I wonder why you got a +5 insightful for that. As only your BetaMax statements are true, and well known.
The BetaMax case was primarily related to time shifting and maybe format shifting of content. Recording live TV for later watching; maybe lending the tape to a friend or inviting them over to watch the program at your home. Not much distribution was involved, nor was it promoted as a tool for distribution of any content.
LimeWire was promoted for distribution of content, specifically for the illegal sharing of copyrighted content with as many people as possible, and also as a channel to receive such content. That's quite a different scenario from BetaMax. Copying your own CDs to your iPod or to CD-R, that's BetaMax territory. Wholesale sharing with the world, not so much. In case of home taping the source of the material was usually legitimate (TV broadcasts), can't say that for LimeWire.
PirateBay lives in Sweden, which has nothing to do with US law. I know the US likes to see it differently, but that's not the point. They're under Swedish law. Oh well probably moving all over the world by now but that's where their origins lie.
BitTorrent is primarily a protocol, not an entity. A protocol can not be sued as such. And indeed in the US it should fall under the BetaMax cases, in the rest of the world (mind the US has a mere 5% of the world population! it may be different.
Sony's DRM cases fall under the DMCA's realm which postdates and thus overrules the Betamax case. As such the BetaMax case is not applicable any more.
While you may like to put it all under BetaMax case law, it really doesn't fly. Minor differences are enough for case law - and here the differences are huge, not to say totally inapplicable.
I'd guess Microsoft is next. For producing the leading browser (IE is still the most used; and definitely was in the LimeWire era) that helped people find out about music and display the CNet web site, if not for producing the leading operating system, after all Windows was a prerequisite for running LimeWire. So without Windows no LimeWire no infringement. Right? Right. Now Microsoft please pay up for the losses, OK?
Yet for many other attacks they do claim/admit responsibility. They sometimes even announce it in advance. Their communication channels are no secret, anyone can listen in if they like to do so, to keep track of what Anonymous is up to.
Credit card theft doesn't go together with loosely banded idealistic movements. That is for professional thieves, usually operating alone or in tightly closed small groups, as there is profit to be made for them. Those thieves may again align themselves with Anonymous of course. Anonymous has too many members that act individually that such a theft while possible would have its results end up on major torrent sites.
We don't know if this was the response of just one person: the linked article was purportedly written by a company called Anonymous Enterprises LLC (Bermuda). Now I'm too lazy to do any more research on that (I leave that to the experts) so I can't tell who is behind that company. But somehow, somewhere one or more individuals have apparently set this up, and the same or other individual(s) wrote this press release.
This whole "Anonymous" movement, apparently largely concentrated around 4chan, is, well, anonymous. So anyone could be talking "in name of" Anonymous. I quite often see quotes in newspaper from "a spokesperson of Anonymous", who invariably is anonymous him/herself, or at most identified by an on-line handle. How is such a spokesperson identified? Does the rest of the group agree with it?
On the other hand it may be an interesting subject for more research on "crowd intelligence". This I believe is one of the few, if not only, organisations in the world with significant size and without central authority or even charter. They just are, and that in a way fascinates me. Who are they? Why are they? How are decisions made? Can we call their decision making process the ultimate form of democracy, where anyone has an equal vote? Or are there actually individuals with more influence than others - "all are equal, but some are more equal than others"? All I can tell is that this group is highly idealistic, and of course mainly active in Internet related issues.
And then now this company has appeared, claiming to talk in the name of Anonymous. Is this going to be the focal point of this group? If so it'll definitely change shape. Maybe split up, if it's not a group of groups to begin with.
It's remarkable how little is known about this movement, even though their communication is done out in the open, and they're happy to talk to the press.
You're correct about the animals, though the reason for it is hygiene. How does Hong Kong manage to transport and 'store' live animals?
Fish and other seafood are easy: stored in smallish water tanks with serious aeration devices. Transport in open barrels on the back of a truck (those trucks always have some tubes running down the back to drain spilled water). They don't have to worry too much about livable environment for the fish, as long as they're moving by the time they're sold it's enough.
Chickens and other fowl are simply kept in metal cages, usually stuffed really full. The birds have barely any space to move. Food/water generally not provided, again the animals just have to survive the time to slaughter.
Turtles and frogs are normally kept in nets, presumably transported that way too.
Restaurants will usually provide more space per animal, as that makes for better display.
Hygiene is an issue indeed, and is exactly why the sale of live fowl is going down. The Hong Kong government a few years ago bought back the license of many live chicken stall holders, seriously reducing the number of traders. Newer stalls are completely enclosed in transparent walls, the customer can not put their hands on the live birds. It was the practice that customers can inspect and select their own chicken, which I think is part of the reason selling them live was so popular. And nowadays live chicken sellers must close their stall one day a month for cleaning - all markets operate 7 days a week here.
And many children think milk comes from factories, not cows. Particularly those living in cities.
Western societies have it worse than Asian. Well, sort of. In China many restaurants have their food on display: various birds, snakes, fish and other sea animals, turtles, sometimes even dogs and cats.You point out which animal you want and they'll cook it for you. Killing if you prefer can be done under your watch.
Markets here often have large parts of cows, pigs and other large animals hanging on display. Such as complete rib cases, lungs, and tails (with the skin and hair in place preferably). The heads too. It doesn't need much fantasy to see which part of the animal it was.
Fowl like pigeons, ducks and chickens are also sold alive (though in Hong Kong at least that's quickly disappearing over bird flu fears). You choose the animal, hands-on if you like, the shop keeper will slaughter it while you're waiting. Fish, seafood and turtles are also routinely sold alive. I have had a dead fish jump off the kitchen sink an hour or so after being killed and gutted... that scared us mainly because the movement was so sudden and unexpected. A dead fish still jumping in the bag I've had quite often.
In the west indeed there is not much left of the original shape of the animal - many people dislike the idea of seeing what animal it used to be. You won't see a row of pig's heads in the butcher's display, for example. Fish is commonly sold dead, preferably sliced or processed as fish fingers or so. The head is typically tossed out, while the Chinese consider that the best part of the fish. Once when I cooked fish complete with head and tail a friend commented "I don't like my dinner to be watching me!".
So all in all, yes you're totally right. Most people don't know where their food comes from. They wouldn't know how a potato plant looks like (OK that's a non-obvious one). They may recognise corn plants, when grown full.
Knowing where one's food comes from is good I think. Makes people think more about their planet, the value of a clean environment, and how all that dirt we spew out in the air comes back to haunt them quite directly. Health is related to food: you are what you eat, and when you eat dirt, well that can't be too healthy either. And even if just 10,000 people can join a project like this may well generate a lot more general interest. Curious to see how it's going to play out.
From the little detail in the article the question at hand is the time of death of his wife.
Apparently there was a phone call made from their home to the man's mobile, presumably from the wife, proving that she was alive at that time, and about to leave home for her normal morning jogging. The prosecution obviously believes the woman was dead already at that time, and they think the call was staged by the man.
So it's not the thing they prosecute on, on the contrary even: they appear to try to find a way to explain evidence that otherwise would acquit him.
On a related note, I saw a dead-tree article yesterday that said the Netherlands is already using the anonymized data to decide where to place radar enforcement.
That same story has been posted on/. too.
Indeed such info is used by police to find speeding blackspots - where enforcement is more likely to have effect .
And contrary to popular belief here on/., lowering speeds and particularly speed differences DOES seriously improve safety, that has been scientifically proven, and is not about collecting money. Accidents at higher speed also involve more energy so more risk of casualties.
And for those who do not believe it's not about the money they can collect: for well over a decade now in The Netherlands the police has also been announcing speed checks. They will announce on which stretch of which expressway they will have speed checks. They of course will not tell you where exactly, or which time exactly. Just this announcement has a pronounced effect, and they have far fewer fines to collect for much better effect. Besides these announced checks they also perform unannounced checks of course.
From a look at the linked article, it seems that one of the issues is data generated by these web sites. Such as user statistics, or user uploaded content, etc. That naturally lives primarily on the live web server and is also data that you don't want to lose. Also as other commenters mentioned as well the EC2 service is not a cloud-storage server, it's a web hosting service, and web hosts tend to indeed generate their own data.
This data of course needs to be backupped actively, and one would expect a web host to include that in its service. That's one of the reasons to pay for such a service, instead of doing it yourself.
Besides relying on their backups it's of course a good idea to regularly take backups yourself. But even if you do this daily, it means you may lose up to a day's worth of data. And that's (partly) what happened here. It's similar to someone who takes a photo on a digital camera, and subsequently loses that camera and the photo with it. You don't say "they shouldn't use a camera as primary data repository". It isn't. It's a temporary repository, and when the data is generated it's the one and only repository, simply pending copying to backup media.
It shouldn't be hard to put separate cameras on both entry and exit points, and use that data instead. Separate from the toll payment requirement.
Automatic license plate recognition is easy; this kind of speed check systems are in place in The Netherlands for many years already, and are very successful in keeping speeds on those stretches of motorway in check. They do it while traffic zips by at 100 or even 120 km/h. Your toll booths have an easier job there.
First of all, it's a guideline. It has some consequences (makes it harder to buy stuff directly) but doesn't block access.
As a parent I think ratings are great as it gives you a very quick idea on the content of material. Whether you want to introduce it to your child, is a separate decision, and depends on the child. Of course waiting until some magical age and then open the floodgates all at once is a bad idea, but presenting a violent R18 movie to a 6-year-old is also not a good idea. And that's what ratings do too: it helps me as a parent to make a reasonable pre-selection.
I see a serious conflict possible between (a) and (d). Here my interpretation.
Principle (a) basically allows any material to be rated R18 without further review - if lower classifications are deemed appropriate, then review should be done.
(b) is very reasonable: that's what ratings are for.
But also for a lot of material I'd like to know on which grounds (types of content) a rating is given. This is what principle (c) would prescribe. Some material may depict graphic violence, others explicit sex - it seems there are quite some people that depict anything sexual, but love to look at violent stuff. Or the other way around. A simple R18 rating would not tell enough.
And then (d). That is definitely more than answering the question of "what kind of content belongs under what rating" guidelines. It will definitely be applicable for certain contents that go against the moral of some people, maybe a majority even. And lead to material being "refused classification" as they call it over there, or simply forbidden. And with that it goes right against principle (a).
This doesn't make sense. Why? Because the Apple v. Samsung suit is supposedly about trademark/design infringement. Because the Galaxy looks way too much like Apple's products. Not about anything technical about it.
Or am I missing something here? And is there something fundamental to Android that this suit is about?
And if it is fundamental to Android, logically the suit should be targeting Google - the author of the Android system. But it seems Google is not involved in this one (yet).
Oh and Android surging over iOS is no surprise but just natural... iOS is limited to one current and a few old models phone, and one current and one old model tablet. Android is not limited and currently available on dozens of current, and possibly hundreds of old models of phones and tablets. Not exactly an even fight.
Sorry it's bedtime (midnight here) so not going to read TFA. Apple shouldn't have much to fear from Android - about as much as it has to fear from Windows in the personal computing world. It competes just fine there.
Microsoft that's the potential big loser here, as they have to sell their OS and are really competing head-to-head with Android. In a market where pennies count, they want to add dollars to the cost. Apple has no such issues, there is no price on an iOS license, afaik it's not even for sale other than in combination with a piece of hardware.
So sure, they're largely promotional, but that doesn't mean they can afford to give them away for free, and that's basically what you're asking them to do.
No idea how you can come up with that idea. Never said so. I was even talking about selling CDs.
And most unsigned bands don't have concerts. They have shows. Some of the more popular bands get a cut of the door, depending on venue. Many bands, however, just get a flat fee per set.
Shows... concerts... whatever you call it. There is no difference, really. In the club where I worked (I volunteered at a pop club for some 8 years) we never made such a difference. Call it shows at local clubs, concerts well when they play in stadiums or so and arrange all themselves? No matter what: the more people want to come watch a band, the higher fee they can get (either flat fee or as cut from the door), and the more bookings they can expect as clubs want to book bands that actually draw an audience.
Actually I'm watching the US broadcasts (I've watched the UK version once or twice; and I really don't like that announcer).
But at least one episode, a few seasons back, and I think actually a few more episodes, they needed weights of some fairly small samples (a few grammes or so, that idea). The scale they used gave weight in grammes. They also wrote down the measured weights in grammes. It really surprised me: not just that they suddenly used metric, but that apparently a scale sold in the US can not do imperial. Them being Americans I assume prefer imperial.
Another episode, about the baseball bounce, they measured the bounce height in cm. On a self-made scale no less! They always use feet and inches, but then suddenly they used cm?! Very strange. Other parts of the same myth were done with inches again.
And I just now finished watching S09E02 and E03. In E02 (blue ice) they are talking about aircraft flying at altitude and an air temperature of -20F. That number is mentioned a few times. I thought it's colder up there, may be a limitation of the wind tunnel. But then suddenly the announcer says it's "-20C". Go figure. Not only it suddenly got warmer by 9C (or 16F), he suddenly used a different metric. So much for science...
Engineers tend to use mm as unit, not cm. So even smaller.
Mixing up cm and inch, sure, will happen.
Mixing up mm and inch, well maybe but not so likely. Order of magnitude difference. Should make any somewhat experienced engineer think twice. Then suddenly your bridge really gets small. Or your railway line really narrow. Or your high-rise rising well not really. And yes those constructions ARE done in mm units.
Removing a SIM card is a hassle: remove the back, remove the battery, pull the sim from its holder (if you're lucky it's a clip or so that can open), and re-assemble the phone. That's what I call a hassle. You should try it. Try removing your sim every night before going to sleep, putting it back in the morning - you're going to be fed up with that action very soon.
Doing it once every 12-24 months is of course a no-brainer, doing it three times a day because you now want to use your tablet and then you want to use your phone and it gets old quickly. It's not as easy as popping in a CD, plugging in a headset or connecting a USB cable. It's not designed nor meant to be done time and again. They're replaceable, sure, but that doesn't mean it's really easy to do so, and doing it often enough will likely break the sim holder.
It would also be pretty rough for musicians, because now they would have to live on revenue from live shows. That's great for acts that bring in a lot of people. It means that the people at the bottom, though—the singer-songwriters and small garage bands of the world—would not be able to use recordings to supplement the pittance that they get from club owners.
You obviously don't know much about how that part of the music industry works.
Most bands, especially the small ones, do not make any significant profits on recordings. They only make any real money by playing in clubs, and for most of them that's just covering costs. Merchandise (t-shirts etc) also brings money. Recordings are promotion, sold at the concert at reasonable prices (i.e. less than half the typical retail shop price for a major-label artist), hopefully to be lent by the concert goer to friends, to make their music known. And to get more people to their next concert.
Copyrights actually don't do much for small time artists. The ones making money of music copyrights are music labels.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder why you got a +5 insightful for that. As only your BetaMax statements are true, and well known.
The BetaMax case was primarily related to time shifting and maybe format shifting of content. Recording live TV for later watching; maybe lending the tape to a friend or inviting them over to watch the program at your home. Not much distribution was involved, nor was it promoted as a tool for distribution of any content.
LimeWire was promoted for distribution of content, specifically for the illegal sharing of copyrighted content with as many people as possible, and also as a channel to receive such content. That's quite a different scenario from BetaMax. Copying your own CDs to your iPod or to CD-R, that's BetaMax territory. Wholesale sharing with the world, not so much. In case of home taping the source of the material was usually legitimate (TV broadcasts), can't say that for LimeWire.
PirateBay lives in Sweden, which has nothing to do with US law. I know the US likes to see it differently, but that's not the point. They're under Swedish law. Oh well probably moving all over the world by now but that's where their origins lie.
BitTorrent is primarily a protocol, not an entity. A protocol can not be sued as such. And indeed in the US it should fall under the BetaMax cases, in the rest of the world (mind the US has a mere 5% of the world population! it may be different.
Sony's DRM cases fall under the DMCA's realm which postdates and thus overrules the Betamax case. As such the BetaMax case is not applicable any more.
While you may like to put it all under BetaMax case law, it really doesn't fly. Minor differences are enough for case law - and here the differences are huge, not to say totally inapplicable.
CNet IS the store.
I'd guess Microsoft is next. For producing the leading browser (IE is still the most used; and definitely was in the LimeWire era) that helped people find out about music and display the CNet web site, if not for producing the leading operating system, after all Windows was a prerequisite for running LimeWire. So without Windows no LimeWire no infringement. Right? Right. Now Microsoft please pay up for the losses, OK?
What a world we live in...
Yet for many other attacks they do claim/admit responsibility. They sometimes even announce it in advance. Their communication channels are no secret, anyone can listen in if they like to do so, to keep track of what Anonymous is up to.
Credit card theft doesn't go together with loosely banded idealistic movements. That is for professional thieves, usually operating alone or in tightly closed small groups, as there is profit to be made for them. Those thieves may again align themselves with Anonymous of course. Anonymous has too many members that act individually that such a theft while possible would have its results end up on major torrent sites.
We don't know if this was the response of just one person: the linked article was purportedly written by a company called Anonymous Enterprises LLC (Bermuda). Now I'm too lazy to do any more research on that (I leave that to the experts) so I can't tell who is behind that company. But somehow, somewhere one or more individuals have apparently set this up, and the same or other individual(s) wrote this press release.
This whole "Anonymous" movement, apparently largely concentrated around 4chan, is, well, anonymous. So anyone could be talking "in name of" Anonymous. I quite often see quotes in newspaper from "a spokesperson of Anonymous", who invariably is anonymous him/herself, or at most identified by an on-line handle. How is such a spokesperson identified? Does the rest of the group agree with it?
On the other hand it may be an interesting subject for more research on "crowd intelligence". This I believe is one of the few, if not only, organisations in the world with significant size and without central authority or even charter. They just are, and that in a way fascinates me. Who are they? Why are they? How are decisions made? Can we call their decision making process the ultimate form of democracy, where anyone has an equal vote? Or are there actually individuals with more influence than others - "all are equal, but some are more equal than others"? All I can tell is that this group is highly idealistic, and of course mainly active in Internet related issues.
And then now this company has appeared, claiming to talk in the name of Anonymous. Is this going to be the focal point of this group? If so it'll definitely change shape. Maybe split up, if it's not a group of groups to begin with.
It's remarkable how little is known about this movement, even though their communication is done out in the open, and they're happy to talk to the press.
Can be both, but not only the factory. Cows (or other female lactating mammals for that sake) are an important factor.
You're correct about the animals, though the reason for it is hygiene. How does Hong Kong manage to transport and 'store' live animals?
Fish and other seafood are easy: stored in smallish water tanks with serious aeration devices. Transport in open barrels on the back of a truck (those trucks always have some tubes running down the back to drain spilled water). They don't have to worry too much about livable environment for the fish, as long as they're moving by the time they're sold it's enough.
Chickens and other fowl are simply kept in metal cages, usually stuffed really full. The birds have barely any space to move. Food/water generally not provided, again the animals just have to survive the time to slaughter.
Turtles and frogs are normally kept in nets, presumably transported that way too.
Restaurants will usually provide more space per animal, as that makes for better display.
Hygiene is an issue indeed, and is exactly why the sale of live fowl is going down. The Hong Kong government a few years ago bought back the license of many live chicken stall holders, seriously reducing the number of traders. Newer stalls are completely enclosed in transparent walls, the customer can not put their hands on the live birds. It was the practice that customers can inspect and select their own chicken, which I think is part of the reason selling them live was so popular. And nowadays live chicken sellers must close their stall one day a month for cleaning - all markets operate 7 days a week here.
Even more than that: 300k GBP. That's almost 340k Euro.
30 pounds times 10,000 participants is 300,000 GBP a year on subscription fees alone. That should help a lot.
And many children think milk comes from factories, not cows. Particularly those living in cities.
Western societies have it worse than Asian. Well, sort of. In China many restaurants have their food on display: various birds, snakes, fish and other sea animals, turtles, sometimes even dogs and cats.You point out which animal you want and they'll cook it for you. Killing if you prefer can be done under your watch.
Markets here often have large parts of cows, pigs and other large animals hanging on display. Such as complete rib cases, lungs, and tails (with the skin and hair in place preferably). The heads too. It doesn't need much fantasy to see which part of the animal it was.
Fowl like pigeons, ducks and chickens are also sold alive (though in Hong Kong at least that's quickly disappearing over bird flu fears). You choose the animal, hands-on if you like, the shop keeper will slaughter it while you're waiting. Fish, seafood and turtles are also routinely sold alive. I have had a dead fish jump off the kitchen sink an hour or so after being killed and gutted... that scared us mainly because the movement was so sudden and unexpected. A dead fish still jumping in the bag I've had quite often.
In the west indeed there is not much left of the original shape of the animal - many people dislike the idea of seeing what animal it used to be. You won't see a row of pig's heads in the butcher's display, for example. Fish is commonly sold dead, preferably sliced or processed as fish fingers or so. The head is typically tossed out, while the Chinese consider that the best part of the fish. Once when I cooked fish complete with head and tail a friend commented "I don't like my dinner to be watching me!".
So all in all, yes you're totally right. Most people don't know where their food comes from. They wouldn't know how a potato plant looks like (OK that's a non-obvious one). They may recognise corn plants, when grown full.
Knowing where one's food comes from is good I think. Makes people think more about their planet, the value of a clean environment, and how all that dirt we spew out in the air comes back to haunt them quite directly. Health is related to food: you are what you eat, and when you eat dirt, well that can't be too healthy either. And even if just 10,000 people can join a project like this may well generate a lot more general interest. Curious to see how it's going to play out.
From the little detail in the article the question at hand is the time of death of his wife.
Apparently there was a phone call made from their home to the man's mobile, presumably from the wife, proving that she was alive at that time, and about to leave home for her normal morning jogging. The prosecution obviously believes the woman was dead already at that time, and they think the call was staged by the man.
So it's not the thing they prosecute on, on the contrary even: they appear to try to find a way to explain evidence that otherwise would acquit him.
On a related note, I saw a dead-tree article yesterday that said the Netherlands is already using the anonymized data to decide where to place radar enforcement.
That same story has been posted on /. too.
Indeed such info is used by police to find speeding blackspots - where enforcement is more likely to have effect .
And contrary to popular belief here on /., lowering speeds and particularly speed differences DOES seriously improve safety, that has been scientifically proven, and is not about collecting money. Accidents at higher speed also involve more energy so more risk of casualties.
And for those who do not believe it's not about the money they can collect: for well over a decade now in The Netherlands the police has also been announcing speed checks. They will announce on which stretch of which expressway they will have speed checks. They of course will not tell you where exactly, or which time exactly. Just this announcement has a pronounced effect, and they have far fewer fines to collect for much better effect. Besides these announced checks they also perform unannounced checks of course.
From a look at the linked article, it seems that one of the issues is data generated by these web sites. Such as user statistics, or user uploaded content, etc. That naturally lives primarily on the live web server and is also data that you don't want to lose. Also as other commenters mentioned as well the EC2 service is not a cloud-storage server, it's a web hosting service, and web hosts tend to indeed generate their own data.
This data of course needs to be backupped actively, and one would expect a web host to include that in its service. That's one of the reasons to pay for such a service, instead of doing it yourself.
Besides relying on their backups it's of course a good idea to regularly take backups yourself. But even if you do this daily, it means you may lose up to a day's worth of data. And that's (partly) what happened here. It's similar to someone who takes a photo on a digital camera, and subsequently loses that camera and the photo with it. You don't say "they shouldn't use a camera as primary data repository". It isn't. It's a temporary repository, and when the data is generated it's the one and only repository, simply pending copying to backup media.
It shouldn't be hard to put separate cameras on both entry and exit points, and use that data instead. Separate from the toll payment requirement.
Automatic license plate recognition is easy; this kind of speed check systems are in place in The Netherlands for many years already, and are very successful in keeping speeds on those stretches of motorway in check. They do it while traffic zips by at 100 or even 120 km/h. Your toll booths have an easier job there.
First of all, it's a guideline. It has some consequences (makes it harder to buy stuff directly) but doesn't block access.
As a parent I think ratings are great as it gives you a very quick idea on the content of material. Whether you want to introduce it to your child, is a separate decision, and depends on the child. Of course waiting until some magical age and then open the floodgates all at once is a bad idea, but presenting a violent R18 movie to a 6-year-old is also not a good idea. And that's what ratings do too: it helps me as a parent to make a reasonable pre-selection.
I see a serious conflict possible between (a) and (d). Here my interpretation.
Principle (a) basically allows any material to be rated R18 without further review - if lower classifications are deemed appropriate, then review should be done.
(b) is very reasonable: that's what ratings are for.
But also for a lot of material I'd like to know on which grounds (types of content) a rating is given. This is what principle (c) would prescribe. Some material may depict graphic violence, others explicit sex - it seems there are quite some people that depict anything sexual, but love to look at violent stuff. Or the other way around. A simple R18 rating would not tell enough.
And then (d). That is definitely more than answering the question of "what kind of content belongs under what rating" guidelines. It will definitely be applicable for certain contents that go against the moral of some people, maybe a majority even. And lead to material being "refused classification" as they call it over there, or simply forbidden. And with that it goes right against principle (a).
But what if those entities are really intelligent, and are not making such bombs to begin with?
They should watch Star Trek et. al. more.
Or maybe they did just that too much already.
This doesn't make sense. Why? Because the Apple v. Samsung suit is supposedly about trademark/design infringement. Because the Galaxy looks way too much like Apple's products. Not about anything technical about it.
Or am I missing something here? And is there something fundamental to Android that this suit is about?
And if it is fundamental to Android, logically the suit should be targeting Google - the author of the Android system. But it seems Google is not involved in this one (yet).
Oh and Android surging over iOS is no surprise but just natural... iOS is limited to one current and a few old models phone, and one current and one old model tablet. Android is not limited and currently available on dozens of current, and possibly hundreds of old models of phones and tablets. Not exactly an even fight.
Sorry it's bedtime (midnight here) so not going to read TFA. Apple shouldn't have much to fear from Android - about as much as it has to fear from Windows in the personal computing world. It competes just fine there.
Microsoft that's the potential big loser here, as they have to sell their OS and are really competing head-to-head with Android. In a market where pennies count, they want to add dollars to the cost. Apple has no such issues, there is no price on an iOS license, afaik it's not even for sale other than in combination with a piece of hardware.
So sure, they're largely promotional, but that doesn't mean they can afford to give them away for free, and that's basically what you're asking them to do.
No idea how you can come up with that idea. Never said so. I was even talking about selling CDs.
And most unsigned bands don't have concerts. They have shows. Some of the more popular bands get a cut of the door, depending on venue. Many bands, however, just get a flat fee per set.
Shows... concerts... whatever you call it. There is no difference, really. In the club where I worked (I volunteered at a pop club for some 8 years) we never made such a difference. Call it shows at local clubs, concerts well when they play in stadiums or so and arrange all themselves? No matter what: the more people want to come watch a band, the higher fee they can get (either flat fee or as cut from the door), and the more bookings they can expect as clubs want to book bands that actually draw an audience.
Actually I'm watching the US broadcasts (I've watched the UK version once or twice; and I really don't like that announcer).
But at least one episode, a few seasons back, and I think actually a few more episodes, they needed weights of some fairly small samples (a few grammes or so, that idea). The scale they used gave weight in grammes. They also wrote down the measured weights in grammes. It really surprised me: not just that they suddenly used metric, but that apparently a scale sold in the US can not do imperial. Them being Americans I assume prefer imperial.
Another episode, about the baseball bounce, they measured the bounce height in cm. On a self-made scale no less! They always use feet and inches, but then suddenly they used cm?! Very strange. Other parts of the same myth were done with inches again.
And I just now finished watching S09E02 and E03. In E02 (blue ice) they are talking about aircraft flying at altitude and an air temperature of -20F. That number is mentioned a few times. I thought it's colder up there, may be a limitation of the wind tunnel. But then suddenly the announcer says it's "-20C". Go figure. Not only it suddenly got warmer by 9C (or 16F), he suddenly used a different metric. So much for science...
Engineers tend to use mm as unit, not cm. So even smaller.
Mixing up cm and inch, sure, will happen.
Mixing up mm and inch, well maybe but not so likely. Order of magnitude difference. Should make any somewhat experienced engineer think twice. Then suddenly your bridge really gets small. Or your railway line really narrow. Or your high-rise rising well not really. And yes those constructions ARE done in mm units.
Units should always be given, of course.
Removing a SIM card is a hassle: remove the back, remove the battery, pull the sim from its holder (if you're lucky it's a clip or so that can open), and re-assemble the phone. That's what I call a hassle. You should try it. Try removing your sim every night before going to sleep, putting it back in the morning - you're going to be fed up with that action very soon.
Doing it once every 12-24 months is of course a no-brainer, doing it three times a day because you now want to use your tablet and then you want to use your phone and it gets old quickly. It's not as easy as popping in a CD, plugging in a headset or connecting a USB cable. It's not designed nor meant to be done time and again. They're replaceable, sure, but that doesn't mean it's really easy to do so, and doing it often enough will likely break the sim holder.
It would also be pretty rough for musicians, because now they would have to live on revenue from live shows. That's great for acts that bring in a lot of people. It means that the people at the bottom, though—the singer-songwriters and small garage bands of the world—would not be able to use recordings to supplement the pittance that they get from club owners.
You obviously don't know much about how that part of the music industry works.
Most bands, especially the small ones, do not make any significant profits on recordings. They only make any real money by playing in clubs, and for most of them that's just covering costs. Merchandise (t-shirts etc) also brings money. Recordings are promotion, sold at the concert at reasonable prices (i.e. less than half the typical retail shop price for a major-label artist), hopefully to be lent by the concert goer to friends, to make their music known. And to get more people to their next concert.
Copyrights actually don't do much for small time artists. The ones making money of music copyrights are music labels.
I am an engineer.
Just not a software engineer. That's a special case of engineering.