With all due respect, it is an incredibly bad idea.
I'm going to have to disagree that there's even a plausible argument from even the most paranoid. That the risk of, even if as grand as he would suggest, a 1w radio signal would somehow outweigh the benefits of promoting a modern and rational university IT policy. We're not talking about MW-gauge powerlines overhead a school. We're talking about low power emmissions at high wavelengths. Very different than breathing in smoke, or licking glowing paint (did they really not know radium was radioactive? was it called _radium_ back then?).
If the school doesn't want to pay for it, or are paranoid about security, then say so. But the idea that it's somehow a risk is absurd.
As a side note, if you're going through life so concerned with stuff like this, you need serious help.
This isn't lawsuit material - they've clearly told you what their policy is, and even if they didn't, I'm not sure that this is a recognizable kind of injury. But legalities aside, they've got to understand that this decreases the value of their service. It's not about fairness or buffet line analogies - it's simple: if I can't use the service to get 8 DVDs a month, then I'm not going to pay as much. And if I want 8 a month, and there's a service that does it (Blockbuster ?) then guess who's getting my money.
I've thought Netflix was overpriced for a long time. Certainly their services is better than most others, but it's not worth the premium they charge for it. This only decreases the value even more, particularly if you're paying that premium for 1) quick delivery, 2) high throughput, 3) high likelihood of getting a new release.
Netflix needs to be very careful they understand their customers; I'm underwhelmed with the evidence that they do and if the movie studios can get over their control addiction, they might actually make some money doing what netflix does without the massive postal costs.
So the consumer who buys the linksys box, comes home, and sets it up is liable to protect themselves... but the company that produces software that lacks these purportedly basic protections is under no similar obligation?
It just is more evidence that the legislature should be regulation of last resort. Anybody who's been on their work network or a campus resnet knows that bureaucratic rule making is the least efficient kind out there. That's why we delegate power as much as possible. This doesn't work though when legislatures (even county legislatures) start trying to write network policies for everyone.
There's a myriad of paranoia over anything that happens with a computer -- people could send anonymous emails this way! -- that conveniently forget there are always much more dangerous real world alternatives (do you show id at a mailbox?).
What's more, the only dangers to innovation aren't just patents and copyrights (although these are significant). There's also danger in over-regulating technology simply because most people don't understand it - again, conveniently forgetting that most people don't understand most things and yet this does little to engender a rash of absurd regulation.
New York State should pass a pre-emption statute so that local municipalities can't arbitrarily run over much more important things in pursuit of some meaningless 'security'.
Not to be blunt, but I think you're missing the point. He's trying to wipe drives that are damaged and need to be RMAed - this would almost certainly preclude mounting them. Even if they would mount there may be sectors of the drive that are inaccessible and can't be overwritten.
Let's say some simple spring jams and a drive head won't go past a certain sector (this may not be plausible, but bear with me). There's data still there, and once the factory fixes that little spring the drive works fine again, and the data on that part of the platter, that you couldn't wipe before, is now accessible to whoever gets the drive next. Odds are that won't be you but somebody who buys a refurbished drive. This is the scenario he's trying to avoid.
Also, I don't think that electron microscopy's the problem. That's so far beyond the capacity of most that no one'd even be asking this question if that was an issue.
I don't know if there's a real solution, but I think the best bet here might be trying to figure out what the common source of failure on a HD is - maybe 90% of failures have one feature in common - and figure out how to work around that.
That's about the going rate. Usually I estimate the time and usually they're the one that brings it up. If I can't fix it I don't ask for money. Usually it's me refusing it actually, but that's good for future business.
What are some popular opininos on the difference between Palm OS and Windows Moblie? And more importantly, how easy is it to port simple code to either OS?
We signed up for an international plan with AT&T I think. It cost something like $3 a month and then $0.06 a minute. It was a ton cheaper than the 30p (58 cents) they wanted to charge from the U.K. to the U.S.
That may well be true, but I read Prime Obsession last year and it was in a class of its own. The text is easily read, and Derbshyire is adept at making little comments that suggest a much deeper connection that we haven't discovered yet. It's quality writing, and the math is deceptively simple. It's complicated stuff, but easy to follow. It'd be a good book for young math enthusiasts as well... I can imagine my excitment if I'd have found this book when I was 12 or 14.
First off... did anyone notice that his blog doesn't format correctly in firefox? It doesn't validate either.
Second, I like this choice line:
Do I really trust a bunch of kids at some random university I've never heard of?
Yes, because clearly all university IT departments are run by a loose group of under 18 teenagers. These are probably the same "kids" that write viruses that use IE security vulnerabilities.
Also, note the desperation in lines like "Hopefully, the average person will decide that they do not trust this web site, and they will click Cancel. No Firefox for you!" Wow. That's just pathetic.
Then he attacks "a numeric IP address" (his emphasis) as being the "bastion of spammers and phishers." I'm glad Microsoft doesn't have one [or 8].
Then he gets a series of strange and bizzare dialogue boxes. Now, I recently installed Firefox on my laptop, and had none of the problems he's described. It wasn't served off an unknown unversity site, I didn't have any "7-Zip" error box (probably because Microsoft isn't running my network), and I didn't have a blank dialogue box asking me to click OK or Cancel. I think that someone might want to suggest he reinstall XP. Seriously though, isn't there supposed to be a market incentive for Microsoft employees to be "innovating" better browsers than taking pot shots about the default selection in Firefox? The idea that you would reject Firefox on security grounds, and instead accept IE, is so surreally absurd it baffles the imagination. His contention is that the code isn't signed - nobody knows about it, but Microsoft's closed-source code is trustworthy because there's a corporation behind it, so therefore it's a clear issue of security.
Should firefox start being more security conscious, signing apps, posting obvious MD5 and SHA1 hashes? Of course. But do these really straight forward "innovations" really make up for all of the backdoor security oversights?
It's comical to see a monopoly squirm. We just have to be sure they lose.
That may be enough of an incentive for those that take to computers, but if you're just being taught excel or how to browse the web, most will continue to hunt and peck. look how many old journalists still type entire stories that way. Typing isn't intuitive; it needs to be taught at least to give some foundation, not to mention, some form in order to avoid a generation with carpal tunnel.
They do recognize that people want to play music on their computers. That's why they build players into these cds, which is the point of this entire topic. The recognize that where there's demand there's a market but the market is unforunately (for them) blocked by that pesky Constitution. The betamax case created legitmacy for time/shape shifting and now the goal is to roll back what amounts to competition.
I think the end goal is to create a new business model around pay-per-play. This is how they already view their 'property'. The fact that it's physically contained on DVDs and CDs is a messy necessity. But as we become more intellectually divorced from that view of property we start to see it as their intellectual property and not our physical property. Blocking the main competition through the DMCA DRM combo is hand in hand with this strategy.
don't kid yourself into thinking the riaa just doesn't get it... what's scarier than them not getting it is that they do get it and they're using that against us
Yeah exactly, this is utterly insane. It's not about stopping internet 'piracy', it's pretty clear that ripping the disc is feasible; it's about making it a pain to put into itunes or whatever... so then you buy it off itunes instead of messing with it. It's like rebuying all of your records on CD. The record industry didn't forget that this is the only reason they stayed afloat in the 90s. Perhaps that's an indication that there's a bloated supply side?
I've been using Windows Media center edition for about 4 months now and I've got a whole list of complaints.
1) records in proprietary format (dvr-ms?)
First, proprietary format. You're right on. I have to install Media Center 9 to even watch something and then the quality is less than stellar in light of its compression ratio. I have noticed the differences between their codec and some others too, but that's not a criticism as much as an observation.
2) no skipping of commercials (except of course fast-forward)
Fast forward is fine. The 30 second skip feature's invaluable but auto commercial skipping I think is a legal landmine and it's a bad perception thing. I have no problem hitting that button 4 times in a row fast.
3) doesn't require a TV-tuner, can use any vid card with video capture (S-Video, RCA, coax, etc)
I have a tuner card so I don't know about other options. There was some kungfu going on with getting drivers working but once it worked I didn't touch it.
4) generally comes with a remote for all PVR functions and a IR transmitter to actually change your cable box channel
Remote works great. It's got a much wider angle than even the tivo remotes. You could get one for myth too though
5) supports other media-ish functions like music, pictures, etc
This is really incidental. I guess those are almost order qualifiers at this point. They're so easy there's no excuse to not, but I don't use them.
6) It's Windows for chrissake
Yeah, and here's some more complaints that you wouldn't probably ever envision without the joy of testing one.
There's a database corruption issue about once every 4 days. I'd imagine it follows a poisson distribution, but the corruption will randomly occur. When that happens it will record scheduled shows, but it won't add any new ones or accept changes to any existing ones. Also it can't / won't update guide data or do anything other than record and watch what's there.
The sound will sometimes be overcome with static. I suppose this could be a video card issue but a restart always fixes the problem. It also seems to retroactively affect shows although I haven't really figured this one out yet.
Guide data is notoriously unreliable. This may be a function of the ever occuring database corruption which prevents any new data from being added, but either way it's annoying.
The machine it's running on is a beast compared to the processor that powers a tivo. That and I imagine the drive in it will last another year if I'm lucky.
Menu ergonomics are awful. Once you're used to it it's not bad, but the 'back' button is relative and it's nearly impossible to switch between 3 different menus without having to return to the root menu to get back to it. The animations are pretty, but that's the best part. They get on your nerves too when they pause for 10 seconds and load the data you're trying to get at. There are a bunch of other menu issues that I've managed to adapt to, but it's not intuitive.
The menus, when they're not crashing/pausing, are faster than tivo series one, but about on par with the series twos.
I like it because it gives me a dvr that's working and free (for the moment), however windows is certainly not the 'innovator' in this field. A 2.4+ machine that you have to restart at least every week is hardly competition to a tivo that runs solid for over 2 years.
That or running an entire system off of an embeded card. Does anyone have any experience with systems that run off of flash media? How do they compare speed wise?
You're right, but there's one thing they understand that this discussion doesn't
They're not just looking at the short term (although ironically they are)... If they limit DRM-free channels, and convince people that controls are necessary and normal, then they're one step closer to pay-per-play pricing models. That removes any possibility for an alternative business model because they're no longer people who find and create music, but they become the defacto distributors.
Right now they distribute through channels they can't control. That means competition, which means no profits (in the economic sense). If they control distribution, which pay-per-play inherantly allows, then they control every use. Fair use is damned, and so is any alternative business model.
This isn't just about losing fair use rights; it's also about destroying legitimate business models at the bequest of a failing one. It has no legitimate legal justification. It's politics and they're winning.
Not to start a debate, but what's getting mugged in England like anyway?
In America if you get mugged odds are the mugger has a gun. There's also a better than U.K. chance that the victim has a gun. That makes it a high risk proposition meaning that people who try it are more committe to finishing it. In England I'd imagine with the absence of guns [or the absence of honest people having guns], that more people'd be inclined to try mugging as a consequence.
I'm curious if anyone from the U.K. has any opinion on the matter, or likewise if anyone from America's been robbed. I hear a lot more about pickpockets in Europe than ever happens in America, but maybe that's a consequence of not living in the middle of New York [or London].
Re:No need to re-invent the wheel
on
Open Maps?
·
· Score: 1
On that note does anyone know of any other Terraserver type images that aren't as low res and/or outdated as Microsoft's terraserver maps?
>Fair use is a free speech issue...
No, it's not. Not in this context.
That's patently wrong. First, fair use doctrine is a direct derivative of the first amendment. It may not be free speech as in pickets and protests but it is free speech in legal terms. More broadly the intention (and logic) that links the two together is the check it provides on copyright's ability to limit criticism. Copyright could allow a direct government interference in your ability to criticize [art, media, politics, culture, you name it] because your mention or quoting engages copyright law. There's a long history of copyright used for this and it's the quoted reason in the decisions that paved the way for parody exceptions (I think it's in the opinion however I might be mistaken on that point).
If I understand your later posts though, it becomes a market issue: namely consumers won't buy DRM-enabled products. Well, they probably wouldn't watch DRM-enabled broadcasts either if they had that choice, but clearly that one's been legislated [or regulated; the fcc board's appointed] away. The point of a flag isn't just for the FCC's amusement. It's necessary for later legislation to require manufacturers to use the flag. Try buying a restriction free DAT tape. Give Fritz Hollings a month and you'll be reading on slashdot about a bill in committee that mandates devices be DRM enabled.
If you think this is a market issue then try launching an FM station sans license. See if the FCC recognizes those free market principles. My point is that the FCC, by definition, restricts market freedom. In some cases, like regulating the spectrum, that's not such a bad idea. It doesn't however allow you to say that the market will allow for a choice, because that will be explicitly legislated away. That's the goal. I'm open to other motives you think exist for pushing a broadcast flag, but I can't find any more compelling than the potential for future legislation building on what's being created.
Seriously, who lowered the bar this far. Since when is blocking the port such an awesome and creative idea? Maybe their automation is something to talk about but come on.. why does cnet pat itself on the back every time someone publishes something obvious.
They aren't the only ones though. (Patent office). The same thing happens all over the net. For instance remember the vulnerability that security focus screamed about a few weeks ago? The "vulnerability" is a function of any CSMA/CA system that anyone with a cursory understanding of the protocol would recognize. Why is this a "new" vulnerability?
Again, the "internet is going to crash" stuff about tcp sequence windows; All of this stuff is obvious to anyone who read the RFC. To me that seems a bit different than finding an obscure overflow, or unpublished error. Finding obvious aspects of a protocol is not.
My opinion is that it's part of the "alarm" mentality that we seem to love, and that the press jumps all over. But I'm curious what other opinions on the subject are.
I don't think it's a doppler issue. There're a number of cases of people using their phones on a plane (remember all those 9/11 calls; i don't think those were the onboard planes, they were personal phones)
I've read here and elsewhere that the problem is overloading mutiple cells but it's also because the FAA is paranoid about their avionics equipment (rightly so). They won't let you turn on a 3 watt cd player that *might* leak voltage; you think they'd let you blast cellular signal through the cockpit?
Anyone else notice the absolute lack of a legal argument in the article?
I don't know about most countries, but in the U.S. at least in theory, you have to sue under the guise of a law or legal principle (common law). I'm not sure exactly which doctrine of law they're appealing to but the most obvious, trademark, applies to words in specific contexts; also they have to be registered and renewed. I doubt these things have been done for the term 10^100.
But you know, everybody's getting rich these days so why not jjump in.
If by amazingly cool you mean "i could care less about cameras on the corner as long as it has some neat technology running sql on the backend that can track me *anywhere* in a major city" then yeah, i guess that's amazingly cool.
Or maybe it's amazingly scary. good god. does the telescreen have to occasionally talk back for you to get worried?
Slashdot Mirror
With all due respect, it is an incredibly bad idea.
I'm going to have to disagree that there's even a plausible argument from even the most paranoid. That the risk of, even if as grand as he would suggest, a 1w radio signal would somehow outweigh the benefits of promoting a modern and rational university IT policy. We're not talking about MW-gauge powerlines overhead a school. We're talking about low power emmissions at high wavelengths. Very different than breathing in smoke, or licking glowing paint (did they really not know radium was radioactive? was it called _radium_ back then?).
If the school doesn't want to pay for it, or are paranoid about security, then say so. But the idea that it's somehow a risk is absurd.
As a side note, if you're going through life so concerned with stuff like this, you need serious help.
This isn't lawsuit material - they've clearly told you what their policy is, and even if they didn't, I'm not sure that this is a recognizable kind of injury. But legalities aside, they've got to understand that this decreases the value of their service. It's not about fairness or buffet line analogies - it's simple: if I can't use the service to get 8 DVDs a month, then I'm not going to pay as much. And if I want 8 a month, and there's a service that does it (Blockbuster ?) then guess who's getting my money.
I've thought Netflix was overpriced for a long time. Certainly their services is better than most others, but it's not worth the premium they charge for it. This only decreases the value even more, particularly if you're paying that premium for 1) quick delivery, 2) high throughput, 3) high likelihood of getting a new release.
Netflix needs to be very careful they understand their customers; I'm underwhelmed with the evidence that they do and if the movie studios can get over their control addiction, they might actually make some money doing what netflix does without the massive postal costs.
So the consumer who buys the linksys box, comes home, and sets it up is liable to protect themselves... but the company that produces software that lacks these purportedly basic protections is under no similar obligation?
It just is more evidence that the legislature should be regulation of last resort. Anybody who's been on their work network or a campus resnet knows that bureaucratic rule making is the least efficient kind out there. That's why we delegate power as much as possible. This doesn't work though when legislatures (even county legislatures) start trying to write network policies for everyone.
There's a myriad of paranoia over anything that happens with a computer -- people could send anonymous emails this way! -- that conveniently forget there are always much more dangerous real world alternatives (do you show id at a mailbox?).
What's more, the only dangers to innovation aren't just patents and copyrights (although these are significant). There's also danger in over-regulating technology simply because most people don't understand it - again, conveniently forgetting that most people don't understand most things and yet this does little to engender a rash of absurd regulation.
New York State should pass a pre-emption statute so that local municipalities can't arbitrarily run over much more important things in pursuit of some meaningless 'security'.
Let's say some simple spring jams and a drive head won't go past a certain sector (this may not be plausible, but bear with me). There's data still there, and once the factory fixes that little spring the drive works fine again, and the data on that part of the platter, that you couldn't wipe before, is now accessible to whoever gets the drive next. Odds are that won't be you but somebody who buys a refurbished drive. This is the scenario he's trying to avoid.
Also, I don't think that electron microscopy's the problem. That's so far beyond the capacity of most that no one'd even be asking this question if that was an issue.
I don't know if there's a real solution, but I think the best bet here might be trying to figure out what the common source of failure on a HD is - maybe 90% of failures have one feature in common - and figure out how to work around that.
That's about the going rate. Usually I estimate the time and usually they're the one that brings it up. If I can't fix it I don't ask for money. Usually it's me refusing it actually, but that's good for future business.
This is tangentially related to the post.....
What are some popular opininos on the difference between Palm OS and Windows Moblie? And more importantly, how easy is it to port simple code to either OS?
We signed up for an international plan with AT&T I think. It cost something like $3 a month and then $0.06 a minute. It was a ton cheaper than the 30p (58 cents) they wanted to charge from the U.K. to the U.S.
That may well be true, but I read Prime Obsession last year and it was in a class of its own. The text is easily read, and Derbshyire is adept at making little comments that suggest a much deeper connection that we haven't discovered yet. It's quality writing, and the math is deceptively simple. It's complicated stuff, but easy to follow. It'd be a good book for young math enthusiasts as well... I can imagine my excitment if I'd have found this book when I was 12 or 14.
First off... did anyone notice that his blog doesn't format correctly in firefox? It doesn't validate either.
Second, I like this choice line:
Yes, because clearly all university IT departments are run by a loose group of under 18 teenagers. These are probably the same "kids" that write viruses that use IE security vulnerabilities.Also, note the desperation in lines like "Hopefully, the average person will decide that they do not trust this web site, and they will click Cancel. No Firefox for you!" Wow. That's just pathetic.
Then he attacks " a numeric IP address " (his emphasis) as being the "bastion of spammers and phishers." I'm glad Microsoft doesn't have one [or 8].
Then he gets a series of strange and bizzare dialogue boxes. Now, I recently installed Firefox on my laptop, and had none of the problems he's described. It wasn't served off an unknown unversity site, I didn't have any "7-Zip" error box (probably because Microsoft isn't running my network), and I didn't have a blank dialogue box asking me to click OK or Cancel. I think that someone might want to suggest he reinstall XP. Seriously though, isn't there supposed to be a market incentive for Microsoft employees to be "innovating" better browsers than taking pot shots about the default selection in Firefox? The idea that you would reject Firefox on security grounds, and instead accept IE, is so surreally absurd it baffles the imagination. His contention is that the code isn't signed - nobody knows about it, but Microsoft's closed-source code is trustworthy because there's a corporation behind it, so therefore it's a clear issue of security.
Should firefox start being more security conscious, signing apps, posting obvious MD5 and SHA1 hashes? Of course. But do these really straight forward "innovations" really make up for all of the backdoor security oversights?It's comical to see a monopoly squirm. We just have to be sure they lose.
That may be enough of an incentive for those that take to computers, but if you're just being taught excel or how to browse the web, most will continue to hunt and peck. look how many old journalists still type entire stories that way. Typing isn't intuitive; it needs to be taught at least to give some foundation, not to mention, some form in order to avoid a generation with carpal tunnel.
I'm sorry, Apple owns a patent on "switch" advertising, we have cases pending against proctor and gamble
you can however advertise switching to apple products, speaking of which, have you tried safari?
I think the end goal is to create a new business model around pay-per-play. This is how they already view their 'property'. The fact that it's physically contained on DVDs and CDs is a messy necessity. But as we become more intellectually divorced from that view of property we start to see it as their intellectual property and not our physical property. Blocking the main competition through the DMCA DRM combo is hand in hand with this strategy.
don't kid yourself into thinking the riaa just doesn't get it... what's scarier than them not getting it is that they do get it and they're using that against us
Yeah exactly, this is utterly insane. It's not about stopping internet 'piracy', it's pretty clear that ripping the disc is feasible; it's about making it a pain to put into itunes or whatever... so then you buy it off itunes instead of messing with it. It's like rebuying all of your records on CD. The record industry didn't forget that this is the only reason they stayed afloat in the 90s. Perhaps that's an indication that there's a bloated supply side?
First, proprietary format. You're right on. I have to install Media Center 9 to even watch something and then the quality is less than stellar in light of its compression ratio. I have noticed the differences between their codec and some others too, but that's not a criticism as much as an observation.
Fast forward is fine. The 30 second skip feature's invaluable but auto commercial skipping I think is a legal landmine and it's a bad perception thing. I have no problem hitting that button 4 times in a row fast.
I have a tuner card so I don't know about other options. There was some kungfu going on with getting drivers working but once it worked I didn't touch it.
Remote works great. It's got a much wider angle than even the tivo remotes. You could get one for myth too though
This is really incidental. I guess those are almost order qualifiers at this point. They're so easy there's no excuse to not, but I don't use them.
Yeah, and here's some more complaints that you wouldn't probably ever envision without the joy of testing one.
There's a database corruption issue about once every 4 days. I'd imagine it follows a poisson distribution, but the corruption will randomly occur. When that happens it will record scheduled shows, but it won't add any new ones or accept changes to any existing ones. Also it can't / won't update guide data or do anything other than record and watch what's there.
The sound will sometimes be overcome with static. I suppose this could be a video card issue but a restart always fixes the problem. It also seems to retroactively affect shows although I haven't really figured this one out yet.
Guide data is notoriously unreliable. This may be a function of the ever occuring database corruption which prevents any new data from being added, but either way it's annoying.
The machine it's running on is a beast compared to the processor that powers a tivo. That and I imagine the drive in it will last another year if I'm lucky.
Menu ergonomics are awful. Once you're used to it it's not bad, but the 'back' button is relative and it's nearly impossible to switch between 3 different menus without having to return to the root menu to get back to it. The animations are pretty, but that's the best part. They get on your nerves too when they pause for 10 seconds and load the data you're trying to get at. There are a bunch of other menu issues that I've managed to adapt to, but it's not intuitive.
The menus, when they're not crashing/pausing, are faster than tivo series one, but about on par with the series twos.
I like it because it gives me a dvr that's working and free (for the moment), however windows is certainly not the 'innovator' in this field. A 2.4+ machine that you have to restart at least every week is hardly competition to a tivo that runs solid for over 2 years.
That or running an entire system off of an embeded card. Does anyone have any experience with systems that run off of flash media? How do they compare speed wise?
You're right, but there's one thing they understand that this discussion doesn't
They're not just looking at the short term (although ironically they are)... If they limit DRM-free channels, and convince people that controls are necessary and normal, then they're one step closer to pay-per-play pricing models. That removes any possibility for an alternative business model because they're no longer people who find and create music, but they become the defacto distributors.
Right now they distribute through channels they can't control. That means competition, which means no profits (in the economic sense). If they control distribution, which pay-per-play inherantly allows, then they control every use. Fair use is damned, and so is any alternative business model.
This isn't just about losing fair use rights; it's also about destroying legitimate business models at the bequest of a failing one. It has no legitimate legal justification. It's politics and they're winning.
Not to start a debate, but what's getting mugged in England like anyway?
In America if you get mugged odds are the mugger has a gun. There's also a better than U.K. chance that the victim has a gun. That makes it a high risk proposition meaning that people who try it are more committe to finishing it. In England I'd imagine with the absence of guns [or the absence of honest people having guns], that more people'd be inclined to try mugging as a consequence.
I'm curious if anyone from the U.K. has any opinion on the matter, or likewise if anyone from America's been robbed. I hear a lot more about pickpockets in Europe than ever happens in America, but maybe that's a consequence of not living in the middle of New York [or London].
On that note does anyone know of any other Terraserver type images that aren't as low res and/or outdated as Microsoft's terraserver maps?
No, it's not. Not in this context.
That's patently wrong. First, fair use doctrine is a direct derivative of the first amendment. It may not be free speech as in pickets and protests but it is free speech in legal terms. More broadly the intention (and logic) that links the two together is the check it provides on copyright's ability to limit criticism. Copyright could allow a direct government interference in your ability to criticize [art, media, politics, culture, you name it] because your mention or quoting engages copyright law. There's a long history of copyright used for this and it's the quoted reason in the decisions that paved the way for parody exceptions (I think it's in the opinion however I might be mistaken on that point).
If I understand your later posts though, it becomes a market issue: namely consumers won't buy DRM-enabled products. Well, they probably wouldn't watch DRM-enabled broadcasts either if they had that choice, but clearly that one's been legislated [or regulated; the fcc board's appointed] away. The point of a flag isn't just for the FCC's amusement. It's necessary for later legislation to require manufacturers to use the flag. Try buying a restriction free DAT tape. Give Fritz Hollings a month and you'll be reading on slashdot about a bill in committee that mandates devices be DRM enabled.
If you think this is a market issue then try launching an FM station sans license. See if the FCC recognizes those free market principles. My point is that the FCC, by definition, restricts market freedom. In some cases, like regulating the spectrum, that's not such a bad idea. It doesn't however allow you to say that the market will allow for a choice, because that will be explicitly legislated away. That's the goal. I'm open to other motives you think exist for pushing a broadcast flag, but I can't find any more compelling than the potential for future legislation building on what's being created.
That's a clever idea, and it might even work.
Seriously, who lowered the bar this far. Since when is blocking the port such an awesome and creative idea? Maybe their automation is something to talk about but come on.. why does cnet pat itself on the back every time someone publishes something obvious.
They aren't the only ones though. (Patent office). The same thing happens all over the net. For instance remember the vulnerability that security focus screamed about a few weeks ago? The "vulnerability" is a function of any CSMA/CA system that anyone with a cursory understanding of the protocol would recognize. Why is this a "new" vulnerability?
Again, the "internet is going to crash" stuff about tcp sequence windows; All of this stuff is obvious to anyone who read the RFC. To me that seems a bit different than finding an obscure overflow, or unpublished error. Finding obvious aspects of a protocol is not.
My opinion is that it's part of the "alarm" mentality that we seem to love, and that the press jumps all over. But I'm curious what other opinions on the subject are.
I don't think it's a doppler issue. There're a number of cases of people using their phones on a plane (remember all those 9/11 calls; i don't think those were the onboard planes, they were personal phones)
I've read here and elsewhere that the problem is overloading mutiple cells but it's also because the FAA is paranoid about their avionics equipment (rightly so). They won't let you turn on a 3 watt cd player that *might* leak voltage; you think they'd let you blast cellular signal through the cockpit?
There might be more too it though.
Anyone else notice the absolute lack of a legal argument in the article?
I don't know about most countries, but in the U.S. at least in theory, you have to sue under the guise of a law or legal principle (common law). I'm not sure exactly which doctrine of law they're appealing to but the most obvious, trademark, applies to words in specific contexts; also they have to be registered and renewed. I doubt these things have been done for the term 10^100.
But you know, everybody's getting rich these days so why not jjump in.
Law: Justice, Truth, and a Growth Industry
this is a joke right? or should I kill myself now?
I'm aware the articles says you take the picture... but just wait
of course, you could always just uses a gps
If by amazingly cool you mean "i could care less about cameras on the corner as long as it has some neat technology running sql on the backend that can track me *anywhere* in a major city" then yeah, i guess that's amazingly cool.
Or maybe it's amazingly scary. good god. does the telescreen have to occasionally talk back for you to get worried?