Why am I having to read a TorrentFreak article on this? Why is there no mention of it on either http://www.fsf.org/ nor http://defectivebydesign.org/? I don't want to link to TorrentFreak when I share this, nor do I want to link to an obscure PDF file for the original source. It really seems like they should be promoting this on their own site!
I'm continuously shocked whenever I hear about how many paper newspaper subscribers there are out there. I want news journalism to succeed somehow, but I very much want paper to go away. It's horribly wasteful and terrible for the environment, not just for the paper but primarily for the ridiculous delivery infrastructure it requires and all of the carbon emitted by it. We really need to figure out how to get people to pay for digital journalism that is a level above the typical Buzzfeed drivel.
This is very likely going to work, and people are going to gobble up the Galaxy S8 or whatever they're calling it as they have done for years in the past, regardless of how inferior a product it might be. People, particularly U.S. Americans, have a remarkably short attention span.
Why are they still selling Windows 7 and 8? That makes no sense. I understand if they feel the need to support them seemingly forever, but they certainly don't have to sell any *new* licenses. This is just idiotic. Using Windows is bad enough, but a 7 year old version of it? Come on...
I'll continue to encourage this for grandma and other family members that need an easy solution, but to anyone who really cares about privacy and security, a proprietary, closed-source, cloud-based solution is simply not an option. I have used and enjoyed KeyPass (and KeePassX) for years. They are fully open source, and, along with KeeFox and Keepass2Android, very well-integrated solutions. They use high cryptography, and you can achieve the cloud storage benefit if you want by storing your files on a Google Drive, Dropbox, etc. Highly recommended for anyone with the skills to use it over something like LastPass.
Linux marketshare at 2%? What are you smoking? Linux absolutely dominates the server market, embedded device market, mobile phone market, etc. etc. This 2% number makes no sense whatsoever.
How exactly has the show been "further delayed" after the transition of Bryan Fuller? The May 2017 premier date was announced long before Fuller left. This headline clearly made it sound like an *additional* delay. Click-bait.
Am I the only one who can never imagine Qualcomm as anything but the developer of Eudora? It just seems to bizarre to me that this company is now developing computer chips and all this other advanced stuff. Quite a big leap from a proprietary email client. (Yes, I've read about them, and know technically hat their history actually is, but that doesn't change my impression!)
What is the point of this? As I understand it, iMessage simply routes your SMS messages over the internet instead of sending a standard SMS, when it detects the recipient phone number is running iMessage. Does it have other features besides that, and all the standard SMS stuff? We can already do that easily with Google Voice, Hangouts, Allo, Facebook, and a plethora of other closed services. What we really need is *standards compliance*.
I personally despise anything that keeps the ancient SMS standard alive, but it's sadly the best standard we have. It's just pathetic that these companies all refuse to inter-operate.
I also want to see the numbers on total cost of ownership for PCs running Linux. I'm sure this depends on the extent to which the operating system is locked down, but I would imagine that a user running a solid Linux distribution appropriately locked down (without root) would have the fewest support issues of all. Some hard numbers on this would certainly be intriguing...
It seems to me that T-Mobile US, unlike its competitors, was actually completely transparent about their plans and policies. Am I missing something? They specifically offered different data amounts labeled as "high speed data", with the unlimited data always being at a lower speed. I don't see the problem here, or why they should be fined. Now, if they had a secret cap that they didn't tell their customers about up-front, or only in the fine print, like other carriers, that would be serious. This just makes no sense to me.
I really think T-Mobile has the right idea with their offering, I just wish they offered a way to toggle whether high-speed was on or off. High-speed data is of little use to me on a phone. I know it is to other people, and that's great, they can pay for that. All I want is the ability to get directions, send/receive IMs and email, and ideally enough to do VoIP or low-quality video chat. T-Mobile already offers high-speed streaming of music and video from most major sites that don't count against your high speed data limit.
I know I sound like a total corporate shill here, and that's not my intention. I just hope that the FCC is targeting the worst offences, and this doesn't seem to be one of them.
What the fuck is wrong with you? (or these mysterious "guys?") Resorting to physical violence because someone is using a phone? You have some serious problems...
Why you'd choose to take the side of these asshole capitalists is beyond me.
If there are any content distributors who are *not* pushing this, I would be very interested to learn about them, and support them myself. Louis CK is the best example I know of that would come close to mainstream. The vast, vast majority of films on Netflix are distributed by a very small number of huge companies, and they are all requiring this for streaming. My point was that you've done precisely what these content creators hoped to achieve by not making available your desired titles in your country. If that's the kind of behaviour you want to encourage, then please go right ahead.
So are they strip-searching everyone as they enter the venue? Seems like it would be rather trivial to conceal a device on your person, especially if you brought a decoy phone to put in their magic box. I was appalled at the huge number of rent-a-cop-types present at a recent comedy show I went to, yelling at anyone who had their phone out, even if they were clearly not using it to record the show.
I really want to support live performance--this is something performers really deserve to be paid well for (as opposed to royalties on recordings they already did the work for). This is not a viable solution, however. We've got to come up with a better way...and that may just be honestly. Fair use allows limited recordings of such events, and anything outside of that can and should be prosecuted. It seems to me like this isn't that much of an issue. No one's going to want to watch some shitty, low-light, phone cam version of an entire performance. These are usually just for oddball occurrences within shows and/or racist rants by performers.
One more thing... Much of the need for these pathetic geo-restrictions is actually the *music* industry, funnily enough. Because they sell distribution rights to copyrighted music to a different companies in every country, licensing a work for streaming in one country requires a whole different set of agreements than in another country. I believe this is why, even if a content provider like the BBC wants to make its content available everywhere, they can't until they've secured the rights for every song used in the media for every country. It's absolutely appalling. RIAA and ASCAP fucking us all over yet again, even in a completely different medium!
> Why should US citizens pay so that foreigners can watch our videos? Shouldn't you just unsub from Netflix and let them know why?
You realise this goes two-ways, right? There is a lot of content geo-blocked to people in the US as well (especially in Canada). And what does citizenship have to do with this? It only matters *where* the endpoint of the internet connection is, it has nothing to do with the nationality of the user paying for that connection. U.S. Americans travelling abroad should be able to view the same content available to them at home.
If you are Canadian, YOU are an American. Stop trying to pretend like you're this magical "other". It's a huge continent, and we're all in this together. I'm not defending the United States' absurd lack of regulation, nor our many idiot residents that can't be bothered to use things like seat belts--that is truly astounding in this day and age. I just get sick of stuck-up Canadians, Mexicans, Brazilians, etc. pretending that they aren't Americans just as much as we are.
These customers were trying to actually *pay* for the content they wanted, as opposed to just pirating it, and still the asshole executives stuck in the 20th century insist on trying to block it. This is so incredibly disappointing. Surely we can continue to band together to oppose these absurd geo-restrictions. I have no doubt that the people at Netflix are very talented and will continue figuring out ways to stop it, but we have the numbers behind us. If media companies want to prevent piracy, they need to stop trying to control how and where we can access the media we have voluntarily chosen to pay for. They need to start treating us like actual *customers* instead of fighting us like the enemy.
I'm sure that when trains were just being built, people were the same way the first few times they rode one. Apprehensive and staring out the window all the time at this marvel of technology. But they got over it. How idiotic to think that people wouldn't do exactly the same with a self-driving car, *especially* once they turn the seats around and remove manual controls!
Slashdot Mirror
Why am I having to read a TorrentFreak article on this? Why is there no mention of it on either http://www.fsf.org/ nor http://defectivebydesign.org/? I don't want to link to TorrentFreak when I share this, nor do I want to link to an obscure PDF file for the original source. It really seems like they should be promoting this on their own site!
I'm continuously shocked whenever I hear about how many paper newspaper subscribers there are out there. I want news journalism to succeed somehow, but I very much want paper to go away. It's horribly wasteful and terrible for the environment, not just for the paper but primarily for the ridiculous delivery infrastructure it requires and all of the carbon emitted by it. We really need to figure out how to get people to pay for digital journalism that is a level above the typical Buzzfeed drivel.
This is very likely going to work, and people are going to gobble up the Galaxy S8 or whatever they're calling it as they have done for years in the past, regardless of how inferior a product it might be. People, particularly U.S. Americans, have a remarkably short attention span.
And get off my damn lawn!
Why are they still selling Windows 7 and 8? That makes no sense. I understand if they feel the need to support them seemingly forever, but they certainly don't have to sell any *new* licenses. This is just idiotic. Using Windows is bad enough, but a 7 year old version of it? Come on...
I'll continue to encourage this for grandma and other family members that need an easy solution, but to anyone who really cares about privacy and security, a proprietary, closed-source, cloud-based solution is simply not an option. I have used and enjoyed KeyPass (and KeePassX) for years. They are fully open source, and, along with KeeFox and Keepass2Android, very well-integrated solutions. They use high cryptography, and you can achieve the cloud storage benefit if you want by storing your files on a Google Drive, Dropbox, etc. Highly recommended for anyone with the skills to use it over something like LastPass.
Linux marketshare at 2%? What are you smoking? Linux absolutely dominates the server market, embedded device market, mobile phone market, etc. etc. This 2% number makes no sense whatsoever.
How exactly has the show been "further delayed" after the transition of Bryan Fuller? The May 2017 premier date was announced long before Fuller left. This headline clearly made it sound like an *additional* delay. Click-bait.
Am I the only one who can never imagine Qualcomm as anything but the developer of Eudora? It just seems to bizarre to me that this company is now developing computer chips and all this other advanced stuff. Quite a big leap from a proprietary email client. (Yes, I've read about them, and know technically hat their history actually is, but that doesn't change my impression!)
I don't get it. Doesn't iMessage transparently switch to SMS? How would using it make one bit of difference?
What is the point of this? As I understand it, iMessage simply routes your SMS messages over the internet instead of sending a standard SMS, when it detects the recipient phone number is running iMessage. Does it have other features besides that, and all the standard SMS stuff? We can already do that easily with Google Voice, Hangouts, Allo, Facebook, and a plethora of other closed services. What we really need is *standards compliance*.
I personally despise anything that keeps the ancient SMS standard alive, but it's sadly the best standard we have. It's just pathetic that these companies all refuse to inter-operate.
I also want to see the numbers on total cost of ownership for PCs running Linux. I'm sure this depends on the extent to which the operating system is locked down, but I would imagine that a user running a solid Linux distribution appropriately locked down (without root) would have the fewest support issues of all. Some hard numbers on this would certainly be intriguing...
It seems to me that T-Mobile US, unlike its competitors, was actually completely transparent about their plans and policies. Am I missing something? They specifically offered different data amounts labeled as "high speed data", with the unlimited data always being at a lower speed. I don't see the problem here, or why they should be fined. Now, if they had a secret cap that they didn't tell their customers about up-front, or only in the fine print, like other carriers, that would be serious. This just makes no sense to me.
I really think T-Mobile has the right idea with their offering, I just wish they offered a way to toggle whether high-speed was on or off. High-speed data is of little use to me on a phone. I know it is to other people, and that's great, they can pay for that. All I want is the ability to get directions, send/receive IMs and email, and ideally enough to do VoIP or low-quality video chat. T-Mobile already offers high-speed streaming of music and video from most major sites that don't count against your high speed data limit.
I know I sound like a total corporate shill here, and that's not my intention. I just hope that the FCC is targeting the worst offences, and this doesn't seem to be one of them.
What the fuck is wrong with you? (or these mysterious "guys?") Resorting to physical violence because someone is using a phone? You have some serious problems...
Why you'd choose to take the side of these asshole capitalists is beyond me.
If there are any content distributors who are *not* pushing this, I would be very interested to learn about them, and support them myself. Louis CK is the best example I know of that would come close to mainstream. The vast, vast majority of films on Netflix are distributed by a very small number of huge companies, and they are all requiring this for streaming. My point was that you've done precisely what these content creators hoped to achieve by not making available your desired titles in your country. If that's the kind of behaviour you want to encourage, then please go right ahead.
So are they strip-searching everyone as they enter the venue? Seems like it would be rather trivial to conceal a device on your person, especially if you brought a decoy phone to put in their magic box. I was appalled at the huge number of rent-a-cop-types present at a recent comedy show I went to, yelling at anyone who had their phone out, even if they were clearly not using it to record the show.
I really want to support live performance--this is something performers really deserve to be paid well for (as opposed to royalties on recordings they already did the work for). This is not a viable solution, however. We've got to come up with a better way...and that may just be honestly. Fair use allows limited recordings of such events, and anything outside of that can and should be prosecuted. It seems to me like this isn't that much of an issue. No one's going to want to watch some shitty, low-light, phone cam version of an entire performance. These are usually just for oddball occurrences within shows and/or racist rants by performers.
One more thing... Much of the need for these pathetic geo-restrictions is actually the *music* industry, funnily enough. Because they sell distribution rights to copyrighted music to a different companies in every country, licensing a work for streaming in one country requires a whole different set of agreements than in another country. I believe this is why, even if a content provider like the BBC wants to make its content available everywhere, they can't until they've secured the rights for every song used in the media for every country. It's absolutely appalling. RIAA and ASCAP fucking us all over yet again, even in a completely different medium!
> Why should US citizens pay so that foreigners can watch our videos? Shouldn't you just unsub from Netflix and let them know why?
You realise this goes two-ways, right? There is a lot of content geo-blocked to people in the US as well (especially in Canada). And what does citizenship have to do with this? It only matters *where* the endpoint of the internet connection is, it has nothing to do with the nationality of the user paying for that connection. U.S. Americans travelling abroad should be able to view the same content available to them at home.
If you are Canadian, YOU are an American. Stop trying to pretend like you're this magical "other". It's a huge continent, and we're all in this together. I'm not defending the United States' absurd lack of regulation, nor our many idiot residents that can't be bothered to use things like seat belts--that is truly astounding in this day and age. I just get sick of stuck-up Canadians, Mexicans, Brazilians, etc. pretending that they aren't Americans just as much as we are.
So basically, you are just continuing to *support* the media companies that force Netflix to implement these draconian measures. Congratulations.
These customers were trying to actually *pay* for the content they wanted, as opposed to just pirating it, and still the asshole executives stuck in the 20th century insist on trying to block it. This is so incredibly disappointing. Surely we can continue to band together to oppose these absurd geo-restrictions. I have no doubt that the people at Netflix are very talented and will continue figuring out ways to stop it, but we have the numbers behind us. If media companies want to prevent piracy, they need to stop trying to control how and where we can access the media we have voluntarily chosen to pay for. They need to start treating us like actual *customers* instead of fighting us like the enemy.
Samsung has its own town? This is incredibly disturbing.
I'm sure that when trains were just being built, people were the same way the first few times they rode one. Apprehensive and staring out the window all the time at this marvel of technology. But they got over it. How idiotic to think that people wouldn't do exactly the same with a self-driving car, *especially* once they turn the seats around and remove manual controls!
If it's just the Matrix, it will be reset before anything too catastrophic happens anyway.
I cringe a little when I here this person described as a "hacker," but this is still a pretty neat discovery. Security through obscurity FTW!