This doesn't necessarily make them non-neutral. So far it seems as if Wikileaks is not acting on behalf of anyone in particular, which would still leave them as being more or less neutral. It's merely a matter of ordering; they release a small amount at a time so they appear to be targeting specific entities.
The embarrassment cast upon the middle east shows that we're not merely dealing with someone who has an axe to grind with the United States.
1: Kids will get around it. 2: It probably won't get through, or be fully enforceable if it does. 3: Why not have an opt-out instead; the people responsible for the account are the parents.
A flock of sheep will begin moving as soon as they see the 'leader' move; the leader is often just whichever one decides to move first because it runs out of food underneath itself then sees some someplace else.
What we have with IPv6 is a bunch of fat lazy sheep who decide they will get off their butts once they see the rest of the flock someplace else.
That's just it; this specific technology is entirely concerned with the trip home from space - it doesn't appear to have any bearing on the cost of getting into space. The lifting technology is what will make it easier for us to build fancy stuff in orbit and beyond.
As a matter of fact I feel hard pressed to understand just what about this is actually a new development, but if people are working hard to overcome the obstacles then all the flashy bits that look good on the television are a lower priority.
That's just it. If you don't pay people what they're worth, you don't get them. Instead you get their cheap alternative.
You don't want to pay full price for a product? You buy the cheap alternative. But then you notice it's not the same, but you can't blame anyone but yourself because you were the one who chose not to pay for the real thing. You don't think cable TV is worth the price the company charges? Then you don't get it, simple as that. What we have here is spoiled corporate brats who don't want to pay what something costs but then whine when they don't have it.
Instead of tapping into the underemployed IT labor resources, which would cost more money, businesses have instead successfully lobbied the federal government to spend its own money to solve their problems for them.
Were at Wal-Mart 2.0, now any job can be paid by government instead of the employers themselves.
Seriously, how can they lay claim to work performed on one's own time if it's part-time? Besides; don't tell people what you're doing. Post it online without using your legal name or informing your employer. If by sheer coincidence they find it, it's already too late.
This is an old trick, just record in studio (people's homes) and then put it all together for the final mix. But still, there is something brilliant and beautiful about this. Not that it reinvents anything, but it does a great job of demonstrating this trick to a new generation of people who can take interest and see what else they can achieve with it.
If you read about it in other places besides here, what you'd more likely see is just endless mockery that would blind people to anything that really *could* go wrong with vaccinations. It is like discussing fertile land turning to desert in rural Africa, then hearing someone chime in that global warming is a hoax because it is snowing outside his window right now.
All that needs to happen is to make it so people can't SPECIFICALLY claim property just for the sake of passive income. Reform the laws so that people can't cash in on something they did not contribute to, no more random lawsuits aimed at people who did all their own work to bring things into existence.
You launch yours, I'll launch mine, and the usual trolls will launch their own just because they can. With any luck, they'll cause enough chaos to bring the issue to light and bring us closer to IP reform.
This is just a personal anecdote, but take it as you will. About a week ago I noticed that Firefox kept crashing on some specific pages, so out of curiosity I decided to load one of them in IE - bad, bad idea. The page loaded a PDF and simply by visiting I was infected with one of the worst malware problems I ever had; task manager shut off, antivirus disabled, locked out of registry editor, windows was completely crippled. Mind you, this was a week ago. Fortunately I'm on a dual boot system and I was able to go into Linux to delete the malignant exe files, which gave me a foothold to manually recover from the rest of it. IE basically just handed these people control over my system, with no input on my part other than loading a news article which happened to have the PDF on it.
I don't want work to be this endless soul crushing grind. I don't want my own experience to be considered worthless because the guy next door has the 4 str 4 stam belt. I don't want to be packed into a department of soulless adolescents who can't even talk normally. I don't want to push 90 hour weeks to hit my next milestone. I don't want my supervisor shrieking at me to get on vent for 21st century cutting edge micromanagement.
The question can not be asked whether someone "can" sue, because anyone can file a suit for any reason. And in modern legal warfare, that is a good assessment of how things go down. Instead it is a matter of whether they WOULD sue.
The questions you should be asking yourself:
-Who holds the rights over the original game?
-How litigious have they been in the past?
-Do they belong to an industry association?
Specifically img.4chan.org, which was what AT&T did for a brief while.
As an added benefit for ISPs it also cuts down on all the illegal porn and DDoS that people like to fling at the site as well.
I remember it being drilled into my head over and over... develop for new hardware instead of old hardware, do everything for the expensive crowd because people who don't spend money on their hardware are less likely to spend money on software.
This might be an outdated school of thought, but I'd say it goes double for Mac users. They're really expensive, and especially nowadays they're taking on this image as a trendy status symbol instead of a tool to do work with. Another things Mac devs have going for them, there is a lot less competition. If you would say that Macs don't have enough games out for them, then that translates into a niche to fill for aspiring businessmen.
It's nothing special.
Just get someone's password, then dump it into the list. These seemingly random login attempts likely come from logins that were found in other attacks. Get a winner, keep it. Then add it to a list of thousands more and you'll have a high chance of hitting the logins of those people who use the same name:pass over all their accounts....and that's why you don't make your bank password the same as your slashdot password.
It's your employer's call. It WILL offend them, and they WILL get even.
Consider the bad economy before you put your career on the line to make a statement, and then consider what the patent is worth - unless you're claiming ownership of ones and zeroes then it likely won't hurt anyone too much to sacrifice yourself over.
There is a chance that these musicians can end up making money from their recordings someday, a much GREATER chance than if they had tried their luck with the RIAA. Feeding all of the CEOs, lawyers, marketing, walmart, etc. is taking money out of the pockets of musicians themselves.
What MUSICIANS need is to be free of these commercial juggernauts so they can compete in the market without juggernaut approval.
This is just another act of the **AAs wanting to bludgeon people over the head for their own profits, and whether we give them what they want or not their response will just be to want more bludgeoning. They're going to push for a copyright term extension and tougher penalties every year, there is no right amount they are shooting for but just to keep increasing them at any cost.
This was in beta and development for HOW long before it spawned a whirlwind of chaos on release?
Looks like the MS priority of "Avoiding bad publicity" isn't working out for them.
Slashdot Mirror
This doesn't necessarily make them non-neutral. So far it seems as if Wikileaks is not acting on behalf of anyone in particular, which would still leave them as being more or less neutral. It's merely a matter of ordering; they release a small amount at a time so they appear to be targeting specific entities.
The embarrassment cast upon the middle east shows that we're not merely dealing with someone who has an axe to grind with the United States.
1: Kids will get around it.
2: It probably won't get through, or be fully enforceable if it does.
3: Why not have an opt-out instead; the people responsible for the account are the parents.
The reason is because ships obey the law of the flag they fly, which pretty much means paying out to the lowest bidder.
With no motivation to clean up their emissions, it is little surprise that there is no great concern over pollution.
A flock of sheep will begin moving as soon as they see the 'leader' move; the leader is often just whichever one decides to move first because it runs out of food underneath itself then sees some someplace else.
What we have with IPv6 is a bunch of fat lazy sheep who decide they will get off their butts once they see the rest of the flock someplace else.
That's just it; this specific technology is entirely concerned with the trip home from space - it doesn't appear to have any bearing on the cost of getting into space. The lifting technology is what will make it easier for us to build fancy stuff in orbit and beyond.
As a matter of fact I feel hard pressed to understand just what about this is actually a new development, but if people are working hard to overcome the obstacles then all the flashy bits that look good on the television are a lower priority.
That's just it. If you don't pay people what they're worth, you don't get them. Instead you get their cheap alternative. You don't want to pay full price for a product? You buy the cheap alternative. But then you notice it's not the same, but you can't blame anyone but yourself because you were the one who chose not to pay for the real thing. You don't think cable TV is worth the price the company charges? Then you don't get it, simple as that. What we have here is spoiled corporate brats who don't want to pay what something costs but then whine when they don't have it.
Instead of tapping into the underemployed IT labor resources, which would cost more money, businesses have instead successfully lobbied the federal government to spend its own money to solve their problems for them.
Were at Wal-Mart 2.0, now any job can be paid by government instead of the employers themselves.
Working for a university on a part-time basis.
Seriously, how can they lay claim to work performed on one's own time if it's part-time? Besides; don't tell people what you're doing. Post it online without using your legal name or informing your employer. If by sheer coincidence they find it, it's already too late.
This is an old trick, just record in studio (people's homes) and then put it all together for the final mix.
But still, there is something brilliant and beautiful about this. Not that it reinvents anything, but it does a great job of demonstrating this trick to a new generation of people who can take interest and see what else they can achieve with it.
Al Bundy: what do you mean I can't get out?
Clerk: I'm sorry, sir, the computer controls the doors too.
If you read about it in other places besides here, what you'd more likely see is just endless mockery that would blind people to anything that really *could* go wrong with vaccinations. It is like discussing fertile land turning to desert in rural Africa, then hearing someone chime in that global warming is a hoax because it is snowing outside his window right now.
All that needs to happen is to make it so people can't SPECIFICALLY claim property just for the sake of passive income. Reform the laws so that people can't cash in on something they did not contribute to, no more random lawsuits aimed at people who did all their own work to bring things into existence.
You launch yours, I'll launch mine, and the usual trolls will launch their own just because they can. With any luck, they'll cause enough chaos to bring the issue to light and bring us closer to IP reform.
This is just a personal anecdote, but take it as you will. About a week ago I noticed that Firefox kept crashing on some specific pages, so out of curiosity I decided to load one of them in IE - bad, bad idea. The page loaded a PDF and simply by visiting I was infected with one of the worst malware problems I ever had; task manager shut off, antivirus disabled, locked out of registry editor, windows was completely crippled. Mind you, this was a week ago. Fortunately I'm on a dual boot system and I was able to go into Linux to delete the malignant exe files, which gave me a foothold to manually recover from the rest of it. IE basically just handed these people control over my system, with no input on my part other than loading a news article which happened to have the PDF on it.
I don't want work to be this endless soul crushing grind. I don't want my own experience to be considered worthless because the guy next door has the 4 str 4 stam belt. I don't want to be packed into a department of soulless adolescents who can't even talk normally. I don't want to push 90 hour weeks to hit my next milestone. I don't want my supervisor shrieking at me to get on vent for 21st century cutting edge micromanagement.
The question can not be asked whether someone "can" sue, because anyone can file a suit for any reason. And in modern legal warfare, that is a good assessment of how things go down. Instead it is a matter of whether they WOULD sue. The questions you should be asking yourself: -Who holds the rights over the original game? -How litigious have they been in the past? -Do they belong to an industry association?
Specifically img.4chan.org, which was what AT&T did for a brief while. As an added benefit for ISPs it also cuts down on all the illegal porn and DDoS that people like to fling at the site as well.
I remember it being drilled into my head over and over... develop for new hardware instead of old hardware, do everything for the expensive crowd because people who don't spend money on their hardware are less likely to spend money on software. This might be an outdated school of thought, but I'd say it goes double for Mac users. They're really expensive, and especially nowadays they're taking on this image as a trendy status symbol instead of a tool to do work with. Another things Mac devs have going for them, there is a lot less competition. If you would say that Macs don't have enough games out for them, then that translates into a niche to fill for aspiring businessmen.
That's just 1.0. Nothing to see here, I advise waiting for the service pack to come out.
It's nothing special. Just get someone's password, then dump it into the list. These seemingly random login attempts likely come from logins that were found in other attacks. Get a winner, keep it. Then add it to a list of thousands more and you'll have a high chance of hitting the logins of those people who use the same name:pass over all their accounts. ...and that's why you don't make your bank password the same as your slashdot password.
It's your employer's call. It WILL offend them, and they WILL get even. Consider the bad economy before you put your career on the line to make a statement, and then consider what the patent is worth - unless you're claiming ownership of ones and zeroes then it likely won't hurt anyone too much to sacrifice yourself over.
There is a chance that these musicians can end up making money from their recordings someday, a much GREATER chance than if they had tried their luck with the RIAA. Feeding all of the CEOs, lawyers, marketing, walmart, etc. is taking money out of the pockets of musicians themselves.
What MUSICIANS need is to be free of these commercial juggernauts so they can compete in the market without juggernaut approval.
This is just another act of the **AAs wanting to bludgeon people over the head for their own profits, and whether we give them what they want or not their response will just be to want more bludgeoning. They're going to push for a copyright term extension and tougher penalties every year, there is no right amount they are shooting for but just to keep increasing them at any cost.
If 3 billion people were in facing death from hunger, the problem would just solve itself after a few years. Or they could all just go get jobs.
This was in beta and development for HOW long before it spawned a whirlwind of chaos on release? Looks like the MS priority of "Avoiding bad publicity" isn't working out for them.