We pledge that we will not allow censorship of the Internet for anything except for in the most extreme circumstances
So, they do advocate censorship then. But only for "bad things" and presumably they think that copying movies isn't bad enough. But something else might be.
Censorship is binary: you are in favour of it or you are not. You can't have "partial censorship".
One of the key reasons that Royal Mail ( which originally conveyed the King's post ) was granted a monopoly on inland mail delivery in 1654 was so that the Private Office could intercept and read / decrypt communications as instructed by warrant.
Additionally the Secret Office was established to covertly intercept letters; whilst the activities of the Private were recorded and acknowledged, the Secret didn't even appear on Royal Mail's expenses.
And the people of Belfast patiently await mention of RMS Titanic's sister-ship and first of class, RMS Olympic, which made her maiden crossing to New York on 31st May 1911 and continued in service until the early 1930s.
A fine example of Harland & Wolff shipbuilding, she even survived the impact of a Royal Navy cruiser which collided with her making 19 knots.
The launch of the Titanic, second of class, was a minor event compared to the ongoing adulation lauded on the Olympic. So you see, the Titanic was neither the largest ship in the World at the time, nor the most famous or glamorous. But that doesn't sell a film very well, does it?
The government isn't paying for this stuff, it is being paid for by the mobile phone companies.
True, the money is dues to be sourced from the winning bid for the 4G licenses, but the money is flowing into the Government coffers and being redirected into this effort. It is therefore money unavailable for other, more worthy, projects.
My solution: the Government should tell TV Licensing to refund the license fee payments to those affected and tell the individuals to listen to the radio if they desperately need stale news reports on the hour.
Meanwhile, funnel that money into Internet access projects for rural areas.
At $4,032 per square foot per year, the NYC Apple Store is the most profitable retail store per square foot in the world, period.
First, that figure refers to sales, not profit.
Second, the record is still held by Richer Sound's London Bridge store. The last figure I saw was from 1995 at £5,870 per square foot ( about $10,000 ).
Please stop hyping Apple with inaccurate information
Unfortunately two-thirds of the pages are reserved for corporate sponsors and the public is required to enter a raffle to have to have the opportunity of viewing the remaining pages, most of which are concerned with lawn bowling and tiddlywinks.
Only VISA is accepted for page view payments.
Do not attempt to drink non-sponsoring beverages whilst viewing the pages.
I assume that you're referring to a provision or interpretation of RIPA. However I consulted on the introduction of RIPA and I am not familiar with what you claim can be compelled by the Act.
In fact there are technical measures ( such as key expiration or tripwire-triggered destruction ) that exempt an individual from being compelled to provide a key. There was some discussion on the GPG mailing list several years ago as to whether such measures could be incorporated into the software; for example a dead-man's lever that destroyed the key if a file was not touched once a day.
If there is a response to the email the user is then approved?
That's the technique for the "interim"period, in which browserid.org will implement user control verification through an e-mailed link. For each e-mail address that you wish to use as an identifying token you'd have to prove that you control it through that mechanism, until your e-mail provider ( which may also be you ) implements BrowserID.
Unfortunately the end-state to which we are all supposed to move is to have our e-mail providers act as the Primary Identifying Authorities for us. browserid.org would then step out of the limelight and let the PIAs take on the burden of proving that the user controls the identifying token.
So though the pattern used ( client-authenticating certificates ) and the implementation ( JavaScript callback into the browser ) are different, if the Big Corps become the PIAs as the Mozilla team intends then the overall picture won't be any different to OpenID today, with the majority of people's online identities still at the mercy of a handful of companies.
Of course, as with OpenID there will always be a few geeks who act as their own PIAs. Just a few.
Yes, I am a UKian! In addition to AAISP, Goscomb and IDNet provide native IPv6 routing and/48 blocks to customers.
Zen keep promising it with no delivery date, and Merula might be v6-capable by now.
However of these only AAISP has been "vetted" by Google; they went through the process a couple of years ago when I was still a customer and it was both eye-opening and eye-watering in terms of the hoops that Google made them jump through. It was like watching an episode of Columbo; "...just one more thing...".
I'm now with Goscomb, who haven't yet tackled the Google v6 obstacle course.
Did you know that for the past three year Google has actually published AAAA RRs for its online properties? However, the catch is that they won't serve you those as a response unless your/32 is on the list of vetted ISPs.
Even if you query one of their public IPv6 resolvers ( e.g. 2001:4860:4860::8888 ) you'll not see a AAAA for YouTube or Google+ unless you're on the list.
To pass the vetting an ISP has to demonstrate various technical aspects such as redundant, othogonally-routed global routes to Google's servers. For small ISPs such as mine, who have worked to implement native IPv6 connectivity, this is simply a step too far. So a proportion of the IPv6-connected world has to fall-back to v4 to talk to Google.
> A copyright owner notifies the infringer of a violation. The infringer says, "Sorry, my > bad, I didn't know. I'll address that immediately." The infringing material is removed. > Both parties go on their merry way.
Except... one of the parties has been able to make money off the copyright of the other party without permission.
Look at it from the copyright holder's perspective. The Internet is a big place and unlike trademarks the holder is not required to actively protect a copyright to retain its validity. So, someone could be improperly profiting from use of copyright materials for quite some time until discovered and "notified of infringement". And then the cycle repeats when the infringer moves to another piece of copyright material.
Another thread this week gave the example of thatguywiththeglasses.com as a site that would be affected by SOPA. Well, yes, pretty much all his content is derived from copyright material. Why should he be able to profit on a repeating basis from other people's copyright? Go out there and create something NEW.
> There is a buzz around it - they aren't selling at a profit really.
Yes, yes they are. They have explicitly said that they are assembling in China so that they make a margin on each unit sold for future R&D. Just because they are a charity does not mean that they do not want to make a profit.
Anyway, once a school factors-in a TV to be connected to each Pi then it's not such a bargain.
Other projects, as requested: Bifferboard and Beagleboard. Both longer-established and actually in production. Bifferboard costs the same as Raspberry Pi Model B.
That's because... they are O2. Both companies operate from 260 Bath Road, Slough.
GiffGaff is a clever branding of O2's service that appeals to the price-conscious market and which uses the exceptional idea of in-sourcing support to the customers themselves. Very clever and apparently very successful, without cannibalising O2's preferred higher-paying customer base.
Caps can be an issue, but with satellite links it's rate-limiting that's the main issue.
For example the TooWay service in Europe can sustain 10 Mbps downlink, but if you use more than 500 MB in any one hour, or 2GB in a week then your data rate will be throttled for the remainder of the "fair access" window.
This was the main reason I had to stay with a flaky, wind-affected ADSL connection instead of moving to satellite. Although the data cap was generous, trying to use it was penalised.
Copyright should give artists the first chance to make money from their work, however that needs to be balanced with the rights of society as a whole.
As someone not generally affected by copyright issues, can they explain to me what benefits there are to society of reforming copyright? Tangible, measurable benefits.
Society should be about more than pop music and blockbuster films. Frankly the Pirate Party has to convince me that laws which deter people from sharing such things are actually bad. Perhaps they are actually a positive influence because they nudge people into doing something productive instead of passively consuming. Maybe someone decided to go outside and play football with their kids because they couldn't find a copy of a film to download; in that instance, society benefits.
Do I care that Cliff Richard's recordings won't reach the public domain in my lifetime? Not at all. Society will continue with or without music.
Do I care that public forests and parks are being sold-off? Absolutely, as that directly affects our society.
The Economist covered the reasons some weeks ago, starting at the sixth paragraph.
Basically, music sales ( real and online ) in Spain are at an all-time low. 10 million albums sold in 2010 in a country of 50 million people.
If there is any country in which the big media conglomerates feel they have lost, it is Spain. Little wonder they're pressuring to have Spain "punished".
> Except that, once SOPA is enacted, you will be greeted with a > 404 when you try to login to your favourite site...forever.
Ah, more fearmongering. No, my personal site will never be affected by SOPA because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds.
Perhaps those sites which would be affected should rely on original content, rather than that which violates copyright and makes them subject to SOPA's terms.
For example, perhaps YouTube should return to its roots of user-generated videos instead of trying to be a freeloading TV channel.
The online world will be smaller, but more original and better-focused. Like it was 20 years ago.
No, choosing a domain registrar is probably the most important decision an Internet-based company has to make in the early days after establishing a name and a business plan.
There is too much "intellectual property" tied-up in a domain name nowadays to trust the like of GoDaddy, or indeed any registrar which doesn't state that the domain is your property
Slashdot Mirror
They definitely need some assistance with Policy.
We pledge that we will not allow censorship of the Internet for anything except for in the most extreme circumstances
So, they do advocate censorship then. But only for "bad things" and presumably they think that copying movies isn't bad enough. But something else might be.
Censorship is binary: you are in favour of it or you are not. You can't have "partial censorship".
if I see a call I don't like, just upturn the phone face down, put it on the desk
/me tries that with wife's S2... yep, works just like that!
Everyone already knows about it.
No we didn't; this report led me on to read about the parent story. Therefore the DNK site had a positive effect for me.
Remember: 95% of the World's population does not live in the USA.
One of the key reasons that Royal Mail ( which originally conveyed the King's post ) was granted a monopoly on inland mail delivery in 1654 was so that the Private Office could intercept and read / decrypt communications as instructed by warrant.
Additionally the Secret Office was established to covertly intercept letters; whilst the activities of the Private were recorded and acknowledged, the Secret didn't even appear on Royal Mail's expenses.
La plus ca change...
I'm also curious why they are producing a 40 year old variant instead of targeting a newer one
What, like the 36-year old airframe design that is the AH-64 Apache?
Although admittedly the Apache has only been in service for 28 years...
And the people of Belfast patiently await mention of RMS Titanic's sister-ship and first of class, RMS Olympic, which made her maiden crossing to New York on 31st May 1911 and continued in service until the early 1930s.
A fine example of Harland & Wolff shipbuilding, she even survived the impact of a Royal Navy cruiser which collided with her making 19 knots.
The launch of the Titanic, second of class, was a minor event compared to the ongoing adulation lauded on the Olympic. So you see, the Titanic was neither the largest ship in the World at the time, nor the most famous or glamorous. But that doesn't sell a film very well, does it?
Linux Mint gives me all of what was great about Ubuntu but with a UI that I can tailor to my liking.
But you had that in Ubuntu:
apt-get install xfce4
or whatever. GDM would even add it as a login option automatically for you.
Why go to all the trouble of installing another distro when the functionality to change UI was five minutes away?
Australia? No thanks. Not exactly the bastion of privacy laws...
In US jurisdiction: Tuffmail or LuxSci
In Europe: euMX
The government isn't paying for this stuff, it is being paid for by the mobile phone companies.
True, the money is dues to be sourced from the winning bid for the 4G licenses, but the money is flowing into the Government coffers and being redirected into this effort. It is therefore money unavailable for other, more worthy, projects.
My solution: the Government should tell TV Licensing to refund the license fee payments to those affected and tell the individuals to listen to the radio if they desperately need stale news reports on the hour.
Meanwhile, funnel that money into Internet access projects for rural areas.
At $4,032 per square foot per year, the NYC Apple Store is the most profitable retail store per square foot in the world, period.
First, that figure refers to sales, not profit.
Second, the record is still held by Richer Sound's London Bridge store. The last figure I saw was from 1995 at £5,870 per square foot ( about $10,000 ).
Please stop hyping Apple with inaccurate information
Unfortunately two-thirds of the pages are reserved for corporate sponsors and the public is required to enter a raffle to have to have the opportunity of viewing the remaining pages, most of which are concerned with lawn bowling and tiddlywinks.
Only VISA is accepted for page view payments.
Do not attempt to drink non-sponsoring beverages whilst viewing the pages.
Note to non-UKians: this is indeed satire.
I assume that you're referring to a provision or interpretation of RIPA. However I consulted on the introduction of RIPA and I am not familiar with what you claim can be compelled by the Act.
In fact there are technical measures ( such as key expiration or tripwire-triggered destruction ) that exempt an individual from being compelled to provide a key. There was some discussion on the GPG mailing list several years ago as to whether such measures could be incorporated into the software; for example a dead-man's lever that destroyed the key if a file was not touched once a day.
If there is a response to the email the user is then approved?
That's the technique for the "interim"period, in which browserid.org will implement user control verification through an e-mailed link. For each e-mail address that you wish to use as an identifying token you'd have to prove that you control it through that mechanism, until your e-mail provider ( which may also be you ) implements BrowserID.
Unfortunately the end-state to which we are all supposed to move is to have our e-mail providers act as the Primary Identifying Authorities for us. browserid.org would then step out of the limelight and let the PIAs take on the burden of proving that the user controls the identifying token.
So though the pattern used ( client-authenticating certificates ) and the implementation ( JavaScript callback into the browser ) are different, if the Big Corps become the PIAs as the Mozilla team intends then the overall picture won't be any different to OpenID today, with the majority of people's online identities still at the mercy of a handful of companies.
Of course, as with OpenID there will always be a few geeks who act as their own PIAs. Just a few.
Yes, I am a UKian! In addition to AAISP, Goscomb and IDNet provide native IPv6 routing and /48 blocks to customers.
Zen keep promising it with no delivery date, and Merula might be v6-capable by now.
However of these only AAISP has been "vetted" by Google; they went through the process a couple of years ago when I was still a customer and it was both eye-opening and eye-watering in terms of the hoops that Google made them jump through. It was like watching an episode of Columbo; "...just one more thing...".
I'm now with Goscomb, who haven't yet tackled the Google v6 obstacle course.
Did you know that for the past three year Google has actually published AAAA RRs for its online properties? However, the catch is that they won't serve you those as a response unless your /32 is on the list of vetted ISPs.
Even if you query one of their public IPv6 resolvers ( e.g. 2001:4860:4860::8888 ) you'll not see a AAAA for YouTube or Google+ unless you're on the list.
To pass the vetting an ISP has to demonstrate various technical aspects such as redundant, othogonally-routed global routes to Google's servers. For small ISPs such as mine, who have worked to implement native IPv6 connectivity, this is simply a step too far. So a proportion of the IPv6-connected world has to fall-back to v4 to talk to Google.
Read more about the frustrating policy here: Google over IPv6.
I wonder if the entertainment industry will announce a pro-SOPA blackout in response.
Imagine the howls of anguish if The Hobbit was delayed for a few months :-)
> A copyright owner notifies the infringer of a violation. The infringer says, "Sorry, my
> bad, I didn't know. I'll address that immediately." The infringing material is removed.
> Both parties go on their merry way.
Except... one of the parties has been able to make money off the copyright of the other party without permission.
Look at it from the copyright holder's perspective. The Internet is a big place and unlike trademarks the holder is not required to actively protect a copyright to retain its validity. So, someone could be improperly profiting from use of copyright materials for quite some time until discovered and "notified of infringement". And then the cycle repeats when the infringer moves to another piece of copyright material.
Another thread this week gave the example of thatguywiththeglasses.com as a site that would be affected by SOPA. Well, yes, pretty much all his content is derived from copyright material. Why should he be able to profit on a repeating basis from other people's copyright? Go out there and create something NEW.
> There is a buzz around it - they aren't selling at a profit really.
Yes, yes they are. They have explicitly said that they are assembling in China so that they make a margin on each unit sold for future R&D. Just because they are a charity does not mean that they do not want to make a profit.
Anyway, once a school factors-in a TV to be connected to each Pi then it's not such a bargain.
Other projects, as requested: Bifferboard and Beagleboard. Both longer-established and actually in production. Bifferboard costs the same as Raspberry Pi Model B.
> and they still use the O2 network
That's because... they are O2. Both companies operate from 260 Bath Road, Slough.
GiffGaff is a clever branding of O2's service that appeals to the price-conscious market and which uses the exceptional idea of in-sourcing support to the customers themselves. Very clever and apparently very successful, without cannibalising O2's preferred higher-paying customer base.
Caps can be an issue, but with satellite links it's rate-limiting that's the main issue.
For example the TooWay service in Europe can sustain 10 Mbps downlink, but if you use more than 500 MB in any one hour, or 2GB in a week then your data rate will be throttled for the remainder of the "fair access" window.
This was the main reason I had to stay with a flaky, wind-affected ADSL connection instead of moving to satellite. Although the data cap was generous, trying to use it was penalised.
Per their UK manifesto:
Copyright should give artists the first chance to make money from their work, however that needs to be balanced with the rights of society as a whole.
As someone not generally affected by copyright issues, can they explain to me what benefits there are to society of reforming copyright? Tangible, measurable benefits.
Society should be about more than pop music and blockbuster films. Frankly the Pirate Party has to convince me that laws which deter people from sharing such things are actually bad. Perhaps they are actually a positive influence because they nudge people into doing something productive instead of passively consuming. Maybe someone decided to go outside and play football with their kids because they couldn't find a copy of a film to download; in that instance, society benefits.
Do I care that Cliff Richard's recordings won't reach the public domain in my lifetime? Not at all. Society will continue with or without music.
Do I care that public forests and parks are being sold-off? Absolutely, as that directly affects our society.
The Economist covered the reasons some weeks ago, starting at the sixth paragraph.
Basically, music sales ( real and online ) in Spain are at an all-time low. 10 million albums sold in 2010 in a country of 50 million people.
If there is any country in which the big media conglomerates feel they have lost, it is Spain. Little wonder they're pressuring to have Spain "punished".
> Except that, once SOPA is enacted, you will be greeted with a
> 404 when you try to login to your favourite site...forever.
Ah, more fearmongering. No, my personal site will never be affected by SOPA because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds.
Perhaps those sites which would be affected should rely on original content, rather than that which violates copyright and makes them subject to SOPA's terms.
For example, perhaps YouTube should return to its roots of user-generated videos instead of trying to be a freeloading TV channel.
The online world will be smaller, but more original and better-focused. Like it was 20 years ago.
> It's plumbing. No-one thinks about it.
No, choosing a domain registrar is probably the most important decision an Internet-based company has to make in the early days after establishing a name and a business plan.
There is too much "intellectual property" tied-up in a domain name nowadays to trust the like of GoDaddy, or indeed any registrar which doesn't state that the domain is your property
Well we can see that a fair chunk of cash went on feel-good video production.
Anyway, from the actual 2010 accounts:
$63 m on "software development" activities
$10 m on "branding and marketing" ( why? )
$12 m on "general and admin" ( what? )
Not much transparency there.