if its not considered terribly bad form, i wonder if Mr. Beckerman wouldnt mind telling us the ballpark figure this case cost Mrs Lindor. Or failing that, just the total number of billable hours and a general idea of other costs, monitary or opportunity, that she incurred.
So the case is dropped without requiring attorneys fees, adding to the impression that it may be cheaper to pay the recording industry a settlement than have years of legal battle for nothing beyond not having been required to pay the ridiculous punitive damages.
a clear win for the RIAA gameplan, if not the widest possible margin.
Note: The networks you're mentioning from Telus and Bell are UMTS only, with no 2G GSM support at all. Won't matter in 5-10 years, but just a heads up.
The problem people don't really seem to get about mobile pricing and "competition" in Canada is that it really is a system with only two sides Rogers and Telus/Bell. Telus and Bell themselves barely compete as their pricing structures are nearly identical beyond minor differences, which makes sense given their Network Sharing Agreements.
Fido is effectively the WestJet of our carriers, cherry picking the majority of their clients within high population density areas, which did make them a competitor within the major cities and a large portion of the market until about 2004 when they became wholly owned by Rogers.
Some people may mentioned the MVNO's Koodo and SOLO Mobile not realizing that Koodo is effectively a slightly lower margin Telus, and Solo Mobile is Bell (down to the same exact 'customer service' tools, except I believe Solo CSSR's are primarily through Canadian based subcontractors only).
Given these details, you see we have effectively two sides only. Two sides which somehow magically conviced everyone in the country that it makes sense for them to have doubled the price (two-sided billing) of per usage SMS's from 15c to 30c a piece. Two sides that maintain suspiciously close pricing that tends to vary only by small amounts for specific cases. Two sides that maintain a consistent CHURN back and forth between the two sets of groups generating Long Term Contract Charges and a variety of fine print charges so that when One is considered the evil, users switch to the other (with similar THEY ARE THE WORST rants concerning the business model in either case, rogers OR bell). The only reason it works is that the worst things only happen to a low enough percentage for each carrier that after they ragequit and go to the other side, its unlikely for it to happen again to the same person (post 90 day billing errors that are considered valid so long as client wasnt able to ask the right question to a CSSR before the 90 days was up thanks to the Consumer Protection Act [HAH], defective merchandise that is considered not covered under warranty but still generated a contract with a valid LTCC charge if cancelled [*cough*AUDIOVOX*cough*], etc).
The long and short of it is Telco companies have us by the short hairs up here in Canada. Heres hoping WIND Mobile takes off, but given that they only launched in friggan December, i cant have an opinion quite yet.
Agreed, there has been such a longstanding history of apple versus pc(Microsoft) and Microsoft versus apple bashing in the recent past that if anything like this was going to happen, it would take a lonnnng wait before that mindset was out of consumers minds. Not only would it muck up years of work priming the marketplace to pit one against the other, but it would require that Microsoft allow the mainstream to consider Apple equivalent and Apple would have to effectively dump the "we're shinier and trendier than those balding business dweebs" tact that they've invested millions in imprinting on the 18-34 demographic.
Not saying such a thing could NEVER happen; However it would be a huge deadweight loss for both companies current marketing strategies, between Apples image play and Microsoft's attempts to make Apples offerings appear irrelevant, that I can't see EITHER company even considering it in the short term.
Systems that control key infrastructure for your nations production and commerce should be on an completely separate network. End of story really.
For the information that needs to be distributed over the internet, make it eyes only transferred from the control network to the internet connected systems (double workstation setup). Then your only concern is direct espionage.
Because thats a broken window fallacy, by investing in new computers they wouldn't need if their current system was properly maintained they're expending money on something that could otherwise be used for the purchase of something else they do not already have, or even invest it (even if its only to the tune of a small government bond or guaranteed interest certificate style investment).
This holds double for items that have a tendancy to either be primarily imported or made primarily with imported parts.
This problem is so easy to understand that its blatantly clear that this is all part of a campaign to paint Google as an evil company.
Personally, i think it has more to do with people seeing the story before them and knee-jerk reacting to it. Google analyzes a lot of data and has a lot of information based on it yes, so when it comes up in conversation the paranoia kicks in and the diatribes come out. I don't think it has anything to do with any organized campaign against google in any sense of it. They are not doing the same for the more obvious cases of concern because 1. they're used to those and 2. they are not being raised as the topic of conversation.
It is a rather common exploitable bit of human psychology that people react this way. It's kinda like how the media had america in a huge pep rally shouting match over privatized insurance versus government run insurance, when all the while no one was discussing the real problem that is that health care pricing is through the roof in america. Everyone was used to it being so expensive and no one was discussing the cost, so everyone ranted about how it was going to be paid instead.
And how will they compensate anyone wrongfully put on that feed for the damage to their reputation? The Court of Public Opinion can be brutal about these things, especially when they work in HR somewhere..
Yeah, because places like Canada and Norway, and most other countries where these games are also legally purchased are having those problems as well.
Oh. Wait.
I've heard of people making the mistake of assuming correlation to mean a possible causal link, but this doesn't even correlate in most countries that have no problem allowing these games. Your reasoning is the same as Homer wanting Lisa's tiger repelling rock.
The problems you describe have to do with much larger underlying problems than anything video games of any sort bring to the table.
I don't really understand how this is even an issue. I seem to remember reading an article almost a decade ago [sadly I don't remember the source] which explained how the NSA operated their networking and it was EXACTLY what you're saying. The only connection their networks had to the outside world were stations with two terminals, internal network on one and external networks on the other with the agent in the chair being the ONLY connection between the two.
No amount of efficiency gained is worth having truly sensitive data being ANYWHERE on an exposed network.
Slashdot Mirror
and they all gave me guff the next time they saw me, saying it made them look bad.
I think it's just against Dude-Union regulations.
He must be from marketing!
GET `IM!
if its not considered terribly bad form, i wonder if Mr. Beckerman wouldnt mind telling us the ballpark figure this case cost Mrs Lindor. Or failing that, just the total number of billable hours and a general idea of other costs, monitary or opportunity, that she incurred.
If only for a sense of proportion.
Actually, they probably have lots of expensive scotch.
and that ruling probably called for a few rounds.
So the case is dropped without requiring attorneys fees, adding to the impression that it may be cheaper to pay the recording industry a settlement than have years of legal battle for nothing beyond not having been required to pay the ridiculous punitive damages.
a clear win for the RIAA gameplan, if not the widest possible margin.
Hell, then they could hold an annual Forum Educating Companies About Litigation. All the POOPs will want to attend FECAL conferences.
Note: The networks you're mentioning from Telus and Bell are UMTS only, with no 2G GSM support at all. Won't matter in 5-10 years, but just a heads up.
The problem people don't really seem to get about mobile pricing and "competition" in Canada is that it really is a system with only two sides Rogers and Telus/Bell. Telus and Bell themselves barely compete as their pricing structures are nearly identical beyond minor differences, which makes sense given their Network Sharing Agreements.
Fido is effectively the WestJet of our carriers, cherry picking the majority of their clients within high population density areas, which did make them a competitor within the major cities and a large portion of the market until about 2004 when they became wholly owned by Rogers.
Some people may mentioned the MVNO's Koodo and SOLO Mobile not realizing that Koodo is effectively a slightly lower margin Telus, and Solo Mobile is Bell (down to the same exact 'customer service' tools, except I believe Solo CSSR's are primarily through Canadian based subcontractors only).
Given these details, you see we have effectively two sides only. Two sides which somehow magically conviced everyone in the country that it makes sense for them to have doubled the price (two-sided billing) of per usage SMS's from 15c to 30c a piece. Two sides that maintain suspiciously close pricing that tends to vary only by small amounts for specific cases. Two sides that maintain a consistent CHURN back and forth between the two sets of groups generating Long Term Contract Charges and a variety of fine print charges so that when One is considered the evil, users switch to the other (with similar THEY ARE THE WORST rants concerning the business model in either case, rogers OR bell). The only reason it works is that the worst things only happen to a low enough percentage for each carrier that after they ragequit and go to the other side, its unlikely for it to happen again to the same person (post 90 day billing errors that are considered valid so long as client wasnt able to ask the right question to a CSSR before the 90 days was up thanks to the Consumer Protection Act [HAH], defective merchandise that is considered not covered under warranty but still generated a contract with a valid LTCC charge if cancelled [*cough*AUDIOVOX*cough*], etc).
The long and short of it is Telco companies have us by the short hairs up here in Canada. Heres hoping WIND Mobile takes off, but given that they only launched in friggan December, i cant have an opinion quite yet.
http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/mlm/healthscatter.png
Glad that anti-socialism angle is working out so well for your country.
Sex Panther by Odeon.
They say that 60% of the time, it works every time.
That doesn't even make sense!
Heh, It's ok to make mistakes so long as it's an even number of sign mistakes!
Agreed, there has been such a longstanding history of apple versus pc(Microsoft) and Microsoft versus apple bashing in the recent past that if anything like this was going to happen, it would take a lonnnng wait before that mindset was out of consumers minds. Not only would it muck up years of work priming the marketplace to pit one against the other, but it would require that Microsoft allow the mainstream to consider Apple equivalent and Apple would have to effectively dump the "we're shinier and trendier than those balding business dweebs" tact that they've invested millions in imprinting on the 18-34 demographic.
Not saying such a thing could NEVER happen; However it would be a huge deadweight loss for both companies current marketing strategies, between Apples image play and Microsoft's attempts to make Apples offerings appear irrelevant, that I can't see EITHER company even considering it in the short term.
Systems that control key infrastructure for your nations production and commerce should be on an completely separate network. End of story really.
For the information that needs to be distributed over the internet, make it eyes only transferred from the control network to the internet connected systems (double workstation setup). Then your only concern is direct espionage.
Because thats a broken window fallacy, by investing in new computers they wouldn't need if their current system was properly maintained they're expending money on something that could otherwise be used for the purchase of something else they do not already have, or even invest it (even if its only to the tune of a small government bond or guaranteed interest certificate style investment).
This holds double for items that have a tendancy to either be primarily imported or made primarily with imported parts.
Except the "noobs" don't want that. They want to play games, watch porn and get on with their lives.
Then wonder why their computer is getting slow, and eventually think "i should just buy a new one".
This problem is so easy to understand that its blatantly clear that this is all part of a campaign to paint Google as an evil company.
Personally, i think it has more to do with people seeing the story before them and knee-jerk reacting to it. Google analyzes a lot of data and has a lot of information based on it yes, so when it comes up in conversation the paranoia kicks in and the diatribes come out. I don't think it has anything to do with any organized campaign against google in any sense of it. They are not doing the same for the more obvious cases of concern because 1. they're used to those and 2. they are not being raised as the topic of conversation.
It is a rather common exploitable bit of human psychology that people react this way. It's kinda like how the media had america in a huge pep rally shouting match over privatized insurance versus government run insurance, when all the while no one was discussing the real problem that is that health care pricing is through the roof in america. Everyone was used to it being so expensive and no one was discussing the cost, so everyone ranted about how it was going to be paid instead.
and so began the field of Unintellectual Property law
And how will they compensate anyone wrongfully put on that feed for the damage to their reputation? The Court of Public Opinion can be brutal about these things, especially when they work in HR somewhere..
Quote at the bottom of slashdot as I read your post: "Let us condemn to hellfire all those who disagree with us." -- militant religionists everywhere
Awesome.
Fixed.
However they may be right for different reasons.
Yeah, because places like Canada and Norway, and most other countries where these games are also legally purchased are having those problems as well.
Oh. Wait.
I've heard of people making the mistake of assuming correlation to mean a possible causal link, but this doesn't even correlate in most countries that have no problem allowing these games. Your reasoning is the same as Homer wanting Lisa's tiger repelling rock.
The problems you describe have to do with much larger underlying problems than anything video games of any sort bring to the table.
So instead of leaving xp, they're staying in droves!
But But But, I want my Kuang Mark 11 to slot into my deck!
I don't really understand how this is even an issue. I seem to remember reading an article almost a decade ago [sadly I don't remember the source] which explained how the NSA operated their networking and it was EXACTLY what you're saying. The only connection their networks had to the outside world were stations with two terminals, internal network on one and external networks on the other with the agent in the chair being the ONLY connection between the two.
No amount of efficiency gained is worth having truly sensitive data being ANYWHERE on an exposed network.
Oh! Uh Oh!