It's not their fault the money has been transferred fraudulently, they have no responsibility and by not getting involved they avoid possible legal liabilities.
However, you'd think that the police/interpol could track the movement of the money -- after all, it's not like someone is going to rock up to an ATM and withdraw 40 million Euros in cash, is it?
I've canceled my Netflix and gone back to torrents. It was the total lack of screeners on Netflix that turned be off. Hell, screeners are great -- it's just like being at the theater. If I can't see the heads of those in front and hear cellphones ringing two rows back then it's not a true movie experience.
Absolutely Exodus is crazy-good on the RP2 with Kodi.
The only problem is the need to occasionally reflash the microSD because something happens to the database and it screws up 1Channel, Exodus, SALTS and all the other video plug-ins. Bit of a pain in the backside but worth the irritation when you consider the results you get.
Yet, strangely enough, Google allows its YouTube service to only tacitly deal with copyright infringements through that service.
This is why Swift, McCartney and a bunch of other recording artists are pushing for a change to the DMCA that would prevent YouTube from effectively leveraging their music for profit without adequate compensation:
Google only censors that which does not stand to make it a profit.
What I find interesting is that when you file a copyright violation complaint with YouTube (when, for instance, someone has uploaded one of your own videos to their own channel and monetized it), they often take their own sweet time to take it down. In fact, there are channels on YT that consist of nothing more than content leached from other channels. As someone who earns his living from his YT channels, I find it annoying that sometimes you have to flle a dozen or more notices against another channel carrying your videos, before YT will act.
What I also want to know is...
Where does the ad-revenue generated by those unauthorised uploads/views go?
I bet that YT doesn't refund the money to the advertisers -- but t hey sure as hell don't pass it on to the original owner of the copyright.
You can be pretty sure that this money goes straight into Google's pockets -- which explains why they're not at all interested in acting quickly to take-down such channels -- because its revenue without the need to share.
I noticed the "google censor" effect just the other day when I went searching for some info on a piece of software that is probably considered to be "evil" because it helps aid the circumvention of copyright.
This is a *very* popular bit of software but oddly enough, Google's search returned almost no results.
"While the Pi solution the writer posed would work, it won't have Netflix"
And that's important why?
I've been using KODI (more recently the TVMC image) with 1Channel, SALTS, Phoenix or Genesis on my RP for a long time and I watch all the Netflix content -- albeit I'm not burdened with a monthly subscription for doing so:-)
If Netflix want to make a plug-in for KODI available I'll subscribe. If they don't then it's no skin off my nose but in the meantime I'm not switching to Android or a PC just to pay them money.
Is it the lease on your building? Yep Is it the power to run your shop's lights? Yep Is it the cost of attending a "widget" conference in Las Vegas for a week? Um... Is it the cost of the new Porsche you purchased which gets used for business use 5% of the time? Errr... Is it the boozy lunches you regularly hold for your "friends" in the widget industry? Hmm...
Most of those 15,000 pages are probably to do with defining what constitutes an acceptable expense and what doesn't.
The problem is immensely more complex than you might think -- which is why business gets away with "avoiding" tax so much more effectively than wage-slaves do.
"As someone who works at a major Air Force bace that flies "heavies", I can tell you that often there is no physical damage and the only way to confirm a "bird strike" is the blood left behind, and small drones do not have blood."
But hang on... surely you're not saying that the media, the pilots union and the regulators have lied to us when they have repeatedly told stories that any kind of collision between a recreational drone and an airliner would result in a devastating loss of life?
"There has been no evidence presented that it hit a drone. Just speculation at this point."
Absolutely true!
What's more, even if this *was* a drone-strike, it simply proves what I (and many others) have been saying for years... a small recreational drone poses a very, very small danger to a commercial airliner. But hey, even if you don't believe me, why not believe Dr Chris Manno, an ex-USAF pilot who now flies 737-800s for one of the USA's largest airlines. His blog entry on the subject of the risks that recreational drones pose to commercial air flights is refreshingly frank and honest -- unlike the crap we're fed by the pilots' unions, airspace regulators and the media.
In fact, Chris Manno's comments on laser pointers and the danger they pose to pilots is also an eye-opener.
What a shame that so many ignorant people (even here on Slashdot) prefer to believe the dross that the media dishes up to them without challenge. Newsbreak: the mainstream media has long ago stopped being a reliable, factual, objective, informed source of news information! It's now all about sensational click-bait stories that focus on hype and misinformation to get eyeballs on webpages, TV screens and newspapers. I'm really rather disappointed in fact that so many Slashdot readers have fallen for this stuff. I guess it speaks to how the Slashdot readership has changed from an intelligent, *thinking* group of individuals to just a cross-section of the "Joe Average" public.
And the RIAA and MPAA will soon claim that drones have cost them billions in lost revenues -- because the money people spend on these things would be far better off spent buying albums and going to the movies.
Let's face it... drone owners are pirates stealing from the hungry mouths of record and film executives. Shame on them!
So why the hell, given that they've had cockpit voice and data recorders for decades, don't modern airliners and even light-aircraft have dashcams?
Surely it's not rocket science to fit a dashcam to an airplane and that footage may be invaluable in a crash analysis or when pilots claim to have had a "close call" with a drone.
Seems to me that we've had these hundreds of reports but not a single shred of photographic evidence.
Yes, but given that if Apple's source code was to be placed into the hands of the US government, the value of that code would plummet -- and therefore the "fair market value" (which would be determined *by* the government) would likely be far less than it is now. Remember.. the US government has shown that even its top agencies (IRS for instance) don't have a clue when it comes to securing important information so once the FBI gets this code, it'll be in the underground "public domain" within a very short space of time and then the value is zilch.
Perhaps the government will seize the code (by court order) and *then* work out what's worth. If they wait long enough they'll simply be able to say "hackers have it now, it's worthless... here's a check for $0".
Given that there are still some hideous problems with YouTube in the wake of the forced integration with G+ and then the unwinding of that mess -- could Google please focus on fixing these bugs before embarking on another round of "new functionality that nobody wants but everyone will be forced to adopt"???
People trying to comment on my popular (YouTube channel partnered) channel still get an "Unknown Error" result -- more than a week after the problem surfaced.
The response has been pretty much "take an asprin and call us in the morning if the problem persists" -- which it does.
When will they learn that Google users would much rather that the existing functionality worked reliably than have to put up with another round of unwanted and unneeded crap forced on us.
Far too much hype (from the media, the FAA and a bunch of pilots who realize that drones may eventually take their jobs). How about we consult a real "straight shooting" former US military pilot who now works for a major US airline as a passenger jet Captain?
I think this guy (who puts his life on the line every day) is a far more credible source of information than a bunch of FAA bureaucrats and a media focused on creating click-bait headlines.
Oh my God... I can hear the "Run your car on water" scammers firing up their computers right now. There's bound to be another wave of crappy scams for sale online which will tout this as the kind of breakthrough that has finally made it practical to boost your mileage by 500% and reduce gas costs by 600%. Just send $49.95 now for the secrets of how this nano-technology can let you split water into hydrogen and run your car for free!
I guess the secret to ensuring that your favorite pastime won't be annexed by a bunch of rogue law-makers is to take up a pastime that *they* enjoy.
For example... many, many times more people are injured or die as a result of playing golf than as a result of playing with drones -- yet you *KNOW* that golf will never be banned or restricted in the way that drones are being -- simply because so many lawmakers are also keen golfers.
Remember... politicians and bureaucrats are primarily looking after their own interests ahead of ensuring the public's safety.
Slashdot Mirror
Samsung really ought to go into the munitions business.
They've already had to recall one of their washing machines which set fire to dozens of houses due to a bad design fault -- now the G7 problem.
Maybe they're not a bad company, they've just missed their calling :-)
Haha... now those folk who mock me for having a $9 "dumb" phone will realise exactly why I've not moved my life onto an Android or iPhone device!
I guess the banks figure "why should we?"
It's not their fault the money has been transferred fraudulently, they have no responsibility and by not getting involved they avoid possible legal liabilities.
However, you'd think that the police/interpol could track the movement of the money -- after all, it's not like someone is going to rock up to an ATM and withdraw 40 million Euros in cash, is it?
I've canceled my Netflix and gone back to torrents. It was the total lack of screeners on Netflix that turned be off. Hell, screeners are great -- it's just like being at the theater. If I can't see the heads of those in front and hear cellphones ringing two rows back then it's not a true movie experience.
Damn you Netflix! :-)
Absolutely Exodus is crazy-good on the RP2 with Kodi.
The only problem is the need to occasionally reflash the microSD because something happens to the database and it screws up 1Channel, Exodus, SALTS and all the other video plug-ins. Bit of a pain in the backside but worth the irritation when you consider the results you get.
Yet, strangely enough, Google allows its YouTube service to only tacitly deal with copyright infringements through that service.
This is why Swift, McCartney and a bunch of other recording artists are pushing for a change to the DMCA that would prevent YouTube from effectively leveraging their music for profit without adequate compensation:
http://fortune.com/2016/06/20/taylor-swift-youtube/
Google only censors that which does not stand to make it a profit.
What I find interesting is that when you file a copyright violation complaint with YouTube (when, for instance, someone has uploaded one of your own videos to their own channel and monetized it), they often take their own sweet time to take it down. In fact, there are channels on YT that consist of nothing more than content leached from other channels. As someone who earns his living from his YT channels, I find it annoying that sometimes you have to flle a dozen or more notices against another channel carrying your videos, before YT will act.
What I also want to know is...
Where does the ad-revenue generated by those unauthorised uploads/views go?
I bet that YT doesn't refund the money to the advertisers -- but t hey sure as hell don't pass it on to the original owner of the copyright.
You can be pretty sure that this money goes straight into Google's pockets -- which explains why they're not at all interested in acting quickly to take-down such channels -- because its revenue without the need to share.
Do no evil?
Yeah, right!
I noticed the "google censor" effect just the other day when I went searching for some info on a piece of software that is probably considered to be "evil" because it helps aid the circumvention of copyright.
This is a *very* popular bit of software but oddly enough, Google's search returned almost no results.
Censorship?
I think it's pretty obvious.
"Some of the Android media centers are cheaper than the Pi once you include the cost of the remote."
KODI allows you to use your TV's remote control in many cases -- there's no need for a separate remote.
"While the Pi solution the writer posed would work, it won't have Netflix"
And that's important why?
I've been using KODI (more recently the TVMC image) with 1Channel, SALTS, Phoenix or Genesis on my RP for a long time and I watch all the Netflix content -- albeit I'm not burdened with a monthly subscription for doing so :-)
If Netflix want to make a plug-in for KODI available I'll subscribe. If they don't then it's no skin off my nose but in the meantime I'm not switching to Android or a PC just to pay them money.
Why would I want to install Linux - it's already installed and running on my machines :-)
But what constitutes a "cost"?
Is it the lease on your building? Yep
Is it the power to run your shop's lights? Yep
Is it the cost of attending a "widget" conference in Las Vegas for a week? Um...
Is it the cost of the new Porsche you purchased which gets used for business use 5% of the time? Errr...
Is it the boozy lunches you regularly hold for your "friends" in the widget industry? Hmm...
Most of those 15,000 pages are probably to do with defining what constitutes an acceptable expense and what doesn't.
The problem is immensely more complex than you might think -- which is why business gets away with "avoiding" tax so much more effectively than wage-slaves do.
I guess Al Qaeda woke up to find their Windows 7 had been automatically upgraded to Windows 10 then? That's got to piss them off.
Wow... that I've been downvoted just proves my point about the way the collective IQ of Slashdot readers has tumbled.
Used to be a great site for those who actually thought for themselves instead of accepting what the media threw at them.
Them days is long gone it would seem.
"As someone who works at a major Air Force bace that flies "heavies", I can tell you that often there is no physical damage and the only way to confirm a "bird strike" is the blood left behind, and small drones do not have blood."
But hang on... surely you're not saying that the media, the pilots union and the regulators have lied to us when they have repeatedly told stories that any kind of collision between a recreational drone and an airliner would result in a devastating loss of life?
Who'd have thought :-)
"There has been no evidence presented that it hit a drone. Just speculation at this point."
Absolutely true!
What's more, even if this *was* a drone-strike, it simply proves what I (and many others) have been saying for years... a small recreational drone poses a very, very small danger to a commercial airliner. But hey, even if you don't believe me, why not believe Dr Chris Manno, an ex-USAF pilot who now flies 737-800s for one of the USA's largest airlines. His blog entry on the subject of the risks that recreational drones pose to commercial air flights is refreshingly frank and honest -- unlike the crap we're fed by the pilots' unions, airspace regulators and the media.
In fact, Chris Manno's comments on laser pointers and the danger they pose to pilots is also an eye-opener.
What a shame that so many ignorant people (even here on Slashdot) prefer to believe the dross that the media dishes up to them without challenge. Newsbreak: the mainstream media has long ago stopped being a reliable, factual, objective, informed source of news information! It's now all about sensational click-bait stories that focus on hype and misinformation to get eyeballs on webpages, TV screens and newspapers. I'm really rather disappointed in fact that so many Slashdot readers have fallen for this stuff. I guess it speaks to how the Slashdot readership has changed from an intelligent, *thinking* group of individuals to just a cross-section of the "Joe Average" public.
Shame really.
And the RIAA and MPAA will soon claim that drones have cost them billions in lost revenues -- because the money people spend on these things would be far better off spent buying albums and going to the movies.
Let's face it ... drone owners are pirates stealing from the hungry mouths of record and film executives. Shame on them!
So why the hell, given that they've had cockpit voice and data recorders for decades, don't modern airliners and even light-aircraft have dashcams?
Surely it's not rocket science to fit a dashcam to an airplane and that footage may be invaluable in a crash analysis or when pilots claim to have had a "close call" with a drone.
Seems to me that we've had these hundreds of reports but not a single shred of photographic evidence.
Something stinks!
How *dare* you bring facts into a Slashdot argument?
Have you no pride at all?
LOL :_)
Yes, but given that if Apple's source code was to be placed into the hands of the US government, the value of that code would plummet -- and therefore the "fair market value" (which would be determined *by* the government) would likely be far less than it is now. Remember.. the US government has shown that even its top agencies (IRS for instance) don't have a clue when it comes to securing important information so once the FBI gets this code, it'll be in the underground "public domain" within a very short space of time and then the value is zilch.
Perhaps the government will seize the code (by court order) and *then* work out what's worth. If they wait long enough they'll simply be able to say "hackers have it now, it's worthless... here's a check for $0".
Given that there are still some hideous problems with YouTube in the wake of the forced integration with G+ and then the unwinding of that mess -- could Google please focus on fixing these bugs before embarking on another round of "new functionality that nobody wants but everyone will be forced to adopt"???
People trying to comment on my popular (YouTube channel partnered) channel still get an "Unknown Error" result -- more than a week after the problem surfaced.
The response has been pretty much "take an asprin and call us in the morning if the problem persists" -- which it does.
When will they learn that Google users would much rather that the existing functionality worked reliably than have to put up with another round of unwanted and unneeded crap forced on us.
Far too much hype (from the media, the FAA and a bunch of pilots who realize that drones may eventually take their jobs). How about we consult a real "straight shooting" former US military pilot who now works for a major US airline as a passenger jet Captain?
Airliners vs drones, calm down
I think this guy (who puts his life on the line every day) is a far more credible source of information than a bunch of FAA bureaucrats and a media focused on creating click-bait headlines.
Oh my God... I can hear the "Run your car on water" scammers firing up their computers right now. There's bound to be another wave of crappy scams for sale online which will tout this as the kind of breakthrough that has finally made it practical to boost your mileage by 500% and reduce gas costs by 600%. Just send $49.95 now for the secrets of how this nano-technology can let you split water into hydrogen and run your car for free!
Groan!
Even PT Barnum would roll in his grave!
I wonder how many DJI Phantoms (the Phantom Menace) and other drones decided to fly 4Km away at that time?
I guess the secret to ensuring that your favorite pastime won't be annexed by a bunch of rogue law-makers is to take up a pastime that *they* enjoy.
For example... many, many times more people are injured or die as a result of playing golf than as a result of playing with drones -- yet you *KNOW* that golf will never be banned or restricted in the way that drones are being -- simply because so many lawmakers are also keen golfers.
Remember... politicians and bureaucrats are primarily looking after their own interests ahead of ensuring the public's safety.
So the military wants a device that violates the conditions and implied license associated with the 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz ISM bands eh?
Does the US military have the authority to defy other government agencies such as the FCC and the FAA?