Thus the problem. There would inevitably be exceptions, and these exceptions would end up favoring those who get to decide who is exempt - government officials and business interests.
I imagine there would emerge some element of a class divide. Sure, you commoners get no privacy, yes. But the politicians? Well, they would argue, they need their lives to be kept secret as a matter of national security. Managers of companies of sufficient influence would find some way to maintain secrecy for the sake protecting their commercially sensitive information. And everything - absolutly everything - relating to children would end up made secret to protect them from the pedophile bogeymen. It would end up, I imagine, in a situation where everyone has no privacy in princible - but those who have some level of money or influence would have no problem getting themselves excluded. Or, equally bad, where no person has any privacy - but the only organisations able to access the monitoring data would be government and corporations, who would be quite happy to make sure it stays that way.
Because,
1. If the newcomer gets established in that area, they might expand and start competing in adjacent areas.
and
2. Just because the telco doesn't service that area now doesn't mean they won't in future, and they'd rather not have an incumbent with loyal customers already in place when that happens.
Except they call it 'campaign contributions' and 'lobbying.' Polite and legal, but in effect just regulated bribery. It doesn't matter if it's a wad of cash under the table or a vague promise of a large donation to politicians that do as the company would like, the end result is the same: The law is made to the whims of the highest bidder.
There won't be a revolution. America has televisions. It's just so much easier to grumble about the government online than it is to actually do something that matters.
Destroying the reactors beyond repair. Turning to seawater cooling means they have given up all hope of salvaging the reactors in a working state, and will settle for just non-exploding.
Even programs that you wouldn't expect to need much memory often benefit heavily, as any modern desktop or server OS uses free RAM for disk cacheing. Adding more memory means fewer slow, slow disk reads are needed.
My intended point is that, with the rise of mobile browsing, there is more diversity. A site shouldn't just assume the browser supports flash any more, or that it has a conventional mouse, or even an address bar.
Game region restrictions on consoles can be bypassed, but it's not trivial. Installing a modchip requires a soldering iron, and even those consoles that can be modded run the risk of being detected and banned from online play or disabled entirely upon the next firmware update. It's something than an import-fan would be happy to do, but not the casual gamer.
"(manipulation of an interface element that's currently guaranteed to exist in any desktop user agent to act as a presentation element)"
Well, almost. It's not there in full-screen mode browsers, and I know that some of those internet kiosks hide it. Mobile phone and tablet browsers too, to save screenspace. But it's usually there.
"What TiVo did would be a GPL violation in regards to the Linux kernel, had they not been very clever and implemented all their software and custom filesystem in user space."
They could have written it as a loadable module instead. Merely using headers is (IIRC) not enough to bring something under the GPL. The result would have been the same, legally.
If you don't mind violating a contract, forgoing access to future updates which might include vital security patches and running the risk of bricking your very expensive phone if you screw up. That's if you can do it at all - it's still hacking, and given enough time Apple might come up with a phone that can't be hacked at all short of soldering something inside it.
"You can install anything you want, outside the market or otherwise" No, you can't. At least not without jailbreaking, which is of dubious legality and means losing access to future updates. Also, it can only be done at all because Apple programmers screw up - it's still possible they'll come up in future with a phone which is impossible to jailbreak without warming up a soldering iron.
Android, in contrast, only runs signed code by default - but there is a very simple option you can untick to change this, and the you can run whatever you want. No hacking required. But with the iPhone and Windows phones, it's their way or no way: If they havn't signed the program, the phone won't run it short of jailbreaking. This is partially about security, partially about control*, and partially about money**
*There are some things Apple appears to loathe, like emulators, flash, or anything that reimpliments the phone's own functionality. They will not permit these.
**The app store brings in a tidy profit - if there were a way for developers to sell directly to users, Apple wouldn't get to take their cut.
It would be if you didn't at one point see the view of a computer screen during the hacking (It's an over-the-shoulder shot) and... yes, it's the glowy city!
Any politician not vetted by the party majority isn't going to get in. There are 535 representatives in congress - and all but two of those is a member of either the republican or democratic party. Even those two had to ally with the democrats. The two parties work together to make sure that no person shall ever breach the walls of their power duopoly, and internally both make sure to maintain some level of party unity. The republicans tend to be a bit better at that one - part of their strength comes from their ability to vote as a block without dissent even on the most contriversial issues, while the democrats always seem to have a couple of members break ranks.
Libya is trying that right now, and learning that it doesn't work very well when the People hare rifles and the government has bomber aircraft. If you want to go the armed revolutionary route, it isn't going to be as easy as it used to be when both sides were armed almost equally. It can be done, but it needs a much higher level of public support.
"If you build a business out of making computer peripherials you better make sure the firmware never gets out and it is a critical piece of it - because the US will smile happily while your business is defeated by cloners that will reproduce your hardware and sell it as yours right out from under you. "
I heard about this happening to some company once... I think it was called IBM? Not sure what happened to them.
This is exactly what various copyright holders already achieved technologically through region-coding in DVDs and games consoles. This appears just to be an attempt to do exactly the same through law instead so it can be applied to non-digital goods and as a further measure to stop those with imported or modified hardware.
It's also very, very expensive. Having a huge pot of cash is an overwheming advantage in court (Be it criminal or civil), and even someone who wins can easily be ruined by the expense. This applies espicially in cases of a corporation vs an individual, as few individuals can afford to match the spending of even one of the smaller corporations.
Slashdot Mirror
Thus the problem. There would inevitably be exceptions, and these exceptions would end up favoring those who get to decide who is exempt - government officials and business interests.
I imagine there would emerge some element of a class divide. Sure, you commoners get no privacy, yes. But the politicians? Well, they would argue, they need their lives to be kept secret as a matter of national security. Managers of companies of sufficient influence would find some way to maintain secrecy for the sake protecting their commercially sensitive information. And everything - absolutly everything - relating to children would end up made secret to protect them from the pedophile bogeymen. It would end up, I imagine, in a situation where everyone has no privacy in princible - but those who have some level of money or influence would have no problem getting themselves excluded. Or, equally bad, where no person has any privacy - but the only organisations able to access the monitoring data would be government and corporations, who would be quite happy to make sure it stays that way.
Because,
1. If the newcomer gets established in that area, they might expand and start competing in adjacent areas.
and
2. Just because the telco doesn't service that area now doesn't mean they won't in future, and they'd rather not have an incumbent with loyal customers already in place when that happens.
Except they call it 'campaign contributions' and 'lobbying.' Polite and legal, but in effect just regulated bribery. It doesn't matter if it's a wad of cash under the table or a vague promise of a large donation to politicians that do as the company would like, the end result is the same: The law is made to the whims of the highest bidder.
But what does Cuba have that the US wants? Nothing at all. They have oil, but they are not one of the major producers.
There won't be a revolution. America has televisions. It's just so much easier to grumble about the government online than it is to actually do something that matters.
Destroying the reactors beyond repair. Turning to seawater cooling means they have given up all hope of salvaging the reactors in a working state, and will settle for just non-exploding.
Pogoplugs are toasty. They've been plagued by overheating issues.
Even programs that you wouldn't expect to need much memory often benefit heavily, as any modern desktop or server OS uses free RAM for disk cacheing. Adding more memory means fewer slow, slow disk reads are needed.
My intended point is that, with the rise of mobile browsing, there is more diversity. A site shouldn't just assume the browser supports flash any more, or that it has a conventional mouse, or even an address bar.
Game region restrictions on consoles can be bypassed, but it's not trivial. Installing a modchip requires a soldering iron, and even those consoles that can be modded run the risk of being detected and banned from online play or disabled entirely upon the next firmware update. It's something than an import-fan would be happy to do, but not the casual gamer.
"(manipulation of an interface element that's currently guaranteed to exist in any desktop user agent to act as a presentation element)"
Well, almost. It's not there in full-screen mode browsers, and I know that some of those internet kiosks hide it. Mobile phone and tablet browsers too, to save screenspace. But it's usually there.
Indeed. My mistake.
"What TiVo did would be a GPL violation in regards to the Linux kernel, had they not been very clever and implemented all their software and custom filesystem in user space."
They could have written it as a loadable module instead. Merely using headers is (IIRC) not enough to bring something under the GPL. The result would have been the same, legally.
"you can open it if you like and have a need to."
If you don't mind violating a contract, forgoing access to future updates which might include vital security patches and running the risk of bricking your very expensive phone if you screw up. That's if you can do it at all - it's still hacking, and given enough time Apple might come up with a phone that can't be hacked at all short of soldering something inside it.
It's goatse. Don't look.
"You can install anything you want, outside the market or otherwise"
No, you can't. At least not without jailbreaking, which is of dubious legality and means losing access to future updates. Also, it can only be done at all because Apple programmers screw up - it's still possible they'll come up in future with a phone which is impossible to jailbreak without warming up a soldering iron.
Android, in contrast, only runs signed code by default - but there is a very simple option you can untick to change this, and the you can run whatever you want. No hacking required. But with the iPhone and Windows phones, it's their way or no way: If they havn't signed the program, the phone won't run it short of jailbreaking. This is partially about security, partially about control*, and partially about money**
*There are some things Apple appears to loathe, like emulators, flash, or anything that reimpliments the phone's own functionality. They will not permit these.
**The app store brings in a tidy profit - if there were a way for developers to sell directly to users, Apple wouldn't get to take their cut.
You forgot about the twitter account.
It would be if you didn't at one point see the view of a computer screen during the hacking (It's an over-the-shoulder shot) and... yes, it's the glowy city!
I don't know who said it, but there is a quote I have seen before: "Capitalism is a game where everyone must play but no-one may be allowed to win."
Any politician not vetted by the party majority isn't going to get in. There are 535 representatives in congress - and all but two of those is a member of either the republican or democratic party. Even those two had to ally with the democrats. The two parties work together to make sure that no person shall ever breach the walls of their power duopoly, and internally both make sure to maintain some level of party unity. The republicans tend to be a bit better at that one - part of their strength comes from their ability to vote as a block without dissent even on the most contriversial issues, while the democrats always seem to have a couple of members break ranks.
Libya is trying that right now, and learning that it doesn't work very well when the People hare rifles and the government has bomber aircraft. If you want to go the armed revolutionary route, it isn't going to be as easy as it used to be when both sides were armed almost equally. It can be done, but it needs a much higher level of public support.
"If you build a business out of making computer peripherials you better make sure the firmware never gets out and it is a critical piece of it - because the US will smile happily while your business is defeated by cloners that will reproduce your hardware and sell it as yours right out from under you. "
I heard about this happening to some company once... I think it was called IBM? Not sure what happened to them.
This is exactly what various copyright holders already achieved technologically through region-coding in DVDs and games consoles. This appears just to be an attempt to do exactly the same through law instead so it can be applied to non-digital goods and as a further measure to stop those with imported or modified hardware.
It's also very, very expensive. Having a huge pot of cash is an overwheming advantage in court (Be it criminal or civil), and even someone who wins can easily be ruined by the expense. This applies espicially in cases of a corporation vs an individual, as few individuals can afford to match the spending of even one of the smaller corporations.