You're requesting the ads - why? To continue the movie analogy, there's nothing stopping you from showing up 4 minutes 36 into the movie, and saving your employer that much.
That's another option, too. I've mentioned you can avoid the ads, but all I'm saying is you can't hold a website responsible for your bandwidth costs due to its advertising methods. If you don't like it, don't use it, or find a way to block it:-)
That's the point of limited broadband, as you ask. It's not that customers sit on an always on service they never use, it's that customers sit on an always on service with normal use.
But it can also because in coutries like Australia where Telstra is the major reseller of wholesale broadband, the ISPs are charged for data. Therefore they *must* impose a download charge/limit to make sure they don't go bankrupt.
If you are selling "internet" then you should be able to access whatever is pubically availiable over the "internet". Even if this means my work has publically made a VPN endpoint for me, I should be able to access it.
Not exactly. They are selling an access plan to the Internet. If I buy a car, I can choose from various models of car with various accessories. Power windows, automatic/manual transmission, executive trim, bull-bar. I might want to use VPN on the Internet, so there's no way I'd be buying this "car." I'll just go find another ISP.
No. In theory you are visiting a web site. The advertising is part of that web site. Where you might incur a cost of $0.000001 dollars per advertisement loaded, it would cost you more in time and effort to figure out what each ad displayed was worth in bytes and dollars.
The advertisements are solicited because they are provided by the web site. They are part of the website.
Take this analogy:
I write a movie review column. My employer sends me down to the local cinema to see a movie, and during that time I am forced to watch 4 minutes 36 worth of ads. On my salary, that works out to be 50 cents worth of my wage in commercials.
Does my employer have the right to sue the advertisers or cinema for these advertisements? No. They are part of a revenue-making process the cinema goes through, and it is exactly the same for a cinema.
Unfortunately on the web, pop-up ads are just a total annoyance. You can block them with special software, and in the cinema, I can turn and talk to my friends, or close my eyes.
No, it's definitely not new. One of my friends and I wrote one once so we could record our High School Admin's password, and we did, too.
What did we find when we got in there? He'd kept archived copies of some of my friend's home directories. No doubt this was because they're better programmers than he ever was or could be.
Mind you, we almost got expelled, but because we didn't actually use our new-found privileges for anything damaging over the course of the several months we had access, they were lenient.
The lack of damage of course, didn't count the amount of times we stuck a steel rule in a computer's floppy disk drive and whacked the hell out of it. But we were students.
By the way, it was 'clearwater.' The password, I mean:)
Is there any proof that P2P file sharing is actually affecting the RIAA's income? Have they made any substantial losses, and how can they prove it was caused by the P2P networks?
It would seem that until I can see a graph of the RIAA revenue increasing for the past ten years, a considerable downward slide for the past 5 of them, and a projection for the next five years, I'm not in a position to believe they're making a loss.
The figures are so all over the place anyway! MP3s have brought chaos to the music market, I'll agree with that. For one, I bought so much music I've never heard of, and thanks to MP3s I have gone off a lot of commercial music I'd otherwise listen to and have started to listen to a lot of music that without MP3s or streaming audio, I would never have heard of.
Secondly, I have bought this music. I go into record stores now and have a look in the various sections and see artists I know and recognize from mp3s. Then I buy their music.
Thirdly, there's a shitload of music out there that I'd never buy anyway. So what, I've got it as an MP3, and I listen to it once in a while, but I'm still not going to buy it on CD. How can the fact that I wasn't going to buy it anyway impact CD sales? Sure it's not exactly legal, but I'm still not going to buy it.
They're starting to sound a lot like Microsoft. Microsoft changed their Windows XP EULA so that you couldn't run programs like VNC or share your desktop without using the Microsoft inbuilt products. That's a killer nightmare for VNC. The RIAA in the same way is destroying the Peer 2 Peer networks which is getting a lot of artists the coverage they'd otherwise never dreamed of. If the RIAA destroy it, they monopolize with their control of the industry.
If I'm a small-time artist and I distribute my songs on P2P for free (lets say I am giving it away the same way Coca Cola gives away free coke's to promote the product,) if the RIAA destroy it, are they responsible for my lost revenue?
Granted, I was probably going to get one anyways. She was like "will you fix my computer problem?" and I was like "only if you get under the desk and give me some head."
This reminds me of the closet football player in Cruel Intentions who was telling all his friends about this girl who went down on him, and he was all "Suck it you dumb bitch! Yeh yeh!"
A little later on in the film, he was blackmailed by Ryan Phillipe with some lovely photographs of him and Joshua Jackson in bed together.
You are the football player character. You're my hero.
"hastily written" is right. I just wonder how many patches get released which end up filling one hole, but end up unknowlingly opening other holes??
Re:may god forgive him for what he has unleashed
on
The First Smiley :-)
·
· Score: 0
Scott's a great guy -- he gave me my first hacking job! -- but he's got a lot to answer for with this one...
Why should he have to answer for it? Should the person who first discovered gun-powder have to answer for that? Or the first person to invent an atom bomb? Or the person who invented cinema hot dogs?
Why should we hold these people responsible for things they simply invented? It was the world that adopted it.
Of course, you could probably stay legal if you "upgrade" the old computer by keeping the case, hard drive, or maybe even the keyboard and mouse.
Microsoft OEM license agreements are bound to the machine's hard drive, given that it is difficult to tie it to any other hardware when people are upgrading bit-by-bit, aside from perhaps the motherboard and processor.
the whole passport thing is based on the assumption of one computer, one person, one identity.
This is indeed very true. You can even "attach" your Passport account to your Windows XP User account. Now what if you are working from home, and need to log in to a work related Passport-enabled website? Do you want to use your personal details for this? I doubt it.
The problem with this whole thing, and the thing that scares me the most is that people trust Microsoft. They see the name and automatically assume it must be something good, but still, after so many years Microsoft produce some of the buggiest code on the market, and these guys are supposed to be professionals.
Every second post on this forum contains the word "TRUST." Most of those are suffixed with a question mark.
Product Activation was broken within ONE WEEK of being released.
ONE WEEK.
Apparently this was Microsoft's latest and greatest security technology that "could not be broken." You have been able to get Product Activation Code GENERATORS for months.
Do end users really believe that TRUSTING Microsoft with their security is going to be advantageous?
Is a Microsoft-based solution to stopping piracy something that big Joe's like "Hollywood" Will go for? In the MSNBC article (http://www.msnbc.com/news/770511.asp?cp1=1) posted last week, we learned that with Palladium you can assign a cryptographic key to any file, which would allow you to specify whether or not it can be copied when you release it to the Internet. This means if you send someone a picture of you naked, they can't copy it because their computer won't let them.
Let's think about that for a moment:
a) Emailing the picture from Palladium->Palladium will stop it from being copied any further.
b) Emailing the picture from Palladium->Linux? What happens here? I can still view the picture, and do whatever I want with it, right? Or am I just unable to access it at all?
(Oh wait, we were counting on Linux to be dead by 2006....)
c) Encrypting a movie file for download with instructions for it not to be copied anywhere -- well that has advantages for Hollywood, apparently. What ever happened to ripping a DVD? Are they intending on running Microsoft Palladium on DVD Players? What stops me from taking that rip, and putting it on a Peer2Peer file sharing network and encrypting it on my Palladium computer as "Free for all!!"
Microsoft aren't a security company. They're a company that writes an Operating System. Perhaps they should stop trying to dominate the market and continue on building their line of OSes.
And I'm not a security expert, far from it. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see how this whole Palladium thing develops.
One of the articles stated "If it's as buggy as the rest of Microsoft's code, can we really trust it?" And that's what I'm happy to agree with.
That is true in some ways, but like most things, for the average newbie or luser, it is difficult to adopt something radically different.
I would say that over 98% of the current computer users in this world have used Windows in some form or another, and an extremely low percentage in comparison towards Linux or other Unixes.
Take this for a comparison:
You own an automatic Toyota. You buy a manual BMW. They're both cars, but they operate differently. You have this new "gear stick" in the BMW, and it's scary. But you play around with it because everything else is familiar -- the indicators, the windscreen wipers, the steering wheel. They're all pretty similar to your automatic Toyota.
Take a user moving from Windows to Linux -- they need an environment in which they are already familiar, with those significant changes. They need certain things they can identify with before they make the big move, and at their skill level, they need to relate to what they know -- Windows.
I recently received a spam message from a company which contained a HTML formatted message which downloaded a number of pornographic images from a website in Hong Kong.
Since this was an obvious spam message, I decided to look into it further, and found the email address of the server's "Technical Contact" through a whois query.
I have since submitted an email to the person claiming that the email was not only intrusive, but a clear case for sexual harassment.
I mean -- how can you justify sending unsolicited pornographic images to someone? The email they sent it to was not only my work address, but the subject of the message was "Regarding your enquiry." A message like this is obviously something you would normally open, because it could legitimately be anything. Low and behold, porn-o-rama.
I have not yet received a response from these clowns, and stated clearly in my email to him the following items:
- I have sent a copy of the email in question and a copy of the email i sent to the webmaster to my lawyer.
- The content of the email was unacceptable for a work corporate email address.
- The content of the email is a form of sexual harassment, of which I may have a case in court for.
- The email was intrusive and unsolicited.
I don't know if I'll get a response or not -- but I hope at least something comes of it.. I don't like spam, and this one went too far.
The next step? Well, they do have a telephone contact on the WHOIS query, and I can only try!
Our router is called Papa, because it's kind of at the "top" of the tree for the Internet, I also chose Vanity, Grouchy, Brainy & Handy.. I used Gargamel for our mail server:)
I then gave them all CNAME's like 'mail' and 'intranet'.
The only time they see the real names, is when they do a lookup, which is fair enough.
I've noticed with most 'revolutionary' technologies, they all appear in the news, we read about them and go "That's really cool! I can't wait till that's on the market!" and that's the last we ever hear of that particular technology.
So I'm wondering when this type of technology will be available on the market, if ever? What sort of costs will be involved, and how long until the price will drop to sensible levels?
Slashdot Mirror
That's another option, too. I've mentioned you can avoid the ads, but all I'm saying is you can't hold a website responsible for your bandwidth costs due to its advertising methods. If you don't like it, don't use it, or find a way to block it
But it can also because in coutries like Australia where Telstra is the major reseller of wholesale broadband, the ISPs are charged for data. Therefore they *must* impose a download charge/limit to make sure they don't go bankrupt.
Not exactly. They are selling an access plan to the Internet. If I buy a car, I can choose from various models of car with various accessories. Power windows, automatic/manual transmission, executive trim, bull-bar. I might want to use VPN on the Internet, so there's no way I'd be buying this "car." I'll just go find another ISP.
No. In theory you are visiting a web site. The advertising is part of that web site. Where you might incur a cost of $0.000001 dollars per advertisement loaded, it would cost you more in time and effort to figure out what each ad displayed was worth in bytes and dollars.
The advertisements are solicited because they are provided by the web site. They are part of the website.
Take this analogy:
I write a movie review column. My employer sends me down to the local cinema to see a movie, and during that time I am forced to watch 4 minutes 36 worth of ads. On my salary, that works out to be 50 cents worth of my wage in commercials.
Does my employer have the right to sue the advertisers or cinema for these advertisements? No. They are part of a revenue-making process the cinema goes through, and it is exactly the same for a cinema.
Unfortunately on the web, pop-up ads are just a total annoyance. You can block them with special software, and in the cinema, I can turn and talk to my friends, or close my eyes.
No, it's definitely not new. One of my friends and I wrote one once so we could record our High School Admin's password, and we did, too.
:)
What did we find when we got in there? He'd kept archived copies of some of my friend's home directories. No doubt this was because they're better programmers than he ever was or could be.
Mind you, we almost got expelled, but because we didn't actually use our new-found privileges for anything damaging over the course of the several months we had access, they were lenient.
The lack of damage of course, didn't count the amount of times we stuck a steel rule in a computer's floppy disk drive and whacked the hell out of it. But we were students.
By the way, it was 'clearwater.' The password, I mean
Is there any proof that P2P file sharing is actually affecting the RIAA's income? Have they made any substantial losses, and how can they prove it was caused by the P2P networks?
It would seem that until I can see a graph of the RIAA revenue increasing for the past ten years, a considerable downward slide for the past 5 of them, and a projection for the next five years, I'm not in a position to believe they're making a loss.
The figures are so all over the place anyway! MP3s have brought chaos to the music market, I'll agree with that. For one, I bought so much music I've never heard of, and thanks to MP3s I have gone off a lot of commercial music I'd otherwise listen to and have started to listen to a lot of music that without MP3s or streaming audio, I would never have heard of.
Secondly, I have bought this music. I go into record stores now and have a look in the various sections and see artists I know and recognize from mp3s. Then I buy their music.
Thirdly, there's a shitload of music out there that I'd never buy anyway. So what, I've got it as an MP3, and I listen to it once in a while, but I'm still not going to buy it on CD. How can the fact that I wasn't going to buy it anyway impact CD sales? Sure it's not exactly legal, but I'm still not going to buy it.
They're starting to sound a lot like Microsoft. Microsoft changed their Windows XP EULA so that you couldn't run programs like VNC or share your desktop without using the Microsoft inbuilt products. That's a killer nightmare for VNC. The RIAA in the same way is destroying the Peer 2 Peer networks which is getting a lot of artists the coverage they'd otherwise never dreamed of. If the RIAA destroy it, they monopolize with their control of the industry.
If I'm a small-time artist and I distribute my songs on P2P for free (lets say I am giving it away the same way Coca Cola gives away free coke's to promote the product,) if the RIAA destroy it, are they responsible for my lost revenue?
A little later on in the film, he was blackmailed by Ryan Phillipe with some lovely photographs of him and Joshua Jackson in bed together.
You are the football player character. You're my hero.
"hastily written" is right. I just wonder how many patches get released which end up filling one hole, but end up unknowlingly opening other holes??
Scott's a great guy -- he gave me my first hacking job! -- but he's got a lot to answer for with this one...
Why should he have to answer for it? Should the person who first discovered gun-powder have to answer for that? Or the first person to invent an atom bomb? Or the person who invented cinema hot dogs?
Why should we hold these people responsible for things they simply invented? It was the world that adopted it.
Microsoft OEM license agreements are bound to the machine's hard drive, given that it is difficult to tie it to any other hardware when people are upgrading bit-by-bit, aside from perhaps the motherboard and processor.
The article specifically states the new range of drives will range from 120Gb up to 200Gb.
This means simply that a 120Gb drive will have 2x60Gb platters, a 160Gb drive will have 2x80Gb platters and a 200Gb drive will have 2x100Gb platters.
The problem with this whole thing, and the thing that scares me the most is that people trust Microsoft. They see the name and automatically assume it must be something good, but still, after so many years Microsoft produce some of the buggiest code on the market, and these guys are supposed to be professionals.
Every second post on this forum contains the word "TRUST." Most of those are suffixed with a question mark.
Product Activation was broken within ONE WEEK of being released.
ONE WEEK.
Apparently this was Microsoft's latest and greatest security technology that "could not be broken." You have been able to get Product Activation Code GENERATORS for months.
Do end users really believe that TRUSTING Microsoft with their security is going to be advantageous?
Is a Microsoft-based solution to stopping piracy something that big Joe's like "Hollywood" Will go for? In the MSNBC article (http://www.msnbc.com/news/770511.asp?cp1=1) posted last week, we learned that with Palladium you can assign a cryptographic key to any file, which would allow you to specify whether or not it can be copied when you release it to the Internet. This means if you send someone a picture of you naked, they can't copy it because their computer won't let them.
Let's think about that for a moment:
a) Emailing the picture from Palladium->Palladium will stop it from being copied any further.
b) Emailing the picture from Palladium->Linux? What happens here? I can still view the picture, and do whatever I want with it, right? Or am I just unable to access it at all?
(Oh wait, we were counting on Linux to be dead by 2006....)
c) Encrypting a movie file for download with instructions for it not to be copied anywhere -- well that has advantages for Hollywood, apparently. What ever happened to ripping a DVD? Are they intending on running Microsoft Palladium on DVD Players? What stops me from taking that rip, and putting it on a Peer2Peer file sharing network and encrypting it on my Palladium computer as "Free for all!!"
Microsoft aren't a security company. They're a company that writes an Operating System. Perhaps they should stop trying to dominate the market and continue on building their line of OSes.
And I'm not a security expert, far from it. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see how this whole Palladium thing develops.
One of the articles stated "If it's as buggy as the rest of Microsoft's code, can we really trust it?" And that's what I'm happy to agree with.
That is true in some ways, but like most things, for the average newbie or luser, it is difficult to adopt something radically different.
I would say that over 98% of the current computer users in this world have used Windows in some form or another, and an extremely low percentage in comparison towards Linux or other Unixes.
Take this for a comparison:
You own an automatic Toyota. You buy a manual BMW. They're both cars, but they operate differently. You have this new "gear stick" in the BMW, and it's scary. But you play around with it because everything else is familiar -- the indicators, the windscreen wipers, the steering wheel. They're all pretty similar to your automatic Toyota.
Take a user moving from Windows to Linux -- they need an environment in which they are already familiar, with those significant changes. They need certain things they can identify with before they make the big move, and at their skill level, they need to relate to what they know -- Windows.
I recently received a spam message from a company which contained a HTML formatted message which downloaded a number of pornographic images from a website in Hong Kong.
Since this was an obvious spam message, I decided to look into it further, and found the email address of the server's "Technical Contact" through a whois query.
I have since submitted an email to the person claiming that the email was not only intrusive, but a clear case for sexual harassment.
I mean -- how can you justify sending unsolicited pornographic images to someone? The email they sent it to was not only my work address, but the subject of the message was "Regarding your enquiry." A message like this is obviously something you would normally open, because it could legitimately be anything. Low and behold, porn-o-rama.
I have not yet received a response from these clowns, and stated clearly in my email to him the following items:
- I have sent a copy of the email in question and a copy of the email i sent to the webmaster to my lawyer.
- The content of the email was unacceptable for a work corporate email address.
- The content of the email is a form of sexual harassment, of which I may have a case in court for.
- The email was intrusive and unsolicited.
I don't know if I'll get a response or not -- but I hope at least something comes of it.. I don't like spam, and this one went too far.
The next step? Well, they do have a telephone contact on the WHOIS query, and I can only try!
I find a couple of ironies here:
h tml) has a link to "Amaze Yourself."
& q= linux
1. That when I visited the "Wehavethewayout" website, it returned:
Directory Listing Denied
This Virtual Directory does not allow contents to be listed.
Great -- so their website isn't even functional anymore. Did they just remove all the content very very quickly?
2. The "Wehavethewayin" website's Linux page (http://www.wehavethewayin.com/section.php/linux.
The Amaze Yourself link points to:
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient
The "sourceid=navclient" section sports the fact that this webmaster used the Google Toolbar!
The Google Toolbar is only available for Internet Explorer!!
I N T E R E S T I N G . . . . . . .
At work here I use the Smurfs.
:)
Our router is called Papa, because it's kind of at the "top" of the tree for the Internet, I also chose Vanity, Grouchy, Brainy & Handy.. I used Gargamel for our mail server
I then gave them all CNAME's like 'mail' and 'intranet'.
The only time they see the real names, is when they do a lookup, which is fair enough.
"Whiplike tails, that make these E-Coli look like furry tampons."
Then how else do you expect the site to remember who we are when we come back??
Log in again *EVERY* time?
I've noticed with most 'revolutionary' technologies, they all appear in the news, we read about them and go "That's really cool! I can't wait till that's on the market!" and that's the last we ever hear of that particular technology.
So I'm wondering when this type of technology will be available on the market, if ever? What sort of costs will be involved, and how long until the price will drop to sensible levels?
Weren't the Japanese going to create an internet that went 1000 times faster than what we have right now?