This is a fantastic idea. Send the e-mail with something you know the thief will open.. like pretend to be an ex-gf and send them some nakedpics.zip, complete with trogan.
It's not an ego issue, it's about maintaining Tier1 status. As soon as you enter into a transit agreement or are paying someone for peering, you are not a Tier1 backbone provider.
Sprint is the big dog here, and Cogent is just trying to push people around.
For one, other products were released by other companies that used the name iPhone. Cicso did absolutely nothing. That's a big hit in a trademark lawsuit. If you don't defend it, you lose it. What "other products" named iPhone? There was only one product named iPhone and Cisco bought the company that owned the product, which is how they came across the trademark. It wouldn't be just Cisco kicking up a fuss if someone else had a product named iPhone, Apple would be doing the same.
See, the thing is they should have to pay, just for the reason that they were a little cocky in having one of Steve Job's "release parties" for a product that they don't legally have rights to the name on.
Sure those articles are from two years ago. So, what? The apps are already bought and paid for. They're older than two years. They didn't change. They don't need to change. Why should businesses and everyone else keep chasing MS' moving goals posts?
Are you running Windows 3.1? Didn't think so. Microsoft isn't changing it's goal posts, it's updating it's software with security patches and new functionality. You don't want to update to it? There's no need to! Microsoft is just telling you that they aren't going to spend more time and money in supporting and creating security patches for an outdated version of their software.
Your machine. Your choice. I wish you best of luck with the Code Red's of the future.
Actually, the application developer screwed you. SP2 has been out for over 2 years. If the developer can't update their application to the latest operating system given two years, you can't really blame Microsoft. Why should they spend the time and money on creating updates for outdated versions of their product due to application developers who are too lazy to update their product?
Slashdot Mirror
This is a fantastic idea. Send the e-mail with something you know the thief will open .. like pretend to be an ex-gf and send them some nakedpics.zip, complete with trogan.
Agreed. Moderation needed!
Haha! This article is rated purple (2 levels above the lowest -- black) already. Wow.
And now it's black :P
It's not an ego issue, it's about maintaining Tier1 status. As soon as you enter into a transit agreement or are paying someone for peering, you are not a Tier1 backbone provider. Sprint is the big dog here, and Cogent is just trying to push people around.
"All this killing... why do I have a sudden urge for Mountain Dew..."
See, the thing is they should have to pay, just for the reason that they were a little cocky in having one of Steve Job's "release parties" for a product that they don't legally have rights to the name on.
Remember, Remember the Fifth of November... It's that time of year. Anyone remember the backstory from "V for Vendetta"?
Are you running Windows 3.1? Didn't think so. Microsoft isn't changing it's goal posts, it's updating it's software with security patches and new functionality. You don't want to update to it? There's no need to! Microsoft is just telling you that they aren't going to spend more time and money in supporting and creating security patches for an outdated version of their software.
Your machine. Your choice. I wish you best of luck with the Code Red's of the future.
Actually, the application developer screwed you. SP2 has been out for over 2 years. If the developer can't update their application to the latest operating system given two years, you can't really blame Microsoft. Why should they spend the time and money on creating updates for outdated versions of their product due to application developers who are too lazy to update their product?