There is literally no device out there that will run XBMC and Netflix at the same time. The Boxee Box is the closest, but has a steep price tag. I would love to build my own STB a la your suggestion but Microsoft won't allow their DRM stack on Moonlight, and Netflix is a firm requirement for this project.
A hacked AppleTV at $100 is the first STB that might actually fulfill my requirements.
"Be prosecuted" shouldn't be a threat if you're innocent,
Seriously? You couldn't finish reading that sentence to realize I was making your point? If a comment is only 2 sentences long, you might want to read both of them before rushing off to insult someone.
The difference is that people are supposed to be able to trust the legal system. "Be prosecuted" shouldn't be a threat if you're innocent, and the fact that it is is a huge damnation of our system.
And for the most part I wouldn't disagree, I understand torts and liability from a legal perspective, but are you really damaging a fisherman for a lifetime of earnings if he has the capability to move on and get another job, albeit with some difficulty? What do you really owe him, beyond punitive damages? It's a difficult question, and I suppose I should concede there's some amount of debt to him, but not 40 years worth.
There's got to be some legal precedent for this sort of situation...
I don't mind a sunset, what I mind is not knowing what comes next. The Obama administration has avoided any sort of commitment to a tax structure beyond the expiration except on a year-at-a-time basis. Only now are they finally getting around to debating the future of tax policy in Congress, and it looks like what we'll end up with is too little too late. A lot of the unemployment at the tail end of this recession could have been mitigated.
I understand there's an ingredient here from BP's own sub-standard practices and negligent risk-taking, but what if it was a hurricane or some other act of god? Or just plain technological progress (like it often does) putting people out of work? At some point people have to move on, as painful as that's going to be.
BP should get smacked enough to punish them for their insane risks (and discourage anyone else from trying that ever again), but they're not responsible for other people's well being.
Why do you think that, exactly? The DMCA still prevents any product to aid in that quest from being imported or sold. So you'd have to construct the hardware yourself. Will you?
Yeah, it was never designed to. But the people who want to design products to solve that use case are LEGALLY PROHIBITED from doing so and selling their wares. That's the problem. There's technological progress that's solving real people's real problems that's being blocked from entering the market. All the while doing absolutely nothing to stop piracy.
Browsers are just client software. It shouldn't matter what platform they run on as long as you can get SOME decent web client on all the platforms you use. Of course, that presumes IE9 actually follows standards... that might be the angle you want to attack here.
Not all contracts are written. Ordering at a restaurant is a type of contract, by law. So is a retail purchase. The legal concept is a little broader than just "a document two people agree to".
I'd love to have the freedom to choose not to use Flash. Right now, many websites require it, so I have to go without, or in the occasional case suck it up and use Flash anyway.
But if Apple uses the iPhone's popularity to start making web designers realize Flash support can't be taken for granted, then even without owning an iPhone my ability to choose not to use Flash is improved.
You misunderstand what I'm arguing. Paying for a developer cert only gives you access to your own devices. To successfully propagate malware you have to coax your victims to load the code, and they aren't going to pay $99 to do it.
I can do that in the US, with my Bank of America checking account. It's part of the bill-pay service. Domestic only, though. For international transfers you have to do a wire transfer and pay a fee (actually some account holders, myself included, have that fee waived).
I agree with your post in entirety, but having already made the mistake this needs to be seriously escalated. 600k is way too much money to take chances on.
I think the idea is that Apple is using their market muscle to make Flash less necessary in the first place. If you had to opt-out of flash usage, you might find it more difficult since site makers would have no reason whatsoever to cater to you.
I don't have an iPhone nor do I want one, but I'm thrilled at the potential effect for iPhones to have on the Flash-heavy web.
Because then Apple can't keep malware off the iPhone. A $99 payment is a pretty good barrier to stop people from following instructions on the internet to get a Bonzai Buddy app, etc, to work. Unfortunately that stops the good code with the bad, but $99 is cheap enough for most developers but the most part-time hobbyists, like yourself.
Regular telephone systems are packet-switched behind the scenes these days, so latency is a function of the quality of your connection, true for both your phone company and your VOIP service.
Market share was not the sole factor driving Standard Oil's proceedings. From the suit filed (reprinted from the Wikipedia article on Standard Oil):
"Rebates, preferences, and other discriminatory practices in favor of the combination by railroad companies; restraint and monopolization by control of pipe lines, and unfair practices against competing pipe lines; contracts with competitors in restraint of trade; unfair methods of competition, such as local price cutting at the points where necessary to suppress competition; [and] espionage of the business of competitors, the operation of bogus independent companies, and payment of rebates on oil, with the like intent."
That's only if it's ratified in the Senate as a treaty. The Obama administration has already signaled that they want to enact it as an executive agreement if possible.
I am curious how many of those videos are unavailable because Google can't legally distribute them under copyright law (or contractual agreement, etc), or because they can't legally distribute them under offensiveness statutes.
At least with the latter Google can't be sued in the US for their actions in foreign markets.
The availability of bad food is a function of government intervention on the food market, though perhaps not wholly so.
Furthermore the "willpower" argument is a complete dodge of the issue. Yes, many people have the willpower to avoid obesity. Many don't, and you could say that they own a component of the blame. But if you think obesity is a problem and you want to fix it, you have to be willing to tackle ALL the components, including the policy reasons that enhance the difference between the US and the rest of the world in this arena.
Slashdot Mirror
There is literally no device out there that will run XBMC and Netflix at the same time. The Boxee Box is the closest, but has a steep price tag. I would love to build my own STB a la your suggestion but Microsoft won't allow their DRM stack on Moonlight, and Netflix is a firm requirement for this project.
A hacked AppleTV at $100 is the first STB that might actually fulfill my requirements.
None of those are well-accepted positions within either party. You're reaching.
"Be prosecuted" shouldn't be a threat if you're innocent,
Seriously? You couldn't finish reading that sentence to realize I was making your point? If a comment is only 2 sentences long, you might want to read both of them before rushing off to insult someone.
The difference is that people are supposed to be able to trust the legal system. "Be prosecuted" shouldn't be a threat if you're innocent, and the fact that it is is a huge damnation of our system.
And for the most part I wouldn't disagree, I understand torts and liability from a legal perspective, but are you really damaging a fisherman for a lifetime of earnings if he has the capability to move on and get another job, albeit with some difficulty? What do you really owe him, beyond punitive damages? It's a difficult question, and I suppose I should concede there's some amount of debt to him, but not 40 years worth.
There's got to be some legal precedent for this sort of situation...
I don't mind a sunset, what I mind is not knowing what comes next. The Obama administration has avoided any sort of commitment to a tax structure beyond the expiration except on a year-at-a-time basis. Only now are they finally getting around to debating the future of tax policy in Congress, and it looks like what we'll end up with is too little too late. A lot of the unemployment at the tail end of this recession could have been mitigated.
I understand there's an ingredient here from BP's own sub-standard practices and negligent risk-taking, but what if it was a hurricane or some other act of god? Or just plain technological progress (like it often does) putting people out of work? At some point people have to move on, as painful as that's going to be.
BP should get smacked enough to punish them for their insane risks (and discourage anyone else from trying that ever again), but they're not responsible for other people's well being.
Stability and predictability are major factors in keeping speculation down.
A lesson lost on the administration when it comes to taxes and employment...
But if James Cameron is on board, Adrian Grenier better be too.
Why do you think that, exactly? The DMCA still prevents any product to aid in that quest from being imported or sold. So you'd have to construct the hardware yourself. Will you?
Yeah, it was never designed to. But the people who want to design products to solve that use case are LEGALLY PROHIBITED from doing so and selling their wares. That's the problem. There's technological progress that's solving real people's real problems that's being blocked from entering the market. All the while doing absolutely nothing to stop piracy.
Browsers are just client software. It shouldn't matter what platform they run on as long as you can get SOME decent web client on all the platforms you use. Of course, that presumes IE9 actually follows standards... that might be the angle you want to attack here.
Not all contracts are written. Ordering at a restaurant is a type of contract, by law. So is a retail purchase. The legal concept is a little broader than just "a document two people agree to".
I'd love to have the freedom to choose not to use Flash. Right now, many websites require it, so I have to go without, or in the occasional case suck it up and use Flash anyway.
But if Apple uses the iPhone's popularity to start making web designers realize Flash support can't be taken for granted, then even without owning an iPhone my ability to choose not to use Flash is improved.
You misunderstand what I'm arguing. Paying for a developer cert only gives you access to your own devices. To successfully propagate malware you have to coax your victims to load the code, and they aren't going to pay $99 to do it.
My argument is that requiring a developer cert keeps malware off victims' phones by preventing them from loading arbitrary code.
Unless you're arguing that coaxing a user to load malware is worth $99/victim?
I can do that in the US, with my Bank of America checking account. It's part of the bill-pay service. Domestic only, though. For international transfers you have to do a wire transfer and pay a fee (actually some account holders, myself included, have that fee waived).
I agree with your post in entirety, but having already made the mistake this needs to be seriously escalated. 600k is way too much money to take chances on.
I think the idea is that Apple is using their market muscle to make Flash less necessary in the first place. If you had to opt-out of flash usage, you might find it more difficult since site makers would have no reason whatsoever to cater to you.
I don't have an iPhone nor do I want one, but I'm thrilled at the potential effect for iPhones to have on the Flash-heavy web.
Because then Apple can't keep malware off the iPhone. A $99 payment is a pretty good barrier to stop people from following instructions on the internet to get a Bonzai Buddy app, etc, to work. Unfortunately that stops the good code with the bad, but $99 is cheap enough for most developers but the most part-time hobbyists, like yourself.
Regular telephone systems are packet-switched behind the scenes these days, so latency is a function of the quality of your connection, true for both your phone company and your VOIP service.
"Rebates, preferences, and other discriminatory practices in favor of the combination by railroad companies; restraint and monopolization by control of pipe lines, and unfair practices against competing pipe lines; contracts with competitors in restraint of trade; unfair methods of competition, such as local price cutting at the points where necessary to suppress competition; [and] espionage of the business of competitors, the operation of bogus independent companies, and payment of rebates on oil, with the like intent."
That's only if it's ratified in the Senate as a treaty. The Obama administration has already signaled that they want to enact it as an executive agreement if possible.
I am curious how many of those videos are unavailable because Google can't legally distribute them under copyright law (or contractual agreement, etc), or because they can't legally distribute them under offensiveness statutes.
At least with the latter Google can't be sued in the US for their actions in foreign markets.
The availability of bad food is a function of government intervention on the food market, though perhaps not wholly so.
Furthermore the "willpower" argument is a complete dodge of the issue. Yes, many people have the willpower to avoid obesity. Many don't, and you could say that they own a component of the blame. But if you think obesity is a problem and you want to fix it, you have to be willing to tackle ALL the components, including the policy reasons that enhance the difference between the US and the rest of the world in this arena.