It depends. If one has not, in fact, committed the crime that the "officer" is "arresting" one for; it should legally not be an arrest at all, but an assault and kidnapping attempt. In this case, I would most certainly be 100% wholeheartedly in favor of the elimination of "resisting arrest" entirely, "danger to the officer" be damned. So far as I'm concerned, he loses any and all moral authority as an officer the instant he decides to try to frame someone for a crime he didn't commit.
If the suspect has, in fact, committed the Crome, OTOH, that's another thing entirely.
The truly obnoxious thing is that without the PIN, the chip itself is worthless, but was forced on us anyway. So we got the slowdown at the registers for no reason. With a PIN, at least if I lose my card or my wallet is stolen, the card would be useless to the thief barring unbelievable luck in guessing. But with only the chip in play, the only place a thief couldn't use my card is the gas station, which was already the case with the stripe.
> Otherwise, we need to accept that this is reasonable > to some extent
No, it's not reasonable and we should not accept it. I'm not at all in favor of the US forcing it's laws on people outside its borders either... not even against total douchebags like Julian Assange or Kim Dotcom. But the offense at hand, in this story and discussion, is from Europe. So I felt no particular need to go off topic.
Or, you could just backup your data. If you do a wired and encrypted backup to iTunes, it's protected both by Filevault and its passphrase and an additional round of encryption in iTunes, on which you could (and should) use a different passphrase.
Then, if your kid (or you, of you suffer from a bad case of butterfingers) wipes your device, it's a minor inconvenience and nothing more. Hell, you could create and load a custom security profile and crank it down to wipe the phone after only 2 failed attempts. And, so long as you are backed up, it's still no big deal.
> The EU needs to make this simpler. They need to > create a clear set of guidelines for what types of > information must be "forgotten" and how a person > can invoke their right.
No. What they need to do is:
1) Take these matters up at the source, rather than shooting the messenger (Google). If some content is libelous, proven defamatory, or otherwise illegal; sue and remove it at the SOURCE. Once the illegal content is removed, it will automatically fall out of the index the next time that site is spidered. Going after Google instead of the original publisher is a flagrant case of simply targeting the party with the deepest pockets.
2) Stop trying to export their laws outside their own borders. If the UK wants to regulate what their citizens can access on site.co.uk within the UK, or if France wants to regulate what can be sold on site.fr within France then fine; they should regulate the.co.uk and.fr subsidiaries. None of those regulations should ever affect, in any way or capacity whatsoever, what I, as a US citizen, can see or buy on site.com.
Not really. "Autopilot" has never meant fully-autonomous computer control with no supervision from the pilot. In fact, the first Sperry autopilot's debut was at the Paris Air show in 1914; back when a "computer" was a person whose job was to do arithmetic by hand. It was a simple gyroscopic affair that enabled forward progress in a straight line and... well... nothing else. Rather, an autopilot is, and always has been, merely a tool to reduce the pilot's workload. It still requires preparation, programming, supervision, and attention.
tl;dr: "autopilot" is 100% appropriate to Tesla's usage and not deceptive at all.
Yup. "Turn on logging for everything that has it (And add it if it doesn't.), and dump it all into Splunk/Kibana/etc." is pretty much the first and automatic instinct for anyone after the first time they have to debug something where the previous guy failed to do so. And while you may off-load data to frozen buckets or glacier or wherever, you certainly don't throw data away, unless you're scrapping the entire system. (And even then...).
It's kind of a no brainer if you've ever actually done honest and productive work before.
Because one day, your fancy-pants IDE will be unavailable. You'll be trying to do or fix something with nothing more than an ssh link and vi. And if you're completely reliant on your IDE and it's crutches to write your code, and you don't know vi anyway; you're screwed.
Hardly. It's not about prostitution at all. Do you think the pussygrabber-in-chief wants to end prostitution? How else would he ever get laid, but for paying? This case was nothing more than an end-run attack against the protections of service providers from liability for end-user content under section 230 the CDA... a hedging of their bets in case SESTA failed to pass. They want to be able to put the screws to tech companies, an force them to aid in their agenda of chipping away at free speech and privacy rights.
They're ALWAYS going to make sure the test case is someone loathsome... "human traffickers" in this case to attack section 230, "pedophiles" to justify laptop searches by airport thugs, or "terrorists" to try to force Apple to build a backdoor for the iPhone. It's just a cheap play to emotional sympathies... a classic "Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children?" canard. Because who DOES want to be on the same side as traffickers, pedos, or terrorists? By framing an attack on speech or privacy protections as part of a campaign against any of the three, they can gain a lot of support from less critically-thinking people who don't understand that by chipping away at speech and privacy protections, they don't just harm people who deserve it, like those traffickers, pedos, and terrorists. The same rights are taken away from EVERYBODY. And that's exactly what 45, the DoJ, and especially the FBI, want.
How many $150K cars are sold vs. $25K cars? Orders of magnitude fewer. $150K cars are a rounding error when it comes to pollution numbers. You don't affect change by pruning the outliers. You do it by improving the performance of the mainstream.
Same with the mag-stripe readers for driver's licenses in my state. When those started showing up; I knew quite a few people in the local rave and club scene. And I actually got into a conversation with a promoter about why he started using those machines. He waxed poetic about them... not because they made verifying anyone's age any easier. No one really cares if an 18-year-old drinks, or if a 16 year old gets into an 18+ party. "Their money is as good as anyone's who's legal. Why shouldn't we take it?". No. He full-up admitted that the only reason those scanners are used is to harvest everyone's addresses so he could sell the lists of his attendees to (multiple) marketing and advertising companies.
After that, I used my passport as my ID for a while. It would throw bartenders, doormen, bouncers, and any other security type for such a loop. I even had one try to claim I was passing it as a fake ID... with a cop not 10 feet away no less. And oh, you could practically see said ID checker seethe when I wouldn't back down, he called the cop over, and said cop put him in his place wrt/ the validity of a passport. It was delicious. Sorry Bub... no mailing address for you! LOL.
Or, as is fairly apparent if you actually bother to read the whole post, the GP is most likely a gay or lesbian who was treated like crap in their midwestern hometown, found California much more welcoming, and doesn't want to back to the abuse. And while the GLBTQ examples are more vehement; I have observed that most of the flyover state haters I've known were in fact people from there who left and found the west coast more palatable. The born and raised "coastal elite" who unjustifiably looks down on the red states with no first hand knowledge of it's like there is largely a caricature invented by those very same red staters.
"Netflix will no longer be able to"? My guess is that Netflix will be more like: "glad not to have to". If I were running Netflix, or any similar service really, I'd be awfully annoyed at having to waste the time, money, and engineering effort to create geographical blocks on content to appease some scummy RIAA/MPAA-wannabe org. (Or, for that matter, the scum at the RIAA and MPAA themselves. Though, I suppose the RIAA doesn't come into play for a video service.) Bonus: the fewer of those types I had to cut deals with, the fewer toxic people I'd have to meet in my life and the happier I'd be in general.
Hell... my plain old last-generation, not-hybrid, 2013 Mazda 3 tops 40 MPG on the freeway. First car I've owned, actually, that not just meets it's EPA estimate, but routinely beats it. The current gen already does better. And the new engine going into the next generation is even more efficient. No way is 50MPG unrealistic.
Monopoly power? Where do you people imagine Amazon has a monopoly? It's not in retail sales, where they do only about a quarter of the business that Walmart does:
They're a big player, to be sure. But that's because they have their fingers in a lot of pies; not because they're the only game in town for any particular one of them. Apparently you don't remember the mid-1990's, when Microsoft had a 97% share of the desktop market. And, even though a trial was held for the show of it, that wasn't considered enough of a monopoly to be actionable and result in a breakup.
This is not about any monopoly. This is nothing more than your dear leader being butthurt that Jeff Bezos doesn't think highly him. And Bezos is right not to.
Demonstrably untrue. I know you people are all into "alternative facts". But in the real world, that's called bullshit. And when you lead off with lies, there's no reason to pay any heed to anything else you people say:
Even if you and your dear leader were right, it's irrelevant. There's only one question that needs to be asked: "How does the USPS set their rates, bulk-shipping or otherwise?".
If the rates are pre-set (by statute, fixed USPS policy, to be competitive with UPS/FedEx, etc.), then the onus is on those who set those rates to assure that the USPS is profitable. And if Amazon is simply purchasing a service at the price that it is offered to anyone. Nothing to see here. It's not Amazon's responsibility to see that anyone else is profitable.
If the USPS cut a deal with Amazon for lower rates, then it's still on the USPS for signing an agreement on which they wouldn't make money. They have accountants, MBAs, and the like, just like everyone else. And they went into any negotiations knowing their fixed and variable costs, and the price at which they could offer their service profitably. If they signed a deal to sell their service at a price that would lose them money, the again, that's not on Amazon. They need to suck it up, wait for the deal to expire, and raise their rates when the contract comes up for renewal. And as before, it's not Amazon's responsibility to see that anyone else is profitable.
Yeah. And if you used "password" for your password, and/or information that any rando can get off your wikipedia page as your password recovery question, you'd get "hacked" too.
The kind that's done on-the-cheap in China. And, truth be told, Apple's QC does better than most in keeping the defect rate in delivered product down. For example: I went through three StarTACs in less than a year before #4 deigned to stay functional (Last Motorola product I ever willingly bought.). The xBox is quite notorious for its low build quality and number of returns. And the defect rate on Thinkpads skyrocketed after IBM sold the brand and their own QC people weren't there anymore to keep Lenovo under their thumbs.
You're doing a "but But BUT... Hillary's EMAILS!!!" on a story about a technical glitch in damaged iPhones under repair? That's whataboutism turned up to 11. What are you people and your jaundiced dear leader going to blame on her next? Rainy days and the common cold?
It'a not that it's not feasible. It's that there's not a big enough market/demand that any manufacturer has bothered to offer that bit of kit. So suggestions for how achieve a similar end result are entirely appropriate. And at the end of the day, "Here's my idea for a device I would like and poses no particularly difficult or interesting technical challenge, but is not offered for sale... GIMME!" is not "news or nerds" or for anyone else. It's banal and trite water-cooler chit-chat at the very best.
If msmash and dryriver think it's such a good idea and are so put out that it doesn't exist; one of them should go get a job in product design at Dell or whatnot, do their own damn market research, and present a business case that there's enough demand for this thing to make it worthwhile to bring to market.
If he committed a crime under BRITISH law then, by all means, the UK should prosecute him as they see fit. Since he wasn't in the US's jurisdiction when the "crime" was committed, he was not subject to US law, and there is no crime. And the DoJ should and was, quite rightfully, be told to go pound sand.
Countries (ALL countries... France is another particularly bad offender.) need to stop this trend of exporting their laws beyond their own borders. Extradition is supposed to be a method to recover fugitives who have committed a crime and then fled your jurisdiction. It was not meant to be a license to go on a fishing expedition for people who've annoyed you from OUTSIDE your jurisdiction where they were never rightfully subject to your laws in the first place.
Perhaps Reddit initially sold themselves as a "say anything" platform. But Facebook sure didn't. In fact, their whole schtick from the very beginning was a more controlled and curated experience than the cesspool MySpace had become. That was the reasoning behind the "real names" policy. And that 's why everyones' Facebook wall looks the same, vs. all of the garbage CSS you could use to "pimp your myspace". I don't recall Twitter actively billing themselves as an anything goes platform either; but just as one that handles so much traffic that it's practically impossible to police.
> If you can't find it on Netflix, can't find it on Hulu, > can't find it on Amazon Prime, and it's not in the > stores, the way to piracy is not long.
For that matter, who wants to hunt through Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO Go/Now, CBS AllAccess, that new Disney service, Vudu, Crunchyroll, Dramafever, and so on and so on and so on; every time they want to watch something? For a lot of people, they're either a Netflix person or a Hulu person, and if it's not on their first choice of service, the next stop is not the expedition above. Their next stop is The Pirate Bay.
Hell, I subscribe to Prime as well as Netflix myself; and I grabbed the first season of The Grand Tour from TPB because Amazon still has that stick up their bum about working with Apple, and there was no AppleTV app for Prime at the time. So, the choice was:
1) Find and clear a place for my laptop next to the TV, find a DisplayPort to HDMI cable, move an AC adaptor over to the TV, hook everything up, make sure the laptop is set not to sleep, mirror the screen, and play it through the browser, and get up and walk to the TV any time I needed to pause or move to the next episode. or: 2) Download the video file, drop it on my shared SMB drive, play it with the VLC app on the AppleTV.
2 was a whole lot faster, easier, and hassle-free.
> Especially BBC content is very tempting to pirate for > us in the US, because BBC America either doesn't > provide the content at all, or it's seriously abridged > and censored, and BBC UK refuses to sell to US > customers and directs them to BBC America.
Yup. That's another one that burns my blood. I'd happily pay their license fee if they'd give me full and unfettered access to their streams, iPlayer, and such without having to resort to VPN shenanigans. But they won't take my money. Can't have these filthy colonial eyes sullying their precious content, can they?
Slashdot Mirror
It depends. If one has not, in fact, committed the crime that the "officer" is "arresting" one for; it should legally not be an arrest at all, but an assault and kidnapping attempt. In this case, I would most certainly be 100% wholeheartedly in favor of the elimination of "resisting arrest" entirely, "danger to the officer" be damned. So far as I'm concerned, he loses any and all moral authority as an officer the instant he decides to try to frame someone for a crime he didn't commit.
If the suspect has, in fact, committed the Crome, OTOH, that's another thing entirely.
The truly obnoxious thing is that without the PIN, the chip itself is worthless, but was forced on us anyway. So we got the slowdown at the registers for no reason. With a PIN, at least if I lose my card or my wallet is stolen, the card would be useless to the thief barring unbelievable luck in guessing. But with only the chip in play, the only place a thief couldn't use my card is the gas station, which was already the case with the stripe.
Pointless. Security. Theater.
> Otherwise, we need to accept that this is reasonable
> to some extent
No, it's not reasonable and we should not accept it. I'm not at all in favor of the US forcing it's laws on people outside its borders either... not even against total douchebags like Julian Assange or Kim Dotcom. But the offense at hand, in this story and discussion, is from Europe. So I felt no particular need to go off topic.
Or, you could just backup your data. If you do a wired and encrypted backup to iTunes, it's protected both by Filevault and its passphrase and an additional round of encryption in iTunes, on which you could (and should) use a different passphrase.
Then, if your kid (or you, of you suffer from a bad case of butterfingers) wipes your device, it's a minor inconvenience and nothing more. Hell, you could create and load a custom security profile and crank it down to wipe the phone after only 2 failed attempts. And, so long as you are backed up, it's still no big deal.
> The EU needs to make this simpler. They need to
> create a clear set of guidelines for what types of
> information must be "forgotten" and how a person
> can invoke their right.
No. What they need to do is:
1) Take these matters up at the source, rather than shooting the messenger (Google). If some content is libelous, proven defamatory, or otherwise illegal; sue and remove it at the SOURCE. Once the illegal content is removed, it will automatically fall out of the index the next time that site is spidered. Going after Google instead of the original publisher is a flagrant case of simply targeting the party with the deepest pockets.
2) Stop trying to export their laws outside their own borders. If the UK wants to regulate what their citizens can access on site.co.uk within the UK, or if France wants to regulate what can be sold on site.fr within France then fine; they should regulate the .co.uk and .fr subsidiaries. None of those regulations should ever affect, in any way or capacity whatsoever, what I, as a US citizen, can see or buy on site.com.
Not really. "Autopilot" has never meant fully-autonomous computer control with no supervision from the pilot. In fact, the first Sperry autopilot's debut was at the Paris Air show in 1914; back when a "computer" was a person whose job was to do arithmetic by hand. It was a simple gyroscopic affair that enabled forward progress in a straight line and... well... nothing else. Rather, an autopilot is, and always has been, merely a tool to reduce the pilot's workload. It still requires preparation, programming, supervision, and attention.
tl;dr: "autopilot" is 100% appropriate to Tesla's usage and not deceptive at all.
Yup. "Turn on logging for everything that has it (And add it if it doesn't.), and dump it all into Splunk/Kibana/etc." is pretty much the first and automatic instinct for anyone after the first time they have to debug something where the previous guy failed to do so. And while you may off-load data to frozen buckets or glacier or wherever, you certainly don't throw data away, unless you're scrapping the entire system. (And even then...).
It's kind of a no brainer if you've ever actually done honest and productive work before.
Bullocks. They're a troll and nothing more. Real artists ship.
Because one day, your fancy-pants IDE will be unavailable. You'll be trying to do or fix something with nothing more than an ssh link and vi. And if you're completely reliant on your IDE and it's crutches to write your code, and you don't know vi anyway; you're screwed.
Hardly. It's not about prostitution at all. Do you think the pussygrabber-in-chief wants to end prostitution? How else would he ever get laid, but for paying? This case was nothing more than an end-run attack against the protections of service providers from liability for end-user content under section 230 the CDA... a hedging of their bets in case SESTA failed to pass. They want to be able to put the screws to tech companies, an force them to aid in their agenda of chipping away at free speech and privacy rights.
They're ALWAYS going to make sure the test case is someone loathsome... "human traffickers" in this case to attack section 230, "pedophiles" to justify laptop searches by airport thugs, or "terrorists" to try to force Apple to build a backdoor for the iPhone. It's just a cheap play to emotional sympathies... a classic "Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children?" canard. Because who DOES want to be on the same side as traffickers, pedos, or terrorists? By framing an attack on speech or privacy protections as part of a campaign against any of the three, they can gain a lot of support from less critically-thinking people who don't understand that by chipping away at speech and privacy protections, they don't just harm people who deserve it, like those traffickers, pedos, and terrorists. The same rights are taken away from EVERYBODY. And that's exactly what 45, the DoJ, and especially the FBI, want.
How many $150K cars are sold vs. $25K cars? Orders of magnitude fewer. $150K cars are a rounding error when it comes to pollution numbers. You don't affect change by pruning the outliers. You do it by improving the performance of the mainstream.
Same with the mag-stripe readers for driver's licenses in my state. When those started showing up; I knew quite a few people in the local rave and club scene. And I actually got into a conversation with a promoter about why he started using those machines. He waxed poetic about them... not because they made verifying anyone's age any easier. No one really cares if an 18-year-old drinks, or if a 16 year old gets into an 18+ party. "Their money is as good as anyone's who's legal. Why shouldn't we take it?". No. He full-up admitted that the only reason those scanners are used is to harvest everyone's addresses so he could sell the lists of his attendees to (multiple) marketing and advertising companies.
After that, I used my passport as my ID for a while. It would throw bartenders, doormen, bouncers, and any other security type for such a loop. I even had one try to claim I was passing it as a fake ID... with a cop not 10 feet away no less. And oh, you could practically see said ID checker seethe when I wouldn't back down, he called the cop over, and said cop put him in his place wrt/ the validity of a passport. It was delicious. Sorry Bub... no mailing address for you! LOL.
Eventually though, they added those RFID chips to passports; and I got too old for raves and clubs anyway. So I don't generally carry a second ID with me these days. But yeah... those scanners have proliferated to retail stores now. I'm fairly blasé about who can send me mail these days since everything important is online. But it may actually be worth it to start carrying my passport card or global entry card; if only for the occasional LOL when some would-be junk mailer tries to swipe the mag stripe that it doesn't have.
Or, as is fairly apparent if you actually bother to read the whole post, the GP is most likely a gay or lesbian who was treated like crap in their midwestern hometown, found California much more welcoming, and doesn't want to back to the abuse. And while the GLBTQ examples are more vehement; I have observed that most of the flyover state haters I've known were in fact people from there who left and found the west coast more palatable. The born and raised "coastal elite" who unjustifiably looks down on the red states with no first hand knowledge of it's like there is largely a caricature invented by those very same red staters.
"Netflix will no longer be able to"? My guess is that Netflix will be more like: "glad not to have to". If I were running Netflix, or any similar service really, I'd be awfully annoyed at having to waste the time, money, and engineering effort to create geographical blocks on content to appease some scummy RIAA/MPAA-wannabe org. (Or, for that matter, the scum at the RIAA and MPAA themselves. Though, I suppose the RIAA doesn't come into play for a video service.) Bonus: the fewer of those types I had to cut deals with, the fewer toxic people I'd have to meet in my life and the happier I'd be in general.
Hell... my plain old last-generation, not-hybrid, 2013 Mazda 3 tops 40 MPG on the freeway. First car I've owned, actually, that not just meets it's EPA estimate, but routinely beats it. The current gen already does better. And the new engine going into the next generation is even more efficient. No way is 50MPG unrealistic.
Monopoly power? Where do you people imagine Amazon has a monopoly? It's not in retail sales, where they do only about a quarter of the business that Walmart does:
https://www.statista.com/stati...
Cloud services? Nope. They're at 31-35%, with both Google and Microsoft growing more rapidly:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/10...
They're a big player, to be sure. But that's because they have their fingers in a lot of pies; not because they're the only game in town for any particular one of them. Apparently you don't remember the mid-1990's, when Microsoft had a 97% share of the desktop market. And, even though a trial was held for the show of it, that wasn't considered enough of a monopoly to be actionable and result in a breakup.
This is not about any monopoly. This is nothing more than your dear leader being butthurt that Jeff Bezos doesn't think highly him. And Bezos is right not to.
> the richest man TO EVER EXIST
Demonstrably untrue. I know you people are all into "alternative facts". But in the real world, that's called bullshit. And when you lead off with lies, there's no reason to pay any heed to anything else you people say:
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://time.com/money/3977798/...
Even if you and your dear leader were right, it's irrelevant. There's only one question that needs to be asked: "How does the USPS set their rates, bulk-shipping or otherwise?".
If the rates are pre-set (by statute, fixed USPS policy, to be competitive with UPS/FedEx, etc.), then the onus is on those who set those rates to assure that the USPS is profitable. And if Amazon is simply purchasing a service at the price that it is offered to anyone. Nothing to see here. It's not Amazon's responsibility to see that anyone else is profitable.
If the USPS cut a deal with Amazon for lower rates, then it's still on the USPS for signing an agreement on which they wouldn't make money. They have accountants, MBAs, and the like, just like everyone else. And they went into any negotiations knowing their fixed and variable costs, and the price at which they could offer their service profitably. If they signed a deal to sell their service at a price that would lose them money, the again, that's not on Amazon. They need to suck it up, wait for the deal to expire, and raise their rates when the contract comes up for renewal. And as before, it's not Amazon's responsibility to see that anyone else is profitable.
Yeah. And if you used "password" for your password, and/or information that any rando can get off your wikipedia page as your password recovery question, you'd get "hacked" too.
The kind that's done on-the-cheap in China. And, truth be told, Apple's QC does better than most in keeping the defect rate in delivered product down. For example: I went through three StarTACs in less than a year before #4 deigned to stay functional (Last Motorola product I ever willingly bought.). The xBox is quite notorious for its low build quality and number of returns. And the defect rate on Thinkpads skyrocketed after IBM sold the brand and their own QC people weren't there anymore to keep Lenovo under their thumbs.
Seriously?
You're doing a "but But BUT... Hillary's EMAILS!!!" on a story about a technical glitch in damaged iPhones under repair? That's whataboutism turned up to 11. What are you people and your jaundiced dear leader going to blame on her next? Rainy days and the common cold?
It'a not that it's not feasible. It's that there's not a big enough market/demand that any manufacturer has bothered to offer that bit of kit. So suggestions for how achieve a similar end result are entirely appropriate. And at the end of the day, "Here's my idea for a device I would like and poses no particularly difficult or interesting technical challenge, but is not offered for sale... GIMME!" is not "news or nerds" or for anyone else. It's banal and trite water-cooler chit-chat at the very best.
If msmash and dryriver think it's such a good idea and are so put out that it doesn't exist; one of them should go get a job in product design at Dell or whatnot, do their own damn market research, and present a business case that there's enough demand for this thing to make it worthwhile to bring to market.
If he committed a crime under BRITISH law then, by all means, the UK should prosecute him as they see fit. Since he wasn't in the US's jurisdiction when the "crime" was committed, he was not subject to US law, and there is no crime. And the DoJ should and was, quite rightfully, be told to go pound sand.
Countries (ALL countries... France is another particularly bad offender.) need to stop this trend of exporting their laws beyond their own borders. Extradition is supposed to be a method to recover fugitives who have committed a crime and then fled your jurisdiction. It was not meant to be a license to go on a fishing expedition for people who've annoyed you from OUTSIDE your jurisdiction where they were never rightfully subject to your laws in the first place.
Perhaps Reddit initially sold themselves as a "say anything" platform. But Facebook sure didn't. In fact, their whole schtick from the very beginning was a more controlled and curated experience than the cesspool MySpace had become. That was the reasoning behind the "real names" policy. And that 's why everyones' Facebook wall looks the same, vs. all of the garbage CSS you could use to "pimp your myspace". I don't recall Twitter actively billing themselves as an anything goes platform either; but just as one that handles so much traffic that it's practically impossible to police.
And r
> If you can't find it on Netflix, can't find it on Hulu,
> can't find it on Amazon Prime, and it's not in the
> stores, the way to piracy is not long.
For that matter, who wants to hunt through Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO Go/Now, CBS AllAccess, that new Disney service, Vudu, Crunchyroll, Dramafever, and so on and so on and so on; every time they want to watch something? For a lot of people, they're either a Netflix person or a Hulu person, and if it's not on their first choice of service, the next stop is not the expedition above. Their next stop is The Pirate Bay.
Hell, I subscribe to Prime as well as Netflix myself; and I grabbed the first season of The Grand Tour from TPB because Amazon still has that stick up their bum about working with Apple, and there was no AppleTV app for Prime at the time. So, the choice was:
1) Find and clear a place for my laptop next to the TV, find a DisplayPort to HDMI cable, move an AC adaptor over to the TV, hook everything up, make sure the laptop is set not to sleep, mirror the screen, and play it through the browser, and get up and walk to the TV any time I needed to pause or move to the next episode.
or:
2) Download the video file, drop it on my shared SMB drive, play it with the VLC app on the AppleTV.
2 was a whole lot faster, easier, and hassle-free.
> Especially BBC content is very tempting to pirate for
> us in the US, because BBC America either doesn't
> provide the content at all, or it's seriously abridged
> and censored, and BBC UK refuses to sell to US
> customers and directs them to BBC America.
Yup. That's another one that burns my blood. I'd happily pay their license fee if they'd give me full and unfettered access to their streams, iPlayer, and such without having to resort to VPN shenanigans. But they won't take my money. Can't have these filthy colonial eyes sullying their precious content, can they?