Slashdot Mirror

A brief look at the daily business of Apple executives:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss_O0BMVdCk

captcha: indolent

I don't want to be forced to buy a $40 adapter [...]

Yeah, but they make the coolest adapters!

I would say they are engaging with YouTube pretty strongly:

https://www.youtube.com/user/t...
https://www.youtube.com/user/U...
https://www.youtube.com/user/k...
https://www.youtube.com/user/P...

Not sure why they are whining, but if I were Alphabet, I would remove all the music from every one of them until this dispute is settled.

I would say they are engaging with YouTube pretty strongly:

https://www.youtube.com/user/t...
https://www.youtube.com/user/U...
https://www.youtube.com/user/k...
https://www.youtube.com/user/P...

Not sure why they are whining, but if I were Alphabet, I would remove all the music from every one of them until this dispute is settled.

I would say they are engaging with YouTube pretty strongly:

https://www.youtube.com/user/t...
https://www.youtube.com/user/U...
https://www.youtube.com/user/k...
https://www.youtube.com/user/P...

Not sure why they are whining, but if I were Alphabet, I would remove all the music from every one of them until this dispute is settled.

I would say they are engaging with YouTube pretty strongly:

https://www.youtube.com/user/t...
https://www.youtube.com/user/U...
https://www.youtube.com/user/k...
https://www.youtube.com/user/P...

Not sure why they are whining, but if I were Alphabet, I would remove all the music from every one of them until this dispute is settled.

In this case, since the artist themselves puts up their videos, don't you think they have already agreed to the profit sharing that Youtube offers?

https://www.youtube.com/user/t...
https://www.youtube.com/user/U...
https://www.youtube.com/user/k...
https://www.youtube.com/user/P...

As for other people putting up their work, that should be handled by a DMCA takedown according to the official procedures, but Alphabet is kind enough to offer the compromise of Content ID with personalized settings on how to share the profits.

In this case, since the artist themselves puts up their videos, don't you think they have already agreed to the profit sharing that Youtube offers?

https://www.youtube.com/user/t...
https://www.youtube.com/user/U...
https://www.youtube.com/user/k...
https://www.youtube.com/user/P...

As for other people putting up their work, that should be handled by a DMCA takedown according to the official procedures, but Alphabet is kind enough to offer the compromise of Content ID with personalized settings on how to share the profits.

In this case, since the artist themselves puts up their videos, don't you think they have already agreed to the profit sharing that Youtube offers?

https://www.youtube.com/user/t...
https://www.youtube.com/user/U...
https://www.youtube.com/user/k...
https://www.youtube.com/user/P...

As for other people putting up their work, that should be handled by a DMCA takedown according to the official procedures, but Alphabet is kind enough to offer the compromise of Content ID with personalized settings on how to share the profits.

In this case, since the artist themselves puts up their videos, don't you think they have already agreed to the profit sharing that Youtube offers?

https://www.youtube.com/user/t...
https://www.youtube.com/user/U...
https://www.youtube.com/user/k...
https://www.youtube.com/user/P...

As for other people putting up their work, that should be handled by a DMCA takedown according to the official procedures, but Alphabet is kind enough to offer the compromise of Content ID with personalized settings on how to share the profits.

You mean like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Look at the description, contains all the links for iTunes, Google Play, etc.

Actually, that's a good point. See this. Why tape over a webcam when someone could listen to your microphone, with no activity LED, especially given that audio is far more incriminating than video? Not that video isn't a problem, but disabling video without also disabling audio is dumb.

It's pretty dumb of you to suggest that my mic is not disabled in tandem with my camera.

Relevant

The Samsung S7 has a 3.5mm jack, and as Lil' Wayne shows, it's waterproof enough...

Actually, that's a good point. See this. Why tape over a webcam when someone could listen to your microphone, with no activity LED, especially given that audio is far more incriminating than video? Not that video isn't a problem, but disabling video without also disabling audio is dumb.

I doubt it is even possible for a presidential candidate to get 269 electoral votes to tie for the presidency. Or did you think the popular vote elected presidents?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

That video appears to tell you what happens in a tie situation, if it were to ever happen.

How about, just maybe for a change, I know most people might consider silly and many others consider it worthless, maybe, just, maybe, HONESTY.

Nah, honesty as the best qualification for a politician, what a stupid idea. Right down there with those other stupid ideas, like INTEGRITY, can have that any of that either.

So let's all sing the "Hopey Changey Song", just imagine it in Sarah Palin's voice, here don't imagine it https://www.youtube.com/watch?....

Also, when this is detected, the person who posted the video will not get anything (except Internet fame) and the companies can opt in or opt out to do this.e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... has 35MM hits. Not that bad. However https://www.youtube.com/watch?... has 217MM hits. Yep, three times as much. (To be fair, the second one is WAY better)

So why would they want it taken down when they multiply their income by 4?

Also, when this is detected, the person who posted the video will not get anything (except Internet fame) and the companies can opt in or opt out to do this.e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... has 35MM hits. Not that bad. However https://www.youtube.com/watch?... has 217MM hits. Yep, three times as much. (To be fair, the second one is WAY better)

So why would they want it taken down when they multiply their income by 4?

Say goodbye to HTTP and HTML then! Since they weren't patented someone will surely patent them and shut down the web!

It was the fact theses technologies were not prohibitively encumbered by copyright and patents that enabled their broad adoption.

Many Gopher daemons required expensive commercial licensing fees and sent many requests for payment of license to users of the Gopher software, often when they were being used for personal or hobby use. This is why permissive licenses and the GPL expressly permit commercial use.

Patent trolls will be trolls. This does not mean that patents are good for business. Nor do patents protect your business. If you have a few patents then a business or troll with a larger portfolio can still sue you out of existence. NPR's This American Life podcast covered this subject: "When Patents Attack"

There is no evidence that patents are beneficial or necessary. We made it all the way through the personal computer revolution without having patents on any software. It's time to do the experiment and abolish patents. If we want we can reinstate them later after gathering evidence to determine whether they're good or bad. Until then the hypothesis that "patents = good" is a bunch of untested bullshit unsupported by any facts, and ignores all the evidence from industries not protected by copyright or patents (such as automotive design and the fashion industry) which are innovative and more lucrative than any other industries which have "Intellectual Property".

Oh noes! Whatever shall we do? Clothing and Car designs can't be patented! Every car and wardrobe will be exactly the same stagnant design because their's no patent incentive to innovate!

Welcome to the real world, here's your reality check. Have your geek card stamped at the door, every tenth post the karma is free.

Facepalm Computer Engineer barbie should not be a mere developer. If you want inspiring computer engineer barbie should be working with neural networks or more in line with IoT tech. Ideally we are looking for a female version of Iron Man. It happened for Deadpool. It can happen for a person in computer systems and mechatronics. Otherwise it is gamer/game developer barbie and look how that turned out. There is a reason why females are discouraged from getting into and pursuing the careers long term and it is not because of biology or interest. The culture even in the Pacific is so toxic not even chemosynthetic bacteria could survive. People of both sexes are thrown into to depression due to many of the industry's foibles and in the industry we have initiatives like IBM's "hack a hair dryer", or Google's "women can have daycare by work". Really it is worse than the discrimination aimed at the disabled entering work fields. In many cases it harms more the perception of the industry. Because only a chauvinist idiot could think either of the two ads were ok to roll into production. Try invoking some challenge and passion into the field. You know the usual suspects: "pushing boundaries", "creative thinking", "working at the cutting edge", and "going where no one has gone before". Use what mechatronics and computer systems engineers currently do in the field as a baseline. Because when working as an engineer and looking at "Computer Engineer" barbie it is just insulting to the engineering profession. In fact many of the comments up here are insulting to the engineering profession. That is why I totally support 100% using androgynous models for engineering advertising. Because regardless of race, sex, religion, disability or background if you have the aptitude to learn and work in the field that is the dominant characteristic of your person that should be focused on. In the office I do not care if you are married, gay, Muslim, Discordian, vegetarian, conservative, like drinking whisky sours, or any combination of the above. I care whether you can work in the role and how you perform. Seriously why does a simple Vodka ad have all the nous and yet none of the obvious finger pointing discrimination: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZRX3vwkEIQ

Samsung figured this out, why can't Apple?

Hey! It ain't my fault someone hacked your IPv4 address and all you get through your headset is this ditty.

Actually, you know nothing about the music industry

Taylor swift wrote the 2010 album Speak Now entirely on her own

We know Bono writes all the lyrics for U2 and the band has known each other since high school

Kings of leon are brothers, who write their own stuff.

Then there's McCartney's legendary songwriting contributions.

Yes even Trent Reznor writes his own music.

It's up to the underlings to negotiate a contract with a record company that benefits them in the royalty department, and these 180 artists are definitely NOT speaking up for the underlings.

This is exactly what is going on here.

Are there any videos on YouTube of people playing *really* small violins?

Its the interwebs.

Better to ask, "Can someone link some Youtube videos of people playing *really* small violins?", to which I will happily answer, "Enjoy"

This one seems apropos ... since its using canned music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxauqa7rJgI

Here's someone REALLY playing a violin that size: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ESgWlzQQag

and lastly ... since we're discussing Fair Use and the DMCA, this is appropriate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jrKXf2G-AA

Are there any videos on YouTube of people playing *really* small violins?

Its the interwebs.

Better to ask, "Can someone link some Youtube videos of people playing *really* small violins?", to which I will happily answer, "Enjoy"

This one seems apropos ... since its using canned music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxauqa7rJgI

Here's someone REALLY playing a violin that size: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ESgWlzQQag

and lastly ... since we're discussing Fair Use and the DMCA, this is appropriate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jrKXf2G-AA

Are there any videos on YouTube of people playing *really* small violins?

Its the interwebs.

Better to ask, "Can someone link some Youtube videos of people playing *really* small violins?", to which I will happily answer, "Enjoy"

This one seems apropos ... since its using canned music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxauqa7rJgI

Here's someone REALLY playing a violin that size: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ESgWlzQQag

and lastly ... since we're discussing Fair Use and the DMCA, this is appropriate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jrKXf2G-AA

Berta Rojas is a good example. Her art is something which the recording industry is not capable of delivering to the public precisely because she plays for a segmented audience and does not have mass appeal the way the overproduced pap of today's so called "pop" music does.

More and more people who know turn to youtube not to listen to new pop that the RIAA churns out in an endless stream. Instead youtube is becoming the best way for the worlds best artists to find an audience. Yes there is a plethora of pop posted to the 'tube" but there is also some stuff that would never be available and this is the most important aspect of what is going on.

Ironic, since the Republicans got their Senate majority in part by the running of ads claiming O is spying on citizens. (Disclaimer: the group who created the ad may be independent of actual Senate candidates.)

While all cars will float, ICE vehicles are nose-heavy due to the engine location. The front end will pitch down making any attempt to use it as a boat dangerous if not fatal - moving forward will increase water pressure on the top of the hood, forcing the vehicle to pitch nose-down even further.

In an EV, the weight is concentrated in the battery, which is usually evenly distributed across the vehicle's floor. So I would expect it to remain closer to horizontal when used as a boat. With some fairing on the bottom of the front end, you could even attach a propeller and get some decent forward speed out of it.

"once a Tesla starts taking on water I'd imagine it'd sink like a lithum rock."

Which is to say, it would still float? Lithium has a density similar to wood (pine).

More like "float aggressively."

I am sorry, but that car wasn't floating. The wheels and tires on a Tesla are going to have no forward thrust, because the entire wheel will be submerged, meaning the top of the wheel is thrusting backwards just as well as the bottom is thrusting forward.

The low profile tires on the Tesla are going to have minimal thrust anyway, because the tread is not even vaguely paddle like. For reference look at this video of the bigfoot monster truck floating across a lake. Even that truck with duallies on it (total of 8 monster truck wheels), which did float high enough for the big mudders to act like paddles, didn't make as quick forward progress as an old man in a canoe, and was extremely slow to respond to steering input.

The tesla in the video not only has enough power to push a big bow wave, it has enough steering traction to slalom through the other cars on the road. The weight of that car was obviously enough to keep the tires on the pavement at that water depth. I am not denying that the Tesla could float, nor am I denying that it may be water tight enough to float well, but it will be pretty much powerless and uncontrolled while floating.

Mr. Musk is very proud of his car, but on this video I call BS. That is not floating.

The other unintentional amphibious car.

The newer Beetle is nothing compared to it's ancestor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Name Calling vs Facts: Facts always win.

You shouldn't be a vegan, babe.

it can back up in a straight line...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

it shows that some in the academic research community are still intent on patching the holes that their peers are helping government hackers exploit.

So, to recap, the government-paid researchers are fighting the efforts of government-paid hackers to make the tool, that the government paid to create as a secure one, less so.

Whichever side wins, we, the taxpayers lose...

You have multiple countries with teams of very smart people working to crack everything crackable that protects privacy--because what allows private communication necessarily allows evasion of monitoring.

Of course, there are a lot of kinds of monitoring. Most obvious categories include:

1. Good purposes (attacking and/or defending against terrorists/child pornographers/organized crime/repressive regimes; tracking and blocking malware and other electronic attacks; etc...).
2. Middle-ground purposes (arguably ends-justify-the-means-behavior like violating some civil liberties while hunting white-collar criminals, child support nonpayment grey market income, doing propaganda against people in group #1).
3. Bad purposes (hunting political opposition, tracking and classifying people based on their political opinions or other things that should be prevented by freedom of speech, finding dirt for blackmail, gathering evidence of and prosecuting someone for common civil ordinance violations and petty crimes in a way which chills and stifles free speech and gives the monitoring agency unfettered power, etc...)

it shows that some in the academic research community are still intent on patching the holes that their peers are helping government hackers exploit.

So, to recap, the government-paid researchers are fighting the efforts of government-paid hackers to make the tool, that the government paid to create as a secure one, less so.

Whichever side wins, we, the taxpayers lose...

I loved that commercial where he beamed into the Xfinity Innovation Center!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Backing up semi trucks using computers already exists (and they're pretty good at it):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Mattel did that already:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I swear to god, I thought turkeys could fly ....

In words of Alex Stamos (Facebook CISO, back then Yahoo CISO): Fortune 500 consists of "SECURE 100" and "TOASTED 400".

I'd say it's about right.

Source:
http://image.slidesharecdn.com...

By the way, I highly recommend that talk:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I thought those chickens could fly'

For those who don't get the reference, probably one of the funniest clips in television history. (Posted anon to avoid karma whoring)

As an aside, I was watching an interview with Daniel Ash today bemoaning the fact that they were popular, but never made much money, it was all about the money for them. See also Hooker with a penis

Of course they would assume every car is stolen. After all, they told us "You wouldn't download a car, would you?", right?

If anyone hasn't seen this PSA from "The IT Crowd", they have missed out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I guess it is probably infinging...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

The Safe Network project is reaching its first alpha version, but it is the culmination of 10 years of research and planning.

Skeptical? It is healthy to have some skepticism, more info here:
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Article at Techcrunch: https://techcrunch.com/2014/07...
Maidsafe explained for bitcoin lovers: https://safe-network-explained...
Maidsafe presentation on Google Techtalks (June 2008): https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Maidsafe forums: https://forum.safenetwork.io/