Just because a device has a certain feature, doesn't mean you can use it. [...] It should be the consumer's responsibility to ensure that they meet the requirements to use those features.
That's true. But in the case of the new iPad, it does not have a 4G feature in Australia. The law is very clear in that scenario: it is Apple's responsibility to accurately describe their product, it's not the consumer's responsibility.
Even if an Australian customer is highly knowledgeable about technology and understands that US 4G is not the same thing as Australian 4G, it doesn't change the fact that the new iPad does not support 4G here.
...you should put all the juicy stuff in plain sight on your harddisk. Then encrypt the stuff you don't care about. When the authorities finally get the password out of you, at least you'll have the satisfaction of confounding them.
If they don't want anyone to read the papers, they should print off millions of copies with an official-looking government cover, then send them out all over the country with big letters on the envelope: "Important Information from Your Government".
"Blacklist" — if that's how Facebook reacts when a website declines to hand over unnecessary data to them, how does Facebook react to the sites which deliberately manipulate the data sent back to Facebook? Or maybe Facebook doesn't realise the extent to which that is happening already?
I hope the Turtleneck of Power gets passed on to Cook.
Bill Gates held on to his Thongs of Virtue when he stepped down from Microsoft, which he put to most excellent use in the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation... but just look at what happened to Steve Balmer when he didn't receive The Thong (think: monkey dance).
Someone set up a madeleinepulver.com site plastered with advertising, including Google ads of course.
Yet curiously it was a competing ad network which placed the advertisement "Live in the USA!" on top of photos of Madeleine Pulver, not Google. With all the data in gmail about this guy moving to the USA, surely Google should have been placing that ad?
Actually, I suspect lots of these are snuck into the manuals by tech support staff as jokes.
Yes, it's quite obvious that they're jokes when you look up the original sources. For example, the article only quotes the first warning of the following:
WARNING
Do not attempt to install if drunk, pregnant or both.
Do not eat antenna.
Do not throw antenna at spouse.
Today, Gillard and NBN paid Eleven Billion Dollars to buy the Telstra copper network. Do you really think they're going to rip it out or decommission it?
The NBN takes the aging copper network out of private hands where Telstra was using it to restrict competition, and replaces it with an open-access high speed network open to full competition.
Just to be clear: almost everyone being forced to switch to the NBN is currently using Telstra infrastructure. If you're on iiNet, Internode, TGP, Optus ADSL etc then you're using Telstra copper. The only people being forced to switch to the NBN who aren't using Telstra infrastructure now are the relatively small number of people on Optus Cable Broadband. After the switch to the NBN, you'll still be using iiNet, Internode, etc for your internet access (if you want to) but instead of using Telstra's infrastructure you'll be using NBNCo's infrastructure. And it will be damn fast and more reliable. And it won't be Telstra... which in itself is simply wonderful.
Both the ISP filtering and the NBN/Telstra/Optus deal have been in the works for years now. Neither is a surprise, they both were obviously going to happen.
"'We are only driving on public roads and taking publicly available imagery so what we are not doing is going into a specific installation and taking private pictures and obviously we are working with the authorities so if there are certain locations they don't want us to be there we won't go there, we are happy working with the authorities here."
61 words in a single sentence makes Google sound rather flustered by the accusation.
This manager would sound much more relaxed with a bit of punctuation:
"'We are only driving on public roads and taking publicly available imagery. So what we are not doing is going into a specific installation — and taking private pictures. And obviously we are working with the authorities. So if there are certain locations they don't want us to be there, we won't go there. We are happy working with the authorities here."
Offensive versus risqué is irrelevant. Duke Nukem Forever is denigrating to women, which is a completely different thing.
You can be as offensive and as risqué as you like in your own home. But if you treated women in your home like they are treated in Duke Nukem Forever, it would be a matter for the police.
If you aren't using the official channels for your application and have in-app purchases, will you be liable for patent infringement?...
I am sure that if you implement the in-app purchases in your independent way, and distribute your application yourself, you also need to get the patent. But what about the third party stores?
Don't be so sure!
The biggest kick in the nuts for Lodsys in that letter is when Apple says "Lodsys's threatened claims are barred by the doctrines of patent exhaustion and first sale". As I read it: because Apple have already paid for a patent license for each iOS device that they sell, no-one can demand another license fee. It's already licensed and paid for. Lodsys is effectively asking to be paid multiple times for the same device, which they can't do.
So, assuming that Google and others are similarly licensed to Apple, Lodsys would not be entitled to any fees from apps on unofficial mods and third-party stores. That's because the Android mod or third-party apps could only run on devices which are already licensed — the mod or app might not license the patent directly, but each user of the mod or app effectively has, because Google or Apple or whoever paid their license fee to IV for the device. It could be that almost every owner of a smartphone in the world is already licensed for this patent, which would make Lodsys feel sick in the stomach (if trolls have stomachs?)
(Remember IANAL and IV got paid for the Apple license, not Lodsys, but who got paid makes no difference)
Much of the point of ChromeOS is that applications will have offline functionality.
The HTML5 technologies that ChromeOS will use for offline functionality are really designed to synchronise with the original server. So when Google Docs or your network goes down, you will be able to keep working on your document. But if you want to take your document somewhere else — say take a copy home as a file on a USB stick — you can't. Exporting documents is done in the cloud, not by the browser, so your document is stuck on your machine. You just have to wait until Google Docs works again so it can sync back up and then export it.
That is almost exactly the same as the PS3 outage. The PS3 console and games continue to work as normal offline, but you can't play online and you can't switch to a competing provider of online games. In a major outage of Google Docs, your ChromeOS would continue to work as normal offline, but you wouldn't be able to take the document anywhere or give it to someone else — and you wouldn't be able to switch to a competing provider like Office Live — because your data is stuck in the Google cloud. One day Google may fix this, but at the moment you would be stuck.
The problem here is being reliant on one company. On a desktop computer with a full operating system you've got myriad alternatives and competing solutions for any problem. On the PS3 and ChromeOS you've got a very simple-to-use system that's normally all you need; but if it fails then you're stuck with no alternative.
Slashdot Mirror
Have fun sandboxing the code to meet App Store rules.
Nobody in Australia calls mobile phones cellphones, so most consumers aren't going to have a clue what Cellular means.
Actually that's perfect. You can't get sued for misleading people if you use a term that has no meaning...
Just because a device has a certain feature, doesn't mean you can use it. [...] It should be the consumer's responsibility to ensure that they meet the requirements to use those features.
That's true. But in the case of the new iPad, it does not have a 4G feature in Australia. The law is very clear in that scenario: it is Apple's responsibility to accurately describe their product, it's not the consumer's responsibility.
Even if an Australian customer is highly knowledgeable about technology and understands that US 4G is not the same thing as Australian 4G, it doesn't change the fact that the new iPad does not support 4G here.
But is that funnier than the fact there are people in offices all over the world talking about "Penetration Testing" with a straight face?
...you should put all the juicy stuff in plain sight on your harddisk. Then encrypt the stuff you don't care about. When the authorities finally get the password out of you, at least you'll have the satisfaction of confounding them.
If they don't want anyone to read the papers, they should print off millions of copies with an official-looking government cover, then send them out all over the country with big letters on the envelope: "Important Information from Your Government".
That guarantees no-one will read it.
"Blacklist" — if that's how Facebook reacts when a website declines to hand over unnecessary data to them, how does Facebook react to the sites which deliberately manipulate the data sent back to Facebook? Or maybe Facebook doesn't realise the extent to which that is happening already?
I hope the Turtleneck of Power gets passed on to Cook.
Bill Gates held on to his Thongs of Virtue when he stepped down from Microsoft, which he put to most excellent use in the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation... but just look at what happened to Steve Balmer when he didn't receive The Thong (think: monkey dance).
Someone set up a madeleinepulver.com site plastered with advertising, including Google ads of course.
Yet curiously it was a competing ad network which placed the advertisement "Live in the USA!" on top of photos of Madeleine Pulver, not Google. With all the data in gmail about this guy moving to the USA, surely Google should have been placing that ad?
PS. Site is now down, screenshot at http://i54.tinypic.com/2ducdvn.png
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Facebook
Actually, I suspect lots of these are snuck into the manuals by tech support staff as jokes.
Yes, it's quite obvious that they're jokes when you look up the original sources. For example, the article only quotes the first warning of the following:
http://www.antennasdirect.com/cmss_files/attachmentlibrary/pdf/generic_instructions.pdf
Today, Gillard and NBN paid Eleven Billion Dollars to buy the Telstra copper network. Do you really think they're going to rip it out or decommission it?
Yes, they are decommissioning the entire copper network: http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/350563/telstra-nbn_co_deal_telstra_plans_phased_copper_decommission/
Or, to put it more rationally:
The NBN takes the aging copper network out of private hands where Telstra was using it to restrict competition, and replaces it with an open-access high speed network open to full competition.
Just to be clear: almost everyone being forced to switch to the NBN is currently using Telstra infrastructure. If you're on iiNet, Internode, TGP, Optus ADSL etc then you're using Telstra copper. The only people being forced to switch to the NBN who aren't using Telstra infrastructure now are the relatively small number of people on Optus Cable Broadband. After the switch to the NBN, you'll still be using iiNet, Internode, etc for your internet access (if you want to) but instead of using Telstra's infrastructure you'll be using NBNCo's infrastructure. And it will be damn fast and more reliable. And it won't be Telstra... which in itself is simply wonderful.
Coincidence?
I say yes, I doubt one influenced the other.
Both the ISP filtering and the NBN/Telstra/Optus deal have been in the works for years now. Neither is a surprise, they both were obviously going to happen.
Yippee!!!
If I was Stephen Conroy, I'd censor posts like that.
time to fire up Tor and change ISPs.
Isn't that redundant?
"'We are only driving on public roads and taking publicly available imagery so what we are not doing is going into a specific installation and taking private pictures and obviously we are working with the authorities so if there are certain locations they don't want us to be there we won't go there, we are happy working with the authorities here."
61 words in a single sentence makes Google sound rather flustered by the accusation.
This manager would sound much more relaxed with a bit of punctuation:
"'We are only driving on public roads and taking publicly available imagery. So what we are not doing is going into a specific installation — and taking private pictures. And obviously we are working with the authorities. So if there are certain locations they don't want us to be there, we won't go there. We are happy working with the authorities here."
Offensive versus risqué is irrelevant. Duke Nukem Forever is denigrating to women, which is a completely different thing.
You can be as offensive and as risqué as you like in your own home. But if you treated women in your home like they are treated in Duke Nukem Forever, it would be a matter for the police.
What comes after forever?
No problem here — both Skype website and calls working fine.
If you aren't using the official channels for your application and have in-app purchases, will you be liable for patent infringement? ...
I am sure that if you implement the in-app purchases in your independent way, and distribute your application yourself, you also need to get the patent. But what about the third party stores?
Don't be so sure!
The biggest kick in the nuts for Lodsys in that letter is when Apple says "Lodsys's threatened claims are barred by the doctrines of patent exhaustion and first sale". As I read it: because Apple have already paid for a patent license for each iOS device that they sell, no-one can demand another license fee. It's already licensed and paid for. Lodsys is effectively asking to be paid multiple times for the same device, which they can't do.
So, assuming that Google and others are similarly licensed to Apple, Lodsys would not be entitled to any fees from apps on unofficial mods and third-party stores. That's because the Android mod or third-party apps could only run on devices which are already licensed — the mod or app might not license the patent directly, but each user of the mod or app effectively has, because Google or Apple or whoever paid their license fee to IV for the device. It could be that almost every owner of a smartphone in the world is already licensed for this patent, which would make Lodsys feel sick in the stomach (if trolls have stomachs?)
(Remember IANAL and IV got paid for the Apple license, not Lodsys, but who got paid makes no difference)
*everyone* is trying to copy the iPhone these days
Hey! Be reasonable... how can they have time to do work when they have so many conferences to attend?
Much of the point of ChromeOS is that applications will have offline functionality.
The HTML5 technologies that ChromeOS will use for offline functionality are really designed to synchronise with the original server. So when Google Docs or your network goes down, you will be able to keep working on your document. But if you want to take your document somewhere else — say take a copy home as a file on a USB stick — you can't. Exporting documents is done in the cloud, not by the browser, so your document is stuck on your machine. You just have to wait until Google Docs works again so it can sync back up and then export it.
That is almost exactly the same as the PS3 outage. The PS3 console and games continue to work as normal offline, but you can't play online and you can't switch to a competing provider of online games. In a major outage of Google Docs, your ChromeOS would continue to work as normal offline, but you wouldn't be able to take the document anywhere or give it to someone else — and you wouldn't be able to switch to a competing provider like Office Live — because your data is stuck in the Google cloud. One day Google may fix this, but at the moment you would be stuck.
The problem here is being reliant on one company. On a desktop computer with a full operating system you've got myriad alternatives and competing solutions for any problem. On the PS3 and ChromeOS you've got a very simple-to-use system that's normally all you need; but if it fails then you're stuck with no alternative.
How does one pronounce 'pwn' in French?