Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: This has NOTHING to do with Net Neutrality (Score 1) 548

by tcrown007 (#34389228) Attached to: Level 3 Shaken Down By Comcast Over Video Streaming

This article submission is pure FUD, and very misleading.

The issue at hand is Level 3 currently have a peering agreement. They send each other traffic at a 1:1 ratio, more or less. Level 3 acquired Netflix as a customer. The traffic ratio will now change to 5:1 in Level 3's favor. Anytime traffic is that out of balance, a commercial (monetary) peering arrangement is made. This has nothing to do with neutrality, or video, or netflix, or anything else. This is simply Level 3 whipping up the childlike fear of no net neutrality in hopes to gain a better peering agreement. Very Shady on their part, and very silly for anyone who gobbles it up.

http://gigaom.com/2010/11/29/level-3-comcast-in-a-cat-fight-over-online-video/

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101129/17242612047/companies-come-out-woodwork-to-claim-comcast-is-violating-net-neutrality-exaggerations-abound.shtml

+ - Court rules bypassing dongles not a DMCA violation-> 2

Submitted by tcrown007
tcrown007 (473444) writes "MGE UPS makes UPS systems and software that are protected by hardware dongles. After the dongles expired, GE bypassed the dongles and continued to use the software. MGE sued, won, and now lost on GE's appeal. Directly from the court's ruling, "Merely bypassing a technological protection that restricts a user from viewing or using a work is insufficient to trigger the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision...The owner’s technological measure must protect the copyrighted material against an infringement of a right that the Copyright Act protects, not from mere use or viewing." Say what? I think I just saw a flying pig go by."
Link to Original Source

Comment: FCC + Net Neutrality != Net Neutrality (Score 2, Insightful) 790

by tcrown007 (#31754376) Attached to: Net Neutrality Suffers Major Setback

Once again, this farce is playing itself out and hardly anyone seems to have learned from history. Once the government is granted the authority to regulate the internet ISPs at the traffic level, it's all over.

Of course, at first it will be regulation to ensure a fair playing field. But now they have the authority. Next, it will be regulations to ensure a playing field the government wants. And in the end, the big corporations will influence the regulation by lobbying and hob-knobbing with the government to use the FCC to force smaller, innovative competitors out of business and cement their monopoly rule. They've already been doing this for years, on average, with telecoms and everything else. Oil, healthcare, you name it.

It's so sad that all of these super intelligent people on Slashdot are arguing for the FCC to be granted these powers, or for Congress to grant them this power when doing so will, according to history, bring about the exact situation everyone here seeks to avoid.

The ONLY solution to maximize internet freedom is no regulation at all.

Earth

Breaking the Squid Barrier 126

Posted by timothy
from the calimari-for-the-5000 dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Dr. Steve O'Shea of Auckland, New Zealand is attempting to break the record for keeping deep sea squid alive in captivity, with the goal of being able to raise a giant squid one day. Right now, he's raising the broad squid, sepioteuthis australis, from egg masses found in seaweed. This is a lot harder than it sounds, because the squid he's studying grow rapidly and eat only live prey, making it hard for them to keep the squid from becoming prey themselves. If his research works out, you might one day be able to visit an aquarium and see giant squid."
Image

Seinfeld's Good Samaritan Law Now Reality? 735

Posted by samzenpus
from the not-that-there-is-anything-wrong-with-that dept.
e3m4n writes "The fictitious 'good samaritan' law from the final episode of Seinfeld (the one that landed them in jail for a year) appears to be headed toward reality for California residents after the house passed this bill. There are some differences, such as direct action is not required, but the concept of guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill."

Comment: Re:pecunix among others? (Score 1) 403

by tcrown007 (#30877758) Attached to: PayPal Freezes the Assets of Wikileaks.org

No non-US source can operate successfully in the US. why? becasue the banks are regulated. All US banks are prohibited from doing business with anyone the US government or some unelected policy wonk says not to. If you cant' transfer money to this non-US entity via any american bank, how are you going to use them?

Everyone here is cyring for paypal to be regulated like a bank. That would change the problem, but would still be a problem nonetheless.

Comment: Re:Quite a troll by Tim B. Lee (Score 1) 944

by tcrown007 (#29848585) Attached to: When Libertarians Attack Free Software

Your assertions would be correct if they were happening in a system where all that has gone before had not gone. However, given the way corporations lobby government entities, the way contracts are handed out, etc, means that experts are NOT the ones deciding for the state in the first place.

His article wasn't that much of a troll, he emphasized the commonality of FOSS and libertarian thought. FOSS is truly an exemplary example of what kind of things would and can happen in a more libertarian society.

Comment: Re:Exploitation is the most prized product (Score 4, Insightful) 944

by tcrown007 (#29848221) Attached to: When Libertarians Attack Free Software

You're completely out of sync with what most libertarians believe. Many libertarians would abolish corporations completely, as the government does not have the power to grant any "rights" to a non person entity. Given that a libertarian would likely take the argument that far, the idea that they *want* corporate feudalism is just absurd on its face. Please stop espousing ideas that are so far from the truth.

Comment: Why for the long haul? (Score 1) 557

by tcrown007 (#29610175) Attached to: Choosing a Personal Printer For the Long Haul

As someone mentioned above, a lot of printer manufacturers and retailers are basically using the razor model now. Give the printer away and charge for the cartridges. In light of this, I recommend at least thinking about the following:

Troll through sites like slickdeals.net or fatwallet.com and look for awesome printer deals. Especially around Black Friday coming up, and frequently from Office Depot. A lot of times between the coupons you can buy from ebay for a few bucks, (like 100 off of 300) and some instant in store rebates, you can get a 300d dollar printer down to 50 bucks, or 100 bucks. I've even seen them get the price down to -50 where you get PAID to take the printer. Given that this brand new printer comes with toner (granted, not a full cartridge, but enough to justify this method), just use the printer till the toner runs out, throw it away or ebay it, and get yourself a new printer again. Rinse, repeat.

I mean, why not? If they are going to use that kind of a business model, it only makes sense to adjust the buying strategy to fit.

Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first overcome. -- Dr. Johnson

Working...