They both want control. Right now, they're getting along, but 2 companies like this will eventually want something that's a "deal breaker". Apple will be offered something too good to pass up in order to break the exclusivity arrangement, or AT&T will tell Apple they MUST do something that will seriously piss off even the devout fanboys which even Apple isn't retarded enough to comply with and then BOOM... skittle trains.
1) We're going to ignore the stolen argument as a) I already said "except for stolen stuff" and b) it's not what this is about.
2) As per the status quo, your analogy is off base. I'm going to assume this is just tradition since we're on slashdot, so you were obligated to use a bad analogy.
Now, as for the appropriate analogy, say you bought a car (new, like the ebook(s) we're talking about), but someone put the wrong logo on it (or painted it a colour not offered on that model, or something else they had access to but weren't supposed to do, not stolen, because that has nothing to do with the case at hand). The dealer or manufacturer or whoever's fault it is might get sued/fired/whatever, but could not in any way shape or form repossess the car. They _might_ be able to refuse to warranty the car or something, but it stays yours.
Let's make something very clear; This situation called for a "recall". Unless it involves a safety issue a recall is VOLUNTARY! It's voluntary because when someone takes back something you bought without your consent, there's a problem. If the item is physical, it's theft. If it's not, it's something else, but still wrong.
While there are some issues w/ treating virtual items and media like physical ones when it comes to the law there are enough parallels that we should just use the existing laws as much as possible until someone with half a brain works out something better. It would simplify the RIAA mess, "Oh, 20 songs stolen? That's petty theft, $20 owed, plus a fine and community service, maybe some time if it's a repeat offence, have a nice day.". Sell something you shouldn't have, "Oops! Our bad, here's a recall request, and we'll throw in a $5 gift cert to make it worth your while.".
But maybe I'm just old fashioned. Like the good old days when things were simple, property was property, and we didn't need a car analogy for everything. I never thought I'd miss the 90s so much...
If I buy something, and it's recalled (obviously we're not talking about food or other perishables) it's mine. It's been sold. Except where it's stolen or other specific cases, it can't be reposessed from me. A book that was printed without permission? Cops aren't coming to my door to get it back. It's mine. The problem, and why it's absolutely NOT ok is that with DRM and remote kill options you can take it back, which by some views is or should be completely illegal.
There are so many vague laws surrounding virtual items that the waters are cloudy on a good day. If you take a CD it's stealing, if you copy an MP3 it's copyright infringement (because you can't "take" it, only "copy" it). Same w/ books, but when you *buy* something you have ownership of it. Media companies want to maintain ownership and only sell you "licences" which can be revoked at any time. This is where it becomes a slippery slope. Take a page (real or virtual) from one of the books from the article. Want to suppress info? You don't need to "burn books" anymore, just a system wide revoke and delete. Done!
It seems like a paranoid point of view, and that the slippery slope is still on the other side of the field, and you might say, "oh, well I understand their reasoning", fine, but they still shouldn't have the *ability* to have done it. That's the issue.
There are so many factors here, the recession being the biggie, but it amplifies everything else. Crappy over priced games are something that sell much worse when you don't have disposable income. Expensive consoles stop selling, not to mention a huge percentage of the market owns a "next gen" console by now. (I know, it's not "next gen" anymore, get over it) Those that don't own one probably have at least one friend with each of the big 3. So you'll get more of the old-school game sharing like before this newfangled internet thing came along and made it so you no longer have to be in the same room as the people you are playing with (as long as you and all your friends go buy a console and a copy of the game each). And then there's used games...
So we're told music and movies (and PC games at the least) don't sell because of piracy, and the PSP is dying because of piracy (oh no, not bad design, poor media choices, iffy game selection, etc. etc., but piracy) etc. etc. Many of the game companies can't get away w/ the same song and dance for Wii/360/PS3 games as they're not pirated on nearly the same scale (maybe 360 games, but AFAIK they can't go on xbox live or they get flagged or something) and take more doing than just downloading a CD patch or key-gen. Enter the new scapegoat; USED GAMES! Of COURSE no one will pay $60-70 (I'm in Canada) for a new game when in a couple weeks it'll be half price (Except for Fallout 3... WTF?!?), esp during the aforementioned recession. What's the solution? Make games that play for longer, with more re-play value so people don't want to sell them the moment they finish them? No, let's just talk about it like it's akin to stealing. Yeehaw!
When did whinning until someone passed a law for you to block competition or handed you a "bailout" become the way to do business? What ever happened to succeeding (or failing) on the merrets of your product/service?
I've had several foul run-ins with RAID, JBOD, and lack of true backup solutions. The failure rates of HDDs are unacceptable, and the manufacturers should be accountable for the safety of your data (Insert car analogy here). Because this is not the case, we now have cheap RAID.
Cheap raid isn't worth a copy of Vista, and no matter if you use hard or soft raid, there is still a single point of failure, and no accountability for the array just going poof (I've had it happen, and it's the ugliest thing to ever have to try to explain to a boss/client).
I think it is unforgiveable for manufacturers of drives to get away with some of the poor quality I have seen, but it's twice as bad for makers of RAID controllers to make the garbage they do, and market it as helping to ensure the safety of your data. And I have seen RAID controllers do more harm than if they had just been left as a bunch of disks, even in RAID 1. If they had to foot the bill for the data recovery, they would be a little less cavalier about releasing shoddy hardware.
Again, as has been pointed out, RAID is primarily to ensure high availability, and is NOT a backup solution. If you're not running a web server or other service, while RAID may be useful when one of your hard drives dies randomly for no reason, it leaves a single point of failure, and that single point was probably designed poorly.
The new firmware/OS/whatever is neat, and available to all iPhones. The new hardware is barely incremental. Yeah there's a higher capacity model(hey, how about a memory slot? Anyone?), slightly better battery life (How about a user replaceable battery so you can carry a spare? You know, like every other cell phone ever invented?), and the compass is kinda neat (do the boy scouts have an iPhone survival badge?) but it's just not that big a deal. Even the fact that it's got a faster CPU doesn't matter that much. It's not like there's any apps that will only run on the newer phone (they've basically stated as much).
If they fixed the hardware limitations (which they're unlikely to do as that would eat into their ridiculous profits on memory, and it's just too dangerous to change your battery while driving a Volkswagen drinking a latte... ok, I'm a little biased, but that doesn't make me wrong! Why can't I change the battery myself?!? Like... without a soldering iron!) then I'd see upgrading to the iPhone 3.1, but not the iPhone 3.0001.
I guess asking for simple, basic features is out of the question, after all, we're talking about a company that took 20 years to give in and add a second button to their mice.
(This post is kinda all over the place. Sorry, it's really late, hopefully there's some sense in there somewhere...)
Some games are good, just not so good I need them ASAP, and not so good that they're worth ~$70. (CAD, as I'm in Canada, don't know exactly how much less they are in the US, and don't feel like looking it up) If all games were $50 or less new, I'd probably buy a lot more new games. Most games I buy for $30 or less used. %50 off is nice, $70 for 10 hours of gameplay isn't.
It's also worth noting that some games don't get cheap even when used until months after they've been released. Fallout 3 is currently only $5-10 less for a used copy, so I may as well buy it in the shrink wrap.
The only thing I can see game publishers doing to try to sell as many first hand copies as possible is have a grace period of a month or two from the publishing date when you can't sell used copies, but they'd probably have to pay off stores to honour such a deal. Expecting a cut of re-sale of your product is just silly.
That only works if you assume that "logic", "fair use" and "common sense" are at play here. i.e. I paid for and own my cell phone so I can unlock it and do what I want with it right? (I'm in Canada, so actually I can, but not so much in the US, your mileage may vary by state)
Point being, if you pay for data, it shouldn't matter how that data is used, period. It shouldn't even matter on unlimited plans. Data is data. Everyone here on slashdot understands it, as do the providers, but why not gouge the consumer anyway, it's not like there's a regulatory body in charge of making sure the consumer is protected against this sort of thing.../sarcasm
I submit to you that stating "well trained and silent" before "ninja" is redundant. If one is lacking in either training or the ability to be silent, it precludes one's propensity for ninja-ness.
What part of "English Canada" are you talking about, 'cause where I live (and work), pub business lunches are pretty normal. I believe the same is true of some parts of the states as well... NYC and LA come to mind, and possibly Boston but that's just a guess.
First, I'm from Canada where AFAIK the company or owner(s) would be responsible for infringing software. Second, IANAL, Canadian or otherwise, so you might want to check w/ one.
Now then, what you seem most worried about is your own legal culpability, not the fact that there is pirated software, which is an easier task to deal with than the technical aspect in some ways.
1) Write an internal memo to management addressing your concerns, outlining the risks associated with not complying w/ software licenses, etc. Include a rough inventory of infringing software, the approximate cost of said software, and the estimated cost to the company if they are pursued for damages.
2) Send yourself a copy by registered mail. Put it on a shelf, or better yet, in a small fire safe or safe deposit box. To be really thorough, send 2, and keep them in separate locations.
3) If you get a response to just ignore it, keep it. If it's to deal with it properly, then you're pretty much golden. Either way, keep the response. Possibly send yourself a printout by registered mail as in step 2.
4) IF the crap ever hits the fan, you have 2 documents which cover you. The dated and sealed envelopes from registered mail are considered legally admissable, so if there's any finger pointing in your direction, you should be able to deflect it handily.
Note: If management changes you may want to redo this process.
Does no one understand the difference between "lose" and "didn't make". Companies rarely "lose" money, they just make less than they expected and count "lost revenue" as loss. "We think we should have made more money than we did, so we'll write off the difference as a loss."
I was thinking the same thing, then I thought of some reasons why it might not work.
First, there's still meteorites and such which could potentially be much more damaging than the elements on earth. You've seen pictures of the moon's surface. Imagine really bad hail all the time.
Then there's the fact that you won't always have exposure to the sun wherever your moon base is. I don't know what the longest period of "night" is on the various parts of the moon, but I'm sure it's significant to the point that batteries won't cut it.
Now that's not to say solar power wouldn't be a good suppliment, especially if we have durable enough material that it's low maintenance, but I doubt you can use it as a primary power source.
It would be interesting to see a precident set that if a law (or contract/agreement/whatever) could be deemed to be not-binding if the language used to define it was either above the education level of the defendant/signer, or just above whatever the national average education level is.
While I know that ignorance isn't a defence, mental capacity is, so why not level of education? Just a thought...
Why was this tagged with "privacy"? It has nothing to do with privacy, unless the blog is password protected or otherwise non-public. It's not like he told his mom and Comcast had him bugged. He wrote in his blog, which many people want covered under the umbrella of "journalism". If it was in a newspaper it wouldn't be called a privacy issue, so why here? If you don't want someone to read your blog, it's called a diary. Hide it under your pillow. If Comcast still contacts you THEN worry.
That being said, I think a company actively responding to complaints sets a good precedent, and I applaud the effort rather than condemn it. I wish more companies would take this kind of interest in their customer's satisfaction.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it would be hilarious if the iPhone Devel Team fixed this in the jailbroken firmware before Apple fixed it officially.
Apple: "Jailbreaking should be illegal because it dangerously closes security holes... er..."
Ah, perchance to dream...
They both want control. Right now, they're getting along, but 2 companies like this will eventually want something that's a "deal breaker". Apple will be offered something too good to pass up in order to break the exclusivity arrangement, or AT&T will tell Apple they MUST do something that will seriously piss off even the devout fanboys which even Apple isn't retarded enough to comply with and then BOOM... skittle trains.
You won't have to, just write it into mythbusters. It's not really about a myth, but it's cool enough they'll find an excuse.
You forgot Space Quest.
Car analogies! Yay! OK, I'll bite.
1) We're going to ignore the stolen argument as a) I already said "except for stolen stuff" and b) it's not what this is about.
2) As per the status quo, your analogy is off base. I'm going to assume this is just tradition since we're on slashdot, so you were obligated to use a bad analogy.
Now, as for the appropriate analogy, say you bought a car (new, like the ebook(s) we're talking about), but someone put the wrong logo on it (or painted it a colour not offered on that model, or something else they had access to but weren't supposed to do, not stolen, because that has nothing to do with the case at hand). The dealer or manufacturer or whoever's fault it is might get sued/fired/whatever, but could not in any way shape or form repossess the car. They _might_ be able to refuse to warranty the car or something, but it stays yours.
Let's make something very clear; This situation called for a "recall". Unless it involves a safety issue a recall is VOLUNTARY! It's voluntary because when someone takes back something you bought without your consent, there's a problem. If the item is physical, it's theft. If it's not, it's something else, but still wrong.
While there are some issues w/ treating virtual items and media like physical ones when it comes to the law there are enough parallels that we should just use the existing laws as much as possible until someone with half a brain works out something better. It would simplify the RIAA mess, "Oh, 20 songs stolen? That's petty theft, $20 owed, plus a fine and community service, maybe some time if it's a repeat offence, have a nice day.". Sell something you shouldn't have, "Oops! Our bad, here's a recall request, and we'll throw in a $5 gift cert to make it worth your while.".
But maybe I'm just old fashioned. Like the good old days when things were simple, property was property, and we didn't need a car analogy for everything. I never thought I'd miss the 90s so much...
Um... NO!
If I buy something, and it's recalled (obviously we're not talking about food or other perishables) it's mine. It's been sold. Except where it's stolen or other specific cases, it can't be reposessed from me. A book that was printed without permission? Cops aren't coming to my door to get it back. It's mine. The problem, and why it's absolutely NOT ok is that with DRM and remote kill options you can take it back, which by some views is or should be completely illegal.
There are so many vague laws surrounding virtual items that the waters are cloudy on a good day. If you take a CD it's stealing, if you copy an MP3 it's copyright infringement (because you can't "take" it, only "copy" it). Same w/ books, but when you *buy* something you have ownership of it. Media companies want to maintain ownership and only sell you "licences" which can be revoked at any time. This is where it becomes a slippery slope. Take a page (real or virtual) from one of the books from the article. Want to suppress info? You don't need to "burn books" anymore, just a system wide revoke and delete. Done!
It seems like a paranoid point of view, and that the slippery slope is still on the other side of the field, and you might say, "oh, well I understand their reasoning", fine, but they still shouldn't have the *ability* to have done it. That's the issue.
Taking something virtual is only stealing if you take it from a big company, if they take it from you it's ok.
There are so many factors here, the recession being the biggie, but it amplifies everything else. Crappy over priced games are something that sell much worse when you don't have disposable income. Expensive consoles stop selling, not to mention a huge percentage of the market owns a "next gen" console by now. (I know, it's not "next gen" anymore, get over it) Those that don't own one probably have at least one friend with each of the big 3. So you'll get more of the old-school game sharing like before this newfangled internet thing came along and made it so you no longer have to be in the same room as the people you are playing with (as long as you and all your friends go buy a console and a copy of the game each). And then there's used games...
So we're told music and movies (and PC games at the least) don't sell because of piracy, and the PSP is dying because of piracy (oh no, not bad design, poor media choices, iffy game selection, etc. etc., but piracy) etc. etc. Many of the game companies can't get away w/ the same song and dance for Wii/360/PS3 games as they're not pirated on nearly the same scale (maybe 360 games, but AFAIK they can't go on xbox live or they get flagged or something) and take more doing than just downloading a CD patch or key-gen. Enter the new scapegoat; USED GAMES! Of COURSE no one will pay $60-70 (I'm in Canada) for a new game when in a couple weeks it'll be half price (Except for Fallout 3... WTF?!?), esp during the aforementioned recession. What's the solution? Make games that play for longer, with more re-play value so people don't want to sell them the moment they finish them? No, let's just talk about it like it's akin to stealing. Yeehaw!
When did whinning until someone passed a law for you to block competition or handed you a "bailout" become the way to do business? What ever happened to succeeding (or failing) on the merrets of your product/service?
I've had several foul run-ins with RAID, JBOD, and lack of true backup solutions. The failure rates of HDDs are unacceptable, and the manufacturers should be accountable for the safety of your data (Insert car analogy here). Because this is not the case, we now have cheap RAID.
Cheap raid isn't worth a copy of Vista, and no matter if you use hard or soft raid, there is still a single point of failure, and no accountability for the array just going poof (I've had it happen, and it's the ugliest thing to ever have to try to explain to a boss/client).
I think it is unforgiveable for manufacturers of drives to get away with some of the poor quality I have seen, but it's twice as bad for makers of RAID controllers to make the garbage they do, and market it as helping to ensure the safety of your data. And I have seen RAID controllers do more harm than if they had just been left as a bunch of disks, even in RAID 1. If they had to foot the bill for the data recovery, they would be a little less cavalier about releasing shoddy hardware.
Again, as has been pointed out, RAID is primarily to ensure high availability, and is NOT a backup solution. If you're not running a web server or other service, while RAID may be useful when one of your hard drives dies randomly for no reason, it leaves a single point of failure, and that single point was probably designed poorly.
The new firmware/OS/whatever is neat, and available to all iPhones. The new hardware is barely incremental. Yeah there's a higher capacity model(hey, how about a memory slot? Anyone?), slightly better battery life (How about a user replaceable battery so you can carry a spare? You know, like every other cell phone ever invented?), and the compass is kinda neat (do the boy scouts have an iPhone survival badge?) but it's just not that big a deal. Even the fact that it's got a faster CPU doesn't matter that much. It's not like there's any apps that will only run on the newer phone (they've basically stated as much).
If they fixed the hardware limitations (which they're unlikely to do as that would eat into their ridiculous profits on memory, and it's just too dangerous to change your battery while driving a Volkswagen drinking a latte... ok, I'm a little biased, but that doesn't make me wrong! Why can't I change the battery myself?!? Like... without a soldering iron!) then I'd see upgrading to the iPhone 3.1, but not the iPhone 3.0001.
I guess asking for simple, basic features is out of the question, after all, we're talking about a company that took 20 years to give in and add a second button to their mice.
(This post is kinda all over the place. Sorry, it's really late, hopefully there's some sense in there somewhere...)
Some games are good, just not so good I need them ASAP, and not so good that they're worth ~$70. (CAD, as I'm in Canada, don't know exactly how much less they are in the US, and don't feel like looking it up) If all games were $50 or less new, I'd probably buy a lot more new games. Most games I buy for $30 or less used. %50 off is nice, $70 for 10 hours of gameplay isn't.
It's also worth noting that some games don't get cheap even when used until months after they've been released. Fallout 3 is currently only $5-10 less for a used copy, so I may as well buy it in the shrink wrap.
The only thing I can see game publishers doing to try to sell as many first hand copies as possible is have a grace period of a month or two from the publishing date when you can't sell used copies, but they'd probably have to pay off stores to honour such a deal. Expecting a cut of re-sale of your product is just silly.
Actually, I believe this is their 4th version of the PSP, not their 2nd, which only goes to show that they're even further out of touch.
That only works if you assume that "logic", "fair use" and "common sense" are at play here. i.e. I paid for and own my cell phone so I can unlock it and do what I want with it right? (I'm in Canada, so actually I can, but not so much in the US, your mileage may vary by state)
Point being, if you pay for data, it shouldn't matter how that data is used, period. It shouldn't even matter on unlimited plans. Data is data. Everyone here on slashdot understands it, as do the providers, but why not gouge the consumer anyway, it's not like there's a regulatory body in charge of making sure the consumer is protected against this sort of thing... /sarcasm
I don't have any mod points at the moment, but if I did, I'm not sure if I should mod this "Funny" or "Insightful"...
I submit to you that stating "well trained and silent" before "ninja" is redundant. If one is lacking in either training or the ability to be silent, it precludes one's propensity for ninja-ness.
In a word, yes. This is the same as linking to infringing web pages, etc. If you do not host infringing material, you are not doing anything illegal.
If I'm a pimp, I'm guilty, if I point you in the direction of a pimp, I'm not.
If I'm holding drugs, I'm guilty, if I tell you where you can get them, I'm not.
If you give me cash for the info, I'm still not guilty. If I get a kickback from the pimp or the dealer only THEN am I in trouble.
So lets summarise: INNOCENT
What part of "English Canada" are you talking about, 'cause where I live (and work), pub business lunches are pretty normal. I believe the same is true of some parts of the states as well... NYC and LA come to mind, and possibly Boston but that's just a guess.
Mythbusters did a bit about this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(season_3)#Biscuit_Bazooka_Spinoff
Now mind you, it only came out to a 9 degree F difference, windows up etc., so really it's not particularly significant, and the law's still dumb.
First, I'm from Canada where AFAIK the company or owner(s) would be responsible for infringing software. Second, IANAL, Canadian or otherwise, so you might want to check w/ one.
Now then, what you seem most worried about is your own legal culpability, not the fact that there is pirated software, which is an easier task to deal with than the technical aspect in some ways.
1) Write an internal memo to management addressing your concerns, outlining the risks associated with not complying w/ software licenses, etc. Include a rough inventory of infringing software, the approximate cost of said software, and the estimated cost to the company if they are pursued for damages.
2) Send yourself a copy by registered mail. Put it on a shelf, or better yet, in a small fire safe or safe deposit box. To be really thorough, send 2, and keep them in separate locations.
3) If you get a response to just ignore it, keep it. If it's to deal with it properly, then you're pretty much golden.
Either way, keep the response. Possibly send yourself a printout by registered mail as in step 2.
4) IF the crap ever hits the fan, you have 2 documents which cover you. The dated and sealed envelopes from registered mail are considered legally admissable, so if there's any finger pointing in your direction, you should be able to deflect it handily.
Note: If management changes you may want to redo this process.
Note that in the picture, the helmet is open. The helmet is probably mainly for insurance purposes.
Crotch shot. 'nuff said.
Does no one understand the difference between "lose" and "didn't make". Companies rarely "lose" money, they just make less than they expected and count "lost revenue" as loss. "We think we should have made more money than we did, so we'll write off the difference as a loss."
I was thinking the same thing, then I thought of some reasons why it might not work.
First, there's still meteorites and such which could potentially be much more damaging than the elements on earth. You've seen pictures of the moon's surface. Imagine really bad hail all the time.
Then there's the fact that you won't always have exposure to the sun wherever your moon base is. I don't know what the longest period of "night" is on the various parts of the moon, but I'm sure it's significant to the point that batteries won't cut it.
Now that's not to say solar power wouldn't be a good suppliment, especially if we have durable enough material that it's low maintenance, but I doubt you can use it as a primary power source.
It would be interesting to see a precident set that if a law (or contract/agreement/whatever) could be deemed to be not-binding if the language used to define it was either above the education level of the defendant/signer, or just above whatever the national average education level is.
While I know that ignorance isn't a defence, mental capacity is, so why not level of education? Just a thought...
Why was this tagged with "privacy"? It has nothing to do with privacy, unless the blog is password protected or otherwise non-public. It's not like he told his mom and Comcast had him bugged. He wrote in his blog, which many people want covered under the umbrella of "journalism". If it was in a newspaper it wouldn't be called a privacy issue, so why here? If you don't want someone to read your blog, it's called a diary. Hide it under your pillow. If Comcast still contacts you THEN worry.
That being said, I think a company actively responding to complaints sets a good precedent, and I applaud the effort rather than condemn it. I wish more companies would take this kind of interest in their customer's satisfaction.