We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!
Moryath (553296) writes "Back in 2008, a bunch of ISPs — Roadrunner, Comcast, AT&T — rolled out "data usage caps" designed, well, mostly to do things like this and try to force customers to use their cable TV service instead of services like Hulu, Youtube, and other video subscription services.
Now it's 2012. Data usage is through the roof — the high quality options on Hulu+ and Amazon's streaming service can serve over 2.5 GB in a single hour. Watch 100 hours in your household, you're over the cap without doing a single thing else.
Is it time for the cable providers to start finally upping these stupid caps?" top
Moryath (553296) writes "In a Mafia-like demonstration of why copyright laws are insane, the unbelievably heartless grinches at New York-based Bourne Music Co decided that a 10-year-old girl's attempt to raise money for a children's hospice by performing an homage to a Charlie Chaplin film needed to be squashed like a bug. While it would have been simple to acknowledge her, they instead demanded payments of $2000 for making the video available for only one year (the video itself had a budget of nothing, since the staff time and equipment usage were donated by Phil Steel and Sound Sense), plus they demanded $250 for every time the girl was caught singing the song in public.
Please feel free to tell them how you feel." Link to Original Source top
Moryath (553296) writes "It appears that the Obama campaign's donation setup has something fishy in it; they've deliberately disabled the security safeguards that prevent cards from being accepted if they don't match the card's registered name and address, removed the requirement of the CVS code on the back, and even removed safeguards that verify that out-of-country donations are from citizens (only US Citizens can legally donate to a political campaign in the US). Direct Data from FEC filings exposing the fraud is popping up; Screenshots of a test attempt with totally bogus info (except the actual credit card number) available.
Moryath (553296) writes "We all know Wikipedia isn't perfect — but can it be saved? Is it usable, or at the same time those who love it crow, why is it that more people are now leaving than entering? Why is it that the vast majority go by, perhaps contribute once, and quickly become like even Wikipedia's co-founder, utterly disillusioned? Why do former administrators come out and tell the problems themselves even when the "community" threatens them?
Or is it something more basic — is it that wikipedia's administrators are too powerful, and too willing to place an indefinite ban on anyone they choose, with no recourse? Is it impossible for new users to even come in and work, with edit-count-itis and entrenched cliques running the place into the ground?" top
Moryath (553296) writes "My spam traps (email addresses that exist solely to receive spam, for filtration's sake) and my real address have recently seen a ton of mail from the Barack Obama campaign.
Their unsubscribe link does not work; email to the campaign asking them to remove my addresses was responded with a form letter thanking me for "joining" the campaign and asking me to donate money; phone calls have all been hung up on, several times after someone claimed to be "transferring" me to "the person who can fix this."
Why is this allowed? And what response would Slashdotters suggest for a campaign that is obviously unwilling to respect my request NOT to receive their spam?" top
Moryath (553296) writes "A couple days ago I submitted the a question in the politics area — I guess maybe it's better as an Ask Slashdot.
My spam traps (email addresses that exist solely to receive spam, for filtration's sake) and my real address have recently seen a ton of mail from the Barack Obama campaign. Their unsubscribe link does not work; email to the campaign asking them to remove my addresses was responded with a form letter thanking me for "joining" the campaign and asking me to donate money; and phone calls have all been hung up on.
Why is this allowed? And what response would Slashdotters suggest for a campaign that is obviously unwilling to respect my request NOT to receive their spam?
The last submission here sat "pending" for 3 days and then was rejected, presumably by a slashdotter who favors Obama. We'll see if this goes any better in this category. I'd really like to see the Obama campaign clean up their act, it's obvious they have bought a spammer list and are using it." top
Moryath (553296) writes "This might deserve to be an Ask Slashdot, or somewhere else, I don't know, but recently a number of my spam-trap email addresses (addresses I keep just to compare to my normal inbox for spam filtering) have been seeing daily emails from the Obama presidential campaign asking for donations.
I tried using the unsubscribe link, which failed to operate; I sent the campaign an email directly , and received a form response thanking me for "joining" their campaign and asking me to donate. Phone calls to the campaign office have been uniformly dismissive — 90% of the time they just hang up, the other 10% they put me on hold claiming to be "getting someone who can fix this" and then drop the call.
It's obvious that they have no intentions with complying with my request to get off of their email system — and equally obvious that they have padded their supposed "record number" of supporters by purchasing bulk email lists from spammers. Why should we support politicians who behave in this way and don't respect our rights? And what would Slashdotters suggest as the next step to deal with a politician who simply refuses to follow the law?
For the record, I'm a registered independent, and so far my only intention for the campaign is to point and laugh at Ron Paul." top
Moryath (553296) writes "Following the story on Fuzzy Zoeller the other day, I saw a Digg Link scrolling around, and it caught my eye. Apparently a former admin from Wikipedia who's been exposing abuses in the system got booted from their private mailing list for exposing some serious corruption. What's worse, some real nasty comments came in to the livejournal he wrote at.
He traced the IP of the comments back far enough to link it to one David Gerard, a high-ranking admin and (not coincidentally) a listmod to that same mailing list who's got a real mean streak.