Basically, he explains what's happened so far, and makes the observation that legislation of this type will be difficult to pass because no one wants to be the one to break American's television sets.
Wait until one of those PEOPLE gets a virus or trojan on their PC and your address is harvested. Or they forward you - and 600 other people - a joke. Or god forbid they post it on their website as part of their friends list, or what have you.
Try having an email address like bob@some.tld. Try hosting a domain and forwarding root@, webmaster@, postermaster@, abuse@, et cetera to your account. Spammers have lists of simple and obvious usernames that they send to every domain they can think of hoping for hits.
I want the public at large to be able to contact me in some instances, so I publish my email addresses unobfuscated. I have 'bob@some.tld'-style email addresses. I forward root@ (and et cetera) to my other accounts for my domains. I couldn't hide even if I wanted to hide.
If you run your own email servers, take a look at this advice. Since the time I took the advice (a couple months ago) I have received *one* spam and that was appropriately tagged as spam and filtered into my spam folder. As far as I can tell there haven't been any false positives.
(I realize the irony in my use of a gmail address for my slashdot account, but that's not about spam. That's about a whole different issue: anonymity.)
Can you trust their blogs in the first place? How do you know positive comments aren't just astroturf?
I think the point is that corporate blogs can be (and will increasingly be) used as marketing tools and should be treated with the same skepticism that you'd treat an advertisement or PR release.
The point the GP was making is that the US has a higher percentage of it's population living in sparsely populated regions. It's relatively easy for Canada to bring a higher percentage of it's population broadband because a higher percentage of those folks live (relatively speaking) right next door to each other.
If 5 million Canadians moved out into the prairies, the population density of Canada would not change. But it be a lot tougher to bring them broadband.
I don't think it's a question of effectiveness. I've seen it used effectively, without lawyers.
His ex isn't stating facts. She's using his copyrighted content (his email) to defame him.
Legally, LJ has no liability if his ex is defaming him. (I believe, as IANAL either.) So of course they're going to take the easy route and side with his ex.
On the other hand, if he notifies them they are hosting his copyrighted content without his consent, they do have some legal liability if they refuse to take it down. In this case, it's easier for LJ to side with him and take down the content.
It never goes to court, because LJ has no interest in spending the money on a lawsuit. Especially when, legally speaking, they might be in the wrong.
Write back to LJ and claim copyright infringement. LJ doesn't have anything to lose if your ex is defaming you, but they do if you notify them they are hosting your copyrighted content without your permission.
I've seen this tactic work. A close friend of mine had her words used the way you're describing. A quick email to the folks in charge of the service and it was taken down. (Wasn't on LJ though.)
For Baltimore County police, said spokesman Bill Toohey, "It's a sign that we're all a little nervous in the post-9/11 world."
Yeah, potentially counterfeit (as judged by a Best Buy employee!) $2 bills are top on my priority list after 9/11. It's so I can't even sleep at night. Thank god we've got people like "spokesman" Bill Toohey protecting us. I don't know what's scarier: That he'd say something like that, or that there's probably a couple hundred million Americans who would nod their heads in "understanding".
This story has everything: Evil Best Buy. Stupid and ignorant employees with a bizarre sense of power and no sense of customer service. Questionable law enforcement policies. Idiot using 9/11 as the ultimate cop-out.
The only problem with the story is that this time the Feds came in and the situation got better.
Mr. Mike Bolesta, please do not rest until everyone responsible for this debacle is severely reprimanded, fined, or has their employment terminated. They are your oppressors. Rise up against them.
That's an interesting question.
I think most content providers will be content to share their content with Google in exchange for
being listed at the very top of the results.
On the other hand, some content providers aren't the original source of the information. Instead they make the information easier to access. In that regard they might consider Google to be a competitor.
It's entirely possible the guy just wants a refund from the company and/or compensation for the trouble of setting up the site and whatever costs he has incurred from the website.
It could be blackmail, but without knowing what this guy is thinking, I don't think we can reach that conclusion. If he's a greedy bastard, it's probably blackmail even if it didn't start out that way. But what do we really know about the guy's sense of morality and ethics?
It's not quite the same thing as naked pictures of your wife. This guy has perfectly legitimate reasons to want to post this information outside of whatever potential profit he may or may not hope to gain.
And heck, it's entirely possible his attempt to sell was in response to the company attempting to buy him off.
Also a little worn is people complaining about it in each and every thread.
What's worse is that, unlike these joke story submissions, the complaints will probably continue for another week.
Let's find what joy we can, instead.
Apple isn't selling simple functionality. They're selling a simple interface. Apple is great at interfaces and at marketing.
Complex functionality does not necessarily require a complex interface. So Apple is free to add functionality to the iPod without increasing the complexity of the interface. And they have done that with the iPod Photo.
I don't see any reason for them to stop there. I suspect we'll see iPod Video or some other added functionality device sometime in the nearish future.
And I won't be surprised if they do it a piece at a time. There are lots of advantages to that, not the least of which fans of the original will pay for an upgrade each time.
He's linked to his own page which markets a book through Amazon's affiliate program. The link has only a tangential relationship to the topic, and as the sibling points out, even that tangent is pretty much broken.
The post is spam, plain and simple. A quick look at his user page shows it's not the first time he's done it, either.
Today I received the letter below via e-mail. It is not clear if I will have to take the site down or not. I am consulting with a lawyer. Please stay tuned.
IANAL, but, you're screwed pal. AFAICT, you used their board layout and their layout. You shouldn't be worried about if you will have to take the site down. You should be worried about whether your setttlement with them is going to bankrupt you.
I don't know why the study would be based on time. You can't show a meaningful trend with time.
Think about people who have transitioned from dial-up to broadband. Most folks, at least in my experience, have specific tasks they perform on the internet each day, week, whatever. Transitioning to broadband allows them to accomplish those same tasks in less time.
For these people, their internet usage may actually go up, because they'll be able to get more done, even while the amount of time they actually spend doing it goes down.
Slashdot Mirror
Make magazine has an audio interview with him about the broadcast flag here:
_ audio_show.html
http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/2005/05/make
Basically, he explains what's happened so far, and makes the observation that legislation of this type will be difficult to pass because no one wants to be the one to break American's television sets.
...but you can stand and fight.
Wait until one of those PEOPLE gets a virus or trojan on their PC and your address is harvested. Or they forward you - and 600 other people - a joke. Or god forbid they post it on their website as part of their friends list, or what have you.
Try having an email address like bob@some.tld. Try hosting a domain and forwarding root@, webmaster@, postermaster@, abuse@, et cetera to your account. Spammers have lists of simple and obvious usernames that they send to every domain they can think of hoping for hits.
I want the public at large to be able to contact me in some instances, so I publish my email addresses unobfuscated. I have 'bob@some.tld'-style email addresses. I forward root@ (and et cetera) to my other accounts for my domains. I couldn't hide even if I wanted to hide.
If you run your own email servers, take a look at this advice. Since the time I took the advice (a couple months ago) I have received *one* spam and that was appropriately tagged as spam and filtered into my spam folder. As far as I can tell there haven't been any false positives.
(I realize the irony in my use of a gmail address for my slashdot account, but that's not about spam. That's about a whole different issue: anonymity.)
Well, there are (a few) girls on /., and I have a hard time imagining them with non-geeky guys.
I know what you mean. I usually imagine them with other girls.
Can you trust their blogs in the first place? How do you know positive comments aren't just astroturf?
I think the point is that corporate blogs can be (and will increasingly be) used as marketing tools and should be treated with the same skepticism that you'd treat an advertisement or PR release.
Being equally urbanized does not mean the population is evenly distributed over the land mass.
The point the GP was making is that the US has a higher percentage of it's population living in sparsely populated regions. It's relatively easy for Canada to bring a higher percentage of it's population broadband because a higher percentage of those folks live (relatively speaking) right next door to each other.
If 5 million Canadians moved out into the prairies, the population density of Canada would not change. But it be a lot tougher to bring them broadband.
Slashdot poster brings back memes thought to be dead and produces jokes as they existed decades ago. He calls it "resurrection karma".
Unfortunately, no good can come of it, as those memes are the same ones we have today.
I don't think it's a question of effectiveness. I've seen it used effectively, without lawyers.
His ex isn't stating facts. She's using his copyrighted content (his email) to defame him.
Legally, LJ has no liability if his ex is defaming him. (I believe, as IANAL either.) So of course they're going to take the easy route and side with his ex.
On the other hand, if he notifies them they are hosting his copyrighted content without his consent, they do have some legal liability if they refuse to take it down. In this case, it's easier for LJ to side with him and take down the content.
It never goes to court, because LJ has no interest in spending the money on a lawsuit. Especially when, legally speaking, they might be in the wrong.
Write back to LJ and claim copyright infringement. LJ doesn't have anything to lose if your ex is defaming you, but they do if you notify them they are hosting your copyrighted content without your permission.
I've seen this tactic work. A close friend of mine had her words used the way you're describing. A quick email to the folks in charge of the service and it was taken down. (Wasn't on LJ though.)
So that's the trick: Make sure any prior art has already been eaten.
For Baltimore County police, said spokesman Bill Toohey, "It's a sign that we're all a little nervous in the post-9/11 world."
Yeah, potentially counterfeit (as judged by a Best Buy employee!) $2 bills are top on my priority list after 9/11. It's so I can't even sleep at night. Thank god we've got people like "spokesman" Bill Toohey protecting us. I don't know what's scarier: That he'd say something like that, or that there's probably a couple hundred million Americans who would nod their heads in "understanding".
This story has everything: Evil Best Buy. Stupid and ignorant employees with a bizarre sense of power and no sense of customer service. Questionable law enforcement policies. Idiot using 9/11 as the ultimate cop-out.
The only problem with the story is that this time the Feds came in and the situation got better.
Mr. Mike Bolesta, please do not rest until everyone responsible for this debacle is severely reprimanded, fined, or has their employment terminated. They are your oppressors. Rise up against them.
That's an interesting question. I think most content providers will be content to share their content with Google in exchange for being listed at the very top of the results. On the other hand, some content providers aren't the original source of the information. Instead they make the information easier to access. In that regard they might consider Google to be a competitor.
It's entirely possible the guy just wants a refund from the company and/or compensation for the trouble of setting up the site and whatever costs he has incurred from the website.
It could be blackmail, but without knowing what this guy is thinking, I don't think we can reach that conclusion. If he's a greedy bastard, it's probably blackmail even if it didn't start out that way. But what do we really know about the guy's sense of morality and ethics?
It's not quite the same thing as naked pictures of your wife. This guy has perfectly legitimate reasons to want to post this information outside of whatever potential profit he may or may not hope to gain.
And heck, it's entirely possible his attempt to sell was in response to the company attempting to buy him off.
"We'd be happy to pay you $X to remove the site."
"Okay, that's fair."
"Ha, sucker! See you in court."
I don't know if it's supposed to be pretty or scary.
It's okay. Those things in the picture are called "girls". What you're feeling is natural.
In any case, you're posting on Slashdot at (apparently) 4:45 your time, so they're nothing you'll ever have to worry about.
+1, ThinkGeek
Also a little worn is people complaining about it in each and every thread. What's worse is that, unlike these joke story submissions, the complaints will probably continue for another week. Let's find what joy we can, instead.
Woah, not so fast. We better consult TBS on this one.
No, that isn't quite right.
Apple isn't selling simple functionality. They're selling a simple interface. Apple is great at interfaces and at marketing.
Complex functionality does not necessarily require a complex interface. So Apple is free to add functionality to the iPod without increasing the complexity of the interface. And they have done that with the iPod Photo.
I don't see any reason for them to stop there. I suspect we'll see iPod Video or some other added functionality device sometime in the nearish future.
And I won't be surprised if they do it a piece at a time. There are lots of advantages to that, not the least of which fans of the original will pay for an upgrade each time.
Quite right. And if you're lucky, the pig will stay for breakfast.
Mmmm, bacon.
An email has been sent to the administrator notifying them of the problem. Please try again late.
Apparently he does his best problem solving at night.
You're right. Make that "i0x2004F200696d".
For the unenlightened few.
He's linked to his own page which markets a book through Amazon's affiliate program. The link has only a tangential relationship to the topic, and as the sibling points out, even that tangent is pretty much broken. The post is spam, plain and simple. A quick look at his user page shows it's not the first time he's done it, either.
From TFA:
Today I received the letter below via e-mail. It is not clear if I will have to take the site down or not. I am consulting with a lawyer. Please stay tuned.
IANAL, but, you're screwed pal. AFAICT, you used their board layout and their layout. You shouldn't be worried about if you will have to take the site down. You should be worried about whether your setttlement with them is going to bankrupt you.
I don't know why the study would be based on time. You can't show a meaningful trend with time.
Think about people who have transitioned from dial-up to broadband. Most folks, at least in my experience, have specific tasks they perform on the internet each day, week, whatever. Transitioning to broadband allows them to accomplish those same tasks in less time.
For these people, their internet usage may actually go up, because they'll be able to get more done, even while the amount of time they actually spend doing it goes down.