Google's is nice, but only because I use Google for my calendar and some email. What's the use case for Samsung?
Personal digital assistants will only have a limited use as long as there's no interconnected API. Right now, you can make your app respond via Google Now - but a whole world exists outside your phone. It needs to be as easy as OAuth to link up and register concepts/hooks.
I'd do it for an Apple TV. I've never wanted one, but I may have to support one from time to time so it would be good to play with one. If I can pay below retail and get some free streaming TV to go with it, I'll do it.
And then back to my Netflix with an extra device to watch it on.
I doubt that any actor, on their agent's advice, would sign such a contract.
Back when they signed it, they only imagined "likeness" to be pictures of their face. Future contracts might be examined more closely, but I was more referring to the ones already signed.
Agree - I have a Samsung front-load and we do this. Haven't had any problems with mold. Have trouble remembering to clean out the lint filter (pump filter), but nothing with the door seal.
I know I'm a single case, but I've had a front-load Samsung for 5 years solid with no issues. No gears/belts on the motor drive - just a variable-speed motor and a 10-year warranty on that. It was good enough to convince me to be a Samsung refrigerator, too.
Especially low-budget / direct-to-video. The characters are established, so you only need to sell them on its existence. No need to use the actor's name. The actor signed away their "likeness" for promotion of the original movie. One could always argue that the sequel is "promotion" for sales of the original movie on DVD/Blu-Ray.
I'm sure the original contracts included provisions for using the artist's "likeness." Most people assumed photos, but who's to say they can't just interpret the contract to have already included these rights?
Hollywood's asking for it. They'll start making sure their contracts regarding perpetual use of likeness of actors can be used to leave actors out of payroll entirely on the next animated film. Especially low-budget direct to video sequels.
There are lots of kinds of speech that is illegal. Libel being one. Perjury another. Voting is freedom of speech and if that can be coerced by being allowed to share a ballot, then that freedom of speech should be protected at a greater cost.
9. Having lawfully entered a voting booth with a voter, requests,
persuades or induces such voter to vote any particular ballot or for any
particular candidate, or makes or keeps any memorandum of anything
occurring within the booth, or directly or indirectly, reveals to
another the name of any candidate voted for by such voter; or,
10. Shows his ballot after it is prepared for voting, to any person so
as to reveal the contents, or solicits a voter to show the same; or,
11. Places any mark upon his ballot, or does any other act in
connection with his ballot with the intent that it may be identified as
the one voted by him; or,
Sharing the photo violates 10-11. It's not "the press" if you take the photo home to show a friend or spouse or employer. Taking the photo holds an inherent risk of violating 10-11, because someday someone might see it.
Photography isn't explicitly mentioned at all. It's about sharing the direct contents of your marked ballot.
Privacy only protects from the photo being taken. If the photo is displayed/distributed, their personal/privacy rights are violated. This is why when you buy tickets to a theme park (for one example), there is a clause in the terms of the agreement giving them the right to use photos of you in their promotional materials.
Last presidential election, a large number of districts ran out of ballots due to voter turnout being far higher than expected. Running out of ballots can swing an election, because what time you can make it to the polling booth is largely related to your socioeconomic situation.
I wouldn't be surprised if the manufacturers are the ones pushing for these laws. They want to be able to sell the tech while also being absolved of aiding in these crimes.
Little point or not, there doesn't seem to be any talk of restricting control over the firmware.
Disabling GPS means no control - drones are not line of sight. And flying by camera requires a much more stable connection than you're likely to get. Overwriting the firmware is a lot more useful of a solution.
To buy one that doesn't have it would require a black market solution.
That is not a slippery slope. It's not even a very damp slope. Prisons are literally a well-known target for drone drops, and this just makes sure that off-the-shelf equipment won't be aiding in committing crimes.
Drone receives coordinates. Drone does math to see if coordinates falls within predefined geofences. Drone decides whether it's allowed to continue on its course. At no point is the GPS system involved in enforcing or contributing to this rule.
You're overthinking it. Including public records and obeying rules based on them won't require closing the source in any way. Bypassing the firmware with a modified version is a possibility, but wouldn't be the manufacturer's fault.
If you manufacture it yourself, however, you'd probably have to implement the same rules or be breaking the law. That doesn't preclude sharing that code with other people.
It's a big enough decision that it would make a lot more sense to want a 2/3rds majority before considering it "decided." (like a US constitutional amendment). Not that you take a re-vote over and over again. In my opinion, a "yes" by a small margin is not certain enough to take action - and doesn't even need a re-vote.
Slashdot Mirror
Google's is nice, but only because I use Google for my calendar and some email. What's the use case for Samsung?
Personal digital assistants will only have a limited use as long as there's no interconnected API. Right now, you can make your app respond via Google Now - but a whole world exists outside your phone. It needs to be as easy as OAuth to link up and register concepts/hooks.
I'd do it for an Apple TV. I've never wanted one, but I may have to support one from time to time so it would be good to play with one. If I can pay below retail and get some free streaming TV to go with it, I'll do it.
And then back to my Netflix with an extra device to watch it on.
Two can play that game:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
That's the beauty of your (and my) Kenmore appliances. Stable technology and manufacturing processes which haven't changed in years.
Kenmore's not even a manufacturer. That's just Sears' store brand name. Every appliance made by a .different company.
I doubt that any actor, on their agent's advice, would sign such a contract.
Back when they signed it, they only imagined "likeness" to be pictures of their face. Future contracts might be examined more closely, but I was more referring to the ones already signed.
I can't comment on anything longer - apartment living prevented owning before that. So it's safe to say I've never had a Samsung appliance fail.
Agree - I have a Samsung front-load and we do this. Haven't had any problems with mold. Have trouble remembering to clean out the lint filter (pump filter), but nothing with the door seal.
I know I'm a single case, but I've had a front-load Samsung for 5 years solid with no issues. No gears/belts on the motor drive - just a variable-speed motor and a 10-year warranty on that. It was good enough to convince me to be a Samsung refrigerator, too.
This. All the wild speculation misses the really low-hanging fruit use case.
Sequels.
Especially low-budget / direct-to-video. The characters are established, so you only need to sell them on its existence. No need to use the actor's name. The actor signed away their "likeness" for promotion of the original movie. One could always argue that the sequel is "promotion" for sales of the original movie on DVD/Blu-Ray.
will argue that it's different enough
I'm sure the original contracts included provisions for using the artist's "likeness." Most people assumed photos, but who's to say they can't just interpret the contract to have already included these rights?
Hollywood's asking for it. They'll start making sure their contracts regarding perpetual use of likeness of actors can be used to leave actors out of payroll entirely on the next animated film. Especially low-budget direct to video sequels.
Give it up. That word is not going to catch on no matter how hard you try to force it.
There are lots of kinds of speech that is illegal. Libel being one. Perjury another. Voting is freedom of speech and if that can be coerced by being allowed to share a ballot, then that freedom of speech should be protected at a greater cost.
Section 17-130 of NY Code:
9. Having lawfully entered a voting booth with a voter, requests,
persuades or induces such voter to vote any particular ballot or for any
particular candidate, or makes or keeps any memorandum of anything
occurring within the booth, or directly or indirectly, reveals to
another the name of any candidate voted for by such voter; or,
10. Shows his ballot after it is prepared for voting, to any person so
as to reveal the contents, or solicits a voter to show the same; or,
11. Places any mark upon his ballot, or does any other act in
connection with his ballot with the intent that it may be identified as
the one voted by him; or,
Sharing the photo violates 10-11. It's not "the press" if you take the photo home to show a friend or spouse or employer. Taking the photo holds an inherent risk of violating 10-11, because someday someone might see it.
Photography isn't explicitly mentioned at all. It's about sharing the direct contents of your marked ballot.
Privacy only protects from the photo being taken. If the photo is displayed/distributed, their personal/privacy rights are violated. This is why when you buy tickets to a theme park (for one example), there is a clause in the terms of the agreement giving them the right to use photos of you in their promotional materials.
Last presidential election, a large number of districts ran out of ballots due to voter turnout being far higher than expected. Running out of ballots can swing an election, because what time you can make it to the polling booth is largely related to your socioeconomic situation.
I wouldn't be surprised if the manufacturers are the ones pushing for these laws. They want to be able to sell the tech while also being absolved of aiding in these crimes.
Little point or not, there doesn't seem to be any talk of restricting control over the firmware.
Disabling GPS means no control - drones are not line of sight. And flying by camera requires a much more stable connection than you're likely to get. Overwriting the firmware is a lot more useful of a solution.
To buy one that doesn't have it would require a black market solution.
That is not a slippery slope. It's not even a very damp slope. Prisons are literally a well-known target for drone drops, and this just makes sure that off-the-shelf equipment won't be aiding in committing crimes.
Drone receives coordinates. Drone does math to see if coordinates falls within predefined geofences. Drone decides whether it's allowed to continue on its course. At no point is the GPS system involved in enforcing or contributing to this rule.
You're overthinking it. Including public records and obeying rules based on them won't require closing the source in any way. Bypassing the firmware with a modified version is a possibility, but wouldn't be the manufacturer's fault.
If you manufacture it yourself, however, you'd probably have to implement the same rules or be breaking the law. That doesn't preclude sharing that code with other people.
It's a big enough decision that it would make a lot more sense to want a 2/3rds majority before considering it "decided." (like a US constitutional amendment). Not that you take a re-vote over and over again. In my opinion, a "yes" by a small margin is not certain enough to take action - and doesn't even need a re-vote.
It's a functional eggcorn - possibly even intentional. I see no problem with it.
That's why they're encasing their new phone in glass. Glass isn't as bendy.