It is. And while they may be able to justify this example, it continues a dangerous precedent. Already sites, including search engines, are being forced to remove links because of dmca violations, even though they themselves have no illegal content. This is a continuation in that direction. Continuing along this path the government will eventually convince us that it should be allowed to censor people who disagree with current policy because those opinions "might cause social unrest". You can't call it free speech if the government chooses what's allowed. Either you allow all speech, or you're involved in censorship. You can't have it both ways.
Is probably an attempt to appease the us govt after successfully challenging the subpoenas. I wonder how long until they add a special version of trends designed specially for the government, including the ability to drill down to individual queries.
Or for that matter, how long until they create a new cabinet-level Department of SEO
That's why we need to make a decision as to the direction that our robotic technologies will take. If they're going to continue to operate more and more independently, they need to be given increased independant thought capabilities to allow them to follow the three laws. Until we do that, we need to build in safety measures and limit our robots capabilities so that it is is impossible for them to kill someone.
Leaving them halfway in between only increases the danger of injury.
Try Foxmarks Bookmark Synchronizer. At first it appears to only work with their servers, but if you look at the advanced settings it allows you to specify your own ftp server. I'm not sure if it encrypts it, but you could get a reasonable level of security by storing it in a non-web-accesible ftp folder, and there might be a setting to use secure ftp or https; I forget (I uninstalled it because I realized I didn't really need it).
Firefox should keep this at least until version 2 or one year after ie 7 is released, whichever is later; it's in their best interests. With IE 7 is planned to only support xp and vista. If firefox follows suit and drops 98 support, people who want more features will be forced to upgrade their os and a large percentage will use ie7 because that's what comes with their computer. But if firefox keeps support, this will be a huge opportunity for them to keep and even increase their market share. IE 7 will bring lots more publicity to and create a greater demand for many of firefox's features, such as tabbed browsing. And to satisfy that demand, many people will prefer to install firefox for free than pay to upgrade their system.
Hmm...I can't copy and paste html code...so it'd still be able to paste this, right:
#container {
background-color:#9E98D8;
}
#banner {
background-image: url(images/banner2.jpg);
}
#footer {
background-image: url(images/footer2.gif);
}
Technically, that's not html. It's css code embedded in a html document. And their copyright notice specifically mentions html. Too bad their site isn't mainly done in javascript; I could paste some of that too.
Let's get everyone to link to them in their posts now (as an added bonus it'll boost their page rank, making sure they get in that index right next to all those pornographic, racist or homophobic sites.
stupid copyright site
Just what we need here...a tax on blank cd's just so that the riaa can get a little more money. If they were to pass that, how would they justify taxing the millions of cd's bought each year that people use for backups, or other non-infringing purposes. Just because you buy blank cd's doesn't mean you're going to pirate music, and there's plenty of ways to pirate music without the use of blank cd's.
Would they give it up already?!
In a way it is third-party. They didn't build it themselves from scratch; they've licensed an existing product and are now in charge of figuring out how to modify someone else's code to work properly with theirs.
Exactly. I never used Giant, but I've noticed several feature reductions between m$as and defender. Take, for example, what it does if a program tries to add a startup entry. Antispyware (basically a rebranded giant) would give you a little alert in the corner asking what you want to do, with an option to remember that choice. Defender? It gives you a little "balloon tip" telling you that a change has been made. You must click on the balloon, which brings up the main defender screen. From there, you select your desired action from a dropdown menu, and click apply. You then must close the defender window before you can continue on what you were doing.
Another point where I've noticed lower quality is in definition updates. Antispyware had new updates about once a week, usually every friday night. There was an option to manually check for updates. Defender delivers its updates through windows update. I've only gotten one update so far in the two months or so I've had it installed, and if there's a way to manually check, I couldn't find it.
Leave it to microsoft to buy a product and make it worse.
I suspect that the reason why they filter that is that it falls under the category of safesearch, which if memory serves is on by default. It would greatly hurt their public image it grade-school students started searching for "port" or something and were suggested to search for porn. But cracks, while illegal, do not fall under the domain of safesearch filtering.
Also, regarding the technical aspects, it's much simpler to filter porn than it to filter cracks. There is only one meaning of porn, so you can be pretty sure that a search for it is a search for adult content. However, crack has many other meanings. Say, for example, someone as a crack in their car window. So they search for information on "window crack". How does google know the difference between this and someone who wants a pirated copy of microsoft windows? This is just another incident of "shoot the messenger" or "break the mirror"
They'd save even more money using gmail's hosted service. From what I understand gmail does even more management of your email than windows live; basically all you have to do is login and created the accounts, and they care of the rest. And google supports pop/smtp for those who want it (and when you have multiple emails-one home, one school, maybe one for a site you have-you don't want to be stuck with webmail clients). Maybe they'll try to make more money out of this by selling pop access.
But I suppose google hasn't been as aggressive about this as ms has. They seem to prefer a "here it is, come and get it" approach rather than thrusting the product in your face like microsoft does.
Slashdot Mirror
It is. And while they may be able to justify this example, it continues a dangerous precedent. Already sites, including search engines, are being forced to remove links because of dmca violations, even though they themselves have no illegal content. This is a continuation in that direction. Continuing along this path the government will eventually convince us that it should be allowed to censor people who disagree with current policy because those opinions "might cause social unrest". You can't call it free speech if the government chooses what's allowed. Either you allow all speech, or you're involved in censorship. You can't have it both ways.
Is probably an attempt to appease the us govt after successfully challenging the subpoenas. I wonder how long until they add a special version of trends designed specially for the government, including the ability to drill down to individual queries. Or for that matter, how long until they create a new cabinet-level Department of SEO
That's why we need to make a decision as to the direction that our robotic technologies will take. If they're going to continue to operate more and more independently, they need to be given increased independant thought capabilities to allow them to follow the three laws. Until we do that, we need to build in safety measures and limit our robots capabilities so that it is is impossible for them to kill someone. Leaving them halfway in between only increases the danger of injury.
Try Foxmarks Bookmark Synchronizer. At first it appears to only work with their servers, but if you look at the advanced settings it allows you to specify your own ftp server. I'm not sure if it encrypts it, but you could get a reasonable level of security by storing it in a non-web-accesible ftp folder, and there might be a setting to use secure ftp or https; I forget (I uninstalled it because I realized I didn't really need it).
Firefox should keep this at least until version 2 or one year after ie 7 is released, whichever is later; it's in their best interests. With IE 7 is planned to only support xp and vista. If firefox follows suit and drops 98 support, people who want more features will be forced to upgrade their os and a large percentage will use ie7 because that's what comes with their computer. But if firefox keeps support, this will be a huge opportunity for them to keep and even increase their market share. IE 7 will bring lots more publicity to and create a greater demand for many of firefox's features, such as tabbed browsing. And to satisfy that demand, many people will prefer to install firefox for free than pay to upgrade their system.
Hmm...I can't copy and paste html code...so it'd still be able to paste this, right: #container { background-color:#9E98D8; } #banner { background-image: url(images/banner2.jpg); } #footer { background-image: url(images/footer2.gif); } Technically, that's not html. It's css code embedded in a html document. And their copyright notice specifically mentions html. Too bad their site isn't mainly done in javascript; I could paste some of that too. Let's get everyone to link to them in their posts now (as an added bonus it'll boost their page rank, making sure they get in that index right next to all those pornographic, racist or homophobic sites. stupid copyright site
Just what we need here...a tax on blank cd's just so that the riaa can get a little more money. If they were to pass that, how would they justify taxing the millions of cd's bought each year that people use for backups, or other non-infringing purposes. Just because you buy blank cd's doesn't mean you're going to pirate music, and there's plenty of ways to pirate music without the use of blank cd's. Would they give it up already?!
In a way it is third-party. They didn't build it themselves from scratch; they've licensed an existing product and are now in charge of figuring out how to modify someone else's code to work properly with theirs.
Exactly. I never used Giant, but I've noticed several feature reductions between m$as and defender. Take, for example, what it does if a program tries to add a startup entry. Antispyware (basically a rebranded giant) would give you a little alert in the corner asking what you want to do, with an option to remember that choice. Defender? It gives you a little "balloon tip" telling you that a change has been made. You must click on the balloon, which brings up the main defender screen. From there, you select your desired action from a dropdown menu, and click apply. You then must close the defender window before you can continue on what you were doing. Another point where I've noticed lower quality is in definition updates. Antispyware had new updates about once a week, usually every friday night. There was an option to manually check for updates. Defender delivers its updates through windows update. I've only gotten one update so far in the two months or so I've had it installed, and if there's a way to manually check, I couldn't find it. Leave it to microsoft to buy a product and make it worse.
I suspect that the reason why they filter that is that it falls under the category of safesearch, which if memory serves is on by default. It would greatly hurt their public image it grade-school students started searching for "port" or something and were suggested to search for porn. But cracks, while illegal, do not fall under the domain of safesearch filtering. Also, regarding the technical aspects, it's much simpler to filter porn than it to filter cracks. There is only one meaning of porn, so you can be pretty sure that a search for it is a search for adult content. However, crack has many other meanings. Say, for example, someone as a crack in their car window. So they search for information on "window crack". How does google know the difference between this and someone who wants a pirated copy of microsoft windows? This is just another incident of "shoot the messenger" or "break the mirror"
The only refers to the fact that it only allows incoming calls-i.e. outgoing calls to other phone numbers would require paying a monthly fee
They'd save even more money using gmail's hosted service. From what I understand gmail does even more management of your email than windows live; basically all you have to do is login and created the accounts, and they care of the rest. And google supports pop/smtp for those who want it (and when you have multiple emails-one home, one school, maybe one for a site you have-you don't want to be stuck with webmail clients). Maybe they'll try to make more money out of this by selling pop access.
But I suppose google hasn't been as aggressive about this as ms has. They seem to prefer a "here it is, come and get it" approach rather than thrusting the product in your face like microsoft does.