They never prove any of the accusations they use to justify their actions, which makes them FAR worse than vigilantism.
Actually, that is the core problem with vigilantism. It is based off of a perceived crime and usually not compared to any unbiased standards. Though how truly unbiased you can be in any case is a discussion for another topic. But the stated goal of the court systems of most developed countries is to give the accused a fair trail in front of either an unbiased judge or jury of their peers. Thus, hopefully, preventing the innocent from being punished and the guilty to be punished fairly.
What this is and many other actions of the copyright cartels, says is that they have seen the results of fair trials and don't like the results. So they have decided that they are going to write their own rules to get what they want. This is perhaps one of the better objective standards to determine when an group has gone from a lawful organization to a criminal institution.
True but, Wikileaks admitted to that fact and told the humanitarian groups that he didn't have the manpower needed to redact the documents properly. There were just too many. (77,000 pages. And that's only from what they published. More remain.) Wikileaks claims that they tried to contact NATO and the White House for assistance in redacting the documents and were denied. (The White House claims Wikileaks never contacted them.) So, they took the ones that looked the most damaging doing a quick skim, set them aside to be redacted and published the rest as-is. After being contacted, they gave the humanitarian groups an offer (or challenge, depending on your point of view) to lend manpower for the purpose of properly redacting all the sensitive documents that could put lives in jeopardy. One or more of the humanitarian groups are reported to be considering the proposal. The White House is not offering to help and is demanding that the documents be deleted/returned and they never publish U.S. secrets again.
I'm not going to claim that Wikileaks is totally clean in this. But, from they're statements, it sounds like they tried to come up with a reasonable compromise given the situation. Now, it depends on whether you believe the White House's version of events or Wikileaks. To me, Wikileaks has the credibility advantage right now. If the White House were to admit that Wikileaks contacted them and they did nothing, it could severely damage their PR assault on Wikileaks, If it leaks later that this is exactly what happened then U.S. credibility will be even more severely damaged. We'll see.
Re:why would you not just use dwm
on
KDE 4.5 Released
·
· Score: 1
But, just because it isn't, doesn't mean you can't claim it is.
Just another version of "I didn't say it was your fault. I said I was going to blame you."
Unfortunately, depending on what your vision problems are or any other eye issues you have, contacts are not an option. You have to wear glasses. My dad has a vision issue that cannot be corrected by either contacts or surgery so, he's stuck with glasses and 3D movies suck for him.
Also there are issues with people like me who have troubles with the yellow part of the color spectrum that apparently plays hell with (but does not completely disable) modern 3D technology.
In summery, 3D movies and TV are NOT for everyone. Please stop behaving like it is. Thank you.
Wow. Whatever drugs your on, better lay off before they kill you or someone puts you out of our misery. You might also want professional help for your serious closet homosexuality.
To the rest of the Slashdot community: Sorry for feeding the trolls.
Because most states micro-manage the.us domains to death. I worked for a school district that used to have a.ca.us address. To add any sub-domain required a written explanation of why you need it then you wait 6-8 weeks to find out if it is approved. Normally, you're 3rd party web provider cannot do any of this paperwork for you so you have to pull staff from other assigned duties to do this. It's a pain in the ass. We moved to a.org domain for this reason.
SharePoint? I doubt the OP wants to spend $50,000 in dedicated server equipment and software licenses to run this solution in search of a problem called SharePoint. Several other posters here have offered solutions that will do the job much better and cheaper than SharePoint could ever hope to live up to.
I hope one day, some good will come out of SharePoint. There does need to be more integration between different applications. But, like many Microsoft server solutions, they take 10x the hardware and money to do that same job as other solutions. I bang my head against it almost every day as I work in an "all Microsoft shop". What a waste of time and money.
I'm personally fine with my awkward typing technique. I say if you've reached speeds that you're happy with and your typing method is not causing you any issues such as tendinitis, why change? I've never understood the obsession with you must do it "the right way."
But, this is my advice and it's worth what you paid for it.
The reality is they will blame the pirates regardless of whether they are responsible or not. It is much easier to blame a 3rd party with no voice to defend itself than to admit failure of management policies. It is also likely that the managers will keep their jobs longer if they do so. So, they will blame the pirates, reality be damned.
I do understand why package updates takes so long. They don't use the package installers that they come with, they have to strip the code and create a new automated package install from scratch for every package. Takes a lot of time but, makes it where they do not have to manually install X package #### amount of times.
I have worked with sysadmins for a large part of my career so, I'm used to the attitude and get along great with them. Instead of having a somewhat techie (you hope) CSR talk to you and relay your issue to the real techs, you talk to the techs directly and cut out the middle man. Add with that the management doesn't enforce a "professional" image and you tend to get a much more raw and honest experience. I personally prefer it but, there are a lot of people that come to expect talking to a "professional people person".
So, to each their own. Dreamhost doesn't try to hide what they are. I like that being a tech with a very cynical outlook on "customer service." (Having been a CSR for over three years of my life. We ARE lying to you by demand of our corporate overloads. All the pleasantries in the world won't change that.)
Warning: This was posted by a grouchy cynical tech. Reply at your own peril.
Just as an FYI, Dreamhost's uptime, at least in my case, has gotten much better. They even pulled off a server migration without a hitch.
I was a customer at the time they were having all of the uptime issues. I didn't switch because uptime wasn't the most important to me as I wasn't trying to make money with it. There were several hairy months but, they were always upfront about the downtime and even took the unusual step of admitting that it was their fault. (This wins big points with me as I am sick of companies always pointing fingers like a 6 year old.) They brought in some 3rd party people to help them resolve the issues and have not had an issue since they finished. But, this is just my case; I cannot speak for other people on other servers.
No, it's actually the consumer's fault because they buy the cheap crap that Walmart sells. If people would research their purchases before they buy instead of going "hey, this is cheap, I'll buy it", this would end tomorrow. Walmart feeds on emotional impulse buying and people trying to live beyond their means.
It's true that I have not done a blind test. I have listened to MP3, OGG and FLAC formats back to back and found my preference to be FLAC, OGG and MP3, in that order. But, that does not qualify as a blind test as I knew which formats were being played so there could be format bias. Hard to do a blind test when I'm the most technical person around and I already know my library.
You're forgetting one option: Just because they think they have not been compromised in 20 years does not mean that they haven't. The best exploits are the ones the user never sees. If they don't run any of these tools or their equivalents, how would they ever know if they were compromised unless they were hit with a bad quality exploit (I admit, there's a lot of these) that made itself obvious?
Do you really feel this is necessary? Sounds like you are jumping through a lot of hoops and degrading your browsing at the expense of a tin-foil hat.
If you are doing anything of importance with your browser, yes. If all you do is surf the web all day, then usually, no.
If you work with online banking, do other forms of commerce online, then you need to treat your web browser like your bank should because it is, by extension, your bank. If any form of VPN connections are used to your work, then you need to treat your computer as a work computer and secure it appropriately. Also, if you surf for porn, you really need to use this as the most nasty exploits are routinely found on these sites. Since a majority of people do the first and/or third they now go in the category of needing to secure their browsers.
I have found that though I can tell the difference between a FLAC and 128Kbps MP3, most of my friends can't. Most of them, if I play the same song back to back, one FLAC and one MP3, they will almost always pick the MP3.:( Thus far, except for me, the only reason I can justify ripping things to FLAC is because I can then convert the file to whatever loss compression format is needed, MP3, AAC, OOG, etc.for portable music players (yes people, the iPod is not the only music player), without the double compression loss.
I'll give you a hint. It's one word and the clue is: Most companies would have their IT budget at $0/€0 if there way any way possible for them to get away with it.
For the record, I was able to see your point very clearly.
Many people don't seem capable of understanding all but the most simple concepts. These are the very same people who we get slogans like "this is your brain on drugs", "war on terrorism", "fair and balanced" and "sea kittens". This is also the same group of people that these slogans work on. So, when you were trying to make a point about sticking to principles regardless of how large or how small the infraction is, all these people could understand is "DRM equals slavery". Though there may be some philosophical similarities, the direct comparison is ludicrous. So, they simply reject it. *sigh*
On the same note, this will likely be misunderstood as well. (Plus it will make members of this group very angry.)
There's something REALLY important you are missing. Countries other than the US don't have a "first to invent" system, they have a "first to file" system. First to file is what Microsoft supports. What this means is that the first "person" who files for a patent, gets it, regardless of who actually invented the item. So, your theory only works in the US right now. Anywhere else in the world, a corporation, including patent trolls, can see your invention, find that you do not yet have a patent on it, patent it and then sue you for patent infringement.
This also makes public domain all but impossible outside the US.
The people providing broadband service to residences or business sites are as you describe: Comcast, Verizon, QWest; DSL, Cable, and Fios.
ISPs providing things like co-location service are not so much the monopoly or duopoly. Yet they, too, qualify for the description "ISP".
Some alternatives exist to wired broadband, but it has its own problems like "being subject to weather", "birds nesting in the antennas", etc.
My apologies, you are correct. I was referring to the incumbent wired broadband internet providers you described. I as not intending to suggest that co-location and web host companies should be made utilities. ISP is sometimes too broad a term to use.
The wireless options in my area are too much of a joke to mention. They are better than dial-up but, that is not saying much. Their coverage area is also really small.
Slashdot Mirror
Net result: I've found better things to do with my time.
And yet you're posting to Slashdot... hmm...
If you do not understand the concept of sarcasm, please delete this post from your memory.
They never prove any of the accusations they use to justify their actions, which makes them FAR worse than vigilantism.
Actually, that is the core problem with vigilantism. It is based off of a perceived crime and usually not compared to any unbiased standards. Though how truly unbiased you can be in any case is a discussion for another topic. But the stated goal of the court systems of most developed countries is to give the accused a fair trail in front of either an unbiased judge or jury of their peers. Thus, hopefully, preventing the innocent from being punished and the guilty to be punished fairly.
What this is and many other actions of the copyright cartels, says is that they have seen the results of fair trials and don't like the results. So they have decided that they are going to write their own rules to get what they want. This is perhaps one of the better objective standards to determine when an group has gone from a lawful organization to a criminal institution.
Yea, but then you'd have P.E.T.A. on you ass. You think the cops are bad! Just try a few dozen rabid hungry vegans at your front door!
True but, Wikileaks admitted to that fact and told the humanitarian groups that he didn't have the manpower needed to redact the documents properly. There were just too many. (77,000 pages. And that's only from what they published. More remain.) Wikileaks claims that they tried to contact NATO and the White House for assistance in redacting the documents and were denied. (The White House claims Wikileaks never contacted them.) So, they took the ones that looked the most damaging doing a quick skim, set them aside to be redacted and published the rest as-is. After being contacted, they gave the humanitarian groups an offer (or challenge, depending on your point of view) to lend manpower for the purpose of properly redacting all the sensitive documents that could put lives in jeopardy. One or more of the humanitarian groups are reported to be considering the proposal. The White House is not offering to help and is demanding that the documents be deleted/returned and they never publish U.S. secrets again.
I'm not going to claim that Wikileaks is totally clean in this. But, from they're statements, it sounds like they tried to come up with a reasonable compromise given the situation. Now, it depends on whether you believe the White House's version of events or Wikileaks. To me, Wikileaks has the credibility advantage right now. If the White House were to admit that Wikileaks contacted them and they did nothing, it could severely damage their PR assault on Wikileaks, If it leaks later that this is exactly what happened then U.S. credibility will be even more severely damaged. We'll see.
But, just because it isn't, doesn't mean you can't claim it is.
Just another version of "I didn't say it was your fault. I said I was going to blame you."
Unfortunately, depending on what your vision problems are or any other eye issues you have, contacts are not an option. You have to wear glasses. My dad has a vision issue that cannot be corrected by either contacts or surgery so, he's stuck with glasses and 3D movies suck for him.
Also there are issues with people like me who have troubles with the yellow part of the color spectrum that apparently plays hell with (but does not completely disable) modern 3D technology.
In summery, 3D movies and TV are NOT for everyone. Please stop behaving like it is. Thank you.
Wow. Whatever drugs your on, better lay off before they kill you or someone puts you out of our misery. You might also want professional help for your serious closet homosexuality.
To the rest of the Slashdot community: Sorry for feeding the trolls.
Because most states micro-manage the .us domains to death. I worked for a school district that used to have a .ca.us address. To add any sub-domain required a written explanation of why you need it then you wait 6-8 weeks to find out if it is approved. Normally, you're 3rd party web provider cannot do any of this paperwork for you so you have to pull staff from other assigned duties to do this. It's a pain in the ass. We moved to a .org domain for this reason.
Umm, sorry to burst your bubble but, I tried banks and got burned. I don't use them anymore, either.
SharePoint? I doubt the OP wants to spend $50,000 in dedicated server equipment and software licenses to run this solution in search of a problem called SharePoint. Several other posters here have offered solutions that will do the job much better and cheaper than SharePoint could ever hope to live up to.
I hope one day, some good will come out of SharePoint. There does need to be more integration between different applications. But, like many Microsoft server solutions, they take 10x the hardware and money to do that same job as other solutions. I bang my head against it almost every day as I work in an "all Microsoft shop". What a waste of time and money.
I'm personally fine with my awkward typing technique. I say if you've reached speeds that you're happy with and your typing method is not causing you any issues such as tendinitis, why change? I've never understood the obsession with you must do it "the right way."
But, this is my advice and it's worth what you paid for it.
The reality is they will blame the pirates regardless of whether they are responsible or not. It is much easier to blame a 3rd party with no voice to defend itself than to admit failure of management policies. It is also likely that the managers will keep their jobs longer if they do so. So, they will blame the pirates, reality be damned.
I do understand why package updates takes so long. They don't use the package installers that they come with, they have to strip the code and create a new automated package install from scratch for every package. Takes a lot of time but, makes it where they do not have to manually install X package #### amount of times.
I have worked with sysadmins for a large part of my career so, I'm used to the attitude and get along great with them. Instead of having a somewhat techie (you hope) CSR talk to you and relay your issue to the real techs, you talk to the techs directly and cut out the middle man. Add with that the management doesn't enforce a "professional" image and you tend to get a much more raw and honest experience. I personally prefer it but, there are a lot of people that come to expect talking to a "professional people person".
So, to each their own. Dreamhost doesn't try to hide what they are. I like that being a tech with a very cynical outlook on "customer service." (Having been a CSR for over three years of my life. We ARE lying to you by demand of our corporate overloads. All the pleasantries in the world won't change that.)
Warning: This was posted by a grouchy cynical tech. Reply at your own peril.
Just as an FYI, Dreamhost's uptime, at least in my case, has gotten much better. They even pulled off a server migration without a hitch.
I was a customer at the time they were having all of the uptime issues. I didn't switch because uptime wasn't the most important to me as I wasn't trying to make money with it. There were several hairy months but, they were always upfront about the downtime and even took the unusual step of admitting that it was their fault. (This wins big points with me as I am sick of companies always pointing fingers like a 6 year old.) They brought in some 3rd party people to help them resolve the issues and have not had an issue since they finished. But, this is just my case; I cannot speak for other people on other servers.
No, it's actually the consumer's fault because they buy the cheap crap that Walmart sells. If people would research their purchases before they buy instead of going "hey, this is cheap, I'll buy it", this would end tomorrow. Walmart feeds on emotional impulse buying and people trying to live beyond their means.
Becides [sic]Edge is in the '3G' spec, so it should be '3G' too.
I used to work for AT&T Wireless. AT&T has never referred to their EDGE network as 3G; they have always called it 2.5G. I can't link to the document on it as it is on the company intranet and not accessible for public viewing. But, here's a quote from the AT&T website that clearly states that AT&T does not consider EDGE 3G: In areas where the 3G network is not available, customers will continue to receive service on the AT&T EDGE network, when coverage is available.
It's true that I have not done a blind test. I have listened to MP3, OGG and FLAC formats back to back and found my preference to be FLAC, OGG and MP3, in that order. But, that does not qualify as a blind test as I knew which formats were being played so there could be format bias. Hard to do a blind test when I'm the most technical person around and I already know my library.
You're forgetting one option: Just because they think they have not been compromised in 20 years does not mean that they haven't. The best exploits are the ones the user never sees. If they don't run any of these tools or their equivalents, how would they ever know if they were compromised unless they were hit with a bad quality exploit (I admit, there's a lot of these) that made itself obvious?
With the coming of age of the Internet, it will soon replace phone service.
Fixed that for you. ;)
Do you really feel this is necessary? Sounds like you are jumping through a lot of hoops and degrading your browsing at the expense of a tin-foil hat.
If you are doing anything of importance with your browser, yes. If all you do is surf the web all day, then usually, no.
If you work with online banking, do other forms of commerce online, then you need to treat your web browser like your bank should because it is, by extension, your bank. If any form of VPN connections are used to your work, then you need to treat your computer as a work computer and secure it appropriately. Also, if you surf for porn, you really need to use this as the most nasty exploits are routinely found on these sites. Since a majority of people do the first and/or third they now go in the category of needing to secure their browsers.
I have found that though I can tell the difference between a FLAC and 128Kbps MP3, most of my friends can't. Most of them, if I play the same song back to back, one FLAC and one MP3, they will almost always pick the MP3. :( Thus far, except for me, the only reason I can justify ripping things to FLAC is because I can then convert the file to whatever loss compression format is needed, MP3, AAC, OOG, etc.for portable music players (yes people, the iPod is not the only music player), without the double compression loss.
I'll give you a hint. It's one word and the clue is: Most companies would have their IT budget at $0/€0 if there way any way possible for them to get away with it.
For the record, I was able to see your point very clearly.
Many people don't seem capable of understanding all but the most simple concepts. These are the very same people who we get slogans like "this is your brain on drugs", "war on terrorism", "fair and balanced" and "sea kittens". This is also the same group of people that these slogans work on. So, when you were trying to make a point about sticking to principles regardless of how large or how small the infraction is, all these people could understand is "DRM equals slavery". Though there may be some philosophical similarities, the direct comparison is ludicrous. So, they simply reject it. *sigh*
On the same note, this will likely be misunderstood as well. (Plus it will make members of this group very angry.)
There's something REALLY important you are missing. Countries other than the US don't have a "first to invent" system, they have a "first to file" system. First to file is what Microsoft supports. What this means is that the first "person" who files for a patent, gets it, regardless of who actually invented the item. So, your theory only works in the US right now. Anywhere else in the world, a corporation, including patent trolls, can see your invention, find that you do not yet have a patent on it, patent it and then sue you for patent infringement.
This also makes public domain all but impossible outside the US.
This deserves some qualifiers:
The people providing broadband service to residences or business sites are as you describe: Comcast, Verizon, QWest; DSL, Cable, and Fios.
ISPs providing things like co-location service are not so much the monopoly or duopoly. Yet they, too, qualify for the description "ISP".
Some alternatives exist to wired broadband, but it has its own problems like "being subject to weather", "birds nesting in the antennas", etc.
My apologies, you are correct. I was referring to the incumbent wired broadband internet providers you described. I as not intending to suggest that co-location and web host companies should be made utilities. ISP is sometimes too broad a term to use.
The wireless options in my area are too much of a joke to mention. They are better than dial-up but, that is not saying much. Their coverage area is also really small.