"Is anyone else getting tired of the sensationalist misuse of the term "bricked" around here?"
Yes, and not because I think there's a "right" and "wrong" term. It's just that I have no idea what they're talking about anymore when they say "bricked".
I've bricked stuff before. When that happens, you throw it in the trash. If we want to use "bricked" to mean "I have to restore from backup", then somebody come up with another term for "permanently inoperable".
Boom. End of sentence. I would say there is no expectation of privacy from outer space or from the street. It's not reasonable.
As for "Mental Anguish", I suffer a lot of mental anguish every day that I'm in traffic. Who do I sue? And only $25K for mental anguish. Either they didn't have a lot of anguish or they don't have a lot of mental.
As for the diminished value of their house, it sounds like they're looking for Google to reimburse them for the downturn in the market that has cut housing values from 1/4 to 3/4's (depending on where you live).
Overall, this is the kind of lawsuit that makes you think the world is overpopulated. On so many levels.
You're right, but that's not necessarily a bad thing in the long run.
Let's take gasoline. The rising prices is bad for the consumer, except that other forms of energy will suddenly become cost effective and we may actually have alternate fuel automobiles that make sense. Cheap gas does inhibit alternative forms of energy and transport.
If we end up with a real alternative, it's worth it in the long run.
It's not like XM or Sirius would destroy their infrastructure (satellites) simply to sell more receivers. Besides which, if they made every radio receiver obsolete, how would they sell you their service?
What they'll have to do, at least for the medium term, is support a unified service that is transmitted in both infrastructures. In the longer term, since the frequencies are governed by the FCC, you'll probably see dual-receiver tuners, sort of like the AM/FM tuner in your car.
Do I wish there were more satellite services? Yes. But I'd rather have 1 than none. And XM and Sirius were probably less than 18 months away from one of the services declaring bankruptcy which would be terrible for consumers, since it would scare away investors from "new" forms of radio that are badly needed.
"What happens when the music you buy turns out to be music you don't actually like all that much? "
You sell the used CDs on places like Ebay or Amazon or to your friends, or to people on Craig's list. When the music not locked via artifical DRM solutions, you can do what you want with it.
But in my area, they dropped PPOE for FIOS about 1-2 years ago. If you put in PPOE credentials it ignores it at this point. I only found out because I've had FIOS for 3 years, and last year I added TV. When the tech replaced my router with their actiontec, he didn't put in any credentials, and said that had been dropped some time ago.
Also, if you're nice to the installer, they'll put the ONT inside your house which is far more convenient.
"t may not have much to do with "banning" anything at all, but, for example, giving parents information that will help them decide if and when to bring video game consoles into the home, or whether someone who is having trouble with violent behavior should be advised to stay away from video games. That research is worthwhile even if there isn't a direct public policy connection."
You seem to criticize the "personal responsibility" mantra, but in doing that you ignore the reality that studies of this sort by definition are political in nature. There are large interests at stake in deciding whether video games are harmful or not. And politicians will latch onto this because taking a position and gaining constituencies is a major part of politics.
I'm all in favor of more information, but it's naive to think that this information won't be used to shape the passage of laws. Because that's the other part of what politicians do.
"one would also have to pay property tax on cars, bikes, books, furniture, and everything else one owns."
Several U.S. states do have personnel property tax on cars. I suspect the only reason that car, bicycles, furniture and other non-durable goods are not taxed is because it is impossible to know you own them. But with a car, if you wish to register the car (to drive), you'll have to pay the property tax.
Do I want a personal property tax? No. I consider even real estate taxes extremely regressive and anti-social. But if you want to use words like "stealing my intellectual property" then you are giving people an entree to really treat it as physical property. It either is property or isn't. And if it is, it should be treated as any other property.
The primary difference between the two was that Microsoft never canceled Vista, they just kept removing features until it was just like Windows XP, only slower. And while Vista is not unstable, there are parts of it that are truly horrible, from glitching MP3 playback to slow file copies. And just like Vista, Copland was promised forever, and it was never going to get there. And just like Copland, Microsoft has already announced a replacement OS (http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2007/02/13/vista-replacement-in-2009-code-named/ ) before the ink has dried on the boxes for Vista.
"I am not saying that [...] a lack of hate speech laws is a good thing"
Oh, I would say that.
"Hate Speech" is not defined. It simply means speech that is offensive to someone. Almost by definition, this type of law runs counter to the idea and ideals of free speech. It can easily be abused by political enemies, by a government that doesn't want criticism, or by one group to silence another.
"Unfortunately, too many people have a free lunch mentality when it comes to bandwidth and media downloads."
To be fair to those "people", doesn't Comcast's marketing department bear some responsibility for what you call a "free lunch mentality"?
It's not like Comcast is giving anything away. They charge $40/month for using their network, they've talked about always-on bandwidth, never talked about any limits, and now that they've set that expectation, some people seem to think that it's a "free lunch mentality".
I get that bandwidth costs money, and I get that you can't truly give unlimited bandwidth, but since Comcast created the perception, it's up to Comcast to fix it (if it really needs to be fixed. I think they're crying the blues to raise prices and get the FCC to enable them to drop network neutrality.
Which says amongst other things: "The Tolkien Trust says that New Line paid them only $62,500 to make 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy of films -- instead of the agreed-upon 7.5 percent of gross receipts of all film-related revenue."
I agree that 50 years is too long (or about right).
But what do you think the same studios would say if you took a film made in 1954 and just started distributing it? They'd sue you into oblivion. Further, it was the film studios themselves who pushed for such long copyright terms.
So I don't see they have either the legal or moral standing to complain about this. They should pay their damned bills, frankly.
If you Google for BD-P1200 Lawsuit, you'll see the profile 1.0 vs 1.1 is not the issue. I'm guessing Samsung released this thing, and now the software patches are eating them alive keeping up with the changing spec (and probably a bad design to begin with). Based on the scant information, I'm guessing Samsung realized at some point they couldn't patch their player to fix all the incompatibilities. Perhaps it was at end of life, so they figured they'd just ignore the complaints.
I don't think this is a "first adopter you have to expect this" situation. It sounds like a bad design. If Samsung had any corporate integrity, they'd replace these players with ones that actually work. I'm not a fan of lawsuits, but Samsung basically said "screw you" to their customers, so it's natural somebody would screw them right back.
Slashdot Mirror
"Is anyone else getting tired of the sensationalist misuse of the term "bricked" around here?"
Yes, and not because I think there's a "right" and "wrong" term. It's just that I have no idea what they're talking about anymore when they say "bricked".
I've bricked stuff before. When that happens, you throw it in the trash. If we want to use "bricked" to mean "I have to restore from backup", then somebody come up with another term for "permanently inoperable".
It's more like
"There is no damage".
Boom. End of sentence. I would say there is no expectation of privacy from outer space or from the street. It's not reasonable.
As for "Mental Anguish", I suffer a lot of mental anguish every day that I'm in traffic. Who do I sue? And only $25K for mental anguish. Either they didn't have a lot of anguish or they don't have a lot of mental.
As for the diminished value of their house, it sounds like they're looking for Google to reimburse them for the downturn in the market that has cut housing values from 1/4 to 3/4's (depending on where you live).
Overall, this is the kind of lawsuit that makes you think the world is overpopulated. On so many levels.
"Instead you will hear 'M$XML, M$XML, M$XML, M$XML, M$XML"
I kinda doubt that it's possible.
You're right, but that's not necessarily a bad thing in the long run.
Let's take gasoline. The rising prices is bad for the consumer, except that other forms of energy will suddenly become cost effective and we may actually have alternate fuel automobiles that make sense. Cheap gas does inhibit alternative forms of energy and transport.
If we end up with a real alternative, it's worth it in the long run.
How could it be worthless?
It's not like XM or Sirius would destroy their infrastructure (satellites) simply to sell more receivers. Besides which, if they made every radio receiver obsolete, how would they sell you their service?
What they'll have to do, at least for the medium term, is support a unified service that is transmitted in both infrastructures. In the longer term, since the frequencies are governed by the FCC, you'll probably see dual-receiver tuners, sort of like the AM/FM tuner in your car.
Do I wish there were more satellite services? Yes. But I'd rather have 1 than none. And XM and Sirius were probably less than 18 months away from one of the services declaring bankruptcy which would be terrible for consumers, since it would scare away investors from "new" forms of radio that are badly needed.
"I wonder what the Ars Technica/privacy zealots who oppose RealID protection will say when the next hijacked airliner is crashed into a building."
Probably not a lot since if everybody has a "RealID" it solves nothing since the "bad guys" will have a RealID as well.
Or did you think they were going to do screening just to make sure only the "good guys" have RealID?
This is going to end up as a copyright/RIAA/MPAA task force to fight the evil copyright pirates putting women and children out of work, right?
It's inevitable.
"What happens when the music you buy turns out to be music you don't actually like all that much? "
You sell the used CDs on places like Ebay or Amazon or to your friends, or to people on Craig's list. When the music not locked via artifical DRM solutions, you can do what you want with it.
I agree.
That's why when I want an even-handed tech assessment, I always go here first:
http://www.microsoftisawesome.com/
"Why can't Apple dictate what gets put on their device?"
It's "their" device right until I pay for it. Then it's "my" device.
Let me turn the question around. Why can't I dictate why software gets loaded on "my" device?
"A heavy reader will make up that $400 in a year or so, and then start pulling ahead."
Use the library. The Kindle falls behind to start and falls further behind with each book you read.
Plus, librarians are sexy! They're fighting for our 1st amendment rights.
That's interesting and worth a try.
But in my area, they dropped PPOE for FIOS about 1-2 years ago. If you put in PPOE credentials it ignores it at this point. I only found out because I've had FIOS for 3 years, and last year I added TV. When the tech replaced my router with their actiontec, he didn't put in any credentials, and said that had been dropped some time ago.
Also, if you're nice to the installer, they'll put the ONT inside your house which is far more convenient.
"t may not have much to do with "banning" anything at all, but, for example, giving parents information that will help them decide if and when to bring video game consoles into the home, or whether someone who is having trouble with violent behavior should be advised to stay away from video games. That research is worthwhile even if there isn't a direct public policy connection."
You seem to criticize the "personal responsibility" mantra, but in doing that you ignore the reality that studies of this sort by definition are political in nature. There are large interests at stake in deciding whether video games are harmful or not. And politicians will latch onto this because taking a position and gaining constituencies is a major part of politics.
I'm all in favor of more information, but it's naive to think that this information won't be used to shape the passage of laws. Because that's the other part of what politicians do.
"You don't have a right to distribute that content to 100s of thousands of people"
Sure, that's pretty clear, at least on the surface.
But do you think we have the right to take our CD's and DVD's and "rip" them to our iPods?
"one would also have to pay property tax on cars, bikes, books, furniture, and everything else one owns."
Several U.S. states do have personnel property tax on cars. I suspect the only reason that car, bicycles, furniture and other non-durable goods are not taxed is because it is impossible to know you own them. But with a car, if you wish to register the car (to drive), you'll have to pay the property tax.
Do I want a personal property tax? No. I consider even real estate taxes extremely regressive and anti-social. But if you want to use words like "stealing my intellectual property" then you are giving people an entree to really treat it as physical property. It either is property or isn't. And if it is, it should be treated as any other property.
Governments, no matter how benign, really hate unfettered access to information.
The most discouraging part is a majority of people seem to agree ("...well, as long as it's to fight the terrorist...").
The most predictable part is someone will say "...this isn't about free speech".
A truism: "When somebody says 'this isn't about free speech', it almost certainly is".
In the past months, I've purchased many CD's (30), most from Sony/BMG, and none have any DRM.
Has your experience been different? What titles have DRM?
"it is just that I hate capitalism."
No you don't. You probably don't care for a plutocracy, but capitalism is pretty inherent in human beings.
I'm kind of joking, but there are strong parallels between Vista and the ill-fated "Copland" OS from Apple.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copland_(operating_system)
The primary difference between the two was that Microsoft never canceled Vista, they just kept removing features until it was just like Windows XP, only slower. And while Vista is not unstable, there are parts of it that are truly horrible, from glitching MP3 playback to slow file copies. And just like Vista, Copland was promised forever, and it was never going to get there. And just like Copland, Microsoft has already announced a replacement OS (http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2007/02/13/vista-replacement-in-2009-code-named/ ) before the ink has dried on the boxes for Vista.
Seriously, there are strong parallels here.
"I am not saying that [...] a lack of hate speech laws is a good thing"
Oh, I would say that.
"Hate Speech" is not defined. It simply means speech that is offensive to someone. Almost by definition, this type of law runs counter to the idea and ideals of free speech. It can easily be abused by political enemies, by a government that doesn't want criticism, or by one group to silence another.
make up a phony name/email address (disposable email addresses are a dime a dozen or cheaper) and use it without revealing info.
If your not sure what will happen, install it in Sandboxie.
"Unfortunately, too many people have a free lunch mentality when it comes to bandwidth and media downloads."
To be fair to those "people", doesn't Comcast's marketing department bear some responsibility for what you call a "free lunch mentality"?
It's not like Comcast is giving anything away. They charge $40/month for using their network, they've talked about always-on bandwidth, never talked about any limits, and now that they've set that expectation, some people seem to think that it's a "free lunch mentality".
I get that bandwidth costs money, and I get that you can't truly give unlimited bandwidth, but since Comcast created the perception, it's up to Comcast to fix it (if it really needs to be fixed. I think they're crying the blues to raise prices and get the FCC to enable them to drop network neutrality.
"Everyone pirating content is just leeching off the honest people "
Well, perhaps they're leaching, but certainly not from honest people. Perhaps you missed this story:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/12/0317238
Which says amongst other things: "The Tolkien Trust says that New Line paid them only $62,500 to make 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy of films -- instead of the agreed-upon 7.5 percent of gross receipts of all film-related revenue."
Perhaps I'm judging too quickly though.
Oh wait:
"http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/27/business/media/27movie.html?_r=1&oref=slogin"
No, I guess I'm not. Honestly is apparently not the policy at the film studios.
I agree that 50 years is too long (or about right).
But what do you think the same studios would say if you took a film made in 1954 and just started distributing it? They'd sue you into oblivion. Further, it was the film studios themselves who pushed for such long copyright terms.
So I don't see they have either the legal or moral standing to complain about this. They should pay their damned bills, frankly.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080211-samsung-sued-over-defective-first-gen-blu-ray-players.html
If you Google for BD-P1200 Lawsuit, you'll see the profile 1.0 vs 1.1 is not the issue. I'm guessing Samsung released this thing, and now the software patches are eating them alive keeping up with the changing spec (and probably a bad design to begin with). Based on the scant information, I'm guessing Samsung realized at some point they couldn't patch their player to fix all the incompatibilities. Perhaps it was at end of life, so they figured they'd just ignore the complaints.
I don't think this is a "first adopter you have to expect this" situation. It sounds like a bad design. If Samsung had any corporate integrity, they'd replace these players with ones that actually work. I'm not a fan of lawsuits, but Samsung basically said "screw you" to their customers, so it's natural somebody would screw them right back.