Slashdot Mirror

The reason for the about face is probably a lawsuit against cisco from the Free Software Federation. This is a good thing that the actions of the FSF are forcing other companies to properly comply with the open source licenses they choose.

If the Android Market business model does not suit your needs, you can go to a third party marketplace. You can find one that has the tradeoff of security and flexibility that matches your own. You can't do that with Apple.

Of course not. Everybody knows there are ZERO iOS apps available outside of the App Store.

Who are you kidding, fucktard?

You may bypass encryption for fair use.

Title 17 Chapter 12 Section 1201

Which sounds good until you realize it makes no provision for the creation and ownership of tools needed to break encryption even if the end result falls under fair use. This has been ruled on already. http://www.appscout.com/2009/08/realnetworks_and_the_fair_use.php

Agreed. If sites are known to offer illegal content, owners should be tracked down and prosecuted. Surely, this kind of nasty content is illegal everywhere in the world.

Instead, we have a central filtering database. Not just that this approach is very superficial, not just that it involves false positives, it also means that almost all UK traffic goes through IWF servers. As they are not a government or law enforcement agency, you'd expect this to be part of the ISP terms of service, but most of the time it is not. What this seems to be is ISPs clandestinely passing all your browsing information to a third party.

Some two years on, my ISP keeps promising to answer my questions about this, but I got no answers so far.

Hoookay, assuming the NYTs is correct that only about 6.7% of touch screen Apple devices are jailbroken, out of some 37 million, this piracy figure is just bizarre. The actual economic losses are only the delta between what the jailbreakers would have bought, if they didn't have the "free-as-in-shoplifted" option.

In a buy-or-bust scenario, I find it very difficult to believe that these users would be in the market to buy much more or less than the median user, once their micro-economic motivations adjusted to the new reality.

Hell, back in the days when I bothered to jailbreak my Touch, it was only to use Cydia to install capabilities beyond what any AppStore app would be allowed to enable, all of it free-beer/speech. Given the cost of most apps compared to the cost of the platform, or to most PC/console shrink-wrapped products, why would I bother to pirate, unless for my BBS days rationale: collect 'em all, run 'em once.

When my grandmother judge shops to get one of its flunkes to preside over the case, then I'll listen to your argument.

Now before you say that the court dismissed that claim, notice the last line: "Pirate Bay went on to accuse Judge Eka of commiserating with lawyers for the Motion Picture Association of America and the IFPI." In other words, Fox B says it's OK for Fox A to guard the hen house.

http://www.appscout.com/2009/02/verizon_unlocks_blackberry_sto_1.php Verizon unlocked the Storm's GPS about 5 months ago. Google maps on my storm has no problem using a true GPS signal neither does the camera for Geotagging.

So how much was the commission on the I am Rich" I guess he'd lose the most...

Come to think of it, it was discussed before, that most people don't use many of their apps after the first few days, maybe even first few hours.

So, let's say there's a game on your iPhone, what would be the expected total time to finish it and get bored with it? I bet less than 90 days. So you can basically have a free game: download, finish, refund. It's golden!

In the world of "proper" computers, when was the last time you could get a full refund for a software after 90 days? In digital downloads, I don't think it ever happened. Of course, most of the time the developer cannot be sure that the person didn't make a copy of the software and send back the original copy (that is controlled in the iPhone's little walled garden). But e.g. Steam would be similarly in charge of your software - and offer no such refund...

So, if it's in the contract, well, not much to do about it. If you get bitten (more refunds than sales) think again next time how you sell your app or maybe how to make a better one that peopel actually wanna keep! If still make money, give thanks to the mighty Steve that he let you keep some, and the users don't exploit the possibilities handed to them... ;)

And, Android's kill switch is only for the programs that come through Google's own app store.

[Citation Needed]

FTFA: Furthermore, keep in mind that this kill switch will only affect apps distributed through the Market, not those installed from the Web.

Which cites : http://www.appscout.com/2008/10/android_contactssync_syncs_con.php
(As far as I can tell, Google's power to revoke apps off your phone only applies to stuff in the App Market. The much-vaunted "kill switch" comes from the Android Market terms of service, so if the developer is outside the Android Market, it probably doesn't apply.)

Which links to nothing relevant and provides no support for his statement.

Until we hear from Google, this is all just conjecture from blogs.
And based on TFA's tone, this post comes to mind

And, Android's kill switch is only for the programs that come through Google's own app store.

[Citation Needed]

FTFA: Furthermore, keep in mind that this kill switch will only affect apps distributed through the Market, not those installed from the Web.

Which cites : http://www.appscout.com/2008/10/android_contactssync_syncs_con.php
(As far as I can tell, Google's power to revoke apps off your phone only applies to stuff in the App Market. The much-vaunted "kill switch" comes from the Android Market terms of service, so if the developer is outside the Android Market, it probably doesn't apply.)

Which links to nothing relevant and provides no support for his statement.

Until we hear from Google, this is all just conjecture from blogs.
And based on TFA's tone, this post comes to mind

His joke references the fact that Excel was found to miscalcute certain calculations:

http://www.appscout.com/2007/09/excel_cant_multiply.php

And MS's response:

http://blogs.msdn.com/excel/archive/2007/09/25/calculation-issue-update.aspx