I hear ya, and I have know little to nothing about any of this, but wasn't the idea that predictive compression and chatbots essentially do the same thing, i.e. trying to figure out the answer to something previously stated? If you manage to do one, you get the other.
That makes me wonder how it can even be legal to lock a phone in such a manner. To make an effort to limit consumer freedom never sounded right, and in the light of your post, it sounds like syntax error.
I wanted (want) Ubuntu for my laptop, but it didn't work with wifi etc., so I gave up. And - not trying to be an ass - it wasn't because Linux had its reputation for being hard to install, it was because it Linux is hard to install.
And yes, I know the reason behind it, but the fact remains the same and it's sad that hardware manufcaturers can't straighten up and make their hardware easily workable under Linux, blablabla.
So, how does this compare to the all so popular way of promiting other products like Coca-cola by bundling each bottle with a free download from iTunes? Industry doesn't seem to mind that...
I seem to remember that overturning the ban and releasing the official 'blood' patch was something of a anticlimax, as the original game was considerable less gory then the unofficial patches everyone had downloaded in the mean time. (Images of real people, grannies with zima-frames, babies, naked girls etc.)
... which is why there's probably/possibly no way even a modified Manhunt 2 is going to get a rating.
Always nice to see the law actually functioning in the interest of the people as opposed to the interest of the money. Although, in cases involving RIAA and similar parties, it usually feels like a close escape when the ruling goes as it seems to have gone this time. Rather than that, I would like to be able to actually have full trust in the law in these cases, not feel like every battle is a close win, likely to be followed by another few losses for the people (f.ex. EU's IPRED2).
I don't see how declaring racist behaviour illegal compare to the anti-governmental censorship this article is about. One is about stopping certain people from attacking, mentally or physically, people of various ethnicities etcetera, and one is about protecting a government from its own people, which by all means should be a contradiction in terms.
I see how the first, stopping Nazis for example, is problematic since it is indeed a constraint on democratic principles, but then again, it's no where near the same league as what you're defending. So please stop it, it's embarrassing.
And as far as MySpace goes, yeez, what are they thinking? Where are the morals? Grr!
Then again, in the same product line, GHz (and perhaps cache amount) is often the only thing that can decide how fast a chip is compared to another. This applies more broadly but to a lesser extent to chips that are in the same generation, albeit not the same product line, for example various Athlon XP incarnations.
Maybe, and just maybe, the trend we see is creating a new generation set of chips, pushing them to their limit in terms of frequency, then when you hit the power consumtion roof, you come up with a new set of chips which are more power efficient, just to eventually push them through the roof. It happened with the Pentium 4, and it looks like something similar is now happening to Opteron. Maybe.
Not that I consider myself particularly good or in any way a professional when it comes to web development, but I have created sites that lack functionality in IE. Why? Because IE is the constant frustration when doing a site, it never works as expected, and the fact that I am right so many times and IE wrong, just pisses ME as a developer off, meaning I every now and then plays ignorant about functionality in IE.
And what's with the release of IE7? Workarounds for IE6's shittiness doesn't work anymore, but the shittiness those workarounds were design to circumvent are still there. Good job, now I must make three different sets of CSS for simple, basic layout. Almost got a stroke there.
Reading the comments here and elsewhere, as well as seeing what is happening in the content industry and what is about to happen, I feel great relief that it seems to be a fact that development, here exampled by Apple, inevitably leads to the opening of standards and devices, through for example wifi and DRM free EMI music.
This is an obvious trend, which I believe and hope will open the eyes of consumers, resulting in increased pressure to open up the movie industry as well. Not least since Apple is a mayor player in both fields.
Who knows, maybe even RIAA will seize and desist one day.
Well, you'd have to get the first MacBook (the black one, obviously, and no Core 2 cheating), or maybe one of those Acer Ferraris or something. It would have to be something that is unique, yet popular and the most expensive first version. A custom built PC or a Dell is simply out of the question.
I guess brand new massively hyped iPhone is more important to Apple than the difference between OS X 10.4 and 10.5 during the limited time period of the summer of 2007.
This video podcast is made available for use by persons located in Australia only. If you are not located in Australia, you are not authorised to use this podcast.
Not only absurd since it's not public domain, it's also absurd since 1) They try to border the Internet. Jeez. 2) They take on some private MNC attitude saying "hey, we only want this content available to those who actually pays for it", ignoring that Australian tax payers basically are the only ones who legally CAN pay for it. Content industry never acted logically, but still, it would seem logical that when you're income is set in stone as more or less is the case with normal public service, you wouldn't fight (rather promote) global spread.
Btw, I'm a Swede, I know nothing about Australian law nor anything more about ABC than a 20 second Wikipedia search gave me, so I might be off on their status as a "normal public service".
I can see why you think that part is interesting, then again, it's a public service company so any policy other than "get our content out there on as many platforms as possible" would be absurd. It's the tax payers who pay for it, thus everything produced under the ABC banner should be (and is it seems) public domain by definition.
On a sidenote: As I said, any other policy would be absurd. Sweden's SVT currently is absurd.
I think it would make great sense to leave the machines as "Vista Certified" and put XP on them with no upgrade cd. This way, they can still double charge, all while converting their new user base to Vista.
Sure, but I guess they're not as interested in selling for profit as they are in making everyone put an equals sign in between PC (guess they lost "computer" quite a few years ago) and Vista. Just as they recently said they rather have pirates "steal" Windows than something else. In short, it's about market share for Vista, not (direct) profit.
In Malaysia, Bangkok and Vietnam (countries I've visited recently), the price of a pirated DVD is basically the same as a double-layer DVDR. The profit comes with mass production and it would no doubt be slightly more expensive to download the DVD9, buy a disc, and burn it, than to buy the pirated DVD of the street.
The downside is that sometimes you get a telesync/cam recorded copy, or subtitles are screwed up. However, at least in Malaysia, after a few months of trying different shops, I'm at a 95 per cent success rate for pure DVD copies, with totally no downside to movie quality, the artwork, the box, the everything. I basically get the same piece of value for no more than 2 USD.
So, here's the sweet part: Flying to Malaysia from Bangkok, I bought several proper legal retail DVDs at the airport. There wasn't a lot to choose from, but quite recent, quite highprofile movies such as Equilibrium and The Machinist (hey, I'm a fan...) were there and they were as retail as anything I'd get back home in Sweden. Price: 4 USD. That's what I'm prepared paying.
Slashdot Mirror
I hear ya, and I have know little to nothing about any of this, but wasn't the idea that predictive compression and chatbots essentially do the same thing, i.e. trying to figure out the answer to something previously stated? If you manage to do one, you get the other.
That makes me wonder how it can even be legal to lock a phone in such a manner. To make an effort to limit consumer freedom never sounded right, and in the light of your post, it sounds like syntax error.
I wanted (want) Ubuntu for my laptop, but it didn't work with wifi etc., so I gave up. And - not trying to be an ass - it wasn't because Linux had its reputation for being hard to install, it was because it Linux is hard to install. And yes, I know the reason behind it, but the fact remains the same and it's sad that hardware manufcaturers can't straighten up and make their hardware easily workable under Linux, blablabla.
So, how does this compare to the all so popular way of promiting other products like Coca-cola by bundling each bottle with a free download from iTunes? Industry doesn't seem to mind that...
Trackball.
Always nice to see the law actually functioning in the interest of the people as opposed to the interest of the money. Although, in cases involving RIAA and similar parties, it usually feels like a close escape when the ruling goes as it seems to have gone this time. Rather than that, I would like to be able to actually have full trust in the law in these cases, not feel like every battle is a close win, likely to be followed by another few losses for the people (f.ex. EU's IPRED2).
I don't see how declaring racist behaviour illegal compare to the anti-governmental censorship this article is about. One is about stopping certain people from attacking, mentally or physically, people of various ethnicities etcetera, and one is about protecting a government from its own people, which by all means should be a contradiction in terms. I see how the first, stopping Nazis for example, is problematic since it is indeed a constraint on democratic principles, but then again, it's no where near the same league as what you're defending. So please stop it, it's embarrassing. And as far as MySpace goes, yeez, what are they thinking? Where are the morals? Grr!
Why, the Internet (HDD) or BD?
Then again, in the same product line, GHz (and perhaps cache amount) is often the only thing that can decide how fast a chip is compared to another. This applies more broadly but to a lesser extent to chips that are in the same generation, albeit not the same product line, for example various Athlon XP incarnations.
Maybe, and just maybe, the trend we see is creating a new generation set of chips, pushing them to their limit in terms of frequency, then when you hit the power consumtion roof, you come up with a new set of chips which are more power efficient, just to eventually push them through the roof. It happened with the Pentium 4, and it looks like something similar is now happening to Opteron. Maybe.
So I can like artificially stimulate my brain to like learn Kung-Fu in an instant? Or why not this silly exam on third world ideologies...
200 peso notes famously become scarce before elections
All the more reason to make it electronic!
Not that I consider myself particularly good or in any way a professional when it comes to web development, but I have created sites that lack functionality in IE. Why? Because IE is the constant frustration when doing a site, it never works as expected, and the fact that I am right so many times and IE wrong, just pisses ME as a developer off, meaning I every now and then plays ignorant about functionality in IE.
And what's with the release of IE7? Workarounds for IE6's shittiness doesn't work anymore, but the shittiness those workarounds were design to circumvent are still there. Good job, now I must make three different sets of CSS for simple, basic layout. Almost got a stroke there.
there are no longer any playability problems
So, the update consisted of removing the DRM? Not even Sony can deny that the soul point of DRM is to create playability problems...
Reading the comments here and elsewhere, as well as seeing what is happening in the content industry and what is about to happen, I feel great relief that it seems to be a fact that development, here exampled by Apple, inevitably leads to the opening of standards and devices, through for example wifi and DRM free EMI music.
This is an obvious trend, which I believe and hope will open the eyes of consumers, resulting in increased pressure to open up the movie industry as well. Not least since Apple is a mayor player in both fields.
Who knows, maybe even RIAA will seize and desist one day.
If you cut a good deal at the projector, you might even afford the actual player for those Blu-Ray discs.
Well, you'd have to get the first MacBook (the black one, obviously, and no Core 2 cheating), or maybe one of those Acer Ferraris or something. It would have to be something that is unique, yet popular and the most expensive first version. A custom built PC or a Dell is simply out of the question.
I guess brand new massively hyped iPhone is more important to Apple than the difference between OS X 10.4 and 10.5 during the limited time period of the summer of 2007.
Then it's absurd.
This video podcast is made available for use by persons located in Australia only. If you are not located in Australia, you are not authorised to use this podcast.
Not only absurd since it's not public domain, it's also absurd since 1) They try to border the Internet. Jeez. 2) They take on some private MNC attitude saying "hey, we only want this content available to those who actually pays for it", ignoring that Australian tax payers basically are the only ones who legally CAN pay for it. Content industry never acted logically, but still, it would seem logical that when you're income is set in stone as more or less is the case with normal public service, you wouldn't fight (rather promote) global spread.
Btw, I'm a Swede, I know nothing about Australian law nor anything more about ABC than a 20 second Wikipedia search gave me, so I might be off on their status as a "normal public service".
I can see why you think that part is interesting, then again, it's a public service company so any policy other than "get our content out there on as many platforms as possible" would be absurd. It's the tax payers who pay for it, thus everything produced under the ABC banner should be (and is it seems) public domain by definition. On a sidenote: As I said, any other policy would be absurd. Sweden's SVT currently is absurd.
I think it would make great sense to leave the machines as "Vista Certified" and put XP on them with no upgrade cd. This way, they can still double charge, all while converting their new user base to Vista. Sure, but I guess they're not as interested in selling for profit as they are in making everyone put an equals sign in between PC (guess they lost "computer" quite a few years ago) and Vista. Just as they recently said they rather have pirates "steal" Windows than something else. In short, it's about market share for Vista, not (direct) profit.
In Malaysia, Bangkok and Vietnam (countries I've visited recently), the price of a pirated DVD is basically the same as a double-layer DVDR. The profit comes with mass production and it would no doubt be slightly more expensive to download the DVD9, buy a disc, and burn it, than to buy the pirated DVD of the street. The downside is that sometimes you get a telesync/cam recorded copy, or subtitles are screwed up. However, at least in Malaysia, after a few months of trying different shops, I'm at a 95 per cent success rate for pure DVD copies, with totally no downside to movie quality, the artwork, the box, the everything. I basically get the same piece of value for no more than 2 USD. So, here's the sweet part: Flying to Malaysia from Bangkok, I bought several proper legal retail DVDs at the airport. There wasn't a lot to choose from, but quite recent, quite highprofile movies such as Equilibrium and The Machinist (hey, I'm a fan...) were there and they were as retail as anything I'd get back home in Sweden. Price: 4 USD. That's what I'm prepared paying.