They didn't have much of a choice. Apple's T&Cs require that no product sold on their storefronts cost more than via any other medium, and they have a minimum $0.99 price point, and their prices are all $x.99. Amazon's sellers all had to ramp up their prices on the Amazon store just so that it would cost the same on the iBooks store and not more.
Actually, Apple has explicitly refused to say whether Amazon is against the rules (they wouldn't apparently answer when asked if they'll be reviewing whether Amazon's app falls within them). It could be that they have no issue (or rather, would have trouble portraying it as a legitimate one) with Amazon's implementation - I'd say Sony tried to do in-app purchasing via their own store.
That, and I can't see how getting the democratically elected leader of Zimbabwe imprisoned, facing a death sentence, and inciting violent protests in Tunisia could possibly count as "furthering the efforts of peace". Also, utterly destroying diplomatic relations between countries does not really further "fraternity of nations",
No, Wikileaks most assuredly does not qualify for this prize. If there was one for furthering the goals of transparency and knowledge, then that would be valid.
as long as they are comfortable walking through a store with a large group of people yelling about how immoral the owners are. cyber "protests" in the form of a DDoS is just as valid. just because its easier doesn't mean its not valid.
No, they're not "just as valid" and they're not "protests". In your example, you can just walk through that crowd if you want. In a DDoS, you can't - because the target cannot respond. With a DDoS it's more like a flash mob showed up and stole all the money out of the cash register, and then nailed the doors to the business closed (this may come as a shock, but the business has to pay a lot of money for that bandwidth your DDoS chews up).
Second, when attacking companies like PayPal or Visa, you're actually negatively affecting millions of people as well as that business, who can't transact online, or miss payments like utilities or rent because they're trying to get money out of a PayPal account while the website's down. I sincerely hope that anyone who had issues because of the DDoS attacks all file civil suits against the immature fools "protesting" PayPal and Visa.
if your INTERNET company employs hundreds of people yet isn't able to afford any downtime then maybe you shouldn't make un-ethical decisions, or at least insure or put away for downtime that could be caused from anything, not just a DDoS attack.
I wasn't aware choosing who you want to do business with was unethical? This is news to me. So if I walk into your house because the door is open, it's unethical for you to tell me to leave? Nice! News flash: ethics is subjective. Choosing to kick Wikileaks wasn't unethical, just as asking someone to leave your house isn't unethical. Stop trying to spin it as if it was.
Well, by contrast the IANA ranges list on their website still listed about 7/8s, and Hurricane Electric is a backbone provider who receives BGP announcements of these things. Based on all the stories about near exhaustion, I figured I'd trust the smaller number.
That said, Netcraft hasn't confirmed it, so I don't know...
Yeah, I'm no lawyer, but the whole thing smacks of an "anticompetitive" activity. MS is using their entrenched product, installed by default in Windows (Internet Explorer) to do this.
I mean, do Internet Explorer toolbars really have enough power to see what you're typing and what you end up clicking on an arbitrary page? If so that's kind of scary.
Odd, I searched for Linux on Bing and got not a single anti-Linux site. In fact, I got Wikipedia, Linux.org, Ubuntu.com, Linux.com, and Linux.org.au (I'm in NZ, so it's ranking this up as geographically relevant).
Uh, Google DOES wrap all search results so they can track which you clicked on. To hide it though, they use Javascript to only swap out the Google tracking URL at the last instant after the user clicks it.
Flawed statement. Sure, you can organise a flash mob around a building, but anyone who wants to go to that store can still get in (or the police will quickly arrest the people involved in the mob). During a DDoS attack, the target is completely inaccessible to legitimate customers. That's why it's not a valid form of "protest", but simply an illegal attack to disconnect a target business from what may well be their only way of operating. I'm sure you will feel so good about yourself when dozens or hundreds of people get laid off by an internet company that can't run because a group of dickheads decided to take out their web servers in "protest", and they end up on the street with their families begging for a dollar.
Many of those were allocated under legacy terms which failed to clarify that netblocks are leased, not owned. They also failed to include utilisation requirements in the terms back then. They were changed like 10 years ago or so, but since the allocation agreement couldn't be retroactively modified, they can't reclaim those blocks - because in the eyes of the law, the companies with those blocks own them.
Hurricane Electric still reports 1 remaining unallocated/8 - so the final one isn't out yet. Apparently it's two days before that happens at the current rate.
Failing to do so would lose their immunity under the DMCA to prosecution. Once they've done so though, a counter notice is sufficient to restore access to the content though - without losing their immunity.
Wow, is that an idiotic law or what? So the officer has no right to kill people while trying to arrest them except where there is a very real chance of death, but a person being arrested has an automatic right to kill the officer? My god your country is insane.
Oh, wait, it doesn't say that you have the right to kill an officer (except where it occurs as the result of resistance of excessive use of force) - it says you'll only be charged with manslaughter instead of murder for killing them. Still carries a jail sentence. So you're advocating committing an actual crime in the process of resisting someone else arresting you for an imaginary crime?
I was under the impression it gave congress the right to pass laws pertaining to interstate commerce, does it not? This seems to me to fit squarely in that category.
Two problems with that. One: never, ever cite an American as an authority on the English language. That bastardised half-breed language is not English. Second: try not to cite books whose reviews are more than 50% statements to "take with a grain of salt" and "every other page contains a factual error".
Slashdot Mirror
No, it makes sense. To end up with the same amount as you originally sold it for after removing Apple's 30%, you have to raise prices by 43%.
43% of $1.00 is $0.43
30% of $1.43 is $0.42
They didn't have much of a choice. Apple's T&Cs require that no product sold on their storefronts cost more than via any other medium, and they have a minimum $0.99 price point, and their prices are all $x.99. Amazon's sellers all had to ramp up their prices on the Amazon store just so that it would cost the same on the iBooks store and not more.
Actually, Apple has explicitly refused to say whether Amazon is against the rules (they wouldn't apparently answer when asked if they'll be reviewing whether Amazon's app falls within them). It could be that they have no issue (or rather, would have trouble portraying it as a legitimate one) with Amazon's implementation - I'd say Sony tried to do in-app purchasing via their own store.
That, and I can't see how getting the democratically elected leader of Zimbabwe imprisoned, facing a death sentence, and inciting violent protests in Tunisia could possibly count as "furthering the efforts of peace". Also, utterly destroying diplomatic relations between countries does not really further "fraternity of nations",
No, Wikileaks most assuredly does not qualify for this prize. If there was one for furthering the goals of transparency and knowledge, then that would be valid.
as long as they are comfortable walking through a store with a large group of people yelling about how immoral the owners are.
cyber "protests" in the form of a DDoS is just as valid. just because its easier doesn't mean its not valid.
No, they're not "just as valid" and they're not "protests". In your example, you can just walk through that crowd if you want. In a DDoS, you can't - because the target cannot respond. With a DDoS it's more like a flash mob showed up and stole all the money out of the cash register, and then nailed the doors to the business closed (this may come as a shock, but the business has to pay a lot of money for that bandwidth your DDoS chews up).
Second, when attacking companies like PayPal or Visa, you're actually negatively affecting millions of people as well as that business, who can't transact online, or miss payments like utilities or rent because they're trying to get money out of a PayPal account while the website's down. I sincerely hope that anyone who had issues because of the DDoS attacks all file civil suits against the immature fools "protesting" PayPal and Visa.
if your INTERNET company employs hundreds of people yet isn't able to afford any downtime then maybe you shouldn't make un-ethical decisions, or at least insure or put away for downtime that could be caused from anything, not just a DDoS attack.
I wasn't aware choosing who you want to do business with was unethical? This is news to me. So if I walk into your house because the door is open, it's unethical for you to tell me to leave? Nice! News flash: ethics is subjective. Choosing to kick Wikileaks wasn't unethical, just as asking someone to leave your house isn't unethical. Stop trying to spin it as if it was.
Well, by contrast the IANA ranges list on their website still listed about 7 /8s, and Hurricane Electric is a backbone provider who receives BGP announcements of these things. Based on all the stories about near exhaustion, I figured I'd trust the smaller number.
That said, Netcraft hasn't confirmed it, so I don't know...
"Nobody's saying this is illegal (... yet?)."
Yeah, I'm no lawyer, but the whole thing smacks of an "anticompetitive" activity. MS is using their entrenched product, installed by default in Windows (Internet Explorer) to do this.
No it isn't.
I mean, do Internet Explorer toolbars really have enough power to see what you're typing and what you end up clicking on an arbitrary page? If so that's kind of scary.
Yes, they do. Just like Firefox toolbars.
Odd, I searched for Linux on Bing and got not a single anti-Linux site. In fact, I got Wikipedia, Linux.org, Ubuntu.com, Linux.com, and Linux.org.au (I'm in NZ, so it's ranking this up as geographically relevant).
Uh, Google DOES wrap all search results so they can track which you clicked on. To hide it though, they use Javascript to only swap out the Google tracking URL at the last instant after the user clicks it.
It adds free money for the guy that founded SRWare to get free money from repacking Chrome.
See: http://neugierig.org/software/chromium/notes/2009/12/iron.html
Flawed statement. Sure, you can organise a flash mob around a building, but anyone who wants to go to that store can still get in (or the police will quickly arrest the people involved in the mob). During a DDoS attack, the target is completely inaccessible to legitimate customers. That's why it's not a valid form of "protest", but simply an illegal attack to disconnect a target business from what may well be their only way of operating. I'm sure you will feel so good about yourself when dozens or hundreds of people get laid off by an internet company that can't run because a group of dickheads decided to take out their web servers in "protest", and they end up on the street with their families begging for a dollar.
Many of those were allocated under legacy terms which failed to clarify that netblocks are leased, not owned. They also failed to include utilisation requirements in the terms back then. They were changed like 10 years ago or so, but since the allocation agreement couldn't be retroactively modified, they can't reclaim those blocks - because in the eyes of the law, the companies with those blocks own them.
Like the time Microsoft knocked shell.windows.com offline by turning off an ex-developer's workstation.
Actually true story.
Yes, but as IP space is non-transferable, the response from IANA if they try sell them will be swift and merciless.
Hurricane Electric still reports 1 remaining unallocated /8 - so the final one isn't out yet. Apparently it's two days before that happens at the current rate.
You mean a "Host:" header right? I believe that's actually optional too.
Ah, righto- so it's like saying that self-defense laws apply equally to dodgy cops? That makes considerably more sense, and I can understand that.
Failing to do so would lose their immunity under the DMCA to prosecution. Once they've done so though, a counter notice is sufficient to restore access to the content though - without losing their immunity.
Wow, is that an idiotic law or what? So the officer has no right to kill people while trying to arrest them except where there is a very real chance of death, but a person being arrested has an automatic right to kill the officer? My god your country is insane.
Oh, wait, it doesn't say that you have the right to kill an officer (except where it occurs as the result of resistance of excessive use of force) - it says you'll only be charged with manslaughter instead of murder for killing them. Still carries a jail sentence. So you're advocating committing an actual crime in the process of resisting someone else arresting you for an imaginary crime?
Enjoy your stay in PMITA prison.
Is the amendment process "get someone else to propose a treaty, since the document dictates that treaties are effectively amendments themselves"?
I was under the impression it gave congress the right to pass laws pertaining to interstate commerce, does it not? This seems to me to fit squarely in that category.
It's craptastic in your "real browser" too. Scrolling is chomping up an entire core of my processor, and typing this comment is pretty hard on it too.
I almost wish Michael Kristopelt or whatever his name is was right, and Slashdot had stagnated.
For Cold Fusion, I'd imagine "that's hot" means it isn't working would it not?
Two problems with that. One: never, ever cite an American as an authority on the English language. That bastardised half-breed language is not English. Second: try not to cite books whose reviews are more than 50% statements to "take with a grain of salt" and "every other page contains a factual error".