"Innocent until proven guilty" tends to be regarded as a sensible method in most societies. I know it's not a court of law, but establishing someone's guilt (to some level higher than a simple accusation that anyone can make with almost no evidence) before they suffer adverse consequences is still a good idea.
On the other hand, there are all the (very valid) reasons that Slashdot so often points out for DMCA takedowns being a bad thing: open WiFi, kids using the computer, automated takedown bots, faulty IP address gathering, and probably many others that I've forgotten to mention here.
Just because Dr. Rockerfeller J. Richington doesn't need to turn to P2P for a copy of The Hurt Locker, it doesn't mean he's immune to DMCA letters.
I doubt that'll get enough response to hurt them - the subscription fees of a few tech savvy customers don't amount to that much. Ideally a few rich and powerful businesspeople would lose their connections because of this; once the lawsuits start flying that should take care of things.
Everything you say is true, but perhaps incomplete. The police are there as a public service, after all, and what rubs most people the wrong way is that they won't take the time to help with minor to moderate theft or fraud (cases worth a few hundred to a couple of thousand - dodgy eBay auctions, that kind of thing) but they will use money and resources enforcing seemingly minor traffic offences, drug possession, and the like.
It's a somewhat simplistic view to take, I know, but I think the public at large would be willing to accept that their own relatively minor financial losses aren't worth the time to investigate if the police resources were entirely tied up catching violent criminals. As it is, the (somewhat accurate) perception is that paperwork and easy to reach (but less important) targets take precedence over property crime against individuals.
I don't know about this tech specifically, but I'm thinking perhaps they need a decent sized parabolic dish rather than a phone antenna to provide an acceptable signal.
True, but I'd suggest that the SAR guys want the money to go on a ruggedised basic call/text model rather than a smartphone which has a lot more to go wrong in both hardware and software.
It seems to me that they're marketing it as a satellite phone that's good for every day use - problem is, if you're in the niche that needs a satellite phone then you probably don't have the same everyday needs as your average businessman.
Hopefully I'm not missing the point entirely here (and if I am, I apologise), but isn't that still constrained by the overall limit of 120GB (or whatever amount)?
A fixed 'number of downloads'? What does that even mean?
If it's limited by the number of gigabytes then we're going back to the argument that they're advertising something as unlimited when it's clearly not. If it's limited by number of files then that just makes no logical sense (although that's by no means enough to rule it out as a move by a major company).
I don't even have a problem with data limits from ISPs, I've made plenty of posts in support of them (although with certain caveats that many current ISPs don't live up to). I just think they should be more upfront about it in the advertising, and using words like unlimited without further qualifiers is in no helping on that front.
I've noticed the 'unlimited time' argument come up on Slashdot before. That might be the argument that the ISPs would try to make, but since many of the ads actually say 'unlimited downloads' they're already on very thin ice. Beyond that, since 'always on' is a standard feature of the vast majority of broadband connections, it would be hard to argue before most advertising standards boards that the 'unlimited' moniker is not, at the very least, highly misleading if referring to time without stating it explicitly.
5k is a lot more plausible for a serious film/TV buff, especially if they went through rating things they'd seen long before Netflix. Probably a mix of bots and real users, at that level. 50k, OTOH, seems pretty much bot-only territory.
I'm not familiar with Alice specifically, but even with pretty limited interactivity it's quite possibly good for the job - these students are very unlikely to be going into the real complex nuts and bolts anyway, so giving them a very rudimentary idea of the 'computer' side while letting them focus on the 'art' side is probably enough. If they like what they see enough to consider a career in it, they'll just end up passing on the art and ideas to a separate team of coders anyway.
Those of us who actually do create things are more worried about turning potential customers into real customers than suing people.
I feel like this should be shouted from the rooftops.
It's getting depressing the amount of time, money and effort the government is spending in the vain hope of protecting some special interest groups who generally speak for a tiny minority of the creative industry. What's worse is the amount of collateral damage in the form of both technical and legal measures that can be used to infringe on our freedom to speak.
Copying someone's hard work without paying for it is a dick move. Restricting said work with onerous DRM so that it's not possible to pay for a copy that can be used as one wants, or taking my money on the assumption that I'm infringing your copyright, or crippling the connection between my PC and monitor, or trying works up in copyrights so long that we'll never see them made public in our lifetimes, or tracking my online behaviour, or any number of other moves made by the entertainment industry lobby, is such colossal asshattery that the initial act of infringement pales in comparison.
HDCP comes alongside HDMI, which has been standard in run of the mill Dell laptops and the like for a while, not to mention games consoles. I see the occasional problem with something as simple as people hooking up a laptop to a projector or TV, simply because there's a handshake and key exchange going on rather than a straightforward connection. I'd say it's been working its way into the offices and living rooms of the average user for three to four years now.
The fact that it's been relatively (but by no means entirely) hassle free so far does not, however, mean that the trend will continue. The companies don't want to go all out with the media restrictions while HDMI is 'new' - it'd just risk causing a backlash and having consumers avoid it. Much more sensible to allow an installed base to build and then bring in the restrictions later. I'm glad to see that yet another piece of useless DRM has (apparently) fallen.
I suppose you're going to tell everyone in England that they should be speaking a language from the Celtic family, too? The original European settlers absolutely fucked up when they steamrolled in with their own languages, but then they also killed a whole lot of the indigenous population, so that's perhaps a hint that they aren't the go-to guys for advice on courtesy. The fact of the matter is that English is, rightly or wrongly, prevalent enough in the US, and has been for long enough, that it is entirely reasonably for one to expect to speak it in almost all day-to-day interactions.
I see your point, but there's a wide gap between accommodating disabilities and accommodating those who have chosen to come to an institution where classes are taught and examined in English.
I'm very much aware and in favour of the fact that our society is multicultural, but I also think the person making the choice (be that moving to a particular country, attending a particular educational institution, whatever) should be the one to make the effort. It's a standard that I consider fair, and one I am more than willing to apply to myself.
There's also the possibility that the orchestra believes in the cause and is offering their services at a cut rate - if anything, it would be more likely that the better (and presumably, therefore, relatively well paid in general) musicians would be willing and able to do such a thing.
In any case, their website has examples of music they've previously had recorded, so you can judge the quality for yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
"Innocent until proven guilty" tends to be regarded as a sensible method in most societies. I know it's not a court of law, but establishing someone's guilt (to some level higher than a simple accusation that anyone can make with almost no evidence) before they suffer adverse consequences is still a good idea.
On the other hand, there are all the (very valid) reasons that Slashdot so often points out for DMCA takedowns being a bad thing: open WiFi, kids using the computer, automated takedown bots, faulty IP address gathering, and probably many others that I've forgotten to mention here.
Just because Dr. Rockerfeller J. Richington doesn't need to turn to P2P for a copy of The Hurt Locker, it doesn't mean he's immune to DMCA letters.
Incidentally, why don't we hear about people pursuing that "penalty of perjury" bit in the more obviously spurious takedown letters?
I doubt that'll get enough response to hurt them - the subscription fees of a few tech savvy customers don't amount to that much. Ideally a few rich and powerful businesspeople would lose their connections because of this; once the lawsuits start flying that should take care of things.
This informative news article might shed some light on that one.
Everything you say is true, but perhaps incomplete. The police are there as a public service, after all, and what rubs most people the wrong way is that they won't take the time to help with minor to moderate theft or fraud (cases worth a few hundred to a couple of thousand - dodgy eBay auctions, that kind of thing) but they will use money and resources enforcing seemingly minor traffic offences, drug possession, and the like.
It's a somewhat simplistic view to take, I know, but I think the public at large would be willing to accept that their own relatively minor financial losses aren't worth the time to investigate if the police resources were entirely tied up catching violent criminals. As it is, the (somewhat accurate) perception is that paperwork and easy to reach (but less important) targets take precedence over property crime against individuals.
I'd never thought of the force from the drop causing problems, but now you mention it it makes perfect sense. Good call!
In principle I agree with you. In practice, self checkouts are buggy as hell and any saved money will go straight to the pockets of the executives.
Better that than:
"Please say your account number now"
"12345"
"You said 'one' 'six' 'potato' 'beep' 'peanut', is this correct?"
I don't know about this tech specifically, but I'm thinking perhaps they need a decent sized parabolic dish rather than a phone antenna to provide an acceptable signal.
True, but I'd suggest that the SAR guys want the money to go on a ruggedised basic call/text model rather than a smartphone which has a lot more to go wrong in both hardware and software.
It seems to me that they're marketing it as a satellite phone that's good for every day use - problem is, if you're in the niche that needs a satellite phone then you probably don't have the same everyday needs as your average businessman.
Hopefully I'm not missing the point entirely here (and if I am, I apologise), but isn't that still constrained by the overall limit of 120GB (or whatever amount)?
A fixed 'number of downloads'? What does that even mean?
If it's limited by the number of gigabytes then we're going back to the argument that they're advertising something as unlimited when it's clearly not. If it's limited by number of files then that just makes no logical sense (although that's by no means enough to rule it out as a move by a major company).
I don't even have a problem with data limits from ISPs, I've made plenty of posts in support of them (although with certain caveats that many current ISPs don't live up to). I just think they should be more upfront about it in the advertising, and using words like unlimited without further qualifiers is in no helping on that front.
I've noticed the 'unlimited time' argument come up on Slashdot before. That might be the argument that the ISPs would try to make, but since many of the ads actually say 'unlimited downloads' they're already on very thin ice. Beyond that, since 'always on' is a standard feature of the vast majority of broadband connections, it would be hard to argue before most advertising standards boards that the 'unlimited' moniker is not, at the very least, highly misleading if referring to time without stating it explicitly.
Crack coming out in 3...2...1...
Freeze dried ice cream and the dust buster; how can you say that's not benefit enough?
Is that a jab at NYU or a jab at college kids in general?
5k is a lot more plausible for a serious film/TV buff, especially if they went through rating things they'd seen long before Netflix. Probably a mix of bots and real users, at that level. 50k, OTOH, seems pretty much bot-only territory.
I don't know if it'll lose him his job but yeah, this isn't even within the realms of MS's PR strategy, this is just some exec talking like an idiot.
I'm not familiar with Alice specifically, but even with pretty limited interactivity it's quite possibly good for the job - these students are very unlikely to be going into the real complex nuts and bolts anyway, so giving them a very rudimentary idea of the 'computer' side while letting them focus on the 'art' side is probably enough. If they like what they see enough to consider a career in it, they'll just end up passing on the art and ideas to a separate team of coders anyway.
It's the guy they named the Futurama character after.
Those of us who actually do create things are more worried about turning potential customers into real customers than suing people.
I feel like this should be shouted from the rooftops.
It's getting depressing the amount of time, money and effort the government is spending in the vain hope of protecting some special interest groups who generally speak for a tiny minority of the creative industry. What's worse is the amount of collateral damage in the form of both technical and legal measures that can be used to infringe on our freedom to speak.
Copying someone's hard work without paying for it is a dick move. Restricting said work with onerous DRM so that it's not possible to pay for a copy that can be used as one wants, or taking my money on the assumption that I'm infringing your copyright, or crippling the connection between my PC and monitor, or trying works up in copyrights so long that we'll never see them made public in our lifetimes, or tracking my online behaviour, or any number of other moves made by the entertainment industry lobby, is such colossal asshattery that the initial act of infringement pales in comparison.
HDCP comes alongside HDMI, which has been standard in run of the mill Dell laptops and the like for a while, not to mention games consoles. I see the occasional problem with something as simple as people hooking up a laptop to a projector or TV, simply because there's a handshake and key exchange going on rather than a straightforward connection. I'd say it's been working its way into the offices and living rooms of the average user for three to four years now.
The fact that it's been relatively (but by no means entirely) hassle free so far does not, however, mean that the trend will continue. The companies don't want to go all out with the media restrictions while HDMI is 'new' - it'd just risk causing a backlash and having consumers avoid it. Much more sensible to allow an installed base to build and then bring in the restrictions later. I'm glad to see that yet another piece of useless DRM has (apparently) fallen.
I suppose you're going to tell everyone in England that they should be speaking a language from the Celtic family, too? The original European settlers absolutely fucked up when they steamrolled in with their own languages, but then they also killed a whole lot of the indigenous population, so that's perhaps a hint that they aren't the go-to guys for advice on courtesy. The fact of the matter is that English is, rightly or wrongly, prevalent enough in the US, and has been for long enough, that it is entirely reasonably for one to expect to speak it in almost all day-to-day interactions.
I see your point, but there's a wide gap between accommodating disabilities and accommodating those who have chosen to come to an institution where classes are taught and examined in English.
I'm very much aware and in favour of the fact that our society is multicultural, but I also think the person making the choice (be that moving to a particular country, attending a particular educational institution, whatever) should be the one to make the effort. It's a standard that I consider fair, and one I am more than willing to apply to myself.
There's also the possibility that the orchestra believes in the cause and is offering their services at a cut rate - if anything, it would be more likely that the better (and presumably, therefore, relatively well paid in general) musicians would be willing and able to do such a thing.
In any case, their website has examples of music they've previously had recorded, so you can judge the quality for yourself.