Until you exercise that option and pay the fee its still not your phone.
After you pay it off its yours and sure you should ( and as far as i know can, as there are no legal restrictions ) be able to unlock it and 'move on'. Of cousre having to root/jailbreak to do it means you are potentially violating the TOS of your new carrier when you sign up with them.....
It doesn't matter since you are on their network, under contract and being subsidized, so its really not your device to do with as you please anyway.
If want your own machine to do with as you please, buy a device outright and don't sign up with a cell carrier. Of course it wont be as useful, but you get FULL control that way.
Only danger about waiting too long for release is everyone moves ahead of you. In today's ADHD new shiny object world its often better to release *something* to get it out there in front of people, then refine it in version 2.
No, i understood it. Its why i said if they came to your house they *would* have a warrant, and you couldn't say boo about it..
I would imagine that if the 'data' was stored at your house instead of some 3rd party, then a warrant would be needed for that too. Being off site on what is essentially a 'public service provider' is the key to me. I also bet that if you had a paid storage service off site the same warrant need would apply.
Imagine if the U.S. authorities wanted to do a house search at my home, go through my private papers. There would be a hell of a fight. It's absolutely unacceptable.'"
If you lived here, where the actual data resides in the twitter case, no there wouldn't be a 'hell of a fight'. They would come with a warrant from a judge, tear down your door, search your house and you get to sit there politely and watch. If you protest, you get hauled away.
That the RIAA made a big stink about Napster in the early days is what caused it all.
Until that happened hardly anyone in the general public knew it existed. The concept of getting 'free music' wasn't even in their minds, until then.
Way to go RIAA for creating your own nightmare. Unless that was the goal, get it on the radar, then demonize it via the media and pay for legislation in a preemptive strike. ( that backfired... )
That analogy in the story really sucks bad. Its nothing like the example that the post office isn't held responsible for content. Of course they aren't. they cant see the content.
If you have to use the PO, it would be more like them refusing to deliver due to the content of the magazine titles. " we think its bad "
Because I don't use my connection 24/7 at full-throttle.
I dont agree its not a big deal, and the car analogy doesn't really apply as when the bandwidth goes up like this more services will end up using it ( much as places like netflix appeared to suck up current bandwidth )
i agree that forkablity for an application is important, just in case the sponsor pulls the rug out from underneath it or goes bankrupt/sold/etc, but i still think that a single 'distribution' with everyone behind it is the best way to go, and if the entire community was behind it, instead of a subset like it is now, there would be far less risk and a whole lot more momentum forward.
Sure everyone has moved forward over the years and great things have been accomplished, but just imagine what could have been if we didn't keep hanging a sharp left every so often and regrouping because we didn't like some distribution's logo or installer colors...
Slashdot Mirror
the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks.
I do agree since one is about speech and the other about stealing 'hard' goods, but what the hell does that have to do with anything based on reality?
Yay.. universal binaries again, like apple had the foresight to do but then later quit. ( no, that was not sarcasm, just disappointment )
Until you exercise that option and pay the fee its still not your phone.
After you pay it off its yours and sure you should ( and as far as i know can, as there are no legal restrictions ) be able to unlock it and 'move on'. Of cousre having to root/jailbreak to do it means you are potentially violating the TOS of your new carrier when you sign up with them.....
I don't even believe that. As long as you continue to pay your contract, you should be able to unlock the phone.
Until you have paid off the subsidy its not really your phone. You are on in effect a 'lease to own' contract.
Google dropped the ball when they permitted downstream customers to close their source
And if they hadn't, no manufacturer would have adopted it.
It doesn't matter since you are on their network, under contract and being subsidized, so its really not your device to do with as you please anyway.
If want your own machine to do with as you please, buy a device outright and don't sign up with a cell carrier. Of course it wont be as useful, but you get FULL control that way.
Expect the same requirements soon from your ISP.
Why Obama hasn't yet done so is a mystery to me.
Umm, perhaps he approves of what happened as it further advances true agendas?
The Obama administration was doomed at the onset
I disagree. It was the American Public that was doomed.
privilege of having a thought(tm)
Only approved thoughts...
Too bad they went out of business... great idea tho. a full LCD tablet + a touchscreen e-ink.
Its not the same phone, just yet another android phone. Yet another marketing gimmick.
Only danger about waiting too long for release is everyone moves ahead of you. In today's ADHD new shiny object world its often better to release *something* to get it out there in front of people, then refine it in version 2.
Just buy the bastards outright. ( tho trying to buy Sony would be tough, they are much larger than most realize )
No, i understood it. Its why i said if they came to your house they *would* have a warrant, and you couldn't say boo about it..
I would imagine that if the 'data' was stored at your house instead of some 3rd party, then a warrant would be needed for that too. Being off site on what is essentially a 'public service provider' is the key to me. I also bet that if you had a paid storage service off site the same warrant need would apply.
Imagine if the U.S. authorities wanted to do a house search at my home, go through my private papers. There would be a hell of a fight. It's absolutely unacceptable.'"
If you lived here, where the actual data resides in the twitter case, no there wouldn't be a 'hell of a fight'. They would come with a warrant from a judge, tear down your door, search your house and you get to sit there politely and watch. If you protest, you get hauled away.
That the RIAA made a big stink about Napster in the early days is what caused it all.
Until that happened hardly anyone in the general public knew it existed. The concept of getting 'free music' wasn't even in their minds, until then.
Way to go RIAA for creating your own nightmare. Unless that was the goal, get it on the radar, then demonize it via the media and pay for legislation in a preemptive strike. ( that backfired... )
4 ) Be sued and lose money defending their clients, even if they win.
That analogy in the story really sucks bad. Its nothing like the example that the post office isn't held responsible for content. Of course they aren't. they cant see the content.
If you have to use the PO, it would be more like them refusing to deliver due to the content of the magazine titles. " we think its bad "
Anyways, great concept. Shitty implementation in areas of gameplay that matter.
That sums up a LOT of things out there.. even non digital.
...that the highest goal most projects strive for, is to imitate something mediorce or lame (like Windows)?
If X does something better than Y, its stupid and self-defeating to ignore it beacuse you dislike X.
The goal is functionality, and it seems that in this case X was doing it better, so it was well worth investigating why.
Sounds invasive to me. if i opt out of something why is my browser still squealing on me about doing it?
Or did i misunderstand what was being described?
Because I don't use my connection 24/7 at full-throttle.
I dont agree its not a big deal, and the car analogy doesn't really apply as when the bandwidth goes up like this more services will end up using it ( much as places like netflix appeared to suck up current bandwidth )
Besides, some of us used to run fill tilt 24/7.
Not really. And remember too that ethics are relative.
I know what i would decide without thinking twice, and yes the world would be screwed. In a heartbeat.
Why bother with 'superfast' if all its going to do is get you to your monthly cap faster ( and potentially overage charges ) ?
i agree that forkablity for an application is important, just in case the sponsor pulls the rug out from underneath it or goes bankrupt/sold/etc, but i still think that a single 'distribution' with everyone behind it is the best way to go, and if the entire community was behind it, instead of a subset like it is now, there would be far less risk and a whole lot more momentum forward.
Sure everyone has moved forward over the years and great things have been accomplished, but just imagine what could have been if we didn't keep hanging a sharp left every so often and regrouping because we didn't like some distribution's logo or installer colors...
When you have to use specific windows only applications at the office, you stay with the OS.
its also the only thing that is supported/approved for many people..