Sorry, you're wrong. Copyright law is very clear, I suggest you read up on it.
For example, it is perfectly legal to borrow a CD from a friend, copy it for your own personal use, and then return the CD. However, it is not legal for your friend to copy their CD and then give you the copy.
Some 20 teens sued by the Recording Industry Association of America, which accuses them of unauthorized downloads
The entire article is wrong. They were busted for being uploaders (sharers) of music, not downloaders. In fact, it is perfectly legal to download music off the internet. It is against copyright law to share it, which is what they were doing.
Ok, now show me anywhere in that exchange that SPEWS misrepresented itself, or said anything, whatsoever.
Suppose I start posting a list of ip addresses I don't like on my homepage. Then someone else tells a third person they should block those ips using iptables. Then a fourth person, who is using one of those ips complains. How am I in any way responsible for the problems of that fourth person?
BLOCKED This is Privoxy 3.0.2 on localhost.localdomain (127.0.0.1), port 8080, enabled Request for blocked URL
Your request for http://www.unicast.com/ was blocked. See why or go there anyway. More Privoxy:
* Privoxy main page
* View & change the current configuration
* View the source code version numbers
* View the request headers.
* Look up which actions apply to a URL and why
* Toggle Privoxy on or off
* Documentation
Support and Service via Sourceforge:
We value your feedback. To provide you with the best support, we ask that you:
* use the support forum or (better) the mailing lists to get help.
* submit banners and all problems with the actions file only through the actions file feedback system.
* submit bugs only through our bug tracker. Make sure that the bug has not yet been submitted.
* submit feature requests only through our feature request tracker.
You're an idiot. You bought a case that came with a power supply? Then you return the whole case. I can't believe you expect them to part shit out for you. If you wanted that, you should have contacted the manufacturer. Your demands are absolutely absurd, and if I was Newegg, I'd give you the finger too.
Well next time I make a movie, and then people complain about it, I'll just claim that I intended for it to be shitty and lack everything that one would expect. Now pay me a million dollars.
U.S. Attorneys save their resources for true "federal cases"
You bring up an important point which I failed to mention below. Prosecutors in this country are very overworked. So just because you don't see a lot of prosecutions for some behavior doesn't mean they wouldn't like to. They simply lack the time.
Prosecutors also choose their cases carefully. They want public, well-known cases that expand into new areas and then solidify them. Remember, there is lot's of politics involved, and they all have careers of their own to advance. Stuff that they don't think is terribly important is done away with with plea agreements or simply dropped.
What's this all have to do with state vs federal? Well, the feds simply don't think the hippies smoking weed in San Francisco are worth the effort prosecuting. Especially not under the most liberal appeals court in the country. But if some Kansas town passed a law okaying weed possession, you can bet your ass it would get pounded by the feds.
Federal law always preempts state law. Always. The marijuana laws are based on different things with respect to the states and the federal government. For example, the state may say it's legal to possess marijuana, and the fed may say it's illegal to buy, sell, or grow it (I may have this backwards of course.) The fact is, the feds may rush in on any of these states where it's somewhat legal to possess or smoke marijuana and bust everyone there. In some cases, they have.
The only way a state law trumpts a federal law is if the federal law isn't constitutional. But since they use the Interstate Commerce clause to legislate about almost anything, rarely is a federal law declared unconstitutional on those grounds (although it has happened).
Well, most of my spam comes from forged domains which don't exist, usually with a few constants here and there with a bunch of numbers thrown in.
Then your mail server needs to be reconfigured. There is absolutely no point in accepting email from bogus domains. I've never used a mail server that did so.
In my business, deferred email, even 4 hours, is just as bad as not getting it most of the time. Email is a benefit to our business because it's instant. So, delaying it for hours is a bad thing for us.
Email is not instant! Sure it may act that way a majority of the time, but no where, in any specification or implementation is email determined to be instant. If you need instant communication, you need to be using something else.
I know I'm going to put the SPF records in as soon as I get a chance, but these statistics aren't terribly optimistic so far:
http://www.infinitepenguins.net/SPF/register.php This system serves to monitor the take-up of SPF. So far, 274 domains with SPF records are known. As yet, only a count of registered domains is displayed; more analysis tools will appear once the number of domains increases.
Of these: 84 parse cleanly 0 parse with warnings 173 parse with errors 17 are yet to be checked by this system
There is a difference between "many" and "most". But I'm not sure what your point is. Did I ever say it was appropriate for everyone? Is anything appropriate for everyone? Or are you trying to argue that since you don't like it, it shouldn't exist?
Well if you have a replacement for the IP stack that causes light to move faster, then by all means share it.
I'm now assuming you're not a computer scientist or engineer, or otherwise you'd know about things like pre-fetching, branch prediction, etc.
Yes, and many other companies that provide DSL and cable have the same FAP. So you're complaint about satellite isn't really a complaint about satellite at all, but a complaint about the business practices of some high-speed ISPs.
Many regular people don't need low-latency connections anyways. Plus it's not that bad if you replace the IP stack with something more effecient (usually requiring a Windows box, of course).
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing there are open source versions such as SmartEiffel and Fine!
Ever heard of case law? The statutes are only part of the law.
You are making the case that everyone believes... until they read the copyright law.
Correct, because the burden of copyright law lies with the giver of the copyrighted material, not the receiver. I should have mentioned that.
It's their list, they can do whatever they want with it!
If they choose to generate random IP addresses for inclusion, who cares? It's their list.
No, I didn't. I stated an opinion. Don't tell me you can't tell the difference between an opinion, a suggestion, and a command.
Sorry, you're wrong. Copyright law is very clear, I suggest you read up on it.
For example, it is perfectly legal to borrow a CD from a friend, copy it for your own personal use, and then return the CD. However, it is not legal for your friend to copy their CD and then give you the copy.
Some 20 teens sued by the Recording Industry Association of America, which accuses them of unauthorized downloads
The entire article is wrong. They were busted for being uploaders (sharers) of music, not downloaders. In fact, it is perfectly legal to download music off the internet. It is against copyright law to share it, which is what they were doing.
Ok, now show me anywhere in that exchange that SPEWS misrepresented itself, or said anything, whatsoever.
Suppose I start posting a list of ip addresses I don't like on my homepage. Then someone else tells a third person they should block those ips using iptables. Then a fourth person, who is using one of those ips complains. How am I in any way responsible for the problems of that fourth person?
When I try to go there, all I get is:
BLOCKED
This is Privoxy 3.0.2 on localhost.localdomain (127.0.0.1), port 8080, enabled
Request for blocked URL
Your request for http://www.unicast.com/ was blocked.
See why or go there anyway.
More Privoxy:
* Privoxy main page
* View & change the current configuration
* View the source code version numbers
* View the request headers.
* Look up which actions apply to a URL and why
* Toggle Privoxy on or off
* Documentation
Support and Service via Sourceforge:
We value your feedback. To provide you with the best support, we ask that you:
* use the support forum or (better) the mailing lists to get help.
* submit banners and all problems with the actions file only through the actions file feedback system.
* submit bugs only through our bug tracker. Make sure that the bug has not yet been submitted.
* submit feature requests only through our feature request tracker.
Any idea where one could find independent/government crash test results?
Why are you censoring your post?
You're an idiot. You bought a case that came with a power supply? Then you return the whole case. I can't believe you expect them to part shit out for you. If you wanted that, you should have contacted the manufacturer. Your demands are absolutely absurd, and if I was Newegg, I'd give you the finger too.
I don't think I've ever seen an algorithm where O(1) didn't imply that the time was constant.
Umm, how about the O(1) scheduler presented in the article. When the queues are empty, there is the extra time of switching them. So if
n is the time to pick a process from a nonempty queue
and
p is the time to switch the queues
Then time n + p is bound, but frequently the scheduler takes only time n.
The only way a state law trumpts a federal law is if the federal law isn't constitutional.
I think you need to reread my post.
Such wisdom... on Slashdot... never would have imagined...
Well next time I make a movie, and then people complain about it, I'll just claim that I intended for it to be shitty and lack everything that one would expect. Now pay me a million dollars.
Can you give some more info? A brief summary perhaps?
Thanks.
U.S. Attorneys save their resources for true "federal cases"
You bring up an important point which I failed to mention below. Prosecutors in this country are very overworked. So just because you don't see a lot of prosecutions for some behavior doesn't mean they wouldn't like to. They simply lack the time.
Prosecutors also choose their cases carefully. They want public, well-known cases that expand into new areas and then solidify them. Remember, there is lot's of politics involved, and they all have careers of their own to advance. Stuff that they don't think is terribly important is done away with with plea agreements or simply dropped.
What's this all have to do with state vs federal? Well, the feds simply don't think the hippies smoking weed in San Francisco are worth the effort prosecuting. Especially not under the most liberal appeals court in the country. But if some Kansas town passed a law okaying weed possession, you can bet your ass it would get pounded by the feds.
Federal law always preempts state law. Always. The marijuana laws are based on different things with respect to the states and the federal government. For example, the state may say it's legal to possess marijuana, and the fed may say it's illegal to buy, sell, or grow it (I may have this backwards of course.) The fact is, the feds may rush in on any of these states where it's somewhat legal to possess or smoke marijuana and bust everyone there. In some cases, they have.
The only way a state law trumpts a federal law is if the federal law isn't constitutional. But since they use the Interstate Commerce clause to legislate about almost anything, rarely is a federal law declared unconstitutional on those grounds (although it has happened).
Well, most of my spam comes from forged domains which don't exist, usually with a few constants here and there with a bunch of numbers thrown in.
Then your mail server needs to be reconfigured. There is absolutely no point in accepting email from bogus domains. I've never used a mail server that did so.
In my business, deferred email, even 4 hours, is just as bad as not getting it most of the time. Email is a benefit to our business because it's instant. So, delaying it for hours is a bad thing for us.
Email is not instant! Sure it may act that way a majority of the time, but no where, in any specification or implementation is email determined to be instant. If you need instant communication, you need to be using something else.
I know I'm going to put the SPF records in as soon as I get a chance, but these statistics aren't terribly optimistic so far:
http://www.infinitepenguins.net/SPF/register.php
This system serves to monitor the take-up of SPF. So far, 274 domains with SPF records are known.
As yet, only a count of registered domains is displayed; more analysis tools will appear once the number of domains increases.
Of these:
84 parse cleanly
0 parse with warnings
173 parse with errors
17 are yet to be checked by this system
He is untarring the tcsh distribution so he could compile it. tcsh includes support for Windows.
Many regular people
most people
There is a difference between "many" and "most". But I'm not sure what your point is. Did I ever say it was appropriate for everyone? Is anything appropriate for everyone? Or are you trying to argue that since you don't like it, it shouldn't exist?
Well if you have a replacement for the IP stack that causes light to move faster, then by all means share it.
I'm now assuming you're not a computer scientist or engineer, or otherwise you'd know about things like pre-fetching, branch prediction, etc.
Yes, and many other companies that provide DSL and cable have the same FAP. So you're complaint about satellite isn't really a complaint about satellite at all, but a complaint about the business practices of some high-speed ISPs.
Many regular people don't need low-latency connections anyways. Plus it's not that bad if you replace the IP stack with something more effecient (usually requiring a Windows box, of course).