Exactly. Unfortunately this is tactics of sweeping the dirt under the rug. Shutting your eyes and pretending it's not happening. I don't understand why noone in their right mind thinks that hiding criminal activity reports will stop crime, but are sure that if we remove all child abuse pictures from the internet, then the problem will solve itself.
Basically, digitizing them automatically extends the copyright, since it's "remastering", so good luck with that. Unless you can run across an original tape (yeah, good luck with that), you can't distribute the copies the sell on Amazon and iTunes.
Oh come on. The companies won't lose a dime in this. They will still make the contract and just make termination fee equal to the 2-year contract cost, so they'll still get the money. And it's only fair that they don't get to decide what the user does with his phone (he still pays for the damn thing).
This might come as a surprise, but in Europe we have unlocked subsidized phones. You are effectively locked in by the contract, no need to add overhead and inconvenience by locking down the phone. The company still gets the money in full, providing a long-term hidden loan bundled with service, exactly as planned. And users get to use local SIM cards when going abroad, without paying the extortionist roaming fees. Locking down hardware is nothing more than an attempt at cash-grab by imposing extra inconveniences for the user (you still pay for the phone over the course of two years, except you still don't get to own it, great deal).
Apparently you haven't read the study itself. Which was conducted on mice genetically predisposed to cancer and that during the process control groups were changed so that results would better fit the theory of cancer-inducing GMO. Articles are being removed, because the study was a conducted with so many violations it's result cannot be trusted and since independent attempts to reproduce the results of the study, conducted thoroughly have not come to the same conclusions. But, please, go ahead and don't let facts get in your way of fear-mongering.
Visa PayWave is based on NFC, so, basically any phone with it will work, same for "one touch pairing". "Burst fire" for cam is purely software feature. Take a look at Nexus 4, then back at your G4, then again at Nexus 4, then look at the price of Nexus 4, then at the price of your G4, then go in the corner and wheep. On the way there you might buy an aftermarket Qi charging coil for your G4.
Well, most of the users don't care what Office Suite they don't know how to use. Training is actually minimal. The main boost is that documents can be saved and viewed without lockin to OS and office suit. It also removes dependency on Microsoft and might give a little boost to small businesses, that won't have to buy office and windows in order to communicate with the government, so that migration decision might make a lot of sense.
Yeah, because BSD worked out so nicely for FreeBSD and others in the family. And BSD community is now thriving, thanks to all the commits and return of code from the most open OS - iOS and OS X. Oh, wait, they don't? Ah, who cares about facts, when I can throw dirt at GPL, because those dirty programmers won't let me take the source add some stuff for incompatibility and then sell it off as my own, without sharing source code with the users, they 're clearly infringing on my entitlement to their work.
Guess it's pretty much the same, as with MS. In addition, it's easier to train locals to provide support and develop special features, required by users, thus boosting the economy.
Well, you can recall the USA used to finance some of those organizations to fight USSR in Afganistan. After the USSR dissapeared the organization turned on it's former master and went from freedom fighters to terrorist in a blink of an eye. So yes, it's pretty much the definition.
It's not a social problem. It's problem of power abuse. Making it harder to abuse can help contain the problem. If everyone uses end-to-end encryption, then centralized ubiquitous surveillance is impossible.
You forget that if everyone uses encryption, then you'll have to use rubber-hose attack on all of them. Which is not quite feasible. It can only be applied on a per-person basis, if he's already drawn attention. Just like personal surveillance.
You're using the encryption wrong. If you are the only one who has the key, then NSA can go and build quantum computer. Untill they do that, you are in the clear.
It is taking off now in bank cards, phones and tags. Most of the phones make after GNex have NFC onboard. So I wouldn't burry the standart yet. Especially in favor of some obscure standard, that could as well be an animated GIF with QR codes. NFC rocks with it's simplicity - you touch something - it starts working (an URL is opened, phones are paired and file transfer is initiated and so on).
Well, I'm pretty sure english-speaking users would be even more amused if the name sounded something like "faggot", which is just a bassoon in russian, so, yeah, immature public will always get excited over weird names. And before releasing something you might want to check if it sounds right in other languages.
Who's gonna pay for the "free" dongle? And how on earth can you make IPv6 a premium option if you don't make IPv4 unbearably broken and inconvenient for users? And once they start crying you offer a "new and improved internet". Sad jokes aside - why aren't they implementing NAT64 ? It's solves the problem in the same way as NAT, except more and more resources will have incentive to move to IPv6 and once the momentum is gained and all of the resources are there you can just drop NAT64 altogether without anyone noticing.
It doesn't mean we should help them restrict our rights. On the contrary, we should make DRM as expensive and financially taxing, as we can. Hopefully, it should be made so expensive, anyone touching it should go out of business.
"And "presentation of video on the web" means DRM." No it doesn't. Seems like you've been brainwashed into thinking that some corporation's sense of entitlement trumps basic human rights to obtain, process and share information. Content can and should be available DRM free, because the only thing DRM does - screws the customers and makes pirates gloat. Because any DRM can be broken by definition. And hoping that you can prevent information from being copied by some people who have access to it at the same time being able to copy it by others having access to it is just like hoping you can make air breathable by some people and not breathable by others by your own arbitrary choice.
Yes, it is. Because you will be wasting money and effort helping DRM to entrench. DRM won't have a standart? Good. It will provide poor UX ? Even better. I am against buying lube at victim's expence. W3C should focus on providing good standart and reference implementation for DRM-free content distribution. That would be much more usefull. If someone wants us shacked, I sure as hell ain't wasting time and resources on coming up with ideas on how to pad them with cushions and making them comfortable to wear.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. Unfortunately this is tactics of sweeping the dirt under the rug. Shutting your eyes and pretending it's not happening. I don't understand why noone in their right mind thinks that hiding criminal activity reports will stop crime, but are sure that if we remove all child abuse pictures from the internet, then the problem will solve itself.
And that, kids, is what encryption is for.
Basically, digitizing them automatically extends the copyright, since it's "remastering", so good luck with that. Unless you can run across an original tape (yeah, good luck with that), you can't distribute the copies the sell on Amazon and iTunes.
Why pay once, when you can pay twice? I think it's time to sqeeze the balls of BBC and remind them who pays their bills and salaries.
Oh, don't worry, they'll just extend the copyright term as they did for Mickey or Beatles. I mean there is still money to be made.
Oh come on. The companies won't lose a dime in this. They will still make the contract and just make termination fee equal to the 2-year contract cost, so they'll still get the money. And it's only fair that they don't get to decide what the user does with his phone (he still pays for the damn thing).
This might come as a surprise, but in Europe we have unlocked subsidized phones. You are effectively locked in by the contract, no need to add overhead and inconvenience by locking down the phone. The company still gets the money in full, providing a long-term hidden loan bundled with service, exactly as planned. And users get to use local SIM cards when going abroad, without paying the extortionist roaming fees.
Locking down hardware is nothing more than an attempt at cash-grab by imposing extra inconveniences for the user (you still pay for the phone over the course of two years, except you still don't get to own it, great deal).
Apparently you haven't read the study itself. Which was conducted on mice genetically predisposed to cancer and that during the process control groups were changed so that results would better fit the theory of cancer-inducing GMO. Articles are being removed, because the study was a conducted with so many violations it's result cannot be trusted and since independent attempts to reproduce the results of the study, conducted thoroughly have not come to the same conclusions. But, please, go ahead and don't let facts get in your way of fear-mongering.
Visa PayWave is based on NFC, so, basically any phone with it will work, same for "one touch pairing".
"Burst fire" for cam is purely software feature.
Take a look at Nexus 4, then back at your G4, then again at Nexus 4, then look at the price of Nexus 4, then at the price of your G4, then go in the corner and wheep. On the way there you might buy an aftermarket Qi charging coil for your G4.
Well, most of the users don't care what Office Suite they don't know how to use.
Training is actually minimal. The main boost is that documents can be saved and viewed without lockin to OS and office suit. It also removes dependency on Microsoft and might give a little boost to small businesses, that won't have to buy office and windows in order to communicate with the government, so that migration decision might make a lot of sense.
Yeah, because BSD worked out so nicely for FreeBSD and others in the family. And BSD community is now thriving, thanks to all the commits and return of code from the most open OS - iOS and OS X. Oh, wait, they don't? Ah, who cares about facts, when I can throw dirt at GPL, because those dirty programmers won't let me take the source add some stuff for incompatibility and then sell it off as my own, without sharing source code with the users, they 're clearly infringing on my entitlement to their work.
Guess it's pretty much the same, as with MS. In addition, it's easier to train locals to provide support and develop special features, required by users, thus boosting the economy.
Same way pedophiles care more about your children than you do.
Well, you can recall the USA used to finance some of those organizations to fight USSR in Afganistan. After the USSR dissapeared the organization turned on it's former master and went from freedom fighters to terrorist in a blink of an eye. So yes, it's pretty much the definition.
It's not a social problem. It's problem of power abuse. Making it harder to abuse can help contain the problem. If everyone uses end-to-end encryption, then centralized ubiquitous surveillance is impossible.
You forget that if everyone uses encryption, then you'll have to use rubber-hose attack on all of them. Which is not quite feasible. It can only be applied on a per-person basis, if he's already drawn attention. Just like personal surveillance.
You're using the encryption wrong. If you are the only one who has the key, then NSA can go and build quantum computer. Untill they do that, you are in the clear.
It is taking off now in bank cards, phones and tags. Most of the phones make after GNex have NFC onboard. So I wouldn't burry the standart yet. Especially in favor of some obscure standard, that could as well be an animated GIF with QR codes.
NFC rocks with it's simplicity - you touch something - it starts working (an URL is opened, phones are paired and file transfer is initiated and so on).
Well, I'm pretty sure english-speaking users would be even more amused if the name sounded something like "faggot", which is just a bassoon in russian, so, yeah, immature public will always get excited over weird names. And before releasing something you might want to check if it sounds right in other languages.
Who's gonna pay for the "free" dongle? And how on earth can you make IPv6 a premium option if you don't make IPv4 unbearably broken and inconvenient for users? And once they start crying you offer a "new and improved internet".
Sad jokes aside - why aren't they implementing NAT64 ? It's solves the problem in the same way as NAT, except more and more resources will have incentive to move to IPv6 and once the momentum is gained and all of the resources are there you can just drop NAT64 altogether without anyone noticing.
STUN disagrees.
DRM by definition is not GPL compliant and will require a blob doing the decrypting, otherwise it will be as good as double XOR encryption.
It doesn't mean we should help them restrict our rights. On the contrary, we should make DRM as expensive and financially taxing, as we can. Hopefully, it should be made so expensive, anyone touching it should go out of business.
"And "presentation of video on the web" means DRM."
No it doesn't. Seems like you've been brainwashed into thinking that some corporation's sense of entitlement trumps basic human rights to obtain, process and share information.
Content can and should be available DRM free, because the only thing DRM does - screws the customers and makes pirates gloat. Because any DRM can be broken by definition. And hoping that you can prevent information from being copied by some people who have access to it at the same time being able to copy it by others having access to it is just like hoping you can make air breathable by some people and not breathable by others by your own arbitrary choice.
Yes, it is. Because you will be wasting money and effort helping DRM to entrench. DRM won't have a standart? Good. It will provide poor UX ? Even better. I am against buying lube at victim's expence. W3C should focus on providing good standart and reference implementation for DRM-free content distribution. That would be much more usefull.
If someone wants us shacked, I sure as hell ain't wasting time and resources on coming up with ideas on how to pad them with cushions and making them comfortable to wear.