Umm, no - Apple had nothing to do with the felony that was committed. The guy who sold it could have left it at the bar - logically that would be teh first place the person who lost it would start looking for it. It's not like he went out of his way to find the owner, and I wonder what he was originally planning to do with the phone before he discovered he had something he could sell at a higher value.
I can't feel sorry for Gizmodo either - from everything they did you can see they knew rather well that it was illegal what they were doing. Apple didn't need to do anything, Gizmodo dug their own hole hoping they could get away with it by waving the "I'm a journalist" flag, and they didn't stop digging when they hit gutter level either - there was no need to identify the guy who lost the phone other than for generating more hits.
In general it's created more noise than it was worth. Apple updates hardware. So what?
.. I must admit to a grudging respect for Powerpoint in one aspect: I worked once in a setup where they had mapped all the military procurement processes and projects on ONE slide.
I was impressed with Powerpoint for handling that slide because:
- it was size A0 (we printed this on a plotter)
- the font was Arial 10 - that's how much detail we had
I kid you not, this was in the days where scroll wheel mice were just introduced. Never was a feature more welcome, but hats off - Powerpoint coped.
As for content otherwise, well, yes. I agree with the original premise. The only useful thing of Powerpoint is the outliner..
The risk of losing too much money started to exceed the risk of loss of life..
As I said before, the initial ban was IMHO justified on the basis of the data they had, but they should have followed up immediately with work to validate those few assumptions. By not doing that they left the door open for airlines to push, because there wasn't a viable argument to say no otherwise after the airlines managed to send a couple of empty planes through the clouds unharmed.
1 - At the time of the eruption, there was no other data available than from planes that had flown through dense clouds, and the results weren't very positive. From the perspective of available information, the shutdown was justified - imagine the outrage when they hadn't done that and a plane had downed.
2 - Where they did make a mistake was not immediately collecting data in whatever way possible. Adjusted planes, weather balloons - whatever. That should have allowed for adjusting the strategy as soon as possible. Instead, it took days - this is where the possible compensation story could start.
3 - I heard some budget airlines screech about having to repay passengers their hotel costs. Having been on the receiving end of the "care" such companies in general extend to passengers when they get their schedule wrong I'd say "tough luck". If you didn't insure yourself for that risk it's your own fault - those are the rules of the game. I know some find it totally acceptable to leave people alone in an airport at night (with children) without spending even a minute time to help them find local resources, so tough luck.
My best wishes to everyone who was caught out - I hope you eventually got home safely.
Ah, I see where you're going - the time gap between purchase and firmware update makes it different events. In that case I don't know if there actually IS a relevant law..
You gave cash and got a device in return. As long as Sony puts up an option that states "accept Y/N" you will be deemed to have accepted the deal. However, it's not as easy as it sounds for Sony, because there are IMHO two problems there:
1 - (at least in the UK), AFAIK you cannot override the trade description act. So you can't sell a device based on feature x, y and z and then later nuke feature z, unless that is made explicit at the time of purchase, even though someone accepts this POST purchase. This is the current problem - if anyone is pissed off enough to take Sony to court for this I'm not sure who would win, and it's still possible that Trading Standards acts itself as they are investigating this.
2 - opting out of acceptance MUST mean you can bring the device at no loss, because this is a contract post purchase. If not they can forget the acceptance as it is coerced and thus legally invalid. It's a bit like shrink wrap licensing.
IANAL of course, and I've already solved this problem for myself - there will not be any future devices from Sony bought by me, friends or companies I have control over. I pay for something that I expect to remain that way. Otherwise it actually opens you up to blackmail - if Sony changes its mind and only provides you a feature for extra monthly payments when they run a little bit short you'd have no answer either.
No way. Based on the average amount we spent last year that's well over $100k of sales lost, permanently. This joke could cost them millions - and should.
For the rest, yup, good summary. The main issue is that we're dealing with something that never before had such an impact, so it's time to do the research that wasn't done with earlier eruptions: just how dangerous is it? What I did *not* find acceptable was airlines claiming it was "all safe" because they managed to get a few planes fly unharmed.
Without some science to measure the variables involved this amounts to stating that it's OK to cross the road blindfolded because two people have managed to survive it before, without any data on time of day, day of the week and whether cars swerved to get out of their way..
Anyway, let's see what the second eruption looks like..
I'm wondering how this affects the court cases that have been, because judgement of the relevant offences was pretty much driven by those numbers. I cannot imagine it wasn't patently obvious that the data was false, but I notice in these various re-calculations a total absence of such activity from the RIAA/MPAA side - logically, because they got those numbers accepted as fact.
You could call this lying in court, no? Wouldn't it be funny if all the RIAA convictions were decleraed a mistrail and they had to pay back all the court cases, and those offside settlements they blackmailed out of people?
I don't have a problem with them going after those who pirate in volume, because that's clearly for profit, but the odd sharing? That's killing your customer base - and justice.
No, Slackware. That's why I keep the 3.5" FDD in my system:-)
Actually, that IS how I got my first ever version of Linux - Slackware on 14 floppies and the message "I'll answer questions but only if they're intelligent ones, have fun". That's how I got into Unix sideways, after that I also used SunOS, Solaris, FreeBSD, HP-UX and AIX (as far as I recall, may have been others). I think I've used a fair number of Linux variants, but I got lazy and stuck with (Open)SuSE - I lack the patience/time to hack text files and I need a few services up and running (I could use webmin, I guess)
I'm a bit worried about all those people slagging OSX, I plan to fully ditch Windows (including client work, just have a slice on the Mac) but I need to investigate how to ensure I boost the OSX command line capability without changing too much. But we'll see, have to buy the machine first:-)
Sony can sell what it wants, but it cannot override national laws, even with contract small print.
I was informed in the UK that I'm be entitled to a partial refund because the product no longer reflect the conditions and specifications as sold (i.e. the feature set that made me buy it). All it takes is enough people to complain they don't get a refund to land them with a formal investigation. Actually, AFAIK that might have already started, and right it is too.
What Sony has done here is sold you a full spec car, and then changed the alloys for steel rims without tires. It still works, it's still a car but it's not what you ordered. I find this unacceptable by any metric you care to name, so I'm quite happy to go all the way.
This has also fatally damaged my trust in Sony, there is simply no way I will buy any more equipment from them.
Maybe a weird question, but have you tried keeping a DC powered bulb or LED in your line of sight? This idea was triggered by something I once had to do years ago in analogue audio to keep a signal clean (I honestly have no idea what it was - this is from very long ago).
The idea is to enable you to still pick up that other information, but dominate the "signal" (or image, in your case) by data that is acceptable. With HiBri LEDs you can pretty much blind yourself, so maybe there's a point between black and "blinded" where you pick up enough "regular" environment data to at least allow you to move around, but get so much LED light with it that it keeps your condition at bay.
That's QED then - I had the same "claim a refund" response from UK Trading Standards. Time to upgrade, I think, always nice to get some money back..:-)
It's indeed a place on my list of "places to go", however..
And a delicious meal at the end of it.... my overactive imagination keeps whispering "pollonium" at me after reading this. I'll go and lie down a bit:-)
It would be whining if I threatened without doing anything. It's the reverse, I already acted before I posted. Secondly, no thanks, I prefer to pay tax only where I live, and my passport is a lot more popular than the US one right now. Thirdly, you indirectly imply you would be perfectly happy with a supplier taking away functions of a device after you bought it? Features that would have been part of your purchasing decision? Well, good for you. I have a couple of special offers for you, just sign here..
I can't quite understand Sony here - that's just so stupid and risky that I had to check if the date wasn't April 1st. Oh well, let's see. I'm actually fairly relaxed about this, it's more a matter of principle. I know that Trading Standards in the UK is already investigating this, and advises people to write to Sony for a partial refund.
Sony has put itself in harms way whatever they do. You see, I bought a device with certain features, described in the manual and in the product description itself. The moment they bring out this update they are in effect telling me they are taking away either my ability to read future Bluray disks (if I don't install the update), or my option to install an alternative OS (if I do).
If this was an ordinary case of "accept and install" you would be right - I'd be the idiot. However, because they choose to compel this acceptance by remarking that you could suffer in the future if you don't they change the acceptance from voluntary to forced - in many countries a legal route to annul your agreement, which makes the result of that downgrade a legal mess.
Just to illustrate, as far as I know it's already with UK Trading Standards to be investigated. At the moment their consumer helpline (Consumer Direct) advises to write to Sony UK and claim a refund. I personally think there's no chance Sony will do so, but the devil is in volume: if Trading Standards gets sufficient complaints they will act.
We'll see. I'm not worried about it, it's more the principle that pisses me off. I've been moderately OK with Sony so far, and even their rootkit wasn't a problem because I never installed it. This, however, does something I dislike: trying to take away something I have actually paid for. First off, they can have the fight, just for entertainment's sake, secondly, this is a bit much - I am really not going to buy any further kit from them if I can't trust it to keep the features it originally came with.
I posted an update: in the UK there are two problems looming for them so I guess you should have plenty of laws in the US to make their life difficult. Whoever came up with this idea should be given the "idiot of the year" award because this will cost Sony dearly.
In the UK, the moment the update (well, downgrade really) is available product is no longer as described (you either no longer have a full functional Bluray player if they upgrade the protection, or you lose the Alternative OS facility). That creates a problem for them. However, because you have to agree to thus upgrade under duress (the device will no longer play future Bluray titles) you "agreement" to the installation may not be legally valid. The consequence there is that you have been forced to let them hack your console, which is in the UK a violation of the Computer Misuse Act. Hello entertainment: that's actually a crime...
I'm not sure why they insist on blasting away at both feet, but the collateral damage is that I have already decided to to buy a single piece of Sony kit ever again. I bought it for the quality (and thus paid typically more than the average price for the kit), but I can't have someone doing a virtual walk into my living room and switch of parts of the kit I paid for. Not in your life.
So, let the fun & games begin (pardon the pun) - this may hurt them even more than their root kit. I dont think they learn, though, if that rootkit story didn't bring some insight then nothing will.
I just talked to some people at Trading Standards, and Sony is digging a hole if they do this.
People bought the console with a listed and documented set of features. If Sony gives you a choice between upgrading and thus lose the "Alternative OS" feature or not upgrading and impairing access to future Bluray titles it always amounts to a "Reduction of the features as present and described at the time of purchase", for which you are entiteld to compensation. If you're in the UK, your next step is to notify Sony that you want to be compensated either way, and do this by recorded snail mail so you have an audit trail. Sony is likely to tell the first few to get stuffed, which is fine, because the Office of Trading Standards has now been briefed (guilty, grin), and they will welcome your complaint to take the matter further.
The second issue is that you are in principle forced to install malware under duress. If you don't, future Bluray titles will become unavailable according to Sony - thank you for the blackmail attempt. It means that any statement I agree to during the upgrade is invalidated as it takes place under duress, making the non-benign changes to the console illegal. In the UK this amounts to a violation of the Computer Misuse Act, and with enough people complaining, that too will become actionable.
So, Sony, thank you very much. You have finally ensured there will not be a single Sony made device ever pass my doorstep, because I cannot take the chance that I pay for a device (which is already priced above average) in which features may later disappear. I hack nor pirate, yet am treated as a criminal and punished with functionality which will disappear. I haven't got round to use that feature, but I am offended you even try. I hope people in the UK will follow up as I have (maybe someone can post on how to take the Computer Misuse Act further?).
Summary: - Trade Description Act violation - Computer Misuse Act violation - Several grand worth of purchases killed off without any possibility of recovery
And that's just me. Anyone else with a creative streak?
Dear Sony, if an update to my machine will disable the "install other OS" feature in my PS/3 I will guarantee you that I will have it reported to every possible authority that I can think off and ensure it is followed up.
For a start, IT IS A DOCUMENTED FACILITY. It's on the manual, and I will make pictures of "before" and "after". This means it's something I paid for. Removing it without my permission is (a) theft and (b) a violation of trade description - you can't take something away which has influenced my decision to buy without expecting this to have repercussions. It would be equivalent to selling me a full stereo set and take away the speakers after I bought it so I'd have to spend extra money to buy those.
Secondly, YOU CANNOT FORCE MY COMPLIANCE. If you make acceptance of a trade description violation dependent on, well, a trade description violation (the device should be capable of Bluray playback even with the new code you plan to implement) you will lose double. The sort of coercion is AFAIK illegal in most countries.
So, here's your one and only warning: if I either find the facility gone, or find me unable to play a Bluray disc you WILL be facing the music, if you pardon the pun.
Oh, FYI, I don't use the feature, this is a matter of principle. It would be rather nice if Sony for once thought about the *customer* before doing things. I accept that is a wholly novel and far too innovative concept for Sony, but believe me, the pain is worth it. That's what made the Nintendo Wii such a hit. Learn from it.
Climate Science research leads to severe degeneration of higher brain functions
That is, of course, assuming higher brain functions were available in the first place at the start of the reseach. As far as I can tell, that too is purely hypothetical.
Never having to worry about my information being stolen, traded and analysed.
As for the "stolen" part, Facebook's IP clause (all your IP is yours, but we have unlimited right to copy, use and adapt) is actually identical to Google, the difference being that Google also performs facial recognition on all the images you store (picasa tagging, now outsourced to a locally installed copy of the program near you). Even Facebook doesn't go that far.
They're solving the wrong problem. It's a good way to reduce the trojan impact on banking, but authentication and authorisation are not adequately covered so you'd still need extra gear, and this solution is not very portable.
There are 5 questions to answer for Internet banking, and with the right technology the OS can become almost immaterial.
But let's look at the positive side. At least someone is getting beyond "it's your problem and our gadget covers *our* risk adequately". That is worth encouraging.
Google: We're leaving! Honestly, if you don't do as we want we will leave! We'll up sticks, decamp, depart, box it (etc).
China: No dice. Let us hold open the door for you, need any help with carrying your boxes?
Google: Ah, umm. We'll just do something you don't like from a safe distance!
China: Sigh. Whatever. Anything interesting on TV?
The problem with creating a huge upheaval about something that is in principle the equivalent of a small child stomping its feet is that you look like a complete d*ck if it (rather predictably) doesn't fly. Google doesn't "really" pull out, it "sort of" provides uncensored content and in generally it exposes its BS for what it was for anyone with half a working braincell.
Yup, China censors stuff (with the use of US equipment, AFAIK), they knew that when they went in. China "spies" - fine, even we consider that proven, how does that in any way, shape or form connect with censorship? Further, is Google China really so incompetent technically that it needs NSA "help" (yeah, right)?
If anything has switched me off from Google's management, this has. The company does interesting things but this was stupid edge to edge, and the humanitarian myth was burned the day they walked into the country. Dumb.
Obviously my eyes work differently. Especially in the garden scenes you can actually SEE the layers, and there is one specific scene where the background blurs, which is a depth technique used in 2D which totally does not work in 3D.
With Avatar, the worlds were actually defined as full bodied 3D objects, which ensured rendering was always complete. It must have been one hell to render, but the depth works there. In Alice, well, it was a mess.
However, if you saw it differently I'm happy for you - you must have enjoyed the movie more that way. Me, I'm going to see Avatar again instead:-).
Slashdot Mirror
Umm, no - Apple had nothing to do with the felony that was committed. The guy who sold it could have left it at the bar - logically that would be teh first place the person who lost it would start looking for it. It's not like he went out of his way to find the owner, and I wonder what he was originally planning to do with the phone before he discovered he had something he could sell at a higher value.
I can't feel sorry for Gizmodo either - from everything they did you can see they knew rather well that it was illegal what they were doing. Apple didn't need to do anything, Gizmodo dug their own hole hoping they could get away with it by waving the "I'm a journalist" flag, and they didn't stop digging when they hit gutter level either - there was no need to identify the guy who lost the phone other than for generating more hits.
In general it's created more noise than it was worth. Apple updates hardware. So what?
.. I must admit to a grudging respect for Powerpoint in one aspect: I worked once in a setup where they had mapped all the military procurement processes and projects on ONE slide.
I was impressed with Powerpoint for handling that slide because:
- it was size A0 (we printed this on a plotter)
- the font was Arial 10 - that's how much detail we had
I kid you not, this was in the days where scroll wheel mice were just introduced. Never was a feature more welcome, but hats off - Powerpoint coped.
As for content otherwise, well, yes. I agree with the original premise. The only useful thing of Powerpoint is the outliner..
The risk of losing too much money started to exceed the risk of loss of life..
As I said before, the initial ban was IMHO justified on the basis of the data they had, but they should have followed up immediately with work to validate those few assumptions. By not doing that they left the door open for airlines to push, because there wasn't a viable argument to say no otherwise after the airlines managed to send a couple of empty planes through the clouds unharmed.
1 - At the time of the eruption, there was no other data available than from planes that had flown through dense clouds, and the results weren't very positive. From the perspective of available information, the shutdown was justified - imagine the outrage when they hadn't done that and a plane had downed.
2 - Where they did make a mistake was not immediately collecting data in whatever way possible. Adjusted planes, weather balloons - whatever. That should have allowed for adjusting the strategy as soon as possible. Instead, it took days - this is where the possible compensation story could start.
3 - I heard some budget airlines screech about having to repay passengers their hotel costs. Having been on the receiving end of the "care" such companies in general extend to passengers when they get their schedule wrong I'd say "tough luck". If you didn't insure yourself for that risk it's your own fault - those are the rules of the game. I know some find it totally acceptable to leave people alone in an airport at night (with children) without spending even a minute time to help them find local resources, so tough luck.
My best wishes to everyone who was caught out - I hope you eventually got home safely.
Ah, I see where you're going - the time gap between purchase and firmware update makes it different events. In that case I don't know if there actually IS a relevant law..
You gave cash and got a device in return. As long as Sony puts up an option that states "accept Y/N" you will be deemed to have accepted the deal. However, it's not as easy as it sounds for Sony, because there are IMHO two problems there:
1 - (at least in the UK), AFAIK you cannot override the trade description act. So you can't sell a device based on feature x, y and z and then later nuke feature z, unless that is made explicit at the time of purchase, even though someone accepts this POST purchase. This is the current problem - if anyone is pissed off enough to take Sony to court for this I'm not sure who would win, and it's still possible that Trading Standards acts itself as they are investigating this.
2 - opting out of acceptance MUST mean you can bring the device at no loss, because this is a contract post purchase. If not they can forget the acceptance as it is coerced and thus legally invalid. It's a bit like shrink wrap licensing.
IANAL of course, and I've already solved this problem for myself - there will not be any future devices from Sony bought by me, friends or companies I have control over. I pay for something that I expect to remain that way. Otherwise it actually opens you up to blackmail - if Sony changes its mind and only provides you a feature for extra monthly payments when they run a little bit short you'd have no answer either.
No way. Based on the average amount we spent last year that's well over $100k of sales lost, permanently. This joke could cost them millions - and should.
Ash is dry and doesn't show up on radar, so new sensors are needed so pilots can discover it
Actually, that problem is solved by the Swiss, they do it with lasers.
For the rest, yup, good summary. The main issue is that we're dealing with something that never before had such an impact, so it's time to do the research that wasn't done with earlier eruptions: just how dangerous is it? What I did *not* find acceptable was airlines claiming it was "all safe" because they managed to get a few planes fly unharmed.
Without some science to measure the variables involved this amounts to stating that it's OK to cross the road blindfolded because two people have managed to survive it before, without any data on time of day, day of the week and whether cars swerved to get out of their way..
Anyway, let's see what the second eruption looks like..
Thanks for the summary.
I'm wondering how this affects the court cases that have been, because judgement of the relevant offences was pretty much driven by those numbers. I cannot imagine it wasn't patently obvious that the data was false, but I notice in these various re-calculations a total absence of such activity from the RIAA/MPAA side - logically, because they got those numbers accepted as fact.
You could call this lying in court, no? Wouldn't it be funny if all the RIAA convictions were decleraed a mistrail and they had to pay back all the court cases, and those offside settlements they blackmailed out of people?
I don't have a problem with them going after those who pirate in volume, because that's clearly for profit, but the odd sharing? That's killing your customer base - and justice.
No, Slackware. That's why I keep the 3.5" FDD in my system :-)
Actually, that IS how I got my first ever version of Linux - Slackware on 14 floppies and the message "I'll answer questions but only if they're intelligent ones, have fun". That's how I got into Unix sideways, after that I also used SunOS, Solaris, FreeBSD, HP-UX and AIX (as far as I recall, may have been others). I think I've used a fair number of Linux variants, but I got lazy and stuck with (Open)SuSE - I lack the patience/time to hack text files and I need a few services up and running (I could use webmin, I guess)
I'm a bit worried about all those people slagging OSX, I plan to fully ditch Windows (including client work, just have a slice on the Mac) but I need to investigate how to ensure I boost the OSX command line capability without changing too much. But we'll see, have to buy the machine first :-)
Sony can sell what it wants, but it cannot override national laws, even with contract small print.
I was informed in the UK that I'm be entitled to a partial refund because the product no longer reflect the conditions and specifications as sold (i.e. the feature set that made me buy it). All it takes is enough people to complain they don't get a refund to land them with a formal investigation. Actually, AFAIK that might have already started, and right it is too.
What Sony has done here is sold you a full spec car, and then changed the alloys for steel rims without tires. It still works, it's still a car but it's not what you ordered. I find this unacceptable by any metric you care to name, so I'm quite happy to go all the way.
This has also fatally damaged my trust in Sony, there is simply no way I will buy any more equipment from them.
.. did she scan?
Maybe a weird question, but have you tried keeping a DC powered bulb or LED in your line of sight? This idea was triggered by something I once had to do years ago in analogue audio to keep a signal clean (I honestly have no idea what it was - this is from very long ago).
The idea is to enable you to still pick up that other information, but dominate the "signal" (or image, in your case) by data that is acceptable. With HiBri LEDs you can pretty much blind yourself, so maybe there's a point between black and "blinded" where you pick up enough "regular" environment data to at least allow you to move around, but get so much LED light with it that it keeps your condition at bay.
I hope you'll find a solution.
That's QED then - I had the same "claim a refund" response from UK Trading Standards. Time to upgrade, I think, always nice to get some money back.. :-)
It's indeed a place on my list of "places to go", however..
And a delicious meal at the end of it.. .. my overactive imagination keeps whispering "pollonium" at me after reading this. I'll go and lie down a bit :-)
:-). Wrong 3 times.
It would be whining if I threatened without doing anything. It's the reverse, I already acted before I posted.
Secondly, no thanks, I prefer to pay tax only where I live, and my passport is a lot more popular than the US one right now.
Thirdly, you indirectly imply you would be perfectly happy with a supplier taking away functions of a device after you bought it? Features that would have been part of your purchasing decision? Well, good for you. I have a couple of special offers for you, just sign here..
I can't quite understand Sony here - that's just so stupid and risky that I had to check if the date wasn't April 1st. Oh well, let's see. I'm actually fairly relaxed about this, it's more a matter of principle. I know that Trading Standards in the UK is already investigating this, and advises people to write to Sony for a partial refund.
(despite that, I'm not English either)
Maybe if you'd bothered to read it properly..
Sony has put itself in harms way whatever they do. You see, I bought a device with certain features, described in the manual and in the product description itself. The moment they bring out this update they are in effect telling me they are taking away either my ability to read future Bluray disks (if I don't install the update), or my option to install an alternative OS (if I do).
If this was an ordinary case of "accept and install" you would be right - I'd be the idiot. However, because they choose to compel this acceptance by remarking that you could suffer in the future if you don't they change the acceptance from voluntary to forced - in many countries a legal route to annul your agreement, which makes the result of that downgrade a legal mess.
Just to illustrate, as far as I know it's already with UK Trading Standards to be investigated. At the moment their consumer helpline (Consumer Direct) advises to write to Sony UK and claim a refund. I personally think there's no chance Sony will do so, but the devil is in volume: if Trading Standards gets sufficient complaints they will act.
We'll see. I'm not worried about it, it's more the principle that pisses me off. I've been moderately OK with Sony so far, and even their rootkit wasn't a problem because I never installed it. This, however, does something I dislike: trying to take away something I have actually paid for. First off, they can have the fight, just for entertainment's sake, secondly, this is a bit much - I am really not going to buy any further kit from them if I can't trust it to keep the features it originally came with.
I posted an update: in the UK there are two problems looming for them so I guess you should have plenty of laws in the US to make their life difficult. Whoever came up with this idea should be given the "idiot of the year" award because this will cost Sony dearly.
In the UK, the moment the update (well, downgrade really) is available product is no longer as described (you either no longer have a full functional Bluray player if they upgrade the protection, or you lose the Alternative OS facility). That creates a problem for them. However, because you have to agree to thus upgrade under duress (the device will no longer play future Bluray titles) you "agreement" to the installation may not be legally valid. The consequence there is that you have been forced to let them hack your console, which is in the UK a violation of the Computer Misuse Act. Hello entertainment: that's actually a crime...
I'm not sure why they insist on blasting away at both feet, but the collateral damage is that I have already decided to to buy a single piece of Sony kit ever again. I bought it for the quality (and thus paid typically more than the average price for the kit), but I can't have someone doing a virtual walk into my living room and switch of parts of the kit I paid for. Not in your life.
So, let the fun & games begin (pardon the pun) - this may hurt them even more than their root kit. I dont think they learn, though, if that rootkit story didn't bring some insight then nothing will.
Fools.
I just talked to some people at Trading Standards, and Sony is digging a hole if they do this.
People bought the console with a listed and documented set of features. If Sony gives you a choice between upgrading and thus lose the "Alternative OS" feature or not upgrading and impairing access to future Bluray titles it always amounts to a "Reduction of the features as present and described at the time of purchase", for which you are entiteld to compensation. If you're in the UK, your next step is to notify Sony that you want to be compensated either way, and do this by recorded snail mail so you have an audit trail. Sony is likely to tell the first few to get stuffed, which is fine, because the Office of Trading Standards has now been briefed (guilty, grin), and they will welcome your complaint to take the matter further.
The second issue is that you are in principle forced to install malware under duress. If you don't, future Bluray titles will become unavailable according to Sony - thank you for the blackmail attempt. It means that any statement I agree to during the upgrade is invalidated as it takes place under duress, making the non-benign changes to the console illegal. In the UK this amounts to a violation of the Computer Misuse Act, and with enough people complaining, that too will become actionable.
So, Sony, thank you very much. You have finally ensured there will not be a single Sony made device ever pass my doorstep, because I cannot take the chance that I pay for a device (which is already priced above average) in which features may later disappear. I hack nor pirate, yet am treated as a criminal and punished with functionality which will disappear. I haven't got round to use that feature, but I am offended you even try. I hope people in the UK will follow up as I have (maybe someone can post on how to take the Computer Misuse Act further?).
Summary:
- Trade Description Act violation
- Computer Misuse Act violation
- Several grand worth of purchases killed off without any possibility of recovery
And that's just me. Anyone else with a creative streak?
Dear Sony, if an update to my machine will disable the "install other OS" feature in my PS/3 I will guarantee you that I will have it reported to every possible authority that I can think off and ensure it is followed up.
For a start, IT IS A DOCUMENTED FACILITY. It's on the manual, and I will make pictures of "before" and "after". This means it's something I paid for. Removing it without my permission is (a) theft and (b) a violation of trade description - you can't take something away which has influenced my decision to buy without expecting this to have repercussions. It would be equivalent to selling me a full stereo set and take away the speakers after I bought it so I'd have to spend extra money to buy those.
Secondly, YOU CANNOT FORCE MY COMPLIANCE. If you make acceptance of a trade description violation dependent on, well, a trade description violation (the device should be capable of Bluray playback even with the new code you plan to implement) you will lose double. The sort of coercion is AFAIK illegal in most countries.
So, here's your one and only warning: if I either find the facility gone, or find me unable to play a Bluray disc you WILL be facing the music, if you pardon the pun.
Oh, FYI, I don't use the feature, this is a matter of principle. It would be rather nice if Sony for once thought about the *customer* before doing things. I accept that is a wholly novel and far too innovative concept for Sony, but believe me, the pain is worth it. That's what made the Nintendo Wii such a hit. Learn from it.
Climate Science research leads to severe degeneration of higher brain functions
That is, of course, assuming higher brain functions were available in the first place at the start of the reseach. As far as I can tell, that too is purely hypothetical.
Never having to worry about my information being stolen, traded and analysed.
As for the "stolen" part, Facebook's IP clause (all your IP is yours, but we have unlimited right to copy, use and adapt) is actually identical to Google, the difference being that Google also performs facial recognition on all the images you store (picasa tagging, now outsourced to a locally installed copy of the program near you). Even Facebook doesn't go that far.
They're solving the wrong problem. It's a good way to reduce the trojan impact on banking, but authentication and authorisation are not adequately covered so you'd still need extra gear, and this solution is not very portable.
There are 5 questions to answer for Internet banking, and with the right technology the OS can become almost immaterial.
But let's look at the positive side. At least someone is getting beyond "it's your problem and our gadget covers *our* risk adequately". That is worth encouraging.
.. to never ever using Facebook. Hurray! :-)
Google: We're leaving! Honestly, if you don't do as we want we will leave! We'll up sticks, decamp, depart, box it (etc).
China: No dice. Let us hold open the door for you, need any help with carrying your boxes?
Google: Ah, umm. We'll just do something you don't like from a safe distance!
China: Sigh. Whatever. Anything interesting on TV?
The problem with creating a huge upheaval about something that is in principle the equivalent of a small child stomping its feet is that you look like a complete d*ck if it (rather predictably) doesn't fly. Google doesn't "really" pull out, it "sort of" provides uncensored content and in generally it exposes its BS for what it was for anyone with half a working braincell.
Yup, China censors stuff (with the use of US equipment, AFAIK), they knew that when they went in. China "spies" - fine, even we consider that proven, how does that in any way, shape or form connect with censorship? Further, is Google China really so incompetent technically that it needs NSA "help" (yeah, right)?
If anything has switched me off from Google's management, this has. The company does interesting things but this was stupid edge to edge, and the humanitarian myth was burned the day they walked into the country. Dumb.
Obviously my eyes work differently. Especially in the garden scenes you can actually SEE the layers, and there is one specific scene where the background blurs, which is a depth technique used in 2D which totally does not work in 3D.
With Avatar, the worlds were actually defined as full bodied 3D objects, which ensured rendering was always complete. It must have been one hell to render, but the depth works there. In Alice, well, it was a mess.
However, if you saw it differently I'm happy for you - you must have enjoyed the movie more that way. Me, I'm going to see Avatar again instead :-).