If you put the two together you get quite an insightful speech!
"Gandhi - Dead, Martin Luther King - Dead, John Lennon - Dead, JFK - Dead, Reagan...Wounded, I mean take John Lennon. We live in a country where John Lennon takes six bullets in the chest. Yoko Ono is standing right next to him. Not one Fucking bullet. Explain that to me!"
I admitted I know fuck all about international treaties and I am also not "one of the big boys...", so how about you get off your high horse for a second and talk with some fucking common decency.
Now I've read your post I have a bit better understanding of the situation as it stands. With any luck it has gone some way to help inform my future opinions... Oh, one more thing
I'm not sure what is so hard for you to grasp here. I guess it is time for you to grow up and sit at the big kids table. I said it is because of international treaty.
Reiteration on the same post as the original statement just makes you look stupid. You might want to bear that in mind.
that other country has to either use US law or come to some compensation agreement
So if it's not illegal in xyz country, US turns around and enforces it's law or makes you cough up compensation...
No offence to US, you guys here are great, but when is USA gonna realise it can't just throw it's weight around if the rest of the world doesn't want to play ball?
What next? Your speed limit is 55. Ours is 70. Am I going to get pulled over next time I do 65 "because it's illegal the USA"?
I've yet to meet someone that can do a 24 hour stint and still be productive at the end of it!
After 18 hours most people aren't worth sh|t!
Especially me! If you want my opinion, they should make something that can keep you awake and alert for 24 hours that won't get you locked up or convince you you're a fish!
I realise that full bandwidth cannot be guaranteed at all times. What I object to is them saying categorically "We will not let you get your maximum bandwidth" which is what they're doing.
I'd rather "You might not" as opposed to "You will not".
And as for the "only 5 hours of the day", I have a full time job... That's the only time I need my connection! So what, I can access my internet unrestricted, when I'm out of the house!
That's like saying you can have a HD-TV but it'll only show HD when you're not looking! (Crap analogy I know but you see my point)
Ok but the ins and outs are not what concerns me. What concerns me is we pay for 2mb. I expect that 2 mb as and when I want it and to do with as I please.
For them to turn round and say that after 500mb you're getting reduced bandwidth is bullshit.
Just because I'm not paying for blisteringly fast broadband, doesn't give them the right to arbitrarily axe what bandwidth I PAY FOR because they say so.
If they can't guarantee the bandwidth they're fast enough in charging for, they shouldn't be bloody charging for it!
Where I live I can get faster broadband from a bloody 3 mobile dongle and save myself some money!
During peak use hours (4pm till midnight apparently) My mother-in-laws 2mb broadband is throttled to 1 mb to "ensure equality of access"...
"Well hang on now", says I, You provide half the service, we'll provide half the money...
That, of course, went down like a lead balloon.
I'm personally of the opinion that if they can't provide the promised service because they've overstated their capabilities, that's not my problem. Then to go and HALF said service on a technicality is just abhorent...
Please don't take this as a negative but I worked for a while in an electronics store and I saw plenty of people buying laptops for the under-10s...
Why? What could someone under 10 possibly need with a laptop?
Sure they might WANT a laptop for entertainment. The same as wanting a games console or even a puppy or some such but WHY does it have to be a laptop?
As much as regulatory insitutions try, the internet is a dangerous place and, in my opinion, children have no place there.
Now I'm not a parent and I don't presume to tell anyone who is, how to raise your child. You're a bigger man than me!
I just fail to see the sense in buying an 8 year old a laptop. They are sophisticated, they are fragile and all it does is grant them access to somewhere they don't belong...
Could you imagine if Apple did actually make a console...
They'd stick to their design trend so about half the buyers would be trying to pair the contoller with their AppleTV...
It'd be absolutely gorgeous but the software would fall under 2 categories...
1 - Poor ports of Microsoft games at 120% RRP 2 - Apple bespoke software... let's not talk price:D
Oh... and controllers... huge range, gorgeous design... £60 a pop!
And the OS would be (yet another) version of OSX so it would boot instantly, run forever but, in an iPhone-esque lapse of judgement, be missing a few vital features... probably the ability to load your save games...
And all this, believe it or not, from an Apple Fan!
Surely dedicating a segment of that spectrum would cause problems ensuring equality of access?
At the moment it seems that the more people you have on, the lower your bandwidth - stands to reason.
Surely allocating fixed bandwidth on a first come first served basis would mean eventually you would run out of bandwidth to allocate and people would be denied access?
Psystar are pushing to have OSX made available on non apple hardware. This would involve modifying the kernel to remove certain hardware lockouts so they could then install OSX on their OpenComputer LEGALLY.
So although not directly asking them, for what they are doing to be legal, Apple would have to modify the TPM code out of the kernel.
My point was no one has any right to tell Apple what they can and can't do with their property.
So my wording was shit. My bad.
In my view Apple are well within their rights to rip Psystar to shreds.
Psystar must be modifying the kernel to get it to run on non-apple hardware. This is in direct contravention of the EULA which, as psystar are the ones installing the software and it's not OEM, they are bound by.
They did adopt technical measures smartass. The Trusted Platform Module was included in the spec with the express intent of making OSX Apple hardware dependant.
The fact the OpenComputer does not contain this chip means they must have modified the kernel to remove this dependance...
Slashdot Mirror
If you put the two together you get quite an insightful speech!
"Gandhi - Dead, Martin Luther King - Dead, John Lennon - Dead, JFK - Dead, Reagan...Wounded, I mean take John Lennon. We live in a country where John Lennon takes six bullets in the chest. Yoko Ono is standing right next to him. Not one Fucking bullet. Explain that to me!"
Ok, it's not word for word but you get my point!
Well I suppose someone had to say it eventually :D
Thanks a lot!
[dives in]
I apologise again for my crappy attitude yesterday! :D
Thanks for the links
I apologise for my earlier statements. I've had a rough day and I'm short tempered at the best of times so if i caused any offence I apologise.
I know very little in the way of these treaties, I have not been big on technology for very long, only really since I started uni.
Can you recommend any sources or terms I can read that'll help me get a better understanding of all this?
I admitted I know fuck all about international treaties and I am also not "one of the big boys...", so how about you get off your high horse for a second and talk with some fucking common decency.
Now I've read your post I have a bit better understanding of the situation as it stands. With any luck it has gone some way to help inform my future opinions... Oh, one more thing
I'm not sure what is so hard for you to grasp here. I guess it is time for you to grow up and sit at the big kids table. I said it is because of international treaty.
Reiteration on the same post as the original statement just makes you look stupid. You might want to bear that in mind.
*groans*
that other country has to either use US law or come to some compensation agreement
So if it's not illegal in xyz country, US turns around and enforces it's law or makes you cough up compensation...
No offence to US, you guys here are great, but when is USA gonna realise it can't just throw it's weight around if the rest of the world doesn't want to play ball?
What next? Your speed limit is 55. Ours is 70. Am I going to get pulled over next time I do 65 "because it's illegal the USA"?
Not true. The fans are along the back edge. They're just tucked away and quiet.
I'd say, on the face of it, Apple have the most efficient batteries...
Of course I can probably be proven wrong by someone in the know ;)
Well I'll have the chicken then...
I thought Apple had better / the best batteries on the market?
My old Pavilion got 2.5 hours if I was careful...
My macbook will do 7 hours if I'm careful and 4 if I really kick the arse out of it...
I've yet to meet someone that can do a 24 hour stint and still be productive at the end of it!
After 18 hours most people aren't worth sh|t!
Especially me! If you want my opinion, they should make something that can keep you awake and alert for 24 hours that won't get you locked up or convince you you're a fish!
Pardon my ignorance. Im a UK resident but I'm not that hot on copyright and international law...
What powers do RIAA have outside of the US?
Everyone over here (that knows anything about technology) is either laughing their ass off or quaking in their boots at the mention of RIAA...
Exactly what jurisdiction do they have here?
In my mind, the clue is in the name - Recording Industry Association of AMERICA... makes no mention about the rest of the world.
What powers do they THINK they have and what powers do they ACTUALLY have?
I realise that full bandwidth cannot be guaranteed at all times. What I object to is them saying categorically "We will not let you get your maximum bandwidth" which is what they're doing.
I'd rather "You might not" as opposed to "You will not".
And as for the "only 5 hours of the day", I have a full time job... That's the only time I need my connection! So what, I can access my internet unrestricted, when I'm out of the house!
That's like saying you can have a HD-TV but it'll only show HD when you're not looking!
(Crap analogy I know but you see my point)
Ok but the ins and outs are not what concerns me.
What concerns me is we pay for 2mb. I expect that 2 mb as and when I want it and to do with as I please.
For them to turn round and say that after 500mb you're getting reduced bandwidth is bullshit.
Just because I'm not paying for blisteringly fast broadband, doesn't give them the right to arbitrarily axe what bandwidth I PAY FOR because they say so.
If they can't guarantee the bandwidth they're fast enough in charging for, they shouldn't be bloody charging for it!
Where I live I can get faster broadband from a bloody 3 mobile dongle and save myself some money!
Might think about that actually...
Sounds like what virgin have done in the UK.
During peak use hours (4pm till midnight apparently)
My mother-in-laws 2mb broadband is throttled to 1 mb to "ensure equality of access"...
"Well hang on now", says I, You provide half the service, we'll provide half the money...
That, of course, went down like a lead balloon.
I'm personally of the opinion that if they can't provide the promised service because they've overstated their capabilities, that's not my problem. Then to go and HALF said service on a technicality is just abhorent...
Beardy Branson wants a kicking IMHO...
Please don't take this as a negative but I worked for a while in an electronics store and I saw plenty of people buying laptops for the under-10s...
Why? What could someone under 10 possibly need with a laptop?
Sure they might WANT a laptop for entertainment. The same as wanting a games console or even a puppy or some such but WHY does it have to be a laptop?
As much as regulatory insitutions try, the internet is a dangerous place and, in my opinion, children have no place there.
Now I'm not a parent and I don't presume to tell anyone who is, how to raise your child. You're a bigger man than me!
I just fail to see the sense in buying an 8 year old a laptop. They are sophisticated, they are fragile and all it does is grant them access to somewhere they don't belong...
Thanks for listening, rant over :D
Could you imagine if Apple did actually make a console...
They'd stick to their design trend so about half the buyers would be trying to pair the contoller with their AppleTV...
It'd be absolutely gorgeous but the software would fall under 2 categories...
1 - Poor ports of Microsoft games at 120% RRP :D
2 - Apple bespoke software... let's not talk price
Oh... and controllers... huge range, gorgeous design... £60 a pop!
And the OS would be (yet another) version of OSX so it would boot instantly, run forever but, in an iPhone-esque lapse of judgement, be missing a few vital features... probably the ability to load your save games...
And all this, believe it or not, from an Apple Fan!
I'm the first to admit my knowledge on this is limited...
I read /. in the vain attempt to learn stuff that my piss-poor university neglected to teach me!
Congrats guys, you're all honourary lecturers!
Now keep talking, I'm trying to take notes here!
Surely dedicating a segment of that spectrum would cause problems ensuring equality of access?
At the moment it seems that the more people you have on, the lower your bandwidth - stands to reason.
Surely allocating fixed bandwidth on a first come first served basis would mean eventually you would run out of bandwidth to allocate and people would be denied access?
Surely that would be the Pipex of cellphones?
Drastically reduce your performance and then bring in "The Hoff", produce a series of cathphrases and hope to hell this is enough to save you!
Thing that gets me is anyone that says all this...
Never leaves a name.
Way to go big man. You're such hot-shit and you're so high and mighty, take responsibilty for your words.
If you're too scared to be held accountable for your comments, don't make them, and don't clog up the internet with your mindless drivvel.
What??? Companies would have to... work... to a standard...
They'll never do it!
Personally I reckon they get too much of a giggle from reading threads like this.
Every time someone posts something like this they get straight onto the R&D guys "Right lads, New chargers. Whadda ya got?"
Psystar are pushing to have OSX made available on non apple hardware. This would involve modifying the kernel to remove certain hardware lockouts so they could then install OSX on their OpenComputer LEGALLY.
So although not directly asking them, for what they are doing to be legal, Apple would have to modify the TPM code out of the kernel.
Missed the point entirely...
My point was no one has any right to tell Apple what they can and can't do with their property.
So my wording was shit. My bad.
In my view Apple are well within their rights to rip Psystar to shreds.
Psystar must be modifying the kernel to get it to run on non-apple hardware. This is in direct contravention of the EULA which, as psystar are the ones installing the software and it's not OEM, they are bound by.
They did adopt technical measures smartass.
The Trusted Platform Module was included in the spec with the express intent of making OSX Apple hardware dependant.
The fact the OpenComputer does not contain this chip means they must have modified the kernel to remove this dependance...