Slashdot does the same thing. I've submitted maybe a dozen news articles. They always appear, but with someone else's scoop. Example: The Corel Photopaint for Linux. I submitted a news article exactly 2 minutes after the page went live. Did I get the scoop? nope. Some other bozo did. And he submitted his article long after I did (he complained of FTP being full, which wasn't a problem 2 mins after the page went live).
Yeah, it pisses me off, and I wonder why I bother.
A few months ago, I read an article where Rick McCallum was being interviewed. He stated that things they are looking to do with the DVD. They include view the movie without special effects (so you'd see the blue screen and all), different angles, how the special effects were made, etc...
To me, if they are planning on adding really special features to the DVDs, it's worth the 5 or so year wait. Lucas wants to release one definitive DVD set. Once the DVD set is released, there will no longer be any new Star Wars movies or any modifications to the existing ones.
What's illegal about it? I own a network. I don't want packets from your network to enter mine. It's for me to determine. I have no contract with you to carry your packets. Allowing your packets to go into my network is a PRIVILEGE that I give you that can be taken away at my whim. All of it legal, since I own the pipes that carry your packets.
It's up to the individual ISPs to choose whether they process Usenet Cancel messages or not. If an ISP would be against this embargo against @home Usenet messages, they would simply change their software to ignore the cancel messages and still propagate the @home spam (this is if they are accepting Cancel messages in the first place).
As a single user, you have no idea how much bandwidth and space this spam takes up. We're talking gigabytes and terrabytes of wasted space on a DAILY basis.
You're probably ready to cry out: "But the Internet is based on mutual exchange of packets! If an ISP blocks packets from another ISP, it goes agains everything the Internet stands for and was built for!" Not really. Their needs to be a degree of respect between ISPs. @home disrepects other ISPs by flooding their networks with spam, even after multiple requests to fix the situation. Why respect someone who not only doesn't respect you, but spits in your face and causes you harm in doing so?
"But this hurts the little guy who uses @home who uses usenet". Look at the big picture. This hurts the little guy everywhere. The surgeance of spam has been flooding bandwidth everywhere. ISPs need to upgrade their pipes so that legitimate traffic can flow thru with little lag. When an ISP needs to install a few extra OC3s, not because of growth within their network but because of spam (which gives them no extra revenue), prices go up. As with most companies, most ISPs will not absorb the cost. They'll pass it on to their customers who in turn pass it on to average Joe User who dials up on a modem.
And one last thing. Who gives a flying $$#@# if a few million people can't use Usenet for a few days? How will they be hurt? By not being able to continue their flame war over baked avocados? Will people die or suffer physical harm because they can't post for a few days? Hell no. So who cares if they can't post for a while (if it gets to that point). It's not going to change my world (other than not having to wade thru so much SPAM, which is going to be quite nice for a change). At most some newsgroups will be dead because they are moderated and the moderator sits on the @home network. No big deal. It won't stop the people of this world to stop breathing, eating, sleeping (ok, some addicts may suffer from lack of sleep) or living. So those who are up in arms about this, calm the hell down and think how this really impacts you and the world: It doesn't. And if you think it does, then you might want to step away from the computer and try living in the real world for a while to get your priorities straight.
"I'm convinced at this point that nothing good can ever come of a Marvel comic adapted for film. Has anyone here ever seen The Punisher or Captain America? "
I guess you've never seen Blade (by Marvel Comics). The best comic book adaptation since The Crow. One of the best action movies of the 90's. If you haven't seen it, do yourself a favour and go out and rent it. You won't be disappointed.
I much prefer Corona (Coming Attractions) to AICN. CA tends to either have better inside sources or are more picky on what they post. They don't post everything and anything they hear or get sent. And most of the time, that's for the better. Their posts are much much MUCH closer to being accurate and factual than AICN's. CA is, IMO, the best site out there for news about upcoming movies.
It's also a big pet peeve of mine that Ain't It Cool News includes the word "News" cuz it ain't right. Rumours are *not* news. With such a word you're inticing people to believe that what you're posting is fact. What's even sadder is that legitamite(sp?) news media pick up on such rumours and spread it to other media (tv, magazines, newspapers) as being fact. It's almost sickening.
I'm surprised this ended up being posted on Slashdot. 90% of the stuff posted on Ain't It Cool is purely rumour. And only 10% of those rumours end up being true. Ain't It True very rarely checks sources and posts any fanboy's emails without much if any verification. Take this one with a grain of salt, people. This is the same site that posted James Cameron was making the Spiderman movie for sure.
Sony owns the rights to make Spiderman. Last time I checked, Raimi was still under contract with Universal to make a few more movies for them.
But they're not charging for it! The site is totally free (and it's nice to be able to watch something on those long boring night shifts). I don't know where you pulled that they charged for using the site, cuz they don't. They just have advertisements running at the bottom of the broadcast. I for one hope they win the case and continue to broadcast over the net.
The solution is somewhat easy.
on
License to Surf
·
· Score: 1
The Net is more than just the WWW. It includes telnet, mail, IRC, etc... The W3C can only 'control' the Web aspect of it.
If the W3C decides to enforce such a license, the answer to rectify this is easy (though to put it in action wouldn't be). All that would need to be done is create a new way of displaying graphics and text on the web. Instead of HTML, create a new format & language to do so and call it something else.
I said the answer was easy. Whether it's feasible or not is another matter. But I get the impression that if such a ruling is passed and enforced that it wouldn't take long for this new way of doing things to be embraced by net users in general.
Sandman71, who's a bit surprised Microsoft hasdn't tried doing something like this already;P
The solution is somewhat easy.
on
License to Surf
·
· Score: 1
The Net is more than just the WWW. It includes telnet, mail, IRC, etc... The W3C can only 'control' the Web aspect of it. If the W3C decides to enforce such a license, the answer to rectify this is easy (though to put it in action wouldn't be). All that would need to be done is create a new way of displaying graphics and text on the web. Instead of HTML, create a new format & language to do so and call it something else. I said the answer was easy. Whether it's feasible or not is another matter. But I get the impression that if such a ruling is passed and enforced that it wouldn't take long for this new way of doing things to be embraced by net users in general. Sandman71, who's a bit surprised Microsoft hasdn't tried doing something like this already;P
It's not that easy when duty fees are different in each country. Canada's duty might be 5% for items below 300$, 8% for items above. United Kingdom Duties might be 3$ for items below 100 pounds, etc.. Whoops, Canada changed their duty structure last week. Time to get the programmers back in here to modify the code.
It's not easy keeping track of various duty fees around the world. THere's more than just your country involved.
A warez d00d breaks more than just a license agreement/legally binding agreement/contract. It is illegal to make and distribute copies of software/music that you don't own. Piracy is a total separate issue than license agreements.
A warez d00d only technically breaks the license agreement (cuz he's a minor) if he installs the software. If he doesn't, he's only guilty of owning pirated software.
There's currently no software out there that prohibits you from purchasing it if you're a minor (there may be some, but I personally don't know of any). The license agreement only comes into effect when you attempt to install said software.
So to follow your logic, a 13 year old warez d00d can be pursuited for owning pirated software. But he/she can't be pursuised for breaking the license agreement. Both are individual and seperate entities.
I hate to say it but.. To be able to agree to a license, you CANNOT be a minor. To say it's against a license to put an age limit, it doesn't make any sense. How can it be against a license when that license in itself cannot legally be agreed upon by a minor! That includes *all* licenses as they are legally binding contracts. And as we all know (at least I hope most of you do),a minor cannot enter a legally binding contract on his/her own. So think about it. You guys are too quick to flame and start bitchfests. Think before typing. Midols for everyone!;P Sandman Stop your bitchin and pick up a law book or two on the subject before starting to flame a company.
I'm not sure if this is still available on the newer Slackware versions, but the older versions would let you do a UMBDOS install. What this would do is install linux under a linux directory under windows/Fat16/32, so you don't need to worry about repartitioning. You can either than boot up either OS using LILO, or even more safely if you've never dealt with LILO before, boot Linux from disk when you want to use it (this you can do with pretty much all linux distribs and I would personally recommend it if you're unfamiliar with LILO or uncomfortable to attempt using it at the MBR level).
You can also safely partition your drive(s) using Partition Magic (It even lets you create Linux native and swap partitions). This way you won't lose any of your Windows data (and Partition Magic is just all around handy to have to shrink/grow partitions on the fly).
I wouldn't recommend a *BSD install to start off. I would recommend trying a linux distrib first (I personally love Mandrake 6.1) then moving on to *BSD once you pretty know your way around Linux.
--------- The box said Windows95/98 NT or better - so I installed Linux!
I run Linux on a Pentium Classic 200 with 32 megs of RAM. On it runs Apache (with about 10,000 hits a day), mail (about 100 mails a day processed), DNS. I also used to run an icecast server with 40 people connecting to the site. And the machine could still take it. The computer used is not the most important aspect of doing all this. It's bandwidth. I was running the whole thing over 2.2 Mb ADSL (approx 1.5 times faster than a T1). The amount of people connecting to an icecast server will more depend on how much bandwidth you have.
About 4 months, they overclocked an AMD chip to a gigahertz using that case. I don't see the big dfeal of overclocking an Athlon to 800mhz. This is old news
Slashdot Mirror
Way to discriminate against people with 5 digits. sheesh! :P
It wasn't released in the USA, it was released in North America.
Slashdot does the same thing. I've submitted maybe a dozen news articles. They always appear, but with someone else's scoop. Example: The Corel Photopaint for Linux. I submitted a news article exactly 2 minutes after the page went live. Did I get the scoop? nope. Some other bozo did. And he submitted his article long after I did (he complained of FTP being full, which wasn't a problem 2 mins after the page went live).
Yeah, it pisses me off, and I wonder why I bother.
A few months ago, I read an article where Rick McCallum was being interviewed. He stated that things they are looking to do with the DVD. They include view the movie without special effects (so you'd see the blue screen and all), different angles, how the special effects were made, etc...
To me, if they are planning on adding really special features to the DVDs, it's worth the 5 or so year wait. Lucas wants to release one definitive DVD set. Once the DVD set is released, there will no longer be any new Star Wars movies or any modifications to the existing ones.
What's illegal about it? I own a network. I don't want packets from your network to enter mine. It's for me to determine. I have no contract with you to carry your packets. Allowing your packets to go into my network is a PRIVILEGE that I give you that can be taken away at my whim. All of it legal, since I own the pipes that carry your packets.
It's up to the individual ISPs to choose whether they process Usenet Cancel messages or not. If an ISP would be against this embargo against @home Usenet messages, they would simply change their software to ignore the cancel messages and still propagate the @home spam (this is if they are accepting Cancel messages in the first place).
As a single user, you have no idea how much bandwidth and space this spam takes up. We're talking gigabytes and terrabytes of wasted space on a DAILY basis.
You're probably ready to cry out: "But the Internet is based on mutual exchange of packets! If an ISP blocks packets from another ISP, it goes agains everything the Internet stands for and was built for!" Not really. Their needs to be a degree of respect between ISPs. @home disrepects other ISPs by flooding their networks with spam, even after multiple requests to fix the situation. Why respect someone who not only doesn't respect you, but spits in your face and causes you harm in doing so?
"But this hurts the little guy who uses @home who uses usenet". Look at the big picture. This hurts the little guy everywhere. The surgeance of spam has been flooding bandwidth everywhere. ISPs need to upgrade their pipes so that legitimate traffic can flow thru with little lag. When an ISP needs to install a few extra OC3s, not because of growth within their network but because of spam (which gives them no extra revenue), prices go up. As with most companies, most ISPs will not absorb the cost. They'll pass it on to their customers who in turn pass it on to average Joe User who dials up on a modem.
And one last thing. Who gives a flying $$#@# if a few million people can't use Usenet for a few days? How will they be hurt? By not being able to continue their flame war over baked avocados? Will people die or suffer physical harm because they can't post for a few days? Hell no. So who cares if they can't post for a while (if it gets to that point). It's not going to change my world (other than not having to wade thru so much SPAM, which is going to be quite nice for a change). At most some newsgroups will be dead because they are moderated and the moderator sits on the @home network. No big deal. It won't stop the people of this world to stop breathing, eating, sleeping (ok, some addicts may suffer from lack of sleep) or living. So those who are up in arms about this, calm the hell down and think how this really impacts you and the world: It doesn't. And if you think it does, then you might want to step away from the computer and try living in the real world for a while to get your priorities straight.
"I'm convinced at this point that nothing good can ever come of a Marvel comic adapted for film. Has anyone here ever seen The Punisher or Captain America? "
I guess you've never seen Blade (by Marvel Comics). The best comic book adaptation since The Crow. One of the best action movies of the 90's. If you haven't seen it, do yourself a favour and go out and rent it. You won't be disappointed.
I much prefer Corona (Coming Attractions) to AICN. CA tends to either have better inside sources or are more picky on what they post. They don't post everything and anything they hear or get sent. And most of the time, that's for the better. Their posts are much much MUCH closer to being accurate and factual than AICN's. CA is, IMO, the best site out there for news about upcoming movies.
It's also a big pet peeve of mine that Ain't It Cool News includes the word "News" cuz it ain't right. Rumours are *not* news. With such a word you're inticing people to believe that what you're posting is fact. What's even sadder is that legitamite(sp?) news media pick up on such rumours and spread it to other media (tv, magazines, newspapers) as being fact. It's almost sickening.
I'm surprised this ended up being posted on Slashdot. 90% of the stuff posted on Ain't It Cool is purely rumour. And only 10% of those rumours end up being true. Ain't It True very rarely checks sources and posts any fanboy's emails without much if any verification. Take this one with a grain of salt, people. This is the same site that posted James Cameron was making the Spiderman movie for sure.
Sony owns the rights to make Spiderman. Last time I checked, Raimi was still under contract with Universal to make a few more movies for them.
But they're not charging for it! The site is totally free (and it's nice to be able to watch something on those long boring night shifts).
I don't know where you pulled that they charged for using the site, cuz they don't. They just have advertisements running at the bottom of the broadcast. I for one hope they win the case and continue to broadcast over the net.
The Net is more than just the WWW. It includes telnet, mail, IRC, etc... The W3C can only 'control' the Web aspect of it.
If the W3C decides to enforce such a license, the answer to rectify this is easy (though to put it in action wouldn't be). All that would need to be done is create a new way of displaying graphics and text on the web. Instead of HTML, create a new format & language to do so and call it something else.
I said the answer was easy. Whether it's feasible or not is another matter. But I get the impression that if such a ruling is passed and enforced that it wouldn't take long for this new way of doing things to be embraced by net users in general.
Sandman71, who's a bit surprised Microsoft hasdn't tried doing something like this already
The Net is more than just the WWW. It includes telnet, mail, IRC, etc... The W3C can only 'control' the Web aspect of it. If the W3C decides to enforce such a license, the answer to rectify this is easy (though to put it in action wouldn't be). All that would need to be done is create a new way of displaying graphics and text on the web. Instead of HTML, create a new format & language to do so and call it something else. I said the answer was easy. Whether it's feasible or not is another matter. But I get the impression that if such a ruling is passed and enforced that it wouldn't take long for this new way of doing things to be embraced by net users in general. Sandman71, who's a bit surprised Microsoft hasdn't tried doing something like this already ;P
It's not that easy when duty fees are different in each country. Canada's duty might be 5% for items below 300$, 8% for items above. United Kingdom Duties might be 3$ for items below 100 pounds, etc..
Whoops, Canada changed their duty structure last week. Time to get the programmers back in here to modify the code.
It's not easy keeping track of various duty fees around the world. THere's more than just your country involved.
Sandman
Please excuse the bad spelling. Above should say pursued (or however it's spelled. Lack of caffeine will do that to a guy).
I'd also like to point out that I did state prohibit from purchasing, as in a store (or online).
Sandman
Actually, your thinking is a bit flawed.
A warez d00d breaks more than just a license agreement/legally binding agreement/contract. It is illegal to make and distribute copies of software/music that you don't own. Piracy is a total separate issue than license agreements.
A warez d00d only technically breaks the license agreement (cuz he's a minor) if he installs the software. If he doesn't, he's only guilty of owning pirated software.
There's currently no software out there that prohibits you from purchasing it if you're a minor (there may be some, but I personally don't know of any). The license agreement only comes into effect when you attempt to install said software.
So to follow your logic, a 13 year old warez d00d can be pursuited for owning pirated software. But he/she can't be pursuised for breaking the license agreement. Both are individual and seperate entities.
I hate to say it but.. To be able to agree to a license, you CANNOT be a minor. To say it's against a license to put an age limit, it doesn't make any sense. How can it be against a license when that license in itself cannot legally be agreed upon by a minor! That includes *all* licenses as they are legally binding contracts. And as we all know (at least I hope most of you do),a minor cannot enter a legally binding contract on his/her own. So think about it. You guys are too quick to flame and start bitchfests. Think before typing. Midols for everyone! ;P Sandman Stop your bitchin and pick up a law book or two on the subject before starting to flame a company.
I'm not sure if this is still available on the newer Slackware versions, but the older versions would let you do a UMBDOS install. What this would do is install linux under a linux directory under windows/Fat16/32, so you don't need to worry about repartitioning. You can either than boot up either OS using LILO, or even more safely if you've never dealt with LILO before, boot Linux from disk when you want to use it (this you can do with pretty much all linux distribs and I would personally recommend it if you're unfamiliar with LILO or uncomfortable to attempt using it at the MBR level).
You can also safely partition your drive(s) using Partition Magic (It even lets you create Linux native and swap partitions). This way you won't lose any of your Windows data (and Partition Magic is just all around handy to have to shrink/grow partitions on the fly).
I wouldn't recommend a *BSD install to start off. I would recommend trying a linux distrib first (I personally love Mandrake 6.1) then moving on to *BSD once you pretty know your way around Linux.
---------
The box said Windows95/98 NT or better - so I installed Linux!
I run Linux on a Pentium Classic 200 with 32 megs of RAM. On it runs Apache (with about 10,000 hits a day), mail (about 100 mails a day processed), DNS. I also used to run an icecast server with 40 people connecting to the site. And the machine could still take it. The computer used is not the most important aspect of doing all this. It's bandwidth. I was running the whole thing over 2.2 Mb ADSL (approx 1.5 times faster than a T1). The amount of people connecting to an icecast server will more depend on how much bandwidth you have.
Sorry, that should read an AMD K6-3 450 chip...
About 4 months, they overclocked an AMD chip to a gigahertz using that case. I don't see the big dfeal of overclocking an Athlon to 800mhz. This is old news