Until last Wednesday, when his RSS news reader popped up with headlines from various websites with the news of the reward.
He uses an RSS feeder for his news yet he stores 30 year old magazines in garbage bags under his floor boards.
Nice:)
On a slightly related topic... He said he's using the $10k to pay for his daughters weddings. I want to know where they are getting married and how I can afford a wedding for 5k or less:)
As a rule, rihc and powerful people tend to hang out with other rich and powerful people. I suspect this is more about giving the appearance of impropriety rather than any impropriety itself. Political opponents will try to make hay from this.
Then, as a rule, political persons shouldn't be putting themselves in positions that will allow their opponents such room to gripe.
The article stated that this guy has done this three times before to such a degree that he was asked to step down.
That makes for a $3000 1Ghz laptop running Windows XP.
Let's be fair now... It's a 1Ghz Laptop powered by a now defunct Transmeta chip. So it's really not 1Ghz, it's not being made anymore, and it's still expensive as hell.
There is no excuse for discrimination against gays. Microsoft of all companies should know that.
Well, the current government regime in power in the United States doesn't know it and in fact supports discrimination against gays. So why shouldn't companies?
Finally these guys have decided to put their egos aside and work on a compromise. If they had thought about this in the first place, imagine how much money these corporation would save on wasted R&D.
I doubt it had anything to do with ego as Toshiba is planning on debuting their technology at the end of the year anyway in PCs.
Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it... Sony probably realized that it was going to lose the battle if Toshiba got their stuff to market in 2005 and it was successful. If you can't beat them, join them.
I'm sorry but I really feel that Congress should be spending time protecting flesh and blood people rather than paper created "persons".
Plenty of flesh and blood people are getting fucked over by many other issues and losing a lot more money than if a company loses some possible revenue from a movie released ahead of time.
When my insurance rates go down and my prescription medicines no longer cost as much as they do then I feel Congress is free to explore some other avenues.
In addition to PDAs, Microsoft suggests that the system could be built into rental cars.
Would this be like OnStar? Not the navigational OnStar, the part where even if you don't have a subscription and hit the button they will supposedly guide you out of trouble or call for EMS?
I must say that I have growing concerns about the prospect of one company effectively determining what can and cannot be found on the world wide web, not to mention one company handling the email of a vast proportion of Internet users.
While I see what you are saying and I agree due to my tinfoilhatness I have to disagree that it is "handling the email of a vast proportion of Internet users."
This is a typical Slashdotter perception. Most people outside of "techies" don't use GMail. They may in the future but they aren't currently.
So for right now, let's not get *that* worried about them handling all the Internet's email but I do agree we should keep it in the back of our minds for later.
Because there arne't default kernel options for various tasks and because it's not exactly user friendly to configure and compile your own kernel people end up compiling in crap that they don't need.
Over the last ten years, and especially the last three, I have become increasingly annoyed with online advertising and have done what I can to virtually eliminate it from showing its ugly face on my screen.
squid and adzapper which is currently replacing many ads with 1x1 transparent GIFs. This is especially handy because I tunnel all my web traffic at work over my 256k upstream DSL connection. Do I really want to be wasting bandwith with flashing or changing ads?/etc/hosts to eliminate things like ads.osdn.com, ads.doubleclick.net, and various others. Yeah, I could add them to adzapper but it's a lot more fun to just block them all together. It gives me a sense of accomplishment.
Since Nikon clearly does not want third party raw converters reading their files (they would much rather sell you a copy of Nikon Capture), the likelihood of Nikon providing such an assurance to Adobe is not very high.
It's obvious that they have their own tool that they want you to own in order to decrypt that data.
Adobe is a large company with deep pockets (unlike Bibble), and it is unlikely we would run the legal risk of breaking the white balance encryption unless we can get some assurance from Nikon that they will not sue Adobe for doing so. Since Nikon clearly does not want third party raw converters reading their files (they would much rather sell you a copy of Nikon Capture), the likelihood of Nikon providing such an assurance to Adobe is not very high.
People who would be purchasing a high-end camera like the D2X and D2H would probably only be doing so to use a high-end piece of software to manipulate the 12+MP digital images.
When a potential buyer looks at Photoshop and sees that it isn't supporting the D2X/H fully because of some retarded move by Nikon to try and make money they are likely going to find another camera. People interested in the D2X/H cameras are going to be shopping around looking for the one that best fits their needs and aren't going to be impulse buying a $5000 camera.
Michael: I think, like everything, it's a question of balance. Ease of use, versus security. I defy anybody to tell me why is it more secure to not run as root. Nobody really has a good answer. They say "oh, yeah, it is!", but it really isn't. Here's why: What's the most important thing on your desktop? It's the data. If someone gets access to your libraries or whatever, who cares? Your data is the most precious thing on your computer. And whether you log in as root or log in as user, you have access to that data, technically anyone who's compromising your account has access to your data as well.
Techincally it's gaining control over your system without you knowing it and running exploitable programs as root makes that easier. If the hackers get access to your libraries, programs, etc, they can do far more damage to you by sniffing your data w/o your knowledge. Hackers aren't going to just steal your data and run. If they can gain easy access to the system they are going to modify it and snoop everything and keep getting what they came for.
Michael: Then you could say "Well, it's not really about your data, it's that people could accidentally mess things up!". Well, you could accidentally drive into a wall as well, it doesn't mean we should make all cars drive at 10 miles an hour. So, I don't see the added benefit. I DO see it's an added pain in the ass when grandma tries to change her wallpaper, and it tells her "you don't have root privileges". What are you talking about, man? I'm just trying to use my computer, or change the clock, or any one of a hundred other things. So, people always say "it's less secure", but I defy anyone to point out a single instance, and people all go "Well, I, erm, it's theoretical!". There's no one area I think you can point out - In this instance, a machine that's run with the root user could be compromised, in this instance one couldn't be compromised.
I am in no way a master of Linux/UNIX and I never claimed to be but even I know that if you are exploited while running something as root more damage can be done to a lot more services, files, etc, than if you were just running it as a user. It's not theoretical. It's fucking very real and it's idiots like this guy that make it easier and easier for more zombie boxes to get out there. Look at Windows... Yeah, no, we don't need Linux to end up like that too.
I want to know who the hell this guy is talking to that don't give him a valid argument. I have a feeling they are and he isn't listening.
Michael: I know the hardcore geeks feel differently, that's fine. When somebody installs Linspire, we say "do you want to set up users, yes or no", we give them the choice, right there when they start up for the first time. If they want to set up multiple users, they're welcome to do that, but we don't force them to. That's the difference we have.
It shouldn't even be a choice. Prompt for a password (like OS X) when something that needs root privledges runs. If it has succeeded with the Mac then it can with Linspire users too. If you are so concerned about making the users have a positive Linux experience rewrite the dialog boxes when they ask for "root priveledges" so that they are human readable. Don't just eliminate it and say that there's no valid reason not to. Taking the easy way out doesn't solve the problem.
Since when is Michael Roberson a trusted source? He's an asshole that's just into pushing the envelope and making waves (remember Lindows and MP3.com?) Right now he's doing exactly the same thing. "See, those Linux users are trying to make it hard for the layperson to use "their" OS and I'm trying to make it easy. Listen to me! I'm trustworthy!"
So, do you advocate all cars being unable to accelerate beyond 65 miles per hour? Or all guns being able to sense if they're being used in self defense? How about MP3 players that can detect copyrighted music and refuse to play it? The lack of these features sounds like a "serious issue" to me.
It's a bit different when you are driving a car and you go in excess of the speed limit. This is going into restricted airspace where you need to be licensed in order to fly above it.
Norris says you won't need a pilot's license if you fly it under 400 feet in non-restricted air space. And he's going to sell it for $50,000.
But the car will fly to 10k feet right and it will sell for $50k right? That means that a lot of idiots will be flying one of these things and they will have the ability to go over the 400 foot limit.
Strictly speaking, that's not true. Co-Ops have to compete in the market just like everyone else. (Unlike direct government services.) The real reason why you don't have a choice is that utilities tend to be monopolies, period.
Then my statement is 100% true. I'm not sure what you are talking about. They don't have to compete when they are a monopoly. They can price the services at whatever they want, they can put whatever devices they want on my home to limit my usage, etc.
I am stuck with them if I want to use electricity.
Yeah, great, so they are a government permitted monopoly. It still doesn't make it right and it really doens't make "co-ops" stick out as something positive in my mind.
With a co-op, you can actually do something. You can elect new board members that will better represent your interests.
Well, I just got sucked into this co-op and just received my first brochure about them. Some have been on the board for 20+ years.
Looks like people are just as lazy when it comes to voting for new board members. When it comes time to "make them sweat" I will vote.
Problem is that with a co-op that is mandated on me what choice do I have when the assholes on the board don't do what I want? NOTHING. It's the same fucking thing.
CO-OPs are designed to be businesses by the people, for the people, without engaging in the communist-like practice of merging everything under the government's umbrella.
Yeah, sure, right... I am under a co-op for my electricity. What does that mean for me? Expensive power, a box on my house that turns on and off my A/C at the whim of the grid, and the knowledge that while it's a co-op I have no other choice but to be a part of it.
I'm not saying that all co-ops are bad but they can become just as evil as the corporations. Just because they are setup "for the people by the people" and have members that are elected does NOT mean that they are the best things for an area.
COMPETITION IS GOOD and let's end this pay-off bullshit where corporations and co-ops get to determine what competition means.
Their weapon of choice is industry-crafted legislation that restricts local governments from offering public service Internet access at reasonable rates. Laws are already on the books in a dozen states. This year alone, 10 states are considering similar bills to block public broadband or to strengthen existing restrictions. Spinning broadband as theirs alone to provide, ISPs have chalked up some early victories--including a draconian law now on the books in Pennsylvania, which strips local governments of the right to choose their own homegrown broadband solutions without the prior approval of a monopoly phone company. In late 2004, Verizon dictated the law word-for-word to local legislators, who then quietly slipped it into the middle of a 72-page bill that appeared to call for improved communications infrastructure for all Pennsylvanians.
It will have the opposite effect.
No way! You mean that our elected officials are being paid off by corporations so that state citizens get the shaft? Who would have thought?! Personally, anyone responsible for cheating and lying to the citizens of the states involved in this should be ousted. Why aren't we revolting against this crap now? Oh yeah, we're lazy, sorry; I forgot.
A nation that once prided itself as the global pacesetter in technological innovation and affordable communications is now held in the thrall of corporations eager to keep a basic 21st Century right--the right to connectivity--from citizens who can't afford their exorbitant access fees.
How has America fallen so far back?
Because we take the word of the conglomerates as the word of God, that's why. People see a price tag and they just accept it as reality. Most people are uninterested in shopping around for better service, better prices, etc. It's just easier to plop the good old CC down and have it paid automatically every month.
People don't realize that 1500/256 is crappy service for DSL and that 5000/384 is just as bad. People say, ooooh, Cable is faster than DSL and less money! They don't bother looking into the hidden restrictions and commonplace bullshit that the ISPs pull (such as UNLIMITED SERVICE - as long as you don't pass over our unknown bandwith usage threshold).
Some people say, "but there is no alternative." Sure there is... Become active and do something about it. Oooh, but that would take away from your time watching Survivor and The Apprentice. Perhaps the Cable company would even come and shut off your precious mind-numbing TV delivered drugs. Wah.
Americans are lazy, undereducated about technology, and just don't give a shit about making their own lives better. As long as it is easy and they are told it's acceptable they are good to go.
To this mix of industry sock puppets add a gullible media. In a finely targeted media campaign, the "evils" of municipal broadband were pressed upon local journalists who were willing to echo corporate concerns without digging for an opposing view. Too often, local papers failed to follow the money that linked their sources at the Cato Institute and NMRC to the industry--taking at face value comments and data from these think tanks without revealing the conflicts of interest that would impugn their research.
Welcome to the Georgenium! The one where people believe everything they see on TV and do no self-research into finding out what might be true and what might not be. Why should they form their own opinions? There are two sides to every story but the news media is fair and balanced right?
Realize that we have not only corporations funding false research and presenting it as true we have our own government doing the same thing. Sadly people fall for it and even want more of it!
The corporations are going to quickly realize that what they are doing is going to cause even more problems for them. Yeah, you are going to shut out competition from the municipalities... Just wait until the residents of that municipality cre
Why aren't these files DRM-less (see the article)? But Google is an innovator, and maybe they can come up with something fair (though fair and DRM seem to be mutually exclusive nowadays...).
There is no "fair" DRM. Fair use has restrictions in itself. There is no reason to mandate more restrictions on top of that.
Slashdot Mirror
Until last Wednesday, when his RSS news reader popped up with headlines from various websites with the news of the reward.
:)
:)
He uses an RSS feeder for his news yet he stores 30 year old magazines in garbage bags under his floor boards.
Nice
On a slightly related topic... He said he's using the $10k to pay for his daughters weddings. I want to know where they are getting married and how I can afford a wedding for 5k or less
As a rule, rihc and powerful people tend to hang out with other rich and powerful people. I suspect this is more about giving the appearance of impropriety rather than any impropriety itself. Political opponents will try to make hay from this.
Then, as a rule, political persons shouldn't be putting themselves in positions that will allow their opponents such room to gripe.
The article stated that this guy has done this three times before to such a degree that he was asked to step down.
Looks valid to me.
That makes for a $3000 1Ghz laptop running Windows XP.
Let's be fair now... It's a 1Ghz Laptop powered by a now defunct Transmeta chip. So it's really not 1Ghz, it's not being made anymore, and it's still expensive as hell.
You truly are nuts if you took what I said to be anything other than blantant sarcasm.
There is no excuse for discrimination against gays. Microsoft of all companies should know that.
Well, the current government regime in power in the United States doesn't know it and in fact supports discrimination against gays. So why shouldn't companies?
Finally these guys have decided to put their egos aside and work on a compromise. If they had thought about this in the first place, imagine how much money these corporation would save on wasted R&D.
I doubt it had anything to do with ego as Toshiba is planning on debuting their technology at the end of the year anyway in PCs.
Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it... Sony probably realized that it was going to lose the battle if Toshiba got their stuff to market in 2005 and it was successful. If you can't beat them, join them.
I'm sorry but I really feel that Congress should be spending time protecting flesh and blood people rather than paper created "persons".
Plenty of flesh and blood people are getting fucked over by many other issues and losing a lot more money than if a company loses some possible revenue from a movie released ahead of time.
When my insurance rates go down and my prescription medicines no longer cost as much as they do then I feel Congress is free to explore some other avenues.
I pay their salary too.
2) Data is not lost, we just don't know where it is
And that's when you tell them that just because it's 4/20 does not mean they can be high at work.
How about they just add a Google section and post all this stuff under it and people can filter it out if they see fit?
In addition to PDAs, Microsoft suggests that the system could be built into rental cars.
Would this be like OnStar? Not the navigational OnStar, the part where even if you don't have a subscription and hit the button they will supposedly guide you out of trouble or call for EMS?
I must say that I have growing concerns about the prospect of one company effectively determining what can and cannot be found on the world wide web, not to mention one company handling the email of a vast proportion of Internet users.
While I see what you are saying and I agree due to my tinfoilhatness I have to disagree that it is "handling the email of a vast proportion of Internet users."
This is a typical Slashdotter perception. Most people outside of "techies" don't use GMail. They may in the future but they aren't currently.
So for right now, let's not get *that* worried about them handling all the Internet's email but I do agree we should keep it in the back of our minds for later.
As much as linux ricers like to argue otherwise, there's virtually no reason a normal end user should ever build their own kernel.
So that loading the kernel on 100s of machines is as easy as distributing a single file rather than a distribution of files.
Personally? I never used modules when I could just compile it all in. It's easier to transport that way.
Because there arne't default kernel options for various tasks and because it's not exactly user friendly to configure and compile your own kernel people end up compiling in crap that they don't need.
The kernel is fine it's the setup that sucks.
Over the last ten years, and especially the last three, I have become increasingly annoyed with online advertising and have done what I can to virtually eliminate it from showing its ugly face on my screen.
/etc/hosts to eliminate things like ads.osdn.com, ads.doubleclick.net, and various others. Yeah, I could add them to adzapper but it's a lot more fun to just block them all together. It gives me a sense of accomplishment.
squid and adzapper which is currently replacing many ads with 1x1 transparent GIFs. This is especially handy because I tunnel all my web traffic at work over my 256k upstream DSL connection. Do I really want to be wasting bandwith with flashing or changing ads?
Any other ideas on how to surf ad free?
RTFA, would you?
Since Nikon clearly does not want third party raw converters reading their files (they would much rather sell you a copy of Nikon Capture), the likelihood of Nikon providing such an assurance to Adobe is not very high.
It's obvious that they have their own tool that they want you to own in order to decrypt that data.
Adobe is a large company with deep pockets (unlike Bibble), and it is unlikely we would run the legal risk of breaking the white balance encryption unless we can get some assurance from Nikon that they will not sue Adobe for doing so. Since Nikon clearly does not want third party raw converters reading their files (they would much rather sell you a copy of Nikon Capture), the likelihood of Nikon providing such an assurance to Adobe is not very high.
People who would be purchasing a high-end camera like the D2X and D2H would probably only be doing so to use a high-end piece of software to manipulate the 12+MP digital images.
When a potential buyer looks at Photoshop and sees that it isn't supporting the D2X/H fully because of some retarded move by Nikon to try and make money they are likely going to find another camera. People interested in the D2X/H cameras are going to be shopping around looking for the one that best fits their needs and aren't going to be impulse buying a $5000 camera.
Really dumb move Nikon.
Michael: I think, like everything, it's a question of balance. Ease of use, versus security. I defy anybody to tell me why is it more secure to not run as root. Nobody really has a good answer. They say "oh, yeah, it is!", but it really isn't. Here's why: What's the most important thing on your desktop? It's the data. If someone gets access to your libraries or whatever, who cares? Your data is the most precious thing on your computer. And whether you log in as root or log in as user, you have access to that data, technically anyone who's compromising your account has access to your data as well.
Techincally it's gaining control over your system without you knowing it and running exploitable programs as root makes that easier. If the hackers get access to your libraries, programs, etc, they can do far more damage to you by sniffing your data w/o your knowledge. Hackers aren't going to just steal your data and run. If they can gain easy access to the system they are going to modify it and snoop everything and keep getting what they came for.
Michael: Then you could say "Well, it's not really about your data, it's that people could accidentally mess things up!". Well, you could accidentally drive into a wall as well, it doesn't mean we should make all cars drive at 10 miles an hour. So, I don't see the added benefit. I DO see it's an added pain in the ass when grandma tries to change her wallpaper, and it tells her "you don't have root privileges". What are you talking about, man? I'm just trying to use my computer, or change the clock, or any one of a hundred other things. So, people always say "it's less secure", but I defy anyone to point out a single instance, and people all go "Well, I, erm, it's theoretical!". There's no one area I think you can point out - In this instance, a machine that's run with the root user could be compromised, in this instance one couldn't be compromised.
I am in no way a master of Linux/UNIX and I never claimed to be but even I know that if you are exploited while running something as root more damage can be done to a lot more services, files, etc, than if you were just running it as a user. It's not theoretical. It's fucking very real and it's idiots like this guy that make it easier and easier for more zombie boxes to get out there. Look at Windows... Yeah, no, we don't need Linux to end up like that too.
I want to know who the hell this guy is talking to that don't give him a valid argument. I have a feeling they are and he isn't listening.
Michael: I know the hardcore geeks feel differently, that's fine. When somebody installs Linspire, we say "do you want to set up users, yes or no", we give them the choice, right there when they start up for the first time. If they want to set up multiple users, they're welcome to do that, but we don't force them to. That's the difference we have.
It shouldn't even be a choice. Prompt for a password (like OS X) when something that needs root privledges runs. If it has succeeded with the Mac then it can with Linspire users too. If you are so concerned about making the users have a positive Linux experience rewrite the dialog boxes when they ask for "root priveledges" so that they are human readable. Don't just eliminate it and say that there's no valid reason not to. Taking the easy way out doesn't solve the problem.
Since when is Michael Roberson a trusted source? He's an asshole that's just into pushing the envelope and making waves (remember Lindows and MP3.com?) Right now he's doing exactly the same thing. "See, those Linux users are trying to make it hard for the layperson to use "their" OS and I'm trying to make it easy. Listen to me! I'm trustworthy!"
So, do you advocate all cars being unable to accelerate beyond 65 miles per hour? Or all guns being able to sense if they're being used in self defense? How about MP3 players that can detect copyrighted music and refuse to play it? The lack of these features sounds like a "serious issue" to me.
It's a bit different when you are driving a car and you go in excess of the speed limit. This is going into restricted airspace where you need to be licensed in order to fly above it.
Norris says you won't need a pilot's license if you fly it under 400 feet in non-restricted air space. And he's going to sell it for $50,000.
But the car will fly to 10k feet right and it will sell for $50k right? That means that a lot of idiots will be flying one of these things and they will have the ability to go over the 400 foot limit.
Looks like a serious issue.
Strictly speaking, that's not true. Co-Ops have to compete in the market just like everyone else. (Unlike direct government services.) The real reason why you don't have a choice is that utilities tend to be monopolies, period.
Then my statement is 100% true. I'm not sure what you are talking about. They don't have to compete when they are a monopoly. They can price the services at whatever they want, they can put whatever devices they want on my home to limit my usage, etc.
I am stuck with them if I want to use electricity.
Yeah, great, so they are a government permitted monopoly. It still doesn't make it right and it really doens't make "co-ops" stick out as something positive in my mind.
With a co-op, you can actually do something. You can elect new board members that will better represent your interests.
Well, I just got sucked into this co-op and just received my first brochure about them. Some have been on the board for 20+ years.
Looks like people are just as lazy when it comes to voting for new board members. When it comes time to "make them sweat" I will vote.
Problem is that with a co-op that is mandated on me what choice do I have when the assholes on the board don't do what I want? NOTHING. It's the same fucking thing.
CO-OPs are designed to be businesses by the people, for the people, without engaging in the communist-like practice of merging everything under the government's umbrella.
Yeah, sure, right... I am under a co-op for my electricity. What does that mean for me? Expensive power, a box on my house that turns on and off my A/C at the whim of the grid, and the knowledge that while it's a co-op I have no other choice but to be a part of it.
I'm not saying that all co-ops are bad but they can become just as evil as the corporations. Just because they are setup "for the people by the people" and have members that are elected does NOT mean that they are the best things for an area.
COMPETITION IS GOOD and let's end this pay-off bullshit where corporations and co-ops get to determine what competition means.
Their weapon of choice is industry-crafted legislation that restricts local governments from offering public service Internet access at reasonable rates. Laws are already on the books in a dozen states. This year alone, 10 states are considering similar bills to block public broadband or to strengthen existing restrictions. Spinning broadband as theirs alone to provide, ISPs have chalked up some early victories--including a draconian law now on the books in Pennsylvania, which strips local governments of the right to choose their own homegrown broadband solutions without the prior approval of a monopoly phone company. In late 2004, Verizon dictated the law word-for-word to local legislators, who then quietly slipped it into the middle of a 72-page bill that appeared to call for improved communications infrastructure for all Pennsylvanians.
It will have the opposite effect.
No way! You mean that our elected officials are being paid off by corporations so that state citizens get the shaft? Who would have thought?! Personally, anyone responsible for cheating and lying to the citizens of the states involved in this should be ousted. Why aren't we revolting against this crap now? Oh yeah, we're lazy, sorry; I forgot.
A nation that once prided itself as the global pacesetter in technological innovation and affordable communications is now held in the thrall of corporations eager to keep a basic 21st Century right--the right to connectivity--from citizens who can't afford their exorbitant access fees.
How has America fallen so far back?
Because we take the word of the conglomerates as the word of God, that's why. People see a price tag and they just accept it as reality. Most people are uninterested in shopping around for better service, better prices, etc. It's just easier to plop the good old CC down and have it paid automatically every month.
People don't realize that 1500/256 is crappy service for DSL and that 5000/384 is just as bad. People say, ooooh, Cable is faster than DSL and less money! They don't bother looking into the hidden restrictions and commonplace bullshit that the ISPs pull (such as UNLIMITED SERVICE - as long as you don't pass over our unknown bandwith usage threshold).
Some people say, "but there is no alternative." Sure there is... Become active and do something about it. Oooh, but that would take away from your time watching Survivor and The Apprentice. Perhaps the Cable company would even come and shut off your precious mind-numbing TV delivered drugs. Wah.
Americans are lazy, undereducated about technology, and just don't give a shit about making their own lives better. As long as it is easy and they are told it's acceptable they are good to go.
To this mix of industry sock puppets add a gullible media. In a finely targeted media campaign, the "evils" of municipal broadband were pressed upon local journalists who were willing to echo corporate concerns without digging for an opposing view. Too often, local papers failed to follow the money that linked their sources at the Cato Institute and NMRC to the industry--taking at face value comments and data from these think tanks without revealing the conflicts of interest that would impugn their research.
Welcome to the Georgenium! The one where people believe everything they see on TV and do no self-research into finding out what might be true and what might not be. Why should they form their own opinions? There are two sides to every story but the news media is fair and balanced right?
Realize that we have not only corporations funding false research and presenting it as true we have our own government doing the same thing. Sadly people fall for it and even want more of it!
The corporations are going to quickly realize that what they are doing is going to cause even more problems for them. Yeah, you are going to shut out competition from the municipalities... Just wait until the residents of that municipality cre
It best be less expensive than the $3.50 rental or $10-13 DVD purchase and allow me to watch it without time restrictions like DVDs or it will flop.
Why aren't these files DRM-less (see the article)? But Google is an innovator, and maybe they can come up with something fair (though fair and DRM seem to be mutually exclusive nowadays...).
There is no "fair" DRM. Fair use has restrictions in itself. There is no reason to mandate more restrictions on top of that.