untrue. How is your PC acting like a server in BitTorrent? Because it's sending out data? Sending data is a required function of connecting to the internet. It's not against the TOS to send an email. Nor is it against the TOS to send an email with an attachment. It is certainly not against the TOS to send a file through AIM or GoogleTalk. Where is the line that BitTorrent crosses that turns your PC into a server?
It's therapy driven because over half the boggers are teenage-wanna-punk-goth-emo kids mad at the world because they can't get a girlfriend/boyfriend. LiveJournal and mySpace have been a never ending parade of this nonsense.
"Remember, the ability of an object to float is not (directly) related to its density. Its related to its ability to displace water and its mass. The reason submarines float (or sink) is because their shape displaces a greater mass of water than the equivalent mass of water that would fill their volume."
Something that floats because it displaces a greater volume (we should say volume, not mass here) than the equivalent mass of water is-by definition of density-less dense than water.
But anyway, your thought sparked something with me.
If ice cube melt doesn't change the depth of water in a cup, why would it change the depth of whatever in the ocean? Either you're wrong, the scientists are wrong... or the ice melt is comming off of non-water storage locations. hmmm...
the age of consent in America, more specifically the State where this crime occured, isn't to say that American girls (or California girls) are more innocent at 17 then any other girls. It's to say that ALL girls are innocent enough at that age that they aren't to have sex with way older men, and other places (where the age of consent is lower) are wrong about their laws.
Also note that most states (I don't know the specifics of CA's laws...) have more defined laws than just "don't hump people under the age of 18." For example, in CO if you are 15 years old you can legally have sexual relations with a person up to the age of 25. So then, the age of the AOL mod must be taken into consideration as well.
Even if he is not found to be a sexual violater, he DID violate a position of trust to a minor which IS a crime punishable by law.
Being smart and being intuitive are different (but related) things. Your father is obviously a smart man, but seems to lack a certain intuition for using his computer and the internet. (That's assumed... don't hate me T.T).
The problem isn't really that people are dumb, though some computer users *are* absolutely retarded. It's that the average user doesn't care enough to learn about the computer. IE: Having 3 degrees in physics isn't going to help you out with using a computer any more than having a medical degree will help you play the piano. Most people are just stupid at computers.
Thanks for that... the comment, I think, was more about where the technology *could* take us. Which has been (slightly...) addressed by the man's site. It's just similar to what's in St. John's book, is all.
Indeed. Keep in mind, though, that this is really the beginning of such a technology. Who knows what the future holds for this... pretty soon it could have your DOB, blood type, address, favorite meal. All read at a distance of up to 2 miles!!! Or maybe not. Who knows?
My thoughts exactly. The idea as a whole seems pretty cool, though. Reminds me of Mercedes' (or was it made by Lexus first? some car company's:...) key system where if you throw the keys in the trunk, the trunk won't close or lock or anything. Once you get within a few feet of the car it will unlock automatically and even start up if you have it set to. I'd rather be able to leave they keys at home, then have them surgically implanted into my hand (or left butt cheek... wherever).
what's odd: Ding! you hit the nail on the head... *if* the universe was made up of only light particles. We know (at least assume...) that normal objects with mass (planets, stars... you!) cannot travel at the speed of light. For the universe to have a diameter of 28billion light years, and have only existed for 14billion years, is indeed very strange. It suggests that the average speed of the universe as it expands has been the speed of light. But we already know this shouldn't be true because the universe is made up of more than just light.:D
I think you're assuming too much about how artists make their money.
All the musicians I know (which is alot) make their money off of live shows, not CD sales.
All the painters I know make money by selling the actual paintings. (That seems pretty obvious...)
All the photographers I know make money by selling high-quality prints. (Suprisingly I know quite a few photographers...). Check out websites such as www.deviantart.com. "Budding" photographers can throw up photos for free download and still make money from selling actual prints.
I think we need to realize where money is made on actual art forms (as opposed to entertainment forms such as movies, TV, video games... blah blah blah) and look at how we can help protect the artist and the viewer, not the studios surrounding them.
Does anyone care about the valid and useful DRM applications before screaming human rights violations?
Well, how about this idea:
Does anyone care about the legitimate use of P2P applications? YES! The users do. The recording and creation industries (RIAA, MPAA, etc... but suprisingly over 50% of recording artists advocate free distro of their stuff; that's another subject...) overlook all the legitimate uses because the illegal uses obviously take up much more of the bandwidth.
Should we, the consumers, in the same way that the industry doesn't accept P2P actually accept such an obviously flawed constraint such as DRM? It has it's good points, but the bad are definitely the bigger piece of the pie.
Exactly. You didn't write the song, make the move, etc. If you want to own the content, create it or pay someone to create. It cost more than $.99 a song, or $19.99 a movie.
Intellectually speaking the content is not yours, but when you purchase the content it should belong to you in whatever medium your purchaced it in. As a recording music artist I find this argument fairly absurd.
Argument by analogy: If I knit a sweater with a really neat-o design and sell it on eBay, the sweater becomes the property of whomever I sell it to. It would be improper to put any constraints on that person's use of "my" sweater.
Why should entertainment forms like music, books, and movies be any different?
You're assuming the cashier is actually looking at the name on the card, the name on the ID, and your face. I worked in retail for a small time, and when I got a "See ID" card I would barely take the time out to match everything up (shamefully...).
You agree to some terms when you sign up for an email account. Can you send an email without some email account? In most cases: no. I suppose there are some apps around that allow you to send email without an address (through some forums, etc...), but in every case I've seen you would have had to agree to some terms in order to do even that.
Slashdot Mirror
untrue. How is your PC acting like a server in BitTorrent? Because it's sending out data? Sending data is a required function of connecting to the internet. It's not against the TOS to send an email. Nor is it against the TOS to send an email with an attachment. It is certainly not against the TOS to send a file through AIM or GoogleTalk. Where is the line that BitTorrent crosses that turns your PC into a server?
vista is 64bit...
It's therapy driven because over half the boggers are teenage-wanna-punk-goth-emo kids mad at the world because they can't get a girlfriend/boyfriend. LiveJournal and mySpace have been a never ending parade of this nonsense.
This isn't news.
"Remember, the ability of an object to float is not (directly) related to its density. Its related to its ability to displace water and its mass. The reason submarines float (or sink) is because their shape displaces a greater mass of water than the equivalent mass of water that would fill their volume."
Something that floats because it displaces a greater volume (we should say volume, not mass here) than the equivalent mass of water is-by definition of density-less dense than water.
But anyway, your thought sparked something with me.
If ice cube melt doesn't change the depth of water in a cup, why would it change the depth of whatever in the ocean? Either you're wrong, the scientists are wrong... or the ice melt is comming off of non-water storage locations. hmmm...
At leat this software is being created with good intentions. I'll be sad to see the RIAA take it out. :/
the age of consent in America, more specifically the State where this crime occured, isn't to say that American girls (or California girls) are more innocent at 17 then any other girls. It's to say that ALL girls are innocent enough at that age that they aren't to have sex with way older men, and other places (where the age of consent is lower) are wrong about their laws. Also note that most states (I don't know the specifics of CA's laws...) have more defined laws than just "don't hump people under the age of 18." For example, in CO if you are 15 years old you can legally have sexual relations with a person up to the age of 25. So then, the age of the AOL mod must be taken into consideration as well. Even if he is not found to be a sexual violater, he DID violate a position of trust to a minor which IS a crime punishable by law.
thank you for posting this...
I guess the article wouldn't be as shocking if it read "AOL dude tries to hump 17 year old"
how inefficient are these programs?
read: Norton Internet Security.
Linux is free, but support isn't... well, couldn't it be said that windows is costly, and support for windows is costly as well?
The problem isn't really that people are dumb, though some computer users *are* absolutely retarded. It's that the average user doesn't care enough to learn about the computer. IE: Having 3 degrees in physics isn't going to help you out with using a computer any more than having a medical degree will help you play the piano. Most people are just stupid at computers.
Remind anyone else of ghost in the shell? I can't wait 'till we've got people hacking other people!
Read: Hobbes's Contractarianism. You give up certain rights to be protected (actually... "escape the state of nature").
Thanks for that... the comment, I think, was more about where the technology *could* take us. Which has been (slightly...) addressed by the man's site. It's just similar to what's in St. John's book, is all.
Indeed. Keep in mind, though, that this is really the beginning of such a technology. Who knows what the future holds for this... pretty soon it could have your DOB, blood type, address, favorite meal. All read at a distance of up to 2 miles!!! Or maybe not. Who knows?
My thoughts exactly. The idea as a whole seems pretty cool, though. Reminds me of Mercedes' (or was it made by Lexus first? some car company's:...) key system where if you throw the keys in the trunk, the trunk won't close or lock or anything. Once you get within a few feet of the car it will unlock automatically and even start up if you have it set to. I'd rather be able to leave they keys at home, then have them surgically implanted into my hand (or left butt cheek... wherever).
what's odd: Ding! you hit the nail on the head... *if* the universe was made up of only light particles. We know (at least assume...) that normal objects with mass (planets, stars... you!) cannot travel at the speed of light. For the universe to have a diameter of 28billion light years, and have only existed for 14billion years, is indeed very strange. It suggests that the average speed of the universe as it expands has been the speed of light. But we already know this shouldn't be true because the universe is made up of more than just light. :D
I think you're assuming too much about how artists make their money. All the musicians I know (which is alot) make their money off of live shows, not CD sales. All the painters I know make money by selling the actual paintings. (That seems pretty obvious...) All the photographers I know make money by selling high-quality prints. (Suprisingly I know quite a few photographers...). Check out websites such as www.deviantart.com. "Budding" photographers can throw up photos for free download and still make money from selling actual prints. I think we need to realize where money is made on actual art forms (as opposed to entertainment forms such as movies, TV, video games... blah blah blah) and look at how we can help protect the artist and the viewer, not the studios surrounding them.
Does anyone care about the valid and useful DRM applications before screaming human rights violations? Well, how about this idea: Does anyone care about the legitimate use of P2P applications? YES! The users do. The recording and creation industries (RIAA, MPAA, etc... but suprisingly over 50% of recording artists advocate free distro of their stuff; that's another subject...) overlook all the legitimate uses because the illegal uses obviously take up much more of the bandwidth. Should we, the consumers, in the same way that the industry doesn't accept P2P actually accept such an obviously flawed constraint such as DRM? It has it's good points, but the bad are definitely the bigger piece of the pie.
Exactly. You didn't write the song, make the move, etc. If you want to own the content, create it or pay someone to create. It cost more than $.99 a song, or $19.99 a movie.
Intellectually speaking the content is not yours, but when you purchase the content it should belong to you in whatever medium your purchaced it in. As a recording music artist I find this argument fairly absurd.
Argument by analogy:
If I knit a sweater with a really neat-o design and sell it on eBay, the sweater becomes the property of whomever I sell it to. It would be improper to put any constraints on that person's use of "my" sweater.
Why should entertainment forms like music, books, and movies be any different?
You're assuming the cashier is actually looking at the name on the card, the name on the ID, and your face. I worked in retail for a small time, and when I got a "See ID" card I would barely take the time out to match everything up (shamefully...).
I actually haven't heard of Telnet being used as an email client, but I'm not that "into" the IT world. No need to be rude, now. :/
Question though: Are those a legitimate way to send email? (is connecting to some person's mail server through telnet and sending away OK?)
If this is, indeed, how AOL defines posts, then it *does* imply that IMs are a part of posts because they are a part of "chat participation."
:D
Slashdot news is to be taken with a grain of salt, but slashdot isn't the only news reporting on the recent AOL TOS.
You agree to some terms when you sign up for an email account. Can you send an email without some email account? In most cases: no. I suppose there are some apps around that allow you to send email without an address (through some forums, etc...), but in every case I've seen you would have had to agree to some terms in order to do even that.