Chances are such things as this will be mostly a harmless curiousity. Maybe on occasion some good will come of it by a check on a potential employee or renter or such.
The potential problem isn't someone being actually listed who should be, though after a time some consideration should be given to the passage of time (Did someone do something dumb in 1997? And it's 2013 now and nothing else? Good indication a lesson was learned, there.)
The real misuse or abuse will be subtle and is already a problem with other things; this will be no different. In the mid-1980s when the Tylenol poisonings where happening there was a suspect, 'James Lewis' questioned. I knew a different James Lewis ans the coincidence was joked about.. but if someone looked but not too close, he could have had problems.
Will any such collection of information be harmful? No, not of itself. Just people being stupid about how to use it will be. Just like now. The fear is that now more people will be able to misuse and misinterpret the information.
Just drive over, or need folks move?
on
Fighting UCITA
·
· Score: 1
I'm about 15 miles from Iowa.
With the Iowa law, would I have any protection by making software purchases in Iowa (and saving my receipt, you can just bet!)? Or would I need to have an address in Iowa for my protection?
One advantage to the first situation is that retailers in surrounding states would then have some (perhaps slight, but non-zero) pressure to have such 'bomb shelter' legislation in their own states. Retailers just hate losing customers. And legislatures hate losing "revenue" to surrounding states. This is a mobile society. Being 60 miles from the state border would be a mere nuisance, not an insurmountable problem.
I'm just one person. Insignificant. But the cumulative effect of many people can be noticeable. And then there's the real attention-getter: "Our (software) purchasing department is in Iowa" or "moving to Iowa". This could easily happen with some companies. Who benefits? Iowa. Folks may joke about the state, but passing this law would be one (more) smart move on Iowa's part.
The enemy need not be all that advanced themselves, just have advanced backers or access to advanced systems.
Example: Afghanistan.
Soviet Union sent in some fairly advanced stuff against what they expected to be a buncha guys with rifles and rocks. Surprise, those guys had more than rifles and rocks. Sure, there were other factors and things do change, but one thing remains: You are not fighting the enemy. You are fighting the enemy and any allies (even unwitting ones) he may have.
The idea of getting a genuinely damaging page pulled is reasonable on the surface. The problem is, what if it isn't genuinely damaging? This would seem the case given the information about the original case posted to/. and certainly with the example given in this article.
If this behavior (get any complaint, kneejerk yank a page) becomes the norm, then things like FreeNet will be given impetus. And there the genuinely offensive/dangerous/illegal items that deserve to be yanked cannot be. Result: Treating the problem incorrectly leads to a far worse problem.
Laws on the net are rather like antibiotics, use them incorrectly and all you get is a resistant strain of whatever you were trying to get rid of.
Everyone keeps talking about reporting the Jocks or the lawyers' kids...
While I do not advocate it, it is easy to see it happening. The reason is that that will draw the most attention/outrage/legal problems. A geek turning himself is likely going to be treated as "..a troublemaker who's damaging out system and must be dealt with.. severely." And who care about geeks? Not the school or WAVE or this discussion wouldn't be taking place at all. It would not be needed.
The idea of reporting innocent people is wrong.
Exactly. If you are innocent, then it is wrong to report yourself.
Who *should* be reported? Those who actually ARE a threat to others. Amazingly(?), the kids who are such a threat most often turn out to be jocks. Not always, but that's the best odds. The idea of 'good sportsmanship' might have existed once upon a time. Now, like 'once upon a time' it is just the stuff of Fairy Tales.
No, I'm not advocating it, but it is inevitable and something I didn't see addressed.
What happens when the folks WAVE harrassed or their friends (who might be a good distance away such that school/city correlation will be utterly meaningless) strike back and hack WAVE by doing they're own 'reporting'? What have they to lose? Nothing. That's beauty (or danger) of anonymous reporting accusations. It can work both ways.
"Hey, we've gotten a dozen reports of FirstName LastName doing BadThing1, BadThing2 and BadThing3 at ThisSchool. Maybe we better..."
Can 'die Welle', er, WAVE filter this out? Will they be swamped with having to filter it? Or will they not filter this (WAVE's victims will know what triggers to use, so it won't be easily skimmed away the false positives they manage to lob back) and the crumbled under the weight? And thus lose credibility.. and thereby get bad publicity (from traditional press) and then have to deal with that?
Is such a 'crack' at WAVE honest and ethical? I very much doubt it. Even WAVE being dishonest and unethical (though perhaps well intentioned.. mmm pave that road!) doesn't make it right. But they better expect it for a simple reason: people will fight as dirty as they have to survive.
It means that companies will now be forced into even more desparate measures in order to attempt to make a profit...
Not at all. This ruling doesn't say that source must be opened. That remains the author's choice. What it does say is that if an author opens his source, he has First Amendment protections -- and responsibilities -- for it.
It looks like this program would be very effective, but not in doing what is intended to do.
How does one survive this thing? A kind of enforced happiness (or whatever the attitude dujour is) is required. "You don't wanna get sent in? Fake being 'normal'" Sure, it's not easy. And not everyone who needs to do it will be able to and even those who can do it will have difficulty in keeping up the illusion. That added stress will add up and there are at least two ways for it to manifest.
One way is when that charge of stress gets too big and WAVE causes the very thing it claims to treat: an outburts of staggering violence. Congratulations, Pinkerton, you got folks good & mad as hell...
Another way it could turn out is not by violence, but by these people learning double-behaviour as normal. Congratulations, Pinkerton, you've just created a generation of folks who lie without conscience as it is a survival mechanism.
The desire is right, but the means are amiss. WAVE will be partly effective, but when it fails, it will fail spectaculary. It is like searching for time bombs with a stethoscope - it will find the obvious time bombs, but it will also find harmless watches and clocks, and it won't find the timebombs with electronic timers. (Not the best choice of analogy, but it gets the point a across.)
A good many folks have placed orders for yet to be delivered iOpeners. And they expect (or at least hope for) delivery of modifiable units without a service contract attached.
Supposing that the delivered units are still modifiable (though perhaps not as easily as before), the issue is the service contract. As these people do not want the contract, they will ask about that - and hopefully be told the truth, whatever it may be - and probably find they will be stuck with a contract if they take delivery.
So what will they do? Refuse delivery, of course. Result: warehouses stuffed full of unwanted iOpeners.
Warehousing is expensive. Worse, the stock is taxed. Hrmm...that means stuff just sitting there is worse than tied up money, it *costs*. What to do? First Netpliance tries to sell and reduce inventory.
First by doing just as now. They get a shock and find that doesn't reduce stock very much. And if any non-techs ask their tech friends about it, right now they will likely not get any glowing recommendations. So how to reduce the stock another way?
One way is to reduce the service length and cost.
Another is to raise the price and drop the contract, at least as an option.
Or if they refuse to try either of those, the iOpeners can sit and sit and cos$t and co$t... until in desperation they get sold to a liquidator who turns around and sells them "for parts" at price lower than the current $99 and without any contract.
If you only simulate nuclear explosions on a computer you aren't detonating nukes. No detonation, no (or at least significanlty lower) chance of radiation leakage.
Is this an ideal application of supercomputing power? Maybe, maybe not. But it sure beats the alternative.. once you have the data so you *can* model things, that is.
I've heard horror stories about Cyrix chips too. Mainly that linux users stopped having problems when they switched from Cyrix to AMD.
Curiously, I have heard horror stories about AMD as well. Some of the remaining OS/2 users have foudn that they stop having problems when they switch from AMD Cyrix.
I'm not proud - I'll run whatever chip I can get my hands on:) And the competition is a Good Thing. Maybe I'll never use a Cyrix III, but I may benefit from it anyway.
The NOx emissions come about as the oxidizer used is not pure oxygen but air, which is mostly nitrogen. The high reaction temperature of burning hydrogen does result in some of the nitrogen getting oxidized in side reactions. There is a simple solution, however: lower the cumbustion temperature a bit. How? water injection. Done properly it will keep the cylinder just cool enough enough to reduce (if not eliminate) NOx production. And if you cool (some of) the exhaust, you don't need to worry about running out water for this. --
There are two ways of storing hydrogen for use as a fuel. One is to compress and pressurize it, just like propane -- with all the same problems and risks. Propane or natural gas bottles can go boom, and so can hydrogen.
The other means is to store the gas in a (heavy) metal hydride. This is far safer but has a problem of its own -- those metals ARE heavy, thus limiting range per amount of energy much as batteries do for electric vehicles.
NOVA several years back had a very interesting demo of this. A can of gasoline, a bottle of propane, and a tank of metal hydride were each set out on a range and shot at. The gasoline made a fireball and lingering fire. The propane bottle detonated. The metal hydride just hissed.
Hydrogen isn't perfect, but if a cheap means of production works out, it could mean trading current fuel's imperfections for a better set of problems.
Why endure seperation without solution?
on
LonelyNet
·
· Score: 1
Do I spend less time off-net than I used to? Absolutely. I used to spend all my time off-net since there was no net to be on (or no access, which amounts to the same result.)
Now I spend some (a lot?) of my time on the 'net. This doesn't just mean I'm pulled away from from the local area. It also means I communicate with people who are not local but share interests.
In a Big City there may a few hundred or maybe just a dozen folks with similar interests on some obscure subject (no, I won't give an example, chances are everyone has somet interest too obscure for the neighbors to know even exists). The problem, even in the Big City, is finding them. Now what about out in the boondocks? The nearest similarly inclined person may be a few hundred miles away.
The 'net eases this problem. Looking for something? Try a web search. Look in the newsgroups and search on deja or similar. Maybe see if there's an IRC channel on some network about the subject.
The problem of being Truly Alone ("Am I the *only* one in the world?!") is gone. The problem of communication is eased, and once people know each other even exist, then they can get to serious discussion -- and even meet.
Do I spend less time talking on the phone? Yep. Less *need* to do so when family emails and there is fairly common meeting on IRC. And friends (all over the globe) also communicate by email & IRC.
Sure, I speak to folks eyeball to eyeball and I do use the phone. But the people I actually share interests with aren't local, but on-line. And we do make the effort to meet up, in person, when we can. Just like family. Yes, family is wide spread by several hundred miles too.
So what does this study really say? It says "Go out and socialize with folks you have no (or few) interests in common with and have a bigger phone bill to accomplish what is already handled." Sure, voice is nice -- at times and when needed. Hearing 'nothing new' for a few nights isn't worth the long distance price.
Reading a paper or watching TV hardly seems a social activity, at least not very good ones. At least on line I'm actively exchanging thoughts (is debatable? -- only as much as they would be in person), not just having whatever 'entertainment' wash over me. --
...someone were to rip their CDs to their own drive (or rig up a CD jukebox, etc) and allowed themselves, and only themselves, to access their own private server for the same result?
The result, for that one person, is the same though the work involved is now significant. The difference is now it is 'narrow'casting rather than a broadcast.
MP3.com removes the upfront workload of ripping everything or rigging up the jukebox, and centralizes the servers -- which makes them accessable. While I (for example) could eventually get something like this set up privately at home, running a server isn't a real option for me. No, I don't use MP3.com, but I do see the utility of the enterprise.
Not saying which is best or who is right, just curious about this.
Everyone works at different rates and peoiple come around to things at different times. One sudden buy may get noticed. A handful may slip in under the RADAR. This increases transaction cost but may be worth it. What about folks who come in "late" to the thing?
The hack is do it all legally and without any more warning than absolutely necessary. And if they still do the wrong thing? Well, they can get get all their stock dumped at once -- that makes the value go DOWN (though hackerdom would lose $ in that). But remember as a public company they don't care about the Right Thing or Wrong Thing so much as 'Keep the investors happy.' If the investors are only happy with The Right Thing, what are they gonna do? Yep. Sure, it's pandering. Why not make 'em pander to *us*?
Maybe geeks will take over the world, one stock at a time.
There have been a few articles about maps of the 'net but this is the first time I've seen it considered to give the map continents. The idea is appealing, but doesn't quite work.
There are surely "undiscovered" (not merely unmentioned) continents... but maybe it would be better to consider that they can and do overlap. I'm fairly sure the Corporate and Buy overlap, as well as Corporate and X overlapping. X and God likely do not overlap, not too much, at least, however.
With this, maybe it's more 'regions' in a n-dimensional (n=9? Who knows). space. This does of course muck the whole easy to picture thing that a continent view yeilds, but may be more accurate. An intersting exercise.
Yes, an intersting exercise. But not, as far as I can tell, one with utility -- one can use the 'net fairly well without this view of it. And having this view doesn't improve the usage, does it? If anything the 'under' part may be underused or misunderstood by most. Esp. usenet. I would also consider adding IRC to this region, and maybe a different name as there is more than just under.net out there.
What was even funnier is that not long after that aired he was on radio (and TV I assume) explaining the then-new TV ratings system. Well, mybe not funny by itself, but in combination it was very amusing.
Slashdot Mirror
Chances are such things as this will be mostly a harmless curiousity. Maybe on occasion some good will come of it by a check on a potential employee or renter or such.
The potential problem isn't someone being actually listed who should be, though after a time some consideration should be given to the passage of time (Did someone do something dumb in 1997? And it's 2013 now and nothing else? Good indication a lesson was learned, there.)
The real misuse or abuse will be subtle and is already a problem with other things; this will be no different. In the mid-1980s when the Tylenol poisonings where happening there was a suspect, 'James Lewis' questioned. I knew a different James Lewis ans the coincidence was joked about.. but if someone looked but not too close, he could have had problems.
Will any such collection of information be harmful? No, not of itself. Just people being stupid about how to use it will be. Just like now. The fear is that now more people will be able to misuse and misinterpret the information.
I'm about 15 miles from Iowa.
With the Iowa law, would I have any protection by making software purchases in Iowa (and saving my receipt, you can just bet!)? Or would I need to have an address in Iowa for my protection?
One advantage to the first situation is that retailers in surrounding states would then have some (perhaps slight, but non-zero) pressure to have such 'bomb shelter' legislation in their own states. Retailers just hate losing customers. And legislatures hate losing "revenue" to surrounding states. This is a mobile society. Being 60 miles from the state border would be a mere nuisance, not an insurmountable problem.
I'm just one person. Insignificant. But the cumulative effect of many people can be noticeable. And then there's the real attention-getter: "Our (software) purchasing department is in Iowa" or "moving to Iowa". This could easily happen with some companies. Who benefits? Iowa. Folks may joke about the state, but passing this law would be one (more) smart move on Iowa's part.
The interface ought to configurable, to be tweaked to anyone's liking.
Yet should readily be able to go to the defaults for a while (or a second or third or nth set of preferences) to permit consistent usage.
Jumping from one machine to another even with the same OS and many of the same programs can be disorienting with 'trivial' differences.
Give me a consistent starting point and the ability to configure things to my liking and the rest is details.
Once upon a time it was...
Any program will grow until it can read mail.
But now it seems...
Any program will expand until it can browse the web.
How about one job per program?
Do 'dull' games lead to an increased risk of chartered accountancy?
Do funny, humorus games lead to an increase of comedy in the streets?
And, more importantly, is this causation or mere correlation?
Causation: Evil violent game turns harmless person into violent person.
Correlation: Evil violent person tends to like games that happen to be violent.
Do stupid games lead to an increase of 'first post' nonsense?
The enemy need not be all that advanced themselves, just have advanced backers or access to advanced systems.
Example: Afghanistan.
Soviet Union sent in some fairly advanced stuff against what they expected to be a buncha guys with rifles and rocks. Surprise, those guys had more than rifles and rocks. Sure, there were other factors and things do change, but one thing remains: You are not fighting the enemy. You are fighting the enemy and any allies (even unwitting ones) he may have.
Ah well, I don't use EMACS. And only use vi enough to get something else going, fwiw.
The idea of getting a genuinely damaging page pulled is reasonable on the surface. The problem is, what if it isn't genuinely damaging? This would seem the case given the information about the original case posted to /. and certainly with the example given in this article.
If this behavior (get any complaint, kneejerk yank a page) becomes the norm, then things like FreeNet will be given impetus. And there the genuinely offensive/dangerous/illegal items that deserve to be yanked cannot be. Result: Treating the problem incorrectly leads to a far worse problem.
Laws on the net are rather like antibiotics, use them incorrectly and all you get is a resistant strain of whatever you were trying to get rid of.
Everyone keeps talking about reporting the Jocks or the lawyers' kids...
While I do not advocate it, it is easy to see it happening. The reason is that that will draw the most attention/outrage/legal problems. A geek turning himself is likely going to be treated as "..a troublemaker who's damaging out system and must be dealt with.. severely." And who care about geeks? Not the school or WAVE or this discussion wouldn't be taking place at all. It would not be needed.
The idea of reporting innocent people is wrong.
Exactly. If you are innocent, then it is wrong to report yourself.
Who *should* be reported? Those who actually ARE a threat to others. Amazingly(?), the kids who are such a threat most often turn out to be jocks. Not always, but that's the best odds. The idea of 'good sportsmanship' might have existed once upon a time. Now, like 'once upon a time' it is just the stuff of Fairy Tales.
Let's report WAVE to all of the filtering software makers and request that the site be blocked.
I hadn't considered that one. Thank you for suggesting a beautiful hack.
No, I'm not advocating it, but it is inevitable and something I didn't see addressed.
What happens when the folks WAVE harrassed or their friends (who might be a good distance away such that school/city correlation will be utterly meaningless) strike back and hack WAVE by doing they're own 'reporting'? What have they to lose? Nothing. That's beauty (or danger) of anonymous reporting accusations. It can work both ways.
"Hey, we've gotten a dozen reports of FirstName LastName doing BadThing1, BadThing2 and BadThing3 at ThisSchool. Maybe we better..."
Can 'die Welle', er, WAVE filter this out? Will they be swamped with having to filter it? Or will they not filter this (WAVE's victims will know what triggers to use, so it won't be easily skimmed away the false positives they manage to lob back) and the crumbled under the weight? And thus lose credibility.. and thereby get bad publicity (from traditional press) and then have to deal with that?
Is such a 'crack' at WAVE honest and ethical? I very much doubt it. Even WAVE being dishonest and unethical (though perhaps well intentioned.. mmm pave that road!) doesn't make it right. But they better expect it for a simple reason: people will fight as dirty as they have to survive.
It means that companies will now be forced into even more desparate measures in order to attempt to make a profit...
Not at all. This ruling doesn't say that source must be opened. That remains the author's choice. What it does say is that if an author opens his source, he has First Amendment protections -- and responsibilities -- for it.
It looks like this program would be very effective, but not in doing what is intended to do.
How does one survive this thing? A kind of enforced happiness (or whatever the attitude dujour is) is required. "You don't wanna get sent in? Fake being 'normal'" Sure, it's not easy. And not everyone who needs to do it will be able to and even those who can do it will have difficulty in keeping up the illusion. That added stress will add up and there are at least two ways for it to manifest.
One way is when that charge of stress gets too big and WAVE causes the very thing it claims to treat: an outburts of staggering violence. Congratulations, Pinkerton, you got folks good & mad as hell...
Another way it could turn out is not by violence, but by these people learning double-behaviour as normal. Congratulations, Pinkerton, you've just created a generation of folks who lie without conscience as it is a survival mechanism.
The desire is right, but the means are amiss. WAVE will be partly effective, but when it fails, it will fail spectaculary. It is like searching for time bombs with a stethoscope - it will find the obvious time bombs, but it will also find harmless watches and clocks, and it won't find the timebombs with electronic timers.
(Not the best choice of analogy, but it gets the point a across.)
A good many folks have placed orders for yet to be delivered iOpeners. And they expect (or at least hope for) delivery of modifiable units without a service contract attached.
Supposing that the delivered units are still modifiable (though perhaps not as easily as before), the issue is the service contract. As these people do not want the contract, they will ask about that - and hopefully be told the truth, whatever it may be - and probably find they will be stuck with a contract if they take delivery.
So what will they do? Refuse delivery, of course.
Result: warehouses stuffed full of unwanted iOpeners.
Warehousing is expensive. Worse, the stock is taxed. Hrmm...that means stuff just sitting there is worse than tied up money, it *costs*. What to do? First Netpliance tries to sell and reduce inventory.
First by doing just as now. They get a shock and find that doesn't reduce stock very much. And if any non-techs ask their tech friends about it, right now they will likely not get any glowing recommendations. So how to reduce the stock another way?
One way is to reduce the service length and cost.
Another is to raise the price and drop the contract, at least as an option.
Or if they refuse to try either of those, the iOpeners can sit and sit and cos$t and co$t... until in desperation they get sold to a liquidator who turns around and sells them "for parts" at price lower than the current $99 and without any contract.
If you only simulate nuclear explosions on a computer you aren't detonating nukes. No detonation, no (or at least significanlty lower) chance of radiation leakage.
Is this an ideal application of supercomputing power? Maybe, maybe not. But it sure beats the alternative.. once you have the data so you *can* model things, that is.
I'd suggest a search on Dejanews, I recall seeing this issue a few times (as recently as 1999, maybe int 2000) in a couple of the os2 newsgroups.
Myself, I have an AMD K5-133 that quite happily runs OS/2 Warp Connect (3.0) so I've not run into it directly.
Pentium. Celeron. Itanium.
:) And the competition is a Good Thing. Maybe I'll never use a Cyrix III, but I may benefit from it anyway.
Athlon.
VIA Cyrix III.
At least they got that right.
I've heard horror stories about Cyrix chips too.
Mainly that linux users stopped having problems when they switched from Cyrix to AMD.
Curiously, I have heard horror stories about AMD as well. Some of the remaining OS/2 users have foudn that they stop having problems when they switch from AMD Cyrix.
I'm not proud - I'll run whatever chip I can get my hands on
The NOx emissions come about as the oxidizer used is not pure oxygen but air, which is mostly nitrogen. The high reaction temperature of burning hydrogen does result in some of the nitrogen getting oxidized in side reactions. There is a simple solution, however: lower the cumbustion temperature a bit. How? water injection. Done properly it will keep the cylinder just cool enough enough to reduce (if not eliminate) NOx production. And if you cool (some of) the exhaust, you don't need to worry about running out water for this.
--
There are two ways of storing hydrogen for use as a fuel. One is to compress and pressurize it, just like propane -- with all the same problems and risks. Propane or natural gas bottles can go boom, and so can hydrogen.
The other means is to store the gas in a (heavy) metal hydride. This is far safer but has a problem of its own -- those metals ARE heavy, thus limiting range per amount of energy much as batteries do for electric vehicles.
NOVA several years back had a very interesting demo of this. A can of gasoline, a bottle of propane, and a tank of metal hydride were each set out on a range and shot at. The gasoline made a fireball and lingering fire. The propane bottle detonated. The metal hydride just hissed.
Hydrogen isn't perfect, but if a cheap means of production works out, it could mean trading current fuel's imperfections for a better set of problems.
Do I spend less time off-net than I used to? Absolutely. I used to spend all my time off-net since there was no net to be on (or no access, which amounts to the same result.)
Now I spend some (a lot?) of my time on the 'net. This doesn't just mean I'm pulled away from from the local area. It also means I communicate with people who are not local but share interests.
In a Big City there may a few hundred or maybe just a dozen folks with similar interests on some obscure subject (no, I won't give an example, chances are everyone has somet interest too obscure for the neighbors to know even exists). The problem, even in the Big City, is finding them. Now what about out in the boondocks? The nearest similarly inclined person may be a few hundred miles away.
The 'net eases this problem. Looking for something? Try a web search. Look in the newsgroups and search on deja or similar. Maybe see if there's an IRC channel on some network about the subject.
The problem of being Truly Alone ("Am I the *only* one in the world?!") is gone. The problem of communication is eased, and once people know each other even exist, then they can get to serious discussion -- and even meet.
Do I spend less time talking on the phone? Yep. Less *need* to do so when family emails and there is fairly common meeting on IRC. And friends (all over the globe) also communicate by email & IRC.
Sure, I speak to folks eyeball to eyeball and I do use the phone. But the people I actually share interests with aren't local, but on-line. And we do make the effort to meet up, in person, when we can. Just like family. Yes, family is wide spread by several hundred miles too.
So what does this study really say? It says "Go out and socialize with folks you have no (or few) interests in common with and have a bigger phone bill to accomplish what is already handled." Sure, voice is nice -- at times and when needed. Hearing 'nothing new' for a few nights isn't worth the long distance price.
Reading a paper or watching TV hardly seems a social activity, at least not very good ones. At least on line I'm actively exchanging thoughts (is debatable? -- only as much as they would be in person), not just having whatever 'entertainment' wash over me.
--
...someone were to rip their CDs to their own drive (or rig up a CD jukebox, etc) and allowed themselves, and only themselves, to access their own private server for the same result?
The result, for that one person, is the same though the work involved is now significant. The difference is now it is 'narrow'casting rather than a broadcast.
MP3.com removes the upfront workload of ripping everything or rigging up the jukebox, and centralizes the servers -- which makes them accessable. While I (for example) could eventually get something like this set up privately at home, running a server isn't a real option for me. No, I don't use MP3.com, but I do see the utility of the enterprise.
Not saying which is best or who is right, just curious about this.
Everyone works at different rates and peoiple come around to things at different times. One sudden buy may get noticed. A handful may slip in under the RADAR. This increases transaction cost but may be worth it. What about folks who come in "late" to the thing?
The hack is do it all legally and without any more warning than absolutely necessary. And if they still do the wrong thing? Well, they can get get all their stock dumped at once -- that makes the value go DOWN (though hackerdom would lose $ in that). But remember as a public company they don't care about the Right Thing or Wrong Thing so much as 'Keep the investors happy.' If the investors are only happy with The Right Thing, what are they gonna do? Yep. Sure, it's pandering. Why not make 'em pander to *us*?
Maybe geeks will take over the world, one stock at a time.
There have been a few articles about maps of the 'net but this is the first time I've seen it considered to give the map continents. The idea is appealing, but doesn't quite work.
There are surely "undiscovered" (not merely unmentioned) continents... but maybe it would be better to consider that they can and do overlap. I'm fairly sure the Corporate and Buy overlap, as well as Corporate and X overlapping. X and God likely do not overlap, not too much, at least, however.
With this, maybe it's more 'regions' in a n-dimensional (n=9? Who knows). space. This does of course muck the whole easy to picture thing that a continent view yeilds, but may be more accurate. An intersting exercise.
Yes, an intersting exercise. But not, as far as I can tell, one with utility -- one can use the 'net fairly well without this view of it. And having this view doesn't improve the usage, does it? If anything the 'under' part may be underused or misunderstood by most. Esp. usenet. I would also consider adding IRC to this region, and maybe a different name as there is more than just under.net out there.
What was even funnier is that not long after that aired he was on radio (and TV I assume) explaining the then-new TV ratings system. Well, mybe not funny by itself, but in combination it was very amusing.
"The principle occupation [of the MPAA] is to make sure that American movies move freely and unhobbled around the world..."
It sure looks liek they should be. Oh, wait, sorry, nevermind. There I go again, trying to apply logic...