An Akamai employee is using an analog dead drop? Surely he could have set up some sort of digital delivery served up by his employer, no?
It made him feel more like a secret agent, so they humored him. His handlers did have to tell him not to wear the mask and cape, though. It was creeping out the locals.
To be a cyborg you have to have a device implanted in your body that aids in the body's function; a pacemaker, an artificial hip or knee, a cochlear implant, an accomodating IOL, etc. Implanting a chip that does nothing is just stupid.
I'm not sure an artificial hip/knee would make you a cyborg -- otherwise, a pegleg would also make you a cyborg.
I think the hip/knee seem too passive to be cybrenetic -- there's no sensors or anything beyond purely "mechanical" things; I think you'd need some more sensors or "active" technology. But, hey, I could be massively wrong -- even reading the wikipedia article I'm not sure I really get it.
But, hey, my mom has an artificial knee, and is slated to get another one soon. If my mom is a cyborg, that would be friggin' awesome!!
Wait, why the hell are people registering domains in Libya to shorten URLs?
They don't exactly have a history as a nice place and they have been suspected in supporting terrorism.
WTF is Twitter doing running stuff through a domain registered in friggin' Libya?? Why not just run a couple through Iran or Myanmar while we're at it?
Nowadays, "illegal" doesn't mean you can't do it -- it's just not admissable in court.
You can get your last dollar they still do it, but then need to come up with a pretense for anything involving the courts.
Remember, they can now slap a GPS device onto your car with absolutely no court oversight. Just imagine all of the illegal things they do and cover with sealed court proceedings.
You probably bought it from who had a warehouse full of them and didn't know how to get rid of them in that piss poor market.
Actually, I bought it from Staples. Literally by the next day they were no longer offering the same monitor for sale for any where near what I bought it.
I think someone made a mistake because it was on sale on the web, but even $20 cheaper in the store. I still routinely look at monitors with lower specs and a higher price and smile.
I just wish I'd had the cash to buy two of them -- dual 23" widescreen monitors would be sweet. =)
It takes a special sort of perverted mind for that sentence to make any sort of sense.
My apologies.:-P
Nowadays, it is so damned hard to keep track of which things the *AAs will sue over, and which they wouldn't.
Limewire got sued, Torrent Freak got shut down, I'm not even sure what Napster is anymore or if it exists. ISPs now have to police copyright on behalf of content owners. I just don't know any more.
So we have a situation that regardless of what reality actually is, the perception of reality employed by the RIAA is now the de-facto legal standard at tech companies.
Sadly, if they muddy the waters so that even those of us in the tech industry don't even know the legal status of some of these things... then it's awfully hard to know what is legal, what is illegal, and what is in a gray area.
I'm not even saying that there are legal issues with Torrents. I'm just saying that since I no longer know WTF is going on, I can see why a company like Apple might refuse an app for the iPhone which allows you to manage these things.
Things are quite unclear nowadays, and the lawyers are aggressively trying to make sure everything is illegal unless their clients are getting paid.
I do see this happening in monitors. Sometimes, what you end up is a computer monitor optimized for movies, but not computer stuff as the pixels are actually wider to fit the screen, instead of being nice square pixels where a circle in the native resolution is actually round. So, it's like "fake" widescreen which is good if you're gonna watch movies but not edit text.
Of course, I'm still trying to figure out why a year after I bought my Acer 23" flatscreen with 1920x1080, I can't even buy the equivalent screen without spending markedly more than I paid for it. Methinks I got a sale that they never intended to happen -- 'cause the specs on my monitor are still hard to find again.
By your post, it seems all bittorrent clients are mired in legal battles.
No, I postulated a possible reason why Apple might not want to have anything to do with that kind of filesharing. Nothing more, nothing less. Deal with it.
Stop being apple's bitch.
Awww, you wanna be my bitch? How cute. Maybe we could cuddle or something after dinner and you could give me backrubs?
Please, piss off and have a nice day. Do try to be less of an ass if you can.
so true. it's not like the whole ipod business was built on piracy or anything. i mean ask anyone with a few thousand tracks on their players.
Ummm... I've got something like 6,000 tracks in my iTunes library. Not a single one was pirated -- they're all rips from CDs that I own. I've bought several hundred CDs over the last few years. I know several people with thousands of tracks ripped from CDs in their collection.
iTunes has sold a couple of billion tracks as I recall. The iPod business was built on ease of use, and the ability to buy the music you want and get it in a convenient format. I think the actual software had something to do with it, since it is pretty easy to use.
Apple has never encouraged people to share music, and they've never made it difficult to work with your own CDs or buy new tracks.
They sure as hell didn't build their iPod business on piracy. Now, since they've always allowed you to add DRM free MP3s to your collection, some people may have pirated -- but, Apple never steered them in that direction. It certainly was never part of their business strategy or something they encouraged.
Hell, my cable company does more to suggest that I can be downloading movies and music than Apple does.
Apple keeps an iron grip over apps. It's weird that they would approve something like Bittorrent at all!
From TFA...
Kepner theorized that the app was able to sneak in past Apple’s censors because he avoided using the word “torrent.” Well played, Sir Kepner. Well played.
So, the way he described it, they didn't quite realize what it was actually doing. The reasoning from Apple was:
this category of applications is often used for the purpose of infringing third party rights. We have chosen to not publish this type of application to the App Store.
I can see why they don't want to get embroiled in any of the legal stuff associated with Torrents. While they do have non-infringing uses, I can see a company like Apple just deciding they don't want to risk the legal actions which could result.
The *AAs aren't above suing absolutely everyone who had anything to do with distributing anything which can be/is used to do filesharing. Apple doesn't want to jeopardize their iTunes contracts by appearing to support that.
Because (non-geek) users care mostly about being able to use the thing.
And even some of us geeks don't want to tinker with every device we own all of the time.
For business travel which includes lots of hours in airports, airplanes, and hotel rooms... an iPad is a friggin' awesome tool.
I just did a business trip, which wasn't even a factor in buying my iPad. When you've got a bunch of hours of travel time, the iPad is a really great addition. It also meant I could check my mail from airports and other places along the way without needing to haul out my laptop. And, I could watch movies on the plane, or play games, or generally fill in some of the many hours that business travel leaves me to fill. I even used it to find restaurants and free wifi.
If you look at it as basically a fancy media console with some productivity and work features, it's a pretty nice device to have. It is by no means a general purpose computer, and it isn't going to be used for running a web server. However, for things like reading huge PDFs or some mapping out of ideas to be more ready to dive into some tasks, it's actually quite useful. Since I don't have a smart phone, this covers a lot of that functionality.
Sure, I lugged my work laptop in case I had any "real" work to do, but for most of the trip, my personal iPad covered most of my needs. They're complementary tools. Maybe a little more money than most people are willing to spend on it, but for me, I keep finding reasons why I'm happy with the purchase and why it actually fills a spot in my laptop bag when I travel.
iPad users don't want to spend time configuring their product
Depends on what you mean by "configure". If you mean downloading apps, and re-arranging my icons? Lots of time spent so far. If you mean almost any other form of "configure", you're absolutely correct -- not something I want to do on that device.
In short, iPad Market != Slashdot.
Not all of Slashdot, but the number of iPad users from Slashdot is also not zero.
And, I have to say... kudos to this guy for getting something else running on an iPad, but I'm utterly not interested. I like the OS on my iPad, and I'm looking forward to when iOS 4 becomes available.
I'll also second the sentiment about not being interested in an OS which requires a constant internet connection. I recently took a business trip with my iPad. When I'm on a plane, being able to turn off the wifi and only use it for movies/music/games is one of the best features of it -- in fact, not having really thought about business travel when I bought it, it really proved to be a good traveling companion. I used it far more than my laptop, and every airport and hotel I was in had free wifi so I could check my email and the like.
Tell that to Bill Gates. [wikipedia.org] I rather suspect he'd disagree with you once he stopped laughing.
Well, as a percentage of all people on the planet, the number who actually own billions is vanishingly small.
Anybody who already has billions of dollars is going to be able to fight this more in court, and probably never going to pay the fine. Anybody who doesn't have billions of dollars is likely never going to have it, and is probably never going to pay the fine.
Either way, a billion dollar fine is essentially absurd.
Are you implying that an extradition for a jail sentence would not need to be processed by the courts?
Extradition is usually done before trial... they agree to send you abroad to stand trial for something. That is handled by the courts. They could agree to extradite if you have been found guilty in absentia, but that I'm not sure of or how often that might come up.
In this case, the legal proceedings in the US have already concluded, all that Canada has done is to agree to uphold this judgement -- and, possibly assist in the enforcement of it.
(Of course, I still have no idea how anybody expects to get a billion dollars from anyone.)
How can a Canadian court "uphold" a ruling from a US district court? Why do Canadian courts even care unless this guy is going to be extradited?
This is more about a Canadian court saying "yes, you did something naughty, went through a recognized court system, and we acknowledge the outcome".
Had the court done something which the Canadian court ruled would be counter to Canadian law or treaty obligations, they could have set it aside or basically said the judgement would carry no weight in Canada. I suspect it was mostly a formality, but I'm not sure.
However, if anyone knows more of the legal details, feel free to point out the myriad ways in which I have described it all incorrectly.:-P
Slashdot Mirror
Nor is China. At least, not the axis of evil part. Strictly speaking, I'm not even sure they've been communist for quite a while either.
The rat is fully decoupled from this ... they scraped cells out of the rats brain, and hooked them up to electronics.
There is absolutely no feedback into the rat. It's not even a rat brain anymore. The rat may well be defunct.
The rat bastard!
So, register bich.us or something. ;-)
It made him feel more like a secret agent, so they humored him. His handlers did have to tell him not to wear the mask and cape, though. It was creeping out the locals.
I'm not sure an artificial hip/knee would make you a cyborg -- otherwise, a pegleg would also make you a cyborg.
I think the hip/knee seem too passive to be cybrenetic -- there's no sensors or anything beyond purely "mechanical" things; I think you'd need some more sensors or "active" technology. But, hey, I could be massively wrong -- even reading the wikipedia article I'm not sure I really get it.
But, hey, my mom has an artificial knee, and is slated to get another one soon. If my mom is a cyborg, that would be friggin' awesome!!
That, apparently, is the entire point.
sil.ly, no?
Wait, why the hell are people registering domains in Libya to shorten URLs?
They don't exactly have a history as a nice place and they have been suspected in supporting terrorism.
WTF is Twitter doing running stuff through a domain registered in friggin' Libya?? Why not just run a couple through Iran or Myanmar while we're at it?
Nowadays, "illegal" doesn't mean you can't do it -- it's just not admissable in court.
You can get your last dollar they still do it, but then need to come up with a pretense for anything involving the courts.
Remember, they can now slap a GPS device onto your car with absolutely no court oversight. Just imagine all of the illegal things they do and cover with sealed court proceedings.
You're shitting me. ;-)
Actually, I bought it from Staples. Literally by the next day they were no longer offering the same monitor for sale for any where near what I bought it.
I think someone made a mistake because it was on sale on the web, but even $20 cheaper in the store. I still routinely look at monitors with lower specs and a higher price and smile.
I just wish I'd had the cash to buy two of them -- dual 23" widescreen monitors would be sweet. =)
Shit out of luck, you might say. :-P
But, really, humanity is better off without that being patented. ;-)
My apologies. :-P
Nowadays, it is so damned hard to keep track of which things the *AAs will sue over, and which they wouldn't.
Limewire got sued, Torrent Freak got shut down, I'm not even sure what Napster is anymore or if it exists. ISPs now have to police copyright on behalf of content owners. I just don't know any more.
Sadly, if they muddy the waters so that even those of us in the tech industry don't even know the legal status of some of these things ... then it's awfully hard to know what is legal, what is illegal, and what is in a gray area.
I'm not even saying that there are legal issues with Torrents. I'm just saying that since I no longer know WTF is going on, I can see why a company like Apple might refuse an app for the iPhone which allows you to manage these things.
Things are quite unclear nowadays, and the lawyers are aggressively trying to make sure everything is illegal unless their clients are getting paid.
External keyboard?
I do see this happening in monitors. Sometimes, what you end up is a computer monitor optimized for movies, but not computer stuff as the pixels are actually wider to fit the screen, instead of being nice square pixels where a circle in the native resolution is actually round. So, it's like "fake" widescreen which is good if you're gonna watch movies but not edit text.
Of course, I'm still trying to figure out why a year after I bought my Acer 23" flatscreen with 1920x1080, I can't even buy the equivalent screen without spending markedly more than I paid for it. Methinks I got a sale that they never intended to happen -- 'cause the specs on my monitor are still hard to find again.
No, I postulated a possible reason why Apple might not want to have anything to do with that kind of filesharing. Nothing more, nothing less. Deal with it.
Awww, you wanna be my bitch? How cute. Maybe we could cuddle or something after dinner and you could give me backrubs?
Please, piss off and have a nice day. Do try to be less of an ass if you can.
OK, then perhaps you can explain why they could sue limewire but not torrent?
Honest question? Was limewire providing servers or something tangibly different?
Sometimes it seems that if you can get a sympathetic judge, you can argue all sorts of things in court. Sometimes, they'll even find in your favor.
Ummm ... I've got something like 6,000 tracks in my iTunes library. Not a single one was pirated -- they're all rips from CDs that I own. I've bought several hundred CDs over the last few years. I know several people with thousands of tracks ripped from CDs in their collection.
iTunes has sold a couple of billion tracks as I recall. The iPod business was built on ease of use, and the ability to buy the music you want and get it in a convenient format. I think the actual software had something to do with it, since it is pretty easy to use.
Apple has never encouraged people to share music, and they've never made it difficult to work with your own CDs or buy new tracks.
They sure as hell didn't build their iPod business on piracy. Now, since they've always allowed you to add DRM free MP3s to your collection, some people may have pirated -- but, Apple never steered them in that direction. It certainly was never part of their business strategy or something they encouraged.
Hell, my cable company does more to suggest that I can be downloading movies and music than Apple does.
From TFA ...
So, the way he described it, they didn't quite realize what it was actually doing. The reasoning from Apple was:
I can see why they don't want to get embroiled in any of the legal stuff associated with Torrents. While they do have non-infringing uses, I can see a company like Apple just deciding they don't want to risk the legal actions which could result.
The *AAs aren't above suing absolutely everyone who had anything to do with distributing anything which can be/is used to do filesharing. Apple doesn't want to jeopardize their iTunes contracts by appearing to support that.
Usually it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how the internet works.
And even some of us geeks don't want to tinker with every device we own all of the time.
For business travel which includes lots of hours in airports, airplanes, and hotel rooms ... an iPad is a friggin' awesome tool.
I just did a business trip, which wasn't even a factor in buying my iPad. When you've got a bunch of hours of travel time, the iPad is a really great addition. It also meant I could check my mail from airports and other places along the way without needing to haul out my laptop. And, I could watch movies on the plane, or play games, or generally fill in some of the many hours that business travel leaves me to fill. I even used it to find restaurants and free wifi.
If you look at it as basically a fancy media console with some productivity and work features, it's a pretty nice device to have. It is by no means a general purpose computer, and it isn't going to be used for running a web server. However, for things like reading huge PDFs or some mapping out of ideas to be more ready to dive into some tasks, it's actually quite useful. Since I don't have a smart phone, this covers a lot of that functionality.
Sure, I lugged my work laptop in case I had any "real" work to do, but for most of the trip, my personal iPad covered most of my needs. They're complementary tools. Maybe a little more money than most people are willing to spend on it, but for me, I keep finding reasons why I'm happy with the purchase and why it actually fills a spot in my laptop bag when I travel.
Depends on what you mean by "configure". If you mean downloading apps, and re-arranging my icons? Lots of time spent so far. If you mean almost any other form of "configure", you're absolutely correct -- not something I want to do on that device.
Not all of Slashdot, but the number of iPad users from Slashdot is also not zero.
And, I have to say ... kudos to this guy for getting something else running on an iPad, but I'm utterly not interested. I like the OS on my iPad, and I'm looking forward to when iOS 4 becomes available.
I'll also second the sentiment about not being interested in an OS which requires a constant internet connection. I recently took a business trip with my iPad. When I'm on a plane, being able to turn off the wifi and only use it for movies/music/games is one of the best features of it -- in fact, not having really thought about business travel when I bought it, it really proved to be a good traveling companion. I used it far more than my laptop, and every airport and hotel I was in had free wifi so I could check my email and the like.
I'm not sure of what Chrome would give me.
Well, as a percentage of all people on the planet, the number who actually own billions is vanishingly small.
Anybody who already has billions of dollars is going to be able to fight this more in court, and probably never going to pay the fine. Anybody who doesn't have billions of dollars is likely never going to have it, and is probably never going to pay the fine.
Either way, a billion dollar fine is essentially absurd.
Extradition is usually done before trial ... they agree to send you abroad to stand trial for something. That is handled by the courts. They could agree to extradite if you have been found guilty in absentia, but that I'm not sure of or how often that might come up.
In this case, the legal proceedings in the US have already concluded, all that Canada has done is to agree to uphold this judgement -- and, possibly assist in the enforcement of it.
(Of course, I still have no idea how anybody expects to get a billion dollars from anyone.)
This is more about a Canadian court saying "yes, you did something naughty, went through a recognized court system, and we acknowledge the outcome".
Had the court done something which the Canadian court ruled would be counter to Canadian law or treaty obligations, they could have set it aside or basically said the judgement would carry no weight in Canada. I suspect it was mostly a formality, but I'm not sure.
However, if anyone knows more of the legal details, feel free to point out the myriad ways in which I have described it all incorrectly. :-P