If he was able to release a movie with better quality and user experience than the original, would the movie companies owe him money? Removing DRM should be considered doing a public service.
Because they didn't remove the content from all users' libraries, they made a mistake. I mean, Christ, even the headline to the quoted article is "Amazon accidentally removes Disney Christmas special from owners' accounts."
And in the article Amazon responded to the issue explaining it was a mistake and would be fixed:
Amazon blamed the removal on "a temporary issue with some of our catalog data" which it says has been fixed, adding that "customers should never lose access to their Amazon Instant Video purchases."
It's a data error, not a conspiracy. Jeez. This is such a non-issue blown out of proportion by the article author and misrepresented by the submitter. As usual...
The only mistake they made was getting caught. The "temporary issue with some of our catalog data" sounds like a bullshit coverup story since the first time they informed the user that Disney decided to take the movie away.
The antibacterial in most hand sanitizers is simply alcohol. Microbes cannot build up a resistance to the 50% or better alcohol content. However it isn't effective against all microbes, no bacteria can survive it.
But said the opinions of her former employer would not guide her work. Maybe she will use her knowledge from some of the insanity she has seen to actually tackle the current situation of patents, patent-trolling and lawsuits, so that companies can concentrate on true development which benefits all their users, not just the lawyers.
I think a better solution is that once you've achieved cruising altitude that passenger can petition for a vote of all passengers to have specific annoying passengers literally thrown off the planes. No parachute, just a good heave. As annoying cell phone users are - shouting in their phones, etc. - seat kickers, loud drunks, crying babies and others deserve some sort of retribution too.
Good plan. This would prevent famously annoying people from ever getting on a plane.
Without the ability to see another person's lips it makes it more difficult to hear. When people have difficulty hearing another person they raise their voice. (yeah, it is counter-intuitive.)
People do tend to be less considerate of bystanders when making phone calls than when talking to someone who is actually in the room in my experience; you'll see someone who's having a perfectly reasonable conversation with somebody at dinner, then turn away to answer their phone and jump up an order of magnitude in loudness. I think it's the fact that one side of the conversation is private to the other people in the room; it triggers some sort of general "private talk" flag in the brain that makes you automatically and quite unconsciously begin talking as though there was nobody else there.
Not to mention the "answer a call in the middle of a conversation" rudeness.
Not all laws are in the Constitution. The law that should cover this is the ones covering "public disturbance". Your loud mouth yelling into a cellphone with a bad connection while sitting a foot away from me is going to get your cellphone broken.
Calling real quick to say, "Hey honey, they say we will be landing in 30 minutes" is a lot different than holding a full on conversation about shit I do not want to hear about at the yelling volume most people talk on the phone with.
I like you assholes trot out the "entitlement" argument. when someone asks for a common decency law. I guess your entitlement to be a rude asshole doesn't count. If people on average had common decency we would not need these laws.
There is a train line that came up with a novel idea: on part of the train you can use your cellphone, and on part of the train you can't! Gee, what a concept. Maybe we could let the airlines figure this out, rather than having Congress make laws.
Amtrack does not charge extra for "quiet cars". You can bet your ass an airplane would charge you for some peace and quiet.
Also, on a train you can get up, move around, and there is lots of room between seats. On a plane you are pressed right up against the asshole yammering on his phone right next to you.
The number of smug people continues to grow, but the degree of smugness for the small number of TVless people in 2000 was higher. It's getting too mainstream. I, for one, have felt my level of smugness about my lack of TV decline in recent years.
So you are saying that being a hipster has become too mainstream?
As is pointed out regularly on other/. threads about alternative electricity generation, it's possible to draw electricity during low-cost time periods and store the energy either directly or indirectly. So how does the cost of what's basically a large battery backup system compare with, say, a pump, a large water tank on top of the building, and a dynamo?
It might be less efficient. Each time you convert the energy you are taking some amount of loss to heat/friction. For large scale systems i was under the impression that water-gravity systems were much more efficient than batteries.
Electricity prices are higher during the work day, lower at night. The employees drive the car home and it gets charged overnight in their home on their own power bill.
Well that was the whole deal with CATV many decades ago, when it was beginning to be widely marketed they said we would pay for transmission of programming and not see advertising, or a very small amount of ads. We can plainly see how that's turned out, there's much more advertising than content on pretty much every channel except C-SPAN. I don't hate ads, but please we need to see a higher percentage of content versus ads.
Yeah, now we pay for transmission, programming AND we get to see ads on the majority of channels!
Slashdot Mirror
The Superhornet is largely a new airplane. It is only related to the original Hornet in name and shape.
Just having an officer present is coercion enough. Perhaps they think they have plausible deniability since they are calling it "optional".
What the **** does a DNA sample have to do with the percentage of drunk drivers?!?!?!?
Anybody stupid enough to give them the sample must be drunk or high.
What is Alice and Bob's secret?
Engelbart lived at a time when bureaucracy and inflexible institutions ruled...
He was alive this year. I don't think that culture changed in the last 6 months.
Perhaps if they put a sensor on the heel they would be able to detect this problem.
If he was able to release a movie with better quality and user experience than the original, would the movie companies owe him money? Removing DRM should be considered doing a public service.
Because they didn't remove the content from all users' libraries, they made a mistake. I mean, Christ, even the headline to the quoted article is "Amazon accidentally removes Disney Christmas special from owners' accounts."
And in the article Amazon responded to the issue explaining it was a mistake and would be fixed:
Amazon blamed the removal on "a temporary issue with some of our catalog data" which it says has been fixed, adding that "customers should never lose access to their Amazon Instant Video purchases."
It's a data error, not a conspiracy. Jeez. This is such a non-issue blown out of proportion by the article author and misrepresented by the submitter. As usual...
The only mistake they made was getting caught. The "temporary issue with some of our catalog data" sounds like a bullshit coverup story since the first time they informed the user that Disney decided to take the movie away.
Correct, but the GGP that did not read the article was ranting about hand sanitizers.
The antibacterial in most hand sanitizers is simply alcohol. Microbes cannot build up a resistance to the 50% or better alcohol content. However it isn't effective against all microbes, no bacteria can survive it.
Out of interest, what political groups is 60-minutes known to gain political traction with when it airs stuff like this?
Old people.
He knows when you are sleeping, he knows when you're awake.
It is quite obvious. Santa works for the NSA.
But said the opinions of her former employer would not guide her work.
Maybe she will use her knowledge from some of the insanity she has seen to actually tackle the current situation of patents, patent-trolling and lawsuits, so that companies can concentrate on true development which benefits all their users, not just the lawyers.
His response.
Yes, but my point was that the employees are paying for it, not the company.
I think a better solution is that once you've achieved cruising altitude that passenger can petition for a vote of all passengers to have specific annoying passengers literally thrown off the planes. No parachute, just a good heave. As annoying cell phone users are - shouting in their phones, etc. - seat kickers, loud drunks, crying babies and others deserve some sort of retribution too.
Good plan. This would prevent famously annoying people from ever getting on a plane.
I can't comprehend how a US Senator would consider this worthy of her/his time.
Think of how much time a Senator spends flying between DC and his state and his summer home and to the resort the company bribing him is paying for.
Without the ability to see another person's lips it makes it more difficult to hear. When people have difficulty hearing another person they raise their voice. (yeah, it is counter-intuitive.)
People do tend to be less considerate of bystanders when making phone calls than when talking to someone who is actually in the room in my experience; you'll see someone who's having a perfectly reasonable conversation with somebody at dinner, then turn away to answer their phone and jump up an order of magnitude in loudness. I think it's the fact that one side of the conversation is private to the other people in the room; it triggers some sort of general "private talk" flag in the brain that makes you automatically and quite unconsciously begin talking as though there was nobody else there.
Not to mention the "answer a call in the middle of a conversation" rudeness.
Not all laws are in the Constitution. The law that should cover this is the ones covering "public disturbance". Your loud mouth yelling into a cellphone with a bad connection while sitting a foot away from me is going to get your cellphone broken.
Calling real quick to say, "Hey honey, they say we will be landing in 30 minutes" is a lot different than holding a full on conversation about shit I do not want to hear about at the yelling volume most people talk on the phone with.
I like you assholes trot out the "entitlement" argument. when someone asks for a common decency law. I guess your entitlement to be a rude asshole doesn't count. If people on average had common decency we would not need these laws.
There is a train line that came up with a novel idea: on part of the train you can use your cellphone, and on part of the train you can't! Gee, what a concept. Maybe we could let the airlines figure this out, rather than having Congress make laws.
Amtrack does not charge extra for "quiet cars". You can bet your ass an airplane would charge you for some peace and quiet.
Also, on a train you can get up, move around, and there is lots of room between seats. On a plane you are pressed right up against the asshole yammering on his phone right next to you.
The number of smug people continues to grow, but the degree of smugness for the small number of TVless people in 2000 was higher. It's getting too mainstream. I, for one, have felt my level of smugness about my lack of TV decline in recent years.
So you are saying that being a hipster has become too mainstream?
As is pointed out regularly on other /. threads about alternative electricity generation, it's possible to draw electricity during low-cost time periods and store the energy either directly or indirectly. So how does the cost of what's basically a large battery backup system compare with, say, a pump, a large water tank on top of the building, and a dynamo?
It might be less efficient. Each time you convert the energy you are taking some amount of loss to heat/friction. For large scale systems i was under the impression that water-gravity systems were much more efficient than batteries.
Electricity prices are higher during the work day, lower at night. The employees drive the car home and it gets charged overnight in their home on their own power bill.
Because he CAN tell us he does not have a television. Over and over.
Well that was the whole deal with CATV many decades ago, when it was beginning to be widely marketed they said we would pay for transmission of programming and not see advertising, or a very small amount of ads. We can plainly see how that's turned out, there's much more advertising than content on pretty much every channel except C-SPAN. I don't hate ads, but please we need to see a higher percentage of content versus ads.
Yeah, now we pay for transmission, programming AND we get to see ads on the majority of channels!