The last time I got one of these at home I "pressed 1 to talk to a representative about yor chance to lock in a low rate on your credit card".
I have 5 credit cards, so it's fair to say they would have said which one if they weren't scammers.
I'm not sure if this makes me fair game ("I was asking for it") but hey.
A black woman came on the line. I asked the for the name and phone number of the company. She said the company was 'Financial Solutions' (yay genericity), but would not give me a phone number or address unless I gave her my name. Fuck that, let me talk to your supervisor.
Another black woman came on and told me the same thing. I said I don't have to give you squat, you're the ones who called me. After a few "no/yes" back and forth, she hung up on me.
I reported what little I had to the Do Not Call Registry website, but I'm sure nothing will come of it.
I get another one every few weeks about how "I HAVE WON AN ALL EXPENSES PAID VACATION". Tried the same thing once, an Indian guy called "Jeremy" (right) gave me the same runaround.
I hope to hell that the FTC comes down *hard* on these people. There's nothing more annoying than getting machine spam.
By the way, does anyone know why when I hang up on these the line is not cut? If I turn on my phone again I keep hearing the sales pitch, and I can't use it until it's finished. Holy shit, I'm sure even that is illegal or something.... anyway rant over. Back to work.
The cross-platform for starters. Maybe? I don't think there's such an application.
Unison might fit the bill, but I'm not sure about the FTP part (it does work over ssh, I think).
The thumb drive req might be another problem, because I was about to suggest writing a Python or Perl script to do this (relatively easy). Most Linux distros have Python and Perl, but OS X and Windows I think you'd have to pre-install them. And Perl doesn't ship with an FTP client lib, I don't think.
That doesn't matter. In some businesses, including almost all large ones in my experience, any use of external software requires formal approval of the licensing terms by the legal staff.
Offtopic, but it just struck me how this is dismissed as FUD and fear mongering when the license in question happens the be the GPL.
On topic now... I've never used boost, but I do have experience with STL and Crypto++. The last time I tried to 'install' boost (I needed the static libs) I couldn't pull it off. And I'm really not that bad. Maybe the process has simplified a bit now, but I wasted too much time to make it worth my while.
How about introducing a strange new character that behaves in an obnoxious way, speaks in unintelligible patois and causes everyone to flinch whenever he's onscreen. He could be called Shortstop Bingo and be Indy's trusty right-hand fuck up.
I assume you work for the FSF and/or are behind this operation. Correct?
> in a respectful but firm way
There is nothing respectful about this. And the people you are going to screw over with this do not care what you cannot do to promote your views.
> that is indeed regrettable but it's also inevitable. > The question is, who is responsible for this?
I've heard that before, from other people and in other circumstances. I'm sure you have, too. That you are able to use a phrase like that with disregard says a lot about the people behind this.
> If Apple stuck to what they said they were going to do about DRM, or > if they spent a little more money on their support services and some > executives took a slight pay cut, this wouldn't be an issue.
You are trying to find excuses for the disruption you're going to create. That's nice. That means you know it's wrong.
> Pointing the finger at people using the option as provided to ask > salient questions about the way Apple technology functions
Those 'salient questions' should be asked of the executives of the company, not the working stiffs who hardly set policy or technological directions and are just trying to get through the day and cash their paychecks.
> I am sorry for the inconvenience caused to other customers but in consolation
There is no 'consolation' here, just harassment.
> if we succeed, there will be far fewer agonizing and annoying DRM-induced > computer catastrophes for all of us to deal with.
It's a stretch to claim people go to the Apple store to talk to employees about 'catastrophes' caused by DRM. That's just another way for you to try and jusitify something you know is wrong.
I support your goals, but I don't support your means at all. The more stunts like these you pull, the more your base will erode. And the demographic you so badly need to understand issues like DRM will be the first to think you are nothing more than a band of disruptive morons.
And I hope you and your friends are honest and wear FSF t-shirts. That way everyone who failed to get help at the Apple store that day will know who is responsible.
The reason I still use Skype is simple: the standard US phone number.
Other than that, I would switch in a heartbeat to something that used an open protocol. I don't consider it a necessity that the application itself be open source, but that's just my personal preference. I know many people would also balk at the second condition not being fulfilled.
The FSF seems to justify things like these because they believe in their cause. Many good things have come from people who acted that way. But in this case, they're interfering with free choice, with people's choice to buy Apple products. Just to make a statement on an aspect of commerical law they don't like.
It's difficult to gain context if you see the film 15 years later like me.
That's why most people don't realize how groundbreaking it was.
But once you place it in the year it appeared, that becomes apparent.
I am definitely looking forward to it, but... one of the charms of the original is that it's a bit campy. I hope they don't butcher it with too-snazzy effects and zero story.
It seems this is really not that bad in the sense that it controls access to space-generated data (from weather satellites fr example).
But it also seesm that it's a regulation that is being taken to the nth degree simply because it's there and it never predicted civialan space exploration.
I hope this is one of the 250+ pattents they claim Linux infringes on. I say that because there's plenty of prior art for this one, and I suspect most of the others would be in the same situation, since that's usually the fate of most software patents anyway.
If the date on this patent is right, even their own Windows 3.x file manager would be infringing on it.
But I would go so far as to affirm that the reason they've never used this offensively is the same reason most companies with lots of patents don't either, even if someones is supposed to be infringing on them...
They are designed as protection from other patent trolls.
I agree, but the key here is to ensure that there are no false positives, which have been traditionally the biggest problem with blacklists.
If they figure that out, I don't care what kind of statistical approach they are using, as long as it works.
I think someone from MIT (maybe three or four years ago during the height of the problems with Spamhaus?) tried this before, but I don't remember if it got anywhere. Maybe this is an ofshoot from that.
In the meantime... SpamAssasin with whitelists, which is the best of worse worlds.
It's lame to reply to myself, but I forgot something re: development tools.
Don't dictate what your developers use, if it's possible. Case in point: In my current company we are building a VB.NET web application. There are six developers and five of us use Visual Studio, but the tech lead does not, he uses VIM. I was amazed by this, but after seeing him wrangle some text with that thing, I can see the value over an IDE, although I still prefer its warm confines because I've come to rely on the bells and whistles.
BUT, this works only because he has a build system where he does not rely on the VS project files, only the source code, resources, images, etc. The end result is the same as if you had compiled the thing inside Visual Studio, except that you used only the compilers. This is very cool, and while I don't fully understand the build files, I can see how that's a definite advantage. The scripts even pull the source off CVS and everything.
My point I guess is that you shouldn't tie yourself to development tools, if possible. That's just common sense, and at the same time you'll allow developers to use the tools they prefer. That makes for happy developers.
Maybe one of these days I'll try VIM or EMACS, or maybe I'll just stick with the IDE. But at least I know I have the option.
I'm not a very experienced developer. I've worked at two different companies so far, where I was lucky to learn from some people who were.
The way I'd see this is whether or not you have a one-size-fits-all framework that will be useful in many different situations. But you have levels. For example, you can do pretty mcuch everything with VB.Net or Java, from web apps to desktop clients. So at that level you should pick a good, mature, supported platform that fits your basic needs (Linux, Windows, whatever).
The next level would be the stuff you pile around the base language. That's where it gets interesting. Some people swear by one ORM library (Hibernate) and others prefer whatever they used at the last project. So if you dictate Hibernate and Struts, people who were used to something else might not like that.
But if you don't standardize, you'll find yourself trying to wrangle nine different stacks that might do the same. How much is that worth? It's a waste of time and treasure. My company currently runs MS SQL, Oracle, Sybase, Ingres and MySQL. Why? Probably because at some point someone said "screw Oracle, I'm doing this with Sybase because I like it" and the rest is history. Extricating yourself from that can take years.
If the person making the decision to standardize on LibraryX is knowledgeable enough to make that call and he is making it based on the requirements of the company and the skill levels of the developers (current and future), then the standardization will work. The developers who work there will have to adapt and learn if necessary. Less-experienced developers (like me!) should not dictate what the company uses to ship applications just because they like a given library or toolset, because we choose what we *like* or what is cool rather than what is sustainable.
Anyway, good luck. I've seen how hard all that can be, especially at large firms.
It wasn't a small amount, it was a large amount of blood, a large stain. This is not you leaving traces of blood when you scrape your knuckles (FFS), this is a "I just crushed your skull and you're bleeding all over my car" amount of blood.
> If Reiser was less of an asshole during his trial he would have literally gotten away with murder
I doubt that part of the complaint would stand, because it goes against the first-sale doctrine.
The other problem would be price-fixing. For example, they cannot legally prevent me from buying lots of handbags and re-selling them on the open market for whatever price I can get.
No, companies like these are scared to death of cheap knock-offs from China. That's their greatest terror.
It doesn't matter that the term is enclosed in quotes in the submission. We're talking about trademarks here. If these companies don't take action regarding this they will be allowing their trademarks to be diluted, making them more and more difficult to defend.
This has nothing to do with IP.
Any defendant in court for trademark infringement can bring up the fact that the plaintiff is allowing eBay to sell thousands of cheap imitations. And they would win the case based on that, probably.
Trademark law pretty much requires things like these be done, and the companies have no choice but to go after the entity facilitating the sales.
This has implications beyond the delivery of drugs. Drugs act at the protein level, but imagine a delivery mechanism that does not require a protein receptor, but instead acts at the DNA filament level.
Personal encryption is not widespread because most people don't know anything about security or privacy. They figure the "stuff" going through the "tubes" is safe and only the intended recipients can see it.
Then again most people only send chan letters, lame jokes and soccer practice announcements, so its not like they needed a lots of privacy to begin with.
People with a clue know what they need to do and do it. Everyone else can carry on as usual.
Slashdot Mirror
Booze is really not good for health.
Is that your health, or mine?
I ask because you seem to be using that argument as something that you would not have a problem seeing banned or curtailed.
The last time I got one of these at home I "pressed 1 to talk to a representative about yor chance to lock in a low rate on your credit card".
I have 5 credit cards, so it's fair to say they would have said which one if they weren't scammers.
I'm not sure if this makes me fair game ("I was asking for it") but hey.
A black woman came on the line. I asked the for the name and phone number of the company. She said the company was 'Financial Solutions' (yay genericity), but would not give me a phone number or address unless I gave her my name. Fuck that, let me talk to your supervisor.
Another black woman came on and told me the same thing. I said I don't have to give you squat, you're the ones who called me. After a few "no/yes" back and forth, she hung up on me.
I reported what little I had to the Do Not Call Registry website, but I'm sure nothing will come of it.
I get another one every few weeks about how "I HAVE WON AN ALL EXPENSES PAID VACATION". Tried the same thing once, an Indian guy called "Jeremy" (right) gave me the same runaround.
I hope to hell that the FTC comes down *hard* on these people. There's nothing more annoying than getting machine spam.
By the way, does anyone know why when I hang up on these the line is not cut? If I turn on my phone again I keep hearing the sales pitch, and I can't use it until it's finished. Holy shit, I'm sure even that is illegal or something. ... anyway rant over. Back to work.
Because of FTP? Maybe, but if the guy is moving encrypted tar files over FTP, then he's still secure.
Even if his userid/passwd are compromised, his data wouldn't.
Well, assuming he's using AES or something like that.
The cross-platform for starters. Maybe? I don't think there's such an application.
Unison might fit the bill, but I'm not sure about the FTP part (it does work over ssh, I think).
The thumb drive req might be another problem, because I was about to suggest writing a Python or Perl script to do this (relatively easy). Most Linux distros have Python and Perl, but OS X and Windows I think you'd have to pre-install them. And Perl doesn't ship with an FTP client lib, I don't think.
That doesn't matter. In some businesses, including almost all large ones in my experience, any use of external software requires formal approval of the licensing terms by the legal staff.
Offtopic, but it just struck me how this is dismissed as FUD and fear mongering when the license in question happens the be the GPL.
On topic now... I've never used boost, but I do have experience with STL and Crypto++. The last time I tried to 'install' boost (I needed the static libs) I couldn't pull it off. And I'm really not that bad. Maybe the process has simplified a bit now, but I wasted too much time to make it worth my while.
How about introducing a strange new character that behaves in an obnoxious way, speaks in unintelligible patois and causes everyone to flinch whenever he's onscreen. He could be called Shortstop Bingo and be Indy's trusty right-hand fuck up.
Surely this would totally enhance the franchise.
I assume you work for the FSF and/or are behind this operation. Correct?
> in a respectful but firm way
There is nothing respectful about this. And the people you are going to screw over with this do not care what you cannot do to promote your views.
> that is indeed regrettable but it's also inevitable.
> The question is, who is responsible for this?
I've heard that before, from other people and in other circumstances. I'm sure you have, too. That you are able to use a phrase like that with disregard says a lot about the people behind this.
> If Apple stuck to what they said they were going to do about DRM, or
> if they spent a little more money on their support services and some
> executives took a slight pay cut, this wouldn't be an issue.
You are trying to find excuses for the disruption you're going to create. That's nice. That means you know it's wrong.
> Pointing the finger at people using the option as provided to ask
> salient questions about the way Apple technology functions
Those 'salient questions' should be asked of the executives of the company, not the working stiffs who hardly set policy or technological directions and are just trying to get through the day and cash their paychecks.
> I am sorry for the inconvenience caused to other customers but in consolation
There is no 'consolation' here, just harassment.
> if we succeed, there will be far fewer agonizing and annoying DRM-induced
> computer catastrophes for all of us to deal with.
It's a stretch to claim people go to the Apple store to talk to employees about 'catastrophes' caused by DRM. That's just another way for you to try and jusitify something you know is wrong.
I support your goals, but I don't support your means at all. The more stunts like these you pull, the more your base will erode. And the demographic you so badly need to understand issues like DRM will be the first to think you are nothing more than a band of disruptive morons.
And I hope you and your friends are honest and wear FSF t-shirts. That way everyone who failed to get help at the Apple store that day will know who is responsible.
I have been looking for one, for a long time.
The reason I still use Skype is simple: the standard US phone number.
Other than that, I would switch in a heartbeat to something that used an open protocol. I don't consider it a necessity that the application itself be open source, but that's just my personal preference. I know many people would also balk at the second condition not being fulfilled.
I agree that this will be a form of harassment.
But the term 'terrorism' is out of place here.
Other than that, I agree with your sentiment.
The FSF seems to justify things like these because they believe in their cause. Many good things have come from people who acted that way. But in this case, they're interfering with free choice, with people's choice to buy Apple products. Just to make a statement on an aspect of commerical law they don't like.
That's wrong.
It's difficult to gain context if you see the film 15 years later like me.
That's why most people don't realize how groundbreaking it was.
But once you place it in the year it appeared, that becomes apparent.
I am definitely looking forward to it, but... one of the charms of the original is that it's a bit campy. I hope they don't butcher it with too-snazzy effects and zero story.
You seem to be obsessed by jews (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=622621&cid=24298709)
But most likely you are a troll that uses racism as a tool.
And badly at that.
But this 'law' applies only to US citizens. Does it not? I understand that from the article.
I don't think the NOAA sent release forms to be signed by Soviet cosmonauts.
I took a little bit time to read the regulation (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c102:H.R.6133.ENR:).
It seems this is really not that bad in the sense that it controls access to space-generated data (from weather satellites fr example).
But it also seesm that it's a regulation that is being taken to the nth degree simply because it's there and it never predicted civialan space exploration.
The Space sensing act of when??
Is the US government the only entity that can image the planet from orbit?
What, are they scared I might take a photo of the aliens in Area51?
And what if I'm snapping away at Africa? Australia?
Do I go to jail or what??
Ridiculous.
I hope this is one of the 250+ pattents they claim Linux infringes on. I say that because there's plenty of prior art for this one, and I suspect most of the others would be in the same situation, since that's usually the fate of most software patents anyway.
If the date on this patent is right, even their own Windows 3.x file manager would be infringing on it.
But I would go so far as to affirm that the reason they've never used this offensively is the same reason most companies with lots of patents don't either, even if someones is supposed to be infringing on them...
They are designed as protection from other patent trolls.
I agree, but the key here is to ensure that there are no false positives, which have been traditionally the biggest problem with blacklists.
If they figure that out, I don't care what kind of statistical approach they are using, as long as it works.
I think someone from MIT (maybe three or four years ago during the height of the problems with Spamhaus?) tried this before, but I don't remember if it got anywhere. Maybe this is an ofshoot from that.
In the meantime... SpamAssasin with whitelists, which is the best of worse worlds.
He gets the job done as well as we do with VS, or better. So I don't see the problem.
It's lame to reply to myself, but I forgot something re: development tools.
Don't dictate what your developers use, if it's possible. Case in point: In my current company we are building a VB.NET web application. There are six developers and five of us use Visual Studio, but the tech lead does not, he uses VIM. I was amazed by this, but after seeing him wrangle some text with that thing, I can see the value over an IDE, although I still prefer its warm confines because I've come to rely on the bells and whistles.
BUT, this works only because he has a build system where he does not rely on the VS project files, only the source code, resources, images, etc. The end result is the same as if you had compiled the thing inside Visual Studio, except that you used only the compilers. This is very cool, and while I don't fully understand the build files, I can see how that's a definite advantage. The scripts even pull the source off CVS and everything.
My point I guess is that you shouldn't tie yourself to development tools, if possible. That's just common sense, and at the same time you'll allow developers to use the tools they prefer. That makes for happy developers.
Maybe one of these days I'll try VIM or EMACS, or maybe I'll just stick with the IDE. But at least I know I have the option.
I'm not a very experienced developer. I've worked at two different companies so far, where I was lucky to learn from some people who were.
The way I'd see this is whether or not you have a one-size-fits-all framework that will be useful in many different situations. But you have levels. For example, you can do pretty mcuch everything with VB.Net or Java, from web apps to desktop clients. So at that level you should pick a good, mature, supported platform that fits your basic needs (Linux, Windows, whatever).
The next level would be the stuff you pile around the base language. That's where it gets interesting. Some people swear by one ORM library (Hibernate) and others prefer whatever they used at the last project. So if you dictate Hibernate and Struts, people who were used to something else might not like that.
But if you don't standardize, you'll find yourself trying to wrangle nine different stacks that might do the same. How much is that worth? It's a waste of time and treasure. My company currently runs MS SQL, Oracle, Sybase, Ingres and MySQL. Why? Probably because at some point someone said "screw Oracle, I'm doing this with Sybase because I like it" and the rest is history. Extricating yourself from that can take years.
If the person making the decision to standardize on LibraryX is knowledgeable enough to make that call and he is making it based on the requirements of the company and the skill levels of the developers (current and future), then the standardization will work. The developers who work there will have to adapt and learn if necessary. Less-experienced developers (like me!) should not dictate what the company uses to ship applications just because they like a given library or toolset, because we choose what we *like* or what is cool rather than what is sustainable.
Anyway, good luck. I've seen how hard all that can be, especially at large firms.
It wasn't a small amount, it was a large amount of blood, a large stain. This is not you leaving traces of blood when you scrape your knuckles (FFS), this is a "I just crushed your skull and you're bleeding all over my car" amount of blood.
> If Reiser was less of an asshole during his trial he would have literally gotten away with murder
You sound like you're disappointed he didn't.
Oh, that's bad. I didn't RTFA obviously (keeping with tradition), the Slasdhot article submission specifically says "sale of fake goods"
Thanks for the clarification, that evidently should not be allowed to stand in any way.
I doubt that part of the complaint would stand, because it goes against the first-sale doctrine.
The other problem would be price-fixing. For example, they cannot legally prevent me from buying lots of handbags and re-selling them on the open market for whatever price I can get.
No, companies like these are scared to death of cheap knock-offs from China. That's their greatest terror.
It doesn't matter that the term is enclosed in quotes in the submission. We're talking about trademarks here. If these companies don't take action regarding this they will be allowing their trademarks to be diluted, making them more and more difficult to defend.
This has nothing to do with IP.
Any defendant in court for trademark infringement can bring up the fact that the plaintiff is allowing eBay to sell thousands of cheap imitations. And they would win the case based on that, probably.
Trademark law pretty much requires things like these be done, and the companies have no choice but to go after the entity facilitating the sales.
It's not nice, but that's what it is.
This has implications beyond the delivery of drugs. Drugs act at the protein level, but imagine a delivery mechanism that does not require a protein receptor, but instead acts at the DNA filament level.
This is HUGE news.
Thanx. I dont know why someone would be offended by my comment, it is just the reflection of what i see every day at work.
I live in a big city where people are obsessed with physical security. Locking doors, checking their cars before they get in, etc.
But they don't think their PCs require much more attention than shutting them down at night. So it wont 'overheat'.
Most of them probably pay more attantion to their toasters.
Personal encryption is not widespread because most people don't know anything about security or privacy. They figure the "stuff" going through the "tubes" is safe and only the intended recipients can see it.
Then again most people only send chan letters, lame jokes and soccer practice announcements, so its not like they needed a lots of privacy to begin with.
People with a clue know what they need to do and do it. Everyone else can carry on as usual.