Hence the insurance file. Presumably that encrypted file would contain information that the government would want to remain secret more than they would want wikileaks in general silenced.
If so, that seems to go against the ideals of wikileaks as I understand them. These are the guys who were willing to publish their own leaked donor-list - a clear risk to future donations and thus the existence of wikileaks itself. Holding some documents back to attempt to insure their continued existence seems be in conflict with the reasoning behind the publication their donor list and thus a step down from the high moral ground.
You acknowledge and agree that, except with respect to the Router, at all times ownership of the Equipment shall remain with us and that this Agreement allows you to use Equipment only in connection with your receipt and use of the Service. We may, at our option, supply new or reconditioned Equipment to you. We will repair and maintain the Equipment owned by us, as well as the Router, at our expense,
in fact it would be worse than having no caching at all, it would strip the JavaScript out completely after the 10th site
As a user of noscript for years now, I don't think that's going to be an improvement in many cases. I've found that a majority of websites are already much better without javascript - much less visual noise and load times are fantastic and in many cases whatever functionality is lost isn't even missed. So anything that encourages less reliance on javascript is a good thing.
When they own it, they want it back when you cancel service. Verizon doesn't. However, I'm willing to bet you were under contract, rather than month to month with verizon and that's why they swapped your router for free.
Its not a modem, its a router. Their fibre end-point has a cat-5 jack that the router plugs into. As for a link to their contracts - just go to the fios website and poke around.
That wouldn't be a bad idea, except that when Foobar Electric Cars Inc realised that the government was coming to buy a few million from them they'd rub their hands in glee and double the price.
These rebates are just price supports anyway. Same thing happened with $8K rebate for buying a house - pricing dropped precipitously in the 2-3 weeks after it finally expired.
No, they entered a router which they lease to him with the intention of making their network more secure. You don't get the right to update your firmware just using your own modem on a cable network, so this is likely covered by the contract.
As other have said - no he owned the router. I will go one step further and point out that all verizon fios contracts require the purchase - not lease - of the router up front. Sometimes they will waive the fee as part of the contract, sometimes you have to pay the $100. But, afaik, all fios customers own their routers.
I have fios and I have gone to my own software router running in a VM. But before I completely dumped the actiontec (which is really nice hardware for a router, but not all the well supported by alternative firmwares due to actiontec being asses about the GPL for a really long time), I noticed traffic on that port. After only cursory investigation, the impression I got was that the router was "phoning home" to verizon. That's how it got firmware updates and, I presume in this case, the password was changed. That "phoning home" behavior was something that creeped me out because I have no idea what it's reporting or what changes might be made, so it's what goosed me to start looking into alternative firmwares and eventually go the VM route instead.
A large percentage of people that have credit cards use them to buy more than they can afford to pay off at the end of the month (due in no small part to credit cards that keep raising spending limits far beyond what a lot of people can reasonably afford), ensuring that customers will pay financing fees for the rest of their lives.
Yep, stupid people shouldn't be given the ability to do stupid things. Unless you want to raise your hand and say you are a stupid person, that's really not applicable to this conversation.
While on the other hand, it's really hard to go too far beyond your means with a card that's tied directly to your bank account.
Not true. It took federal legislation to make it even marginally true because until recently it was essentially impossible to get a debit card without "overdraft protection" - it was just not an option the banks offered. The reason why was precisely because of that erroneous belief - that a debit card constrains the user to the money in their bank account. Overdrafts are essentially super-high interest loans that you get automatically by going over your balance with effective interest rates in the triple and quadruple digits.
So, if you are one of those stupid people who shouldn't be using a credit card, then you really shouldn't be using a debit card because (a) you are probably too stupid to have taken advantage of the recent changes in the law to turn off overdraft protection on your debit account and (b) interest rates on debit overdrafts tower over the interest rates on credit cards.
Well, for one thing, Mastercard recently bought Orbiscom. Mastercard sees paypal as a competitor. Since all disposable credit card numbers (including disposable VISA numbers) are handled through Orbiscom's systems Mastercard may have made it prohibitively expensive for Paypal to do business that way.
I'm not convinced that you understand how credit cards work, or for that matter, how money works.
It doesn't take a black card to get good response to fraudulent charges on a credit card because federal banking laws very explicitly define what the banks must do and for once the rules are very favorable to consumers instead of the banks. Meanwhile the only rules governing fraudulent debits are arbitrary ones set up by individual banks and the debit networks. Violating a federal law is a huge deal, the banks don't play around with that -- but breaking their own internal policies, the consequences are practically nil, it puts you at the mercy of someone who might just be in a bad enough mood to take it out on you.
Furthermore the previous poster is exactly on the mark about it being the bank's money at risk for fraudulent charges and your money for a fraudulent debit. At best you can expect your bank to refund the lost money and any of their internal fees. But if that fraud caused any of your checks to bounce or your automated payments not to go through you are looking at fees from the payees - returned check and late payment fees - and you have no chance of getting your bank to reimburse those fees since they aren't internal and really are whatever the payee wants to set them at.
No, the only people who should ever use a debit card are the ones who just plain can't qualify for a credit card or are so bad with money that they can't control their spending (and they better be sure not to get so-called "over-draft protection" on those debit accounts because until recently it was impossible to get a debit card without over-draft protection since those over-draft fees are massive cash cows for all banks).
I wish they could offer the same thing for in-person or over-the-phone purchases.
Nothing stopping you from using the disposable credit card numbers over the phone.
In person - well you could try picking up a mag-stripe writer and using it to write a disposable number to a regular credit card. Just make sure you only swipe that card once before you re-write the mag-stripe with a new number...
The be all and end all reason that TI want's to prevent people from installing software on these calc's is the modern education system.
If you install something a school would consider "cheating" on your calculator, you'll get suspended. the modern system want's to forgo the checking of these devices, (as they rarely have the technical ability to even understand how they work)
So, the problems is that schools don't want to spend the money for teachers/proctors to validate that calculators used on tests don't have "cheat-sheets" on them. Seems to me the solution is for the school to own the calculators used on tests and hand them out before each test and collect them afterwards. This DRM stuff is inherently flawed precisely because the students have unlimited physical access to the calculators. So take away the physical access and you can then skip the DRM and actually get the desired results with greater confidence.
Of course this means the schools have buy their calculators - but if TI was smart they would do something like the OLPC guys did - jack the price on retail calculators and then for every calc purchased by a student, donate one to the kid's school (or actually less than one since not all of the student body will ever be taking a math test simultaneously).
No, I'm saying early things related to great works are worth preserving. That's why the negatives by that guy from before he knew what he was doing are valuable. But game systems that were never very good and never evolved into anything good and negatives by photographers who never went on to accomplish anything are not.
Every historian and ethnographer on the planet would vehemently disagree that the only art history worth saving are the early works of the grandmasters. Those artists do not exist in a vacuum, they are influenced by all kinds of other artists. Furthermore, even the poor works influence society in other ways - when I was a kid jokes about ET on the atari 2600 were rampant and I'm pretty sure that the next generation of game developers learned from ET's sucktasticity - they learned things to avoid.
No. Putting early versions of pong controllers and the original sketches for the pacman levels is the same as that. We don't put negatives that other photographers who weren't any good in museums.
So, original sketches of pacman levels are worth preserving but not the ability to actually play the original pacman. Yeah, you are playing with a full deck.
But we don't put terrible paintings in museums (modern art notwithstanding) to "gives context to the goodness". We forget it and remember the stuff worth remembering.
if you pirate material you basically have no ground to say this guy should get anything for his works.
No, that's bullshit. If you are a copyright non-believer then you don't have the right to complain when others don't believe in your own copyrights. But you still have every right to point out the hypocrisy of a copyright believer committing copyright infringement . It isn't your personal belief in copyright that matters, what matters is your ability to recognize hypocrisy. As the saying goes - it doesn't take a baker to know when the bread is stale.
Oh, thank God. From the title I thought Hollywood was re-releasing Titanic in 3-D. Although the guy hitting the propeller would be pretty cool in 3-D.
It will probably happen. One of my ex's is a producer on an IMAX 3D movie (made for IMAX, not a re-purposed hollywood movie) and she's rubbed shoulders with Cameron and his wife. Last year she went to a pre-screening of Avatar at his private theater and Cameron also showed about 5 minutes of footage from Titanic in 3D and said re-releasing it in 3D is one of the things he would really like to do.
If you send your data to a private company who has not signed any kind of contract to say that they will keep the data private: why wouldn't they look at it?
Did your phone company sign a contract that says they won't listen to your phone calls?
Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
-George Washington
I love it when the fanatics quote that. Read it very closely, he's saying religion is good for stupid people who can't be bothered to reason through things on their own. It's one of the most damning comments on religious believers written by any of the founding fathers.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't be surprised if it were still for sale - as a downloadable game for cell phones.
Hence the insurance file. Presumably that encrypted file would contain information that the government would want to remain secret more than they would want wikileaks in general silenced.
If so, that seems to go against the ideals of wikileaks as I understand them. These are the guys who were willing to publish their own leaked donor-list - a clear risk to future donations and thus the existence of wikileaks itself. Holding some documents back to attempt to insure their continued existence seems be in conflict with the reasoning behind the publication their donor list and thus a step down from the high moral ground.
I don't even know where to start with this...
I have no response to that...
You acknowledge and agree that, except with respect to the Router,
at all times ownership of the Equipment shall remain with us and that
this Agreement allows you to use Equipment only in connection with
your receipt and use of the Service. We may, at our option, supply new
or reconditioned Equipment to you. We will repair and maintain the
Equipment owned by us, as well as the Router, at our expense,
FIOS TV TOS
in fact it would be worse than having no caching at all, it would strip the JavaScript out completely after the 10th site
As a user of noscript for years now, I don't think that's going to be an improvement in many cases. I've found that a majority of websites are already much better without javascript - much less visual noise and load times are fantastic and in many cases whatever functionality is lost isn't even missed. So anything that encourages less reliance on javascript is a good thing.
When they own it, they want it back when you cancel service. Verizon doesn't.
However, I'm willing to bet you were under contract, rather than month to month with verizon and that's why they swapped your router for free.
Its not a modem, its a router. Their fibre end-point has a cat-5 jack that the router plugs into.
As for a link to their contracts - just go to the fios website and poke around.
That wouldn't be a bad idea, except that when Foobar Electric Cars Inc realised that the government was coming to buy a few million from them they'd rub their hands in glee and double the price.
These rebates are just price supports anyway. Same thing happened with $8K rebate for buying a house - pricing dropped precipitously in the 2-3 weeks after it finally expired.
No, they entered a router which they lease to him with the intention of making their network more secure. You don't get the right to update your firmware just using your own modem on a cable network, so this is likely covered by the contract.
As other have said - no he owned the router. I will go one step further and point out that all verizon fios contracts require the purchase - not lease - of the router up front. Sometimes they will waive the fee as part of the contract, sometimes you have to pay the $100. But, afaik, all fios customers own their routers.
I have fios and I have gone to my own software router running in a VM. But before I completely dumped the actiontec (which is really nice hardware for a router, but not all the well supported by alternative firmwares due to actiontec being asses about the GPL for a really long time), I noticed traffic on that port. After only cursory investigation, the impression I got was that the router was "phoning home" to verizon. That's how it got firmware updates and, I presume in this case, the password was changed. That "phoning home" behavior was something that creeped me out because I have no idea what it's reporting or what changes might be made, so it's what goosed me to start looking into alternative firmwares and eventually go the VM route instead.
A large percentage of people that have credit cards use them to buy more than they can afford to pay off at the end of the month (due in no small part to credit cards that keep raising spending limits far beyond what a lot of people can reasonably afford), ensuring that customers will pay financing fees for the rest of their lives.
Yep, stupid people shouldn't be given the ability to do stupid things. Unless you want to raise your hand and say you are a stupid person, that's really not applicable to this conversation.
While on the other hand, it's really hard to go too far beyond your means with a card that's tied directly to your bank account.
Not true. It took federal legislation to make it even marginally true because until recently it was essentially impossible to get a debit card without "overdraft protection" - it was just not an option the banks offered. The reason why was precisely because of that erroneous belief - that a debit card constrains the user to the money in their bank account. Overdrafts are essentially super-high interest loans that you get automatically by going over your balance with effective interest rates in the triple and quadruple digits.
So, if you are one of those stupid people who shouldn't be using a credit card, then you really shouldn't be using a debit card because (a) you are probably too stupid to have taken advantage of the recent changes in the law to turn off overdraft protection on your debit account and (b) interest rates on debit overdrafts tower over the interest rates on credit cards.
Well, for one thing, Mastercard recently bought Orbiscom. Mastercard sees paypal as a competitor. Since all disposable credit card numbers (including disposable VISA numbers) are handled through Orbiscom's systems Mastercard may have made it prohibitively expensive for Paypal to do business that way.
I'm not convinced that you understand how credit cards work, or for that matter, how money works.
It doesn't take a black card to get good response to fraudulent charges on a credit card because federal banking laws very explicitly define what the banks must do and for once the rules are very favorable to consumers instead of the banks. Meanwhile the only rules governing fraudulent debits are arbitrary ones set up by individual banks and the debit networks. Violating a federal law is a huge deal, the banks don't play around with that -- but breaking their own internal policies, the consequences are practically nil, it puts you at the mercy of someone who might just be in a bad enough mood to take it out on you.
Furthermore the previous poster is exactly on the mark about it being the bank's money at risk for fraudulent charges and your money for a fraudulent debit. At best you can expect your bank to refund the lost money and any of their internal fees. But if that fraud caused any of your checks to bounce or your automated payments not to go through you are looking at fees from the payees - returned check and late payment fees - and you have no chance of getting your bank to reimburse those fees since they aren't internal and really are whatever the payee wants to set them at.
No, the only people who should ever use a debit card are the ones who just plain can't qualify for a credit card or are so bad with money that they can't control their spending (and they better be sure not to get so-called "over-draft protection" on those debit accounts because until recently it was impossible to get a debit card without over-draft protection since those over-draft fees are massive cash cows for all banks).
I wish they could offer the same thing for in-person or over-the-phone purchases.
Nothing stopping you from using the disposable credit card numbers over the phone.
In person - well you could try picking up a mag-stripe writer and using it to write a disposable number to a regular credit card. Just make sure you only swipe that card once before you re-write the mag-stripe with a new number...
The be all and end all reason that TI want's to prevent people from installing software on these calc's is the modern education system.
If you install something a school would consider "cheating" on your calculator, you'll get suspended. the modern system want's to forgo the checking of these devices, (as they rarely have the technical ability to even understand how they work)
So, the problems is that schools don't want to spend the money for teachers/proctors to validate that calculators used on tests don't have "cheat-sheets" on them. Seems to me the solution is for the school to own the calculators used on tests and hand them out before each test and collect them afterwards. This DRM stuff is inherently flawed precisely because the students have unlimited physical access to the calculators. So take away the physical access and you can then skip the DRM and actually get the desired results with greater confidence.
Of course this means the schools have buy their calculators - but if TI was smart they would do something like the OLPC guys did - jack the price on retail calculators and then for every calc purchased by a student, donate one to the kid's school (or actually less than one since not all of the student body will ever be taking a math test simultaneously).
So in both cases, the cyclist assumes all physical consquences of the accident.
Other than the trauma of killing someone, yeah.
No, I'm saying early things related to great works are worth preserving. That's why the negatives by that guy from before he knew what he was doing are valuable. But game systems that were never very good and never evolved into anything good and negatives by photographers who never went on to accomplish anything are not.
Every historian and ethnographer on the planet would vehemently disagree that the only art history worth saving are the early works of the grandmasters. Those artists do not exist in a vacuum, they are influenced by all kinds of other artists. Furthermore, even the poor works influence society in other ways - when I was a kid jokes about ET on the atari 2600 were rampant and I'm pretty sure that the next generation of game developers learned from ET's sucktasticity - they learned things to avoid.
No. Putting early versions of pong controllers and the original sketches for the pacman levels is the same as that. We don't put negatives that other photographers who weren't any good in museums.
So, original sketches of pacman levels are worth preserving but not the ability to actually play the original pacman. Yeah, you are playing with a full deck.
But we don't put terrible paintings in museums (modern art notwithstanding) to "gives context to the goodness". We forget it and remember the stuff worth remembering.
False. We put the early works of great painters in museums all the time. Look, here's an article about how some Ansel Adams negatives could be worth 200 million dollars because they are "images that didn't fit in anywhere, that show he is trying to discover his voice, to fully realized Ansel Adams masterpieces.""
That is EXACTLY the same thing as showing how we went from crude games to more sophisticated ones.
if you pirate material you basically have no ground to say this guy should get anything for his works.
No, that's bullshit. If you are a copyright non-believer then you don't have the right to complain when others don't believe in your own copyrights. But you still have every right to point out the hypocrisy of a copyright believer committing copyright infringement . It isn't your personal belief in copyright that matters, what matters is your ability to recognize hypocrisy. As the saying goes - it doesn't take a baker to know when the bread is stale.
Oh, thank God. From the title I thought Hollywood was re-releasing Titanic in 3-D. Although the guy hitting the propeller would be pretty cool in 3-D.
It will probably happen. One of my ex's is a producer on an IMAX 3D movie (made for IMAX, not a re-purposed hollywood movie) and she's rubbed shoulders with Cameron and his wife. Last year she went to a pre-screening of Avatar at his private theater and Cameron also showed about 5 minutes of footage from Titanic in 3D and said re-releasing it in 3D is one of the things he would really like to do.
If you send your data to a private company who has not signed any kind of contract to say that they will keep the data private: why wouldn't they look at it?
Did your phone company sign a contract that says they won't listen to your phone calls?
Dunno about traffic stops specifically, but at least one person, Michael Hyde, has been convicted for taping cops in a public area in Massachusetts.
ou know what? Religion is a good way for people to feel good about themselves as well as band together and help out those less fortunate
Of course it is just as true that religion is a good way for people to feel good about themselves as they band together and harm those less fortunate,
Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
-George Washington
I love it when the fanatics quote that. Read it very closely, he's saying religion is good for stupid people who can't be bothered to reason through things on their own. It's one of the most damning comments on religious believers written by any of the founding fathers.