writes "Assange out on bail and is continuing to maintain his innocents on the charges. However, I am trying to figure out how the hell he could possibly be guilty of rape when the women willingly had sex with him. If they "preferred he use a condom" but agreed to let him have his way with them anyhow, how can they possibly get away with crying "rape" after the fact? I still think that it's just a convenient way that the US is trying to get other countries to keep Assange quiet."Link to Original Source
writes "Yesterday Microsoft was offering download-only Technet subscriptions for free (https://om2.one.microsoft.com/offer/technet_na.aspx) to be used "for testing purposes only" not production. However apparently they under-estimated how quickly the news would spread and just how many people would take advantage of the offer. After years of paying for MSDN subscriptions and quitting after the price just got too obscene I decided to drop my two subscriptions, waiting for a special to come along. This appeared too good to be true but it was a legitimate offer. I took advantage of it however today I started reading reports of the accounts being shut down. I checked mine early this afternoon and the account was still valid and I still had access to my downloads and my keys. Just now I checked and sure enough, I can see the list of downloads but cannot actually download anything nor can I view my keys.
Now here is the question: Is it not reasonable to expect Microsoft to honor a contract where they offered a product for an advertised price, where I accepted that offer and took advantage of it, and they in turn validated that offer by not only accepting THEIR ADVERTISED PRICE in their online ordering system, but proceeding to send me not only a confirmation email, but activation keys, which I in turn used upon receipt to redeem for my legally-purchased software?
Can they legally rescind this offer after my acceptance of their contract offer without any notification? With the oh-so-clearly-worded "for testing purposes only" licensing, which is more restricted than MSDN, is it not reasonable to expect that this offer from Microsoft is anything other than legitimate? I'm fully aware of software licensing costs, I've subscribed to MSDN ultimate three times, the newer equivalent once, and the equivalent of MSDN Professional twice. So, I am fully aware of the "perceived value" of their software. However I am also aware of the duplication and distribution costs, as well as the licensing restrictions, so "free" for "testing purposes only" does not strike me as something that would be unreasonable for one to expect Microsoft to honor the contract on.
What do you all think? Should Microsoft be expected to honor the offer that they have rescinded without notice?"
writes "from http://story.malaysiasun.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/d8 05653303cbbba8/id/230159/cs/1/
The two principal shareholders John Naruszewicz and Kevin Medina at the weeks-end were still trading verbal blows, while ICANN stepped in to the fray after nearly three years of complaints. Whilst most focus has been on the failure of the company's support systems, allegations of fraud and corruption were flowing freely Friday, not only from the principals involved, but from ICANN.
Meantime the control of RegisterFly.com, seized by Naruszewicz on Tuesday, was back in the hands of Medina late Friday. Both parties are accusing the other of hijacking the company's Web site and administration, which has been effectively dysfunctional for weeks. Medina has also replicated the current site at www.registerfly-inc.com so if he loses control again, or the original site is brought down, he can continue to trade on.
What does this mean for the 90,000 domain holders? Many of us have domains in redemption or pendingDelete status because of this internal RegisterFly battle. We finally got ahold of Kevin Medina by getting him to come to RegisterFlies, and all he did was attack the partners who ousted him; he had nothing to say about rescuing customers' domains nor did he seem to care in the slightest. He seems intent only on maintaining control of the company, the database, and of course his investment, and forget about customer service issues.
Whereas John Naruszewicz and Glenn Stansbury raise customers' losses as their first concern, and saving their investment second. On the surface they appear sincere in their claim that they want to make things right.
Rumors are flying about Kevin, about back-room deals with other registrars, reasons why domains have disappeared from customer accounts, why domains have been allowed to remain in redemption status until they move to pendingDelete and are lost.
The coming week will be very telling. If the authorities step in Monday and arrest Mr. Medina, we will know that Mr. Naruszewicz and Mr. Stansbury are likely legitimate in their claims.
But, what happens for small businesses who have lost their domain names due to Mr. Medina's alleged misconduct? Who will ensure that we get our domains back?"
writes "Hans Reiser was was arrested today on suspicion of the murder of his wife following her disappearance. While the disappearance (and possible murder) of his wife is tragic, this will make Linux users wondering where this will leave Reiser 4. If Reiser is found guilty, will Novell or IBM pick up the pieces and finish up Reiser 4 for inclusion in the kernel or is this the end of the Reiser filesystem project? Will there be any future for the Reiser filesystem, and if Hans is found guilty and the project is continued, will the project be renamed to avoid notoriety?"