Difference there.
Subscription is not a "less" version, its a "rental". I don't "buy" in order to "rent"....the two terms are contradictory. Consequently, the value that the music industries perceives on their music is not the same as my perceived value. Until this changes I will continue to send checks directly to artists and request them to just burn me a legit copy without labels, etc. I get pretty good responses doing this with major labels even.
We've all seen this before, and it doesn't work. Nobody wants to pay for all you can eat when it isn't. If you are paying monthly for permanent access to their entire library going forward, lets talk. I'd pay 100 bucks for that. But to pay 100 bucks to use it "unlimited" as long as you are DRM'd? No thanks.
The lowest Tier of comcast internet provided is 6mpbs, they do indeed cap at 750KB/s. The amount you mentioned is indeed correct, and the response the GP got is what is typical of comcast.
The issue at hand is whether they lose Section 230 immunity if they are filtering connections like this. And I hope to damn that they are, because if they aren't I'm going to have to convince whoever controls the infrastructure in my area to build up something other than comcast every single time.
It's not the skinning, its the sliding bar at the top of the screen that is similar to Mac OS style that you can view applications on (like an alt-tab replacement). Who cares about the rest? Specifically its called ObjectDock (a part of stardock). That's all I use. Not the rest of that bloated crap.
This is a well written post, full of awesome. May you get modded accordingly based on what you wrote:) I agree with you 100% completely. My job is for a nonprofit org (name not mentioned for privacy), but they are definitely in the same laid back camp as a university I can imagine (although slightly less educated folks on our side for certain). I envy working in an intellectually challenging place such as yours over my own, definitely:P
No, because the people I work with are retarded and/or have an exceedingly large amount of windows open at a time. Stardock is a lot more efficient to switch between a large quantity of programs than the "group similar icons" thing is, especially with autohide on for stardock.
Forget flashy, but it really does help a lot. We're talking an average of 25-75 windows open at the same time from 6-15 programs.
That shouldn't have been a troll from the AC. That would have been positive modding that should have gone on there.
He is right when he says "about fucking time", as that is exactly the verbiage that reflects on the problems we're having with indecency lately. Fleeting expletives are almost impossible to control and had it not been for "puritanical" views being shoved onto broadcast TV and radio, such wouldn't be a concern. It would also give radio a better selling point versus XM/Sirius as well, considering that one of the reasons people give XM/sirius it's business is that it's not filtered for political agendas nor for content/language.
At my work, the things I install "unauthorized" for myself and my coworkers which are 100% productivity:
Firefox Phrase Express (text macro program) Stardock Microsoft Powertools/toys (the one that gives you a screenshot of each app when you alt+tab).
None are "approved" but all the techs approve of it, because they know better.
None of them use any of what you mentioned. No RSS readers, no games, no funky screensavers, no weather spyware shit. Work is laid back enough to not care (many people just browse the web all day, I mean cmon I'm replying on slashdot), but most people don't push the slacking that far. Also, we're an enormous multibillion $ nonprofit corporation and what I am telling you is like...hmm, well its a worldwide company with thousands of employees. I've talked to the CEO and even he has admitted to having a preference for firefox over IE for example, even though the CIO hasn't officially or formally approved it.
I don't mean it to be ad hominem on this, but I will say you are making a pretty general bias here that is pretty generally not accurate.
I think I get what you mean...maybe. My knowledge of internet topology is limited but I am trying to improve it.
The issue here is not ping, but bandwith. Remember, latency isn't important on downloads. It's important on games and things that are real-time sensitive (so long as the latency isn't to an extreme). Even VOIP isn't that latency intensive, it's bandwith intensive. Same for youtube as well.
Ping/latency only really matters on realtime things. I could be wrong about VOIP, but I know for sure on downloads. Your attractiveness rating would be from the ISP perspective, not our own. You betcha they'd implement this at full priority because it would undercut our performance and raise their profits.
It would also be the opposite of net neutrality and kill off any competition who would unknowingly be slower simply because they get the "low priority" idea all over again. Suddenly you're not getting promised speeds and the excuse is "maybe it's their fault" from the ISP instead of "its actually our fault but we want you to bitch to them so that they pony up cash to us" in the same way that ESPN does it with ESPN360.
What about if a torrent has no seeds or leeches in any remotely local area?
This is why any "massive improvement" on this aspect makes me skeptical. We all know the reason they want to tie it to local is to save bandwidth costs using only their own uploaders basically which would slow speeds down astronomically. Overseas hosts that can do 300KB/s or more on an upload vs a local that can do a cap of 40KB/s. You decide.
I get where you're going, but see previous comment. Just because people don't like ratemycop (notably the officers) doesn't mean its bad. Internet is always going to have extremes and moderates. Who cares how skewed it is, its an early layout of the site.
It could end up something like yelp or digg or some sort of moderated system where its more reliable, but that's up to the site operator. Said site operator should not be responsible for the stuff posted on them (AKA DMCA230 clause- even if we are to get rid of DMCA one day this protection needs to be saved). It's not their fault if it becomes an "I hate cops, cops are pigs" site really, is it? Just because he allowed people to speak?
Cops have a sucky enough job because of the bureaucrats behind em, its not the cop fault. Doesn't mean the cop or the bureaucrats should be taken off of their responsibilities here....it's just rediculously hard to set up a working system to hold the bureaucrats responsible so far...they fight this to no end.
Hard to administer and think of what I just said about the police. Now apply that to any industry where it can be at risk and think of just how selectively entrenched (via influence) any large corrupt corporation would be? Plenty of times that influence goes both ways.
Not many people have the balls or the clout to get beyond that.
Beyond your slightly flameworthy "I love the UK regulations" humor (not meant to be ad hominem), I just wanted to say the US has the same idea. It's a three strikes rule for liquor, but it's a lot harsher out here. If someone has 2 strikes on a liquor license (where 3 = closed down), and you take over that bar, you just inherited 2 strikes.
To get a strike isn't as clearly defined but it's basically "being excessively negligable". A fight that breaks out in your bar that you take them outside will prevent a strike, but letting the bar explode into a brawl might not end up the same unless you did everything you could to break it up. Someone with a fake trying to get the bar shut down claiming they got drinks inside but are underage will not get you a strike (as its pretty common and there are ways to disprove this easily).
It's basically up to the cops and the locals who live near your bar physically. This is why US bars do their best to cater to cops, not for corruption but so that the cop won't have a negative bias which is typical of busy locations and/or big cities where bars are.
I've been looking to open a bar in Chicago and have been research the regulations for about 12 months now. The issue has never been the regulations for industries such as bars and private investigation. The issue is the corporations running rampant abusing people's rights and not following the regulations that are already in place.
However, 7000$ or a 4 year penalty is nothing, especially since you can't jail a corporation either. 70k per infraction might start to get their attention though.
From a legal perspective if you are helping a company file claims in court saying XYZ action is illegal, you need to have a legal backing for that. If you are not licensed to do so then you can't. It's called expert witness and what the requirements are. This is why not everyone can be an expert witness on some topic just because (and why Daubert hearings remove expert witnesses).
Basically unlike a non expert who anything they say is not taken as fact (which is why complaining to a judge on a traffic ticket still gets you guilty if you don't use the proper legal terms such as object, lack of evidence, etc).
This in fact is a huge deal. Also operating illegally when it comes to spying can carry some hefty fines in the US especially when it can be proven (remember they're suing saying they have evidence, so that level of "proof" becomes very easy to show - its like self incrimination but not a kind you can plead 5th amendment on).
As someone else posted is half the example, but I do get what you're saying.
Tell me though, what alternative is there to anything of the Mac line? I think if you said open source that would be the same as Windows in that argument. Or lets rephrase that: What alternatives have their been to Mac's monopoly like lock-in schemes? (Example: AT&T Iphone, Itunes). I don't seem to remember allofmp3 doing too well as of late as an example.
I'm not saying apple is a bad product, the design factor of their products is good. But when have they done anything that it's not been as close to monopoly and lock-in as possible?
Many companies do this as a standard process. The company I work for does this more randomly and its not just the "first shipment", its all shipments period. The things they test are tested for long term endurance to make sure it doesn't just "look okay". Fairly rarely that they see a counterfit/etc, and pretty quickly that they get using inferior materials turned around too.
Of course in China and whatnot the requirements are much lower.
I would never touch windows ever again if games ran smoothly or I could actually get Wine to run properly under Ubuntu (all sorts of error messages that I couldn't google for help/out of date help/nobody wants to help/cedega is shit). Of course that and a lack of more native Linux games is certainly another issue as well.
All I want is like XP-level performance in games in Ubuntu. That would be enough to stop XP, vista, and Windows 7 in their tracks for certain.
Disclaimer: this is not ad hominem, please don't take this personally.
Supporting Apple is the exact same as supporting Microsoft. They both employ lock ins and monopoly abuse. The only difference is one is convicted and hated unilaterally (rightly so, of course), and the other is seen as "well, it's not Microsoft, so it's okay".
Those with knowledge of Apple's lock in never bothered to buy an Ipod to begin with. By the time the "unreplaceable" battery came around, or the "unreplaceable iphone battery" came around, you should have known better. Also since you have a wealth of options other than Itunes, people should have had more common sense.
Between Apple and Microsoft the word choice is an anathema to their products on so many levels that it makes me wonder what people really believe. It's alright though, open source shows that there are and will be many other options.
Just because someone is as Family Guy puts it well, "Borderline Retarded" and happens to get a virus from P2P doesn't mean P2P is a haven for identity thieves. That's like saying that because there is terrorism in the middle east and US soldiers have been killed there may be terrorism in the US. It's not really something that has a correlation:)
Slashdot Mirror
You mean like how Internet explorer was a free download with windows?
Sorry, but Mr. Lawyer AC was dead on. This is a form of monopoly behavior, and unacceptable really.
I agree with ya here.
Problem is, where can you make the designation of who left it open and not without encryption? Some will say "oh, I accidentally left it open". Router logs are not enabled by default and the people who know better typically have it encrypted already or some equivalent. Except that with this wacky ass law people would be sued for auto connecting, another example of some fine politics work as usual.
Yes, because nobody like FON might actually have a legitimate business out of that or anything, right? Or that systems tend to connect to wireless by default? Or what about places that offer free wireless such as a starbucks? Is it grab a coffee, surf the web, go to jail?
Not to be personally attacking you but come on dude. Any amount of logic should show the absence of logic from the MD.
Oh whups, that 5 second key, not so easy. That would be a very easily crackable form of wireless, yet again. More complicated types take more setup. Or, lets use your example. You saying you can sue someone taking one of the donuts you left out and/or that said person is a criminal?
Methods that would fool more people (and be more simple) = Mac address filtering. Someone will not be able to figure out why they simply can't connect to your router, etc.
I do agree we have different preferences and as said. No need to beat the already dead horse on that one.
:) I don't want a collection, but if 10 years from now I want to look back on all my music I've listened to and play a shuffle to see what I liked back then and/or just enjoy, I intend to do that.
Wikipedia indeed does have a similar number mentioned, although I wonder how many are because best buy automatically signs people up for rhapsody trials in their stores.
Other than artists I choose I pretty much stick to Pandora and try out music that is similar to my preferences when they suggest, and hit the bay up to see if an artist is worthwhile/worth contributing funds to. This is my form of listening streamed, and it's free with a lack of control (which was shoved down Pandoras throat if you read up on their press releases). So yeah, we have different preferences
Nobody can say they don't have a music collection, it's just a matter of question of what form it's in. You have your own music collection, albeit somewhat mental on artist preference and not so much stored on data.
I meant to reply earlier, but I got a funky 550 error on my mobile device. I had a really long written thought out response.
First, I want to thank you for your reply. Rhapsody is exactly what I had been thinking of, I just didn't want to mention it because I forgot if it's even legit or not.
Your 2 million number, where exactly does this come from? I seem to remember rhapsody having problems getting people to sign up at first and I never tracked it after that because it seemed the same as napster and everywhere else. Sure, pay monthly, but when it stops you're cut off and you don't keep what you have let alone the DRM in the process. Lets face truth here. Just because the RIAA and other music industries refuse to change on this topic does not mean its a good way to do business.
Cable/satellite TV does not use that model. How can you compare a subscription service to music, to cable/satellite's on demand? They do it as a complementary part of their digital service. It does not encompass their entire service. Difference there.
Subscription is not a "less" version, its a "rental". I don't "buy" in order to "rent"....the two terms are contradictory. Consequently, the value that the music industries perceives on their music is not the same as my perceived value. Until this changes I will continue to send checks directly to artists and request them to just burn me a legit copy without labels, etc. I get pretty good responses doing this with major labels even.
We've all seen this before, and it doesn't work. Nobody wants to pay for all you can eat when it isn't. If you are paying monthly for permanent access to their entire library going forward, lets talk. I'd pay 100 bucks for that.
But to pay 100 bucks to use it "unlimited" as long as you are DRM'd? No thanks.
The lowest Tier of comcast internet provided is 6mpbs, they do indeed cap at 750KB/s. The amount you mentioned is indeed correct, and the response the GP got is what is typical of comcast.
The issue at hand is whether they lose Section 230 immunity if they are filtering connections like this. And I hope to damn that they are, because if they aren't I'm going to have to convince whoever controls the infrastructure in my area to build up something other than comcast every single time.
It's not the skinning, its the sliding bar at the top of the screen that is similar to Mac OS style that you can view applications on (like an alt-tab replacement). Who cares about the rest? Specifically its called ObjectDock (a part of stardock). That's all I use. Not the rest of that bloated crap.
This is a well written post, full of awesome. May you get modded accordingly based on what you wrote :) I agree with you 100% completely. My job is for a nonprofit org (name not mentioned for privacy), but they are definitely in the same laid back camp as a university I can imagine (although slightly less educated folks on our side for certain). I envy working in an intellectually challenging place such as yours over my own, definitely :P
No, because the people I work with are retarded and/or have an exceedingly large amount of windows open at a time. Stardock is a lot more efficient to switch between a large quantity of programs than the "group similar icons" thing is, especially with autohide on for stardock.
Forget flashy, but it really does help a lot. We're talking an average of 25-75 windows open at the same time from 6-15 programs.
That shouldn't have been a troll from the AC. That would have been positive modding that should have gone on there.
He is right when he says "about fucking time", as that is exactly the verbiage that reflects on the problems we're having with indecency lately. Fleeting expletives are almost impossible to control and had it not been for "puritanical" views being shoved onto broadcast TV and radio, such wouldn't be a concern. It would also give radio a better selling point versus XM/Sirius as well, considering that one of the reasons people give XM/sirius it's business is that it's not filtered for political agendas nor for content/language.
You know, they were pretty darn accurate.
At my work, the things I install "unauthorized" for myself and my coworkers which are 100% productivity:
Firefox
Phrase Express (text macro program)
Stardock
Microsoft Powertools/toys (the one that gives you a screenshot of each app when you alt+tab).
None are "approved" but all the techs approve of it, because they know better.
None of them use any of what you mentioned. No RSS readers, no games, no funky screensavers, no weather spyware shit. Work is laid back enough to not care (many people just browse the web all day, I mean cmon I'm replying on slashdot), but most people don't push the slacking that far. Also, we're an enormous multibillion $ nonprofit corporation and what I am telling you is like...hmm, well its a worldwide company with thousands of employees. I've talked to the CEO and even he has admitted to having a preference for firefox over IE for example, even though the CIO hasn't officially or formally approved it.
I don't mean it to be ad hominem on this, but I will say you are making a pretty general bias here that is pretty generally not accurate.
I think I get what you mean...maybe. My knowledge of internet topology is limited but I am trying to improve it.
The issue here is not ping, but bandwith. Remember, latency isn't important on downloads. It's important on games and things that are real-time sensitive (so long as the latency isn't to an extreme). Even VOIP isn't that latency intensive, it's bandwith intensive. Same for youtube as well.
Ping/latency only really matters on realtime things. I could be wrong about VOIP, but I know for sure on downloads. Your attractiveness rating would be from the ISP perspective, not our own. You betcha they'd implement this at full priority because it would undercut our performance and raise their profits.
It would also be the opposite of net neutrality and kill off any competition who would unknowingly be slower simply because they get the "low priority" idea all over again. Suddenly you're not getting promised speeds and the excuse is "maybe it's their fault" from the ISP instead of "its actually our fault but we want you to bitch to them so that they pony up cash to us" in the same way that ESPN does it with ESPN360.
That website is worse than goatse. What the heck is wrong with trolls countering trolls with these nasty anon posts lately?
What about if a torrent has no seeds or leeches in any remotely local area?
This is why any "massive improvement" on this aspect makes me skeptical. We all know the reason they want to tie it to local is to save bandwidth costs using only their own uploaders basically which would slow speeds down astronomically. Overseas hosts that can do 300KB/s or more on an upload vs a local that can do a cap of 40KB/s. You decide.
What about GTA: Hot Coffee?
Oh wait.....
I get where you're going, but see previous comment. Just because people don't like ratemycop (notably the officers) doesn't mean its bad. Internet is always going to have extremes and moderates. Who cares how skewed it is, its an early layout of the site.
It could end up something like yelp or digg or some sort of moderated system where its more reliable, but that's up to the site operator. Said site operator should not be responsible for the stuff posted on them (AKA DMCA230 clause- even if we are to get rid of DMCA one day this protection needs to be saved). It's not their fault if it becomes an "I hate cops, cops are pigs" site really, is it? Just because he allowed people to speak?
Cops have a sucky enough job because of the bureaucrats behind em, its not the cop fault. Doesn't mean the cop or the bureaucrats should be taken off of their responsibilities here....it's just rediculously hard to set up a working system to hold the bureaucrats responsible so far...they fight this to no end.
Simple.
Hard to administer and think of what I just said about the police. Now apply that to any industry where it can be at risk and think of just how selectively entrenched (via influence) any large corrupt corporation would be? Plenty of times that influence goes both ways.
Not many people have the balls or the clout to get beyond that.
Beyond your slightly flameworthy "I love the UK regulations" humor (not meant to be ad hominem), I just wanted to say the US has the same idea. It's a three strikes rule for liquor, but it's a lot harsher out here. If someone has 2 strikes on a liquor license (where 3 = closed down), and you take over that bar, you just inherited 2 strikes.
To get a strike isn't as clearly defined but it's basically "being excessively negligable". A fight that breaks out in your bar that you take them outside will prevent a strike, but letting the bar explode into a brawl might not end up the same unless you did everything you could to break it up.
Someone with a fake trying to get the bar shut down claiming they got drinks inside but are underage will not get you a strike (as its pretty common and there are ways to disprove this easily).
It's basically up to the cops and the locals who live near your bar physically. This is why US bars do their best to cater to cops, not for corruption but so that the cop won't have a negative bias which is typical of busy locations and/or big cities where bars are.
I've been looking to open a bar in Chicago and have been research the regulations for about 12 months now. The issue has never been the regulations for industries such as bars and private investigation. The issue is the corporations running rampant abusing people's rights and not following the regulations that are already in place.
However, 7000$ or a 4 year penalty is nothing, especially since you can't jail a corporation either. 70k per infraction might start to get their attention though.
From a legal perspective if you are helping a company file claims in court saying XYZ action is illegal, you need to have a legal backing for that. If you are not licensed to do so then you can't. It's called expert witness and what the requirements are. This is why not everyone can be an expert witness on some topic just because (and why Daubert hearings remove expert witnesses).
Basically unlike a non expert who anything they say is not taken as fact (which is why complaining to a judge on a traffic ticket still gets you guilty if you don't use the proper legal terms such as object, lack of evidence, etc).
This in fact is a huge deal. Also operating illegally when it comes to spying can carry some hefty fines in the US especially when it can be proven (remember they're suing saying they have evidence, so that level of "proof" becomes very easy to show - its like self incrimination but not a kind you can plead 5th amendment on).
As someone else posted is half the example, but I do get what you're saying.
Tell me though, what alternative is there to anything of the Mac line? I think if you said open source that would be the same as Windows in that argument. Or lets rephrase that: What alternatives have their been to Mac's monopoly like lock-in schemes? (Example: AT&T Iphone, Itunes). I don't seem to remember allofmp3 doing too well as of late as an example.
I'm not saying apple is a bad product, the design factor of their products is good. But when have they done anything that it's not been as close to monopoly and lock-in as possible?
Many companies do this as a standard process. The company I work for does this more randomly and its not just the "first shipment", its all shipments period. The things they test are tested for long term endurance to make sure it doesn't just "look okay". Fairly rarely that they see a counterfit/etc, and pretty quickly that they get using inferior materials turned around too.
Of course in China and whatnot the requirements are much lower.
I would never touch windows ever again if games ran smoothly or I could actually get Wine to run properly under Ubuntu (all sorts of error messages that I couldn't google for help/out of date help/nobody wants to help/cedega is shit). Of course that and a lack of more native Linux games is certainly another issue as well.
All I want is like XP-level performance in games in Ubuntu. That would be enough to stop XP, vista, and Windows 7 in their tracks for certain.
Disclaimer: this is not ad hominem, please don't take this personally.
Supporting Apple is the exact same as supporting Microsoft. They both employ lock ins and monopoly abuse. The only difference is one is convicted and hated unilaterally (rightly so, of course), and the other is seen as "well, it's not Microsoft, so it's okay".
Those with knowledge of Apple's lock in never bothered to buy an Ipod to begin with. By the time the "unreplaceable" battery came around, or the "unreplaceable iphone battery" came around, you should have known better. Also since you have a wealth of options other than Itunes, people should have had more common sense.
Between Apple and Microsoft the word choice is an anathema to their products on so many levels that it makes me wonder what people really believe. It's alright though, open source shows that there are and will be many other options.
Just because someone is as Family Guy puts it well, "Borderline Retarded" and happens to get a virus from P2P doesn't mean P2P is a haven for identity thieves. That's like saying that because there is terrorism in the middle east and US soldiers have been killed there may be terrorism in the US. It's not really something that has a correlation :)