Wasn't Sony the box of genius that made the marketing decisions that led to the utter dominance of the Sony Betamax videotape format some years ago? Yeah, but they also had that proprietary PS/PS2 that didn't do too badly. I just can't believe how long they held on to ATRAC however (not to mention all that check in/out DRM crap).
Sony's philosophy is to tie you in to an integrated suite of media/formats (e.g. memory stick on their cameras, music players, VAIO computers) so that a Sony VAIO will work easily with a Sony camera, etc. etc.
Eircom (Ireland's effective telecom monopoly) had picked the dialler countries out specifically and put them in a special 'Band 13' that was more expensive than anywhere else on the planet - 360.58c per minute, *three times* the next most expensive region. However these same countries could be dialled from for example Germany for as little as 37c/minute.
So likely Eircom were paying the foreign telco a relatively small amount for completing the call, and the foreign telco would pass on a percentage of that to the dialler operator, while Eircom itself was getting the lions share of the actual call costs. If you complained, they would basically say 'you shouldn't have been visiting porn sites then'.
It was in no way in Eircom's interest to see these scams ended, and that's why it was the government regulator that stepped in to force them to block the number.
See here for some more background information. (This guy's site is a parody of the ComReg site but the information he presents is true.)
Apple cannot invoke the DMCA because Real is not completely stripping the DRM. They all replacing Apple's DRM with their own. This is explicitly allowed in the DMCA.
Your point about Streambox is completely valid, but it's actually the other way around with what Real are doing - in order to allow Real files to play on the iPod, they are replacing their own DRM with something compatible with Apple's DRM system. Obviously this is justifiable, as they are not breaking anyone's DRM in the first place.
It would not be so clear cut if they were stripping Apple's DRM and replacing it with their own at all; it might be accepted under the interoperability clause but the situation would not be half so clear-cut.
Well, I don't know where you went to university, but in many students have a long tradition of objecting to unreasonable regulations, and *will* fight them. It's also the sort of case student unions are willing to take on tenants' behalf; we also had free individual legal advice provided by the student union.
Having said that, I was the tenant representative on the housing committee of our university, and we resolved a lot of things with the landlord through negotiation (albeit backed by pressure from the student union and legal advice). Perhaps in this case it could be agreed that those running private networks would encrypt them, or not broadcast the SSID, so that unconfigured clients would *not* automatically connect to them.
I would find it very difficult to believe that any university would let this relate in any way to registration, grading, etc. Accommodation and IT services would completely separate from registration and grading in any university I am aware of, so it would require official cooperation between many people, almost certainly leaving a trace, to sabotage grades. Besides, the philosophy/engineering/physics professor grading your paper likely does not care that you are campaigning against a campus accommodation WiFi rule; they possibly would even support you.
The worst that would happen would be that the students involved would be screwed over by accommodation/IT services (as happened me - didn't get my deposit back the year I was tenant rep and didn't get in to the campus residences the following year; guess that shows I was doing my job;-)
There is no way that the university could get away with this if they were a normal landlord; the only possibility is if the student accommodation does not fall under normal tenancy law (as is the case in some jurisdictions).
...that the FCC has explicitly ruled (as linked in the article) that landlords *cannot* make rules that forbid the use of 802.11.
The university can indeed restrict what is plugged into *their* network, but this deals with APs plugged into third party cable/DSL (presumably popular to get around restrictions/filtering on the university internet connection.)
The article referenced students setting up access points to share third-party cable/DSL - the access points were not connected to the campus network at all. The issue was not to do with security but rather "interference".
This supposed "interference" seemed largely to due to the fact that devices would connect to the strongest signal - suggesting that rather than *actual* interference clients were not properly configured to prioritise connection to the university WiFi SSID rather than just "any SSID".
...as the FCC has sole jurisdiction in this area. See for example this ruling where the landlord (Denver International Airport) was not allowed to prevent tenants (airlines) setting up independent networks, even though it was claiming safety grounds. AFAIK landlords cannot include a prohibition on private 802.11 networks in a lease, and if they do, that prohibition will not be upheld by a court.
The point is, if you want a guarantee against interference, you need to get a licence for a *licenced* band, pay the FCC fees, and do your thing there - 802.11 is unlicenced, and as such you have no guarantee to be free of interference.
I don't see how the university would be any different (perhaps in some jurisdictions university residences can fall outside normal tenancy law; still in this case it appears that the FCC is quite clear on it being the body with total jurisdiction.)
They work now, in my experience of working with Oracle 9i, but they *are* a relatively recent innovation (introduced in Oracle 9i I think). Certainly SQL Server supported ANSI joins well before Oracle did; perhaps grandparent is remembering an older version of Oracle.
...and digital PVRs simply record the exact MPEG2 stream sent from the TV station, no additional processing is involved. And at high bitrates you would be hard pushed to identify MPEG2 artifacts in any case (try zooming on on a well authored DVD and identify the artifacts).
This argument about "lossy compression" comes up again and again. You could say that everything is "compressed" from the original reality; it's a matter of whether you do stupid compression (drop the sampling rate) or intelligent compression (removing things that can't be heard/seen). It's all about getting the maximum perceived audo/picture quality with a given data rate. So, taking the same data rate, would you prefer "uncompressed" 8-bit video at 320x240 say, or MPEG4 "compressed" HDTV at 1920x1080?
In fairness to you, the figures quoted in the article are 'earning less than $2000' and willing to spend 'more than 5% of annual income'. But my point is just that there is a substantial number of people between the horrendously poor earning $1/day and the richer western countries where a majority of the population can afford a computer. I'm thinking China and India to start - that's over two billion people already (he is starting his trials in India, incidentally.)
On the other issue my point had nothing to do with the code quality coming out of India/Pakistan but rather the benefit to the local economy, which I think is undeniable. Since you brought it up, as time goes on and experience is gained the quality will improve (as will the economic benefits). In my experience many of the problems outsourcing to this part of the world tend to be communication and HR management-related rather than the quality of the people.
the grand majority of those 4 billion people not only live on less than $2000 a year- they live on less than $365 a year (since the going wage at the bottom of the third world is $1/day)
Hmm... Can you see where you made a mistake? "Bottom" != "Grand Majority". There are a lot of people for which this device could be affordable. He says in the article that he is targeting people where the cost represents 5% of yearly income - perhaps roughly the same as the proportion of a normal computer cost to average annual income in the western world. Getting computers into the hands of more people can only be good for skills development and the future of these countries. Look at India or Pakistan's software industry, for example.
Consideration in the legal sense is not that they have "considered" the contract, but rather it is the thing that is exchanged. In this case, the consideration you receive is your salary.
In fairness to Sony my experience was a few years ago when they were moving their European repairs from France to (I think) Belgium. But it wasn't just the delays, their attitude was patently offensive - front line support were all courteous, but it was clear that they didn't know anything about what was happening with my laptop and couldn't do anything about it. They also admitted to me that things were majorly fucked up with the move. Management were just plain rude.
They eventually gave me a new C1, (note: this is their policy if something has to be returned three times) but only after I threatened to sue them. At that point, I had long got another computer and sold the C1 when I got it back; they had the computer in repairs for longer than I had actually been using it. I got the first Crusoe one as soon as it came out - a year or so later it was majorly depreciated, and a new model was out.
I've had to send a R600 docking station back since and that did go smoothly (they sent a box for it, and I had it back within a week or so.)
We ordered three servers, one Red Hat and two Windows Server 2003. We don't get any email confirmation or anything else sent with the spec on it. Then suddenly the servers arrive, and I note from the labels on the outside of the boxes that while the Red Hat server is as ordered, the Windows servers are Windows 2000, not 2003. I *do not open the boxes*, and call Dell right away, presuming that they would (a) swap them or (b) send us Windows 2003.
They say that I selected Win 2k on the website (I didn't) and point blank refuse to do anything to help, other than offer to sell us Windows 2003 at the full retail price. One person that I was talking to actually admitted that there was something strange with our order in their system, that it had been modified at some point, and appeared to have *both* Win2k and 2003 selected, but his supervisor denies this. This goes on for a few weeks, with them refusing to do anything, and we need these machines in a hurry, so we start using one of the Win2k ones.
Eventually we just did a chargeback on the whole transaction on the grounds that we didn't get what we ordered (you can only do it on the complete transaction). They picked up the remaining Windows box within a few days... I don't know if we actually ended up paying for the other two that we kept at all, they certainly didn't seem organised enough to charge us again...
That's my story, but I've also heard others in which Dell send out machines with a different (hardware!) spec than ordered, and then refuse to do anything about it (co-worker's laptop was one.)
...my first Picturebook was DOE, so I needed to get another one - that went though the supplier, not Sony, so all was OK - got a replacement within a few days.
It was when the second Picturebook went wrong, a few months later, that the nightmare started - this had to go back to Sony, under the terms of the warranty. They hung onto it for a few weeks and then sent it back - still broken.
So I sent it back again. Took about a month this time. Again it came back - still broken.
So it had to go back a third, and then actually even a fourth time. And the delays this time were longer - in total, they had the machine for *nine months*. When I called, they didn't even know if they *had* the machine. I had to actually buy another notebook while I was waiting.
Quite a contrast to my experience with Compaq, which varied between their sending someone out on-site with parts for a desktop, or a courier with a three-day turnaround for a notebook...
...although even some cameras that are theoretically "USB2.0", like the Nikon D70, still only transfer at USB1.1 speeds (see the very bottom of the page).
And while USB2.0 is theoretically faster than Firewire, it's well known that it is not faster in sustained transfers - I've got a Maxtor Firewire/USB2.0 external hard drive that bears this out; even the manufacturer quotes a higher speed for the firewire interface. (See here for example stats.)
I'm sure it can be hacked if you're good. Turn it into a nice little PDA and check TV listings from it!!
The Philips iPronto TSi6400 actually does this - has 802.11b built-in and automatically updates a program guide on the remote. Also has a web browser. Linux-based OS too, I believe.
...is the tone of the article - it doens't even consider that original idea that copyright might be about balance, a privilege accorded with the intent of fostering creation. Rather, it is simply accepted that the natural expiration of these copyrights, which the holders knew would happen, is somehow causing a property loss to the current holders.
Imagine if you obtained a 50 year lease, and then at the end of those 50 years, the owner wanted the property back. Would you moan to the government about extending your term unilaterally, with no other compensation to the actual owner?
Then there is the 50 Hz VS the correct 60 Hz electrical system (correct because of timing with a second and the human brain)
Well, 50Hz gives us a 25fps television system in PAL against your 30fps NTSC. Which means we can have a one-to-one frame correspondence to 24fps movies, avoiding all that 3:2 pulldown stuff while also allowing a higher resolution (albeit at the cost of running films 4% faster).
...my suggestion about using an impossible domain was connected to stopping the private (non-spam) email that was occasionally bounced on to me. Including, in one case, credit card details.
Heh. I actually registered that to put up a parody/protest about sitefinder. The domain turns out to get a lot of spam; some stuff from people who obviously just typed it into a form, but also however from people who had their mail systems configured to divert their spam/bad mail to nonexistentuser@nonexistentdomain.com (or some variant). All were happy to stop when asked, but if you must configure your mail like this, possibly better use an *impossible* domain (I did get a fair bit of private email bounced on to me by badly configured mail systems).
Slashdot Mirror
Wasn't Sony the box of genius that made the marketing decisions that led to the utter dominance of the Sony Betamax videotape format some years ago?
Yeah, but they also had that proprietary PS/PS2 that didn't do too badly. I just can't believe how long they held on to ATRAC however (not to mention all that check in/out DRM crap).
Sony's philosophy is to tie you in to an integrated suite of media/formats (e.g. memory stick on their cameras, music players, VAIO computers) so that a Sony VAIO will work easily with a Sony camera, etc. etc.
Eircom (Ireland's effective telecom monopoly) had picked the dialler countries out specifically and put them in a special 'Band 13' that was more expensive than anywhere else on the planet - 360.58c per minute, *three times* the next most expensive region. However these same countries could be dialled from for example Germany for as little as 37c/minute.
So likely Eircom were paying the foreign telco a relatively small amount for completing the call, and the foreign telco would pass on a percentage of that to the dialler operator, while Eircom itself was getting the lions share of the actual call costs. If you complained, they would basically say 'you shouldn't have been visiting porn sites then'.
It was in no way in Eircom's interest to see these scams ended, and that's why it was the government regulator that stepped in to force them to block the number.
See here for some more background information. (This guy's site is a parody of the ComReg site but the information he presents is true.)
Apple cannot invoke the DMCA because Real is not completely stripping the DRM. They all replacing Apple's DRM with their own. This is explicitly allowed in the DMCA.
Your point about Streambox is completely valid, but it's actually the other way around with what Real are doing - in order to allow Real files to play on the iPod, they are replacing their own DRM with something compatible with Apple's DRM system. Obviously this is justifiable, as they are not breaking anyone's DRM in the first place.
It would not be so clear cut if they were stripping Apple's DRM and replacing it with their own at all; it might be accepted under the interoperability clause but the situation would not be half so clear-cut.
Well, I don't know where you went to university, but in many students have a long tradition of objecting to unreasonable regulations, and *will* fight them. It's also the sort of case student unions are willing to take on tenants' behalf; we also had free individual legal advice provided by the student union.
;-)
Having said that, I was the tenant representative on the housing committee of our university, and we resolved a lot of things with the landlord through negotiation (albeit backed by pressure from the student union and legal advice). Perhaps in this case it could be agreed that those running private networks would encrypt them, or not broadcast the SSID, so that unconfigured clients would *not* automatically connect to them.
I would find it very difficult to believe that any university would let this relate in any way to registration, grading, etc. Accommodation and IT services would completely separate from registration and grading in any university I am aware of, so it would require official cooperation between many people, almost certainly leaving a trace, to sabotage grades. Besides, the philosophy/engineering/physics professor grading your paper likely does not care that you are campaigning against a campus accommodation WiFi rule; they possibly would even support you.
The worst that would happen would be that the students involved would be screwed over by accommodation/IT services (as happened me - didn't get my deposit back the year I was tenant rep and didn't get in to the campus residences the following year; guess that shows I was doing my job
What, like the rule that says that landlords can't stop tenants installing a satellite dish? (Yes, the physical object.)
There is no way that the university could get away with this if they were a normal landlord; the only possibility is if the student accommodation does not fall under normal tenancy law (as is the case in some jurisdictions).
...that the FCC has explicitly ruled (as linked in the article) that landlords *cannot* make rules that forbid the use of 802.11.
The university can indeed restrict what is plugged into *their* network, but this deals with APs plugged into third party cable/DSL (presumably popular to get around restrictions/filtering on the university internet connection.)
The article referenced students setting up access points to share third-party cable/DSL - the access points were not connected to the campus network at all. The issue was not to do with security but
rather "interference".
This supposed "interference" seemed largely to due to the fact that devices would connect to the strongest signal - suggesting that rather than *actual* interference clients were not properly configured to prioritise connection to the university WiFi SSID rather than just "any SSID".
...as the FCC has sole jurisdiction in this area. See for example this ruling where the landlord (Denver International Airport) was not allowed to prevent tenants (airlines) setting up independent networks, even though it was claiming safety grounds. AFAIK landlords cannot include a prohibition on private 802.11 networks in a lease, and if they do, that prohibition will not be upheld by a court.
The point is, if you want a guarantee against interference, you need to get a licence for a *licenced* band, pay the FCC fees, and do your thing there - 802.11 is unlicenced, and as such you have no guarantee to be free of interference.
I don't see how the university would be any different (perhaps in some jurisdictions university residences can fall outside normal tenancy law; still in this case it appears that the FCC is quite clear on it being the body with total jurisdiction.)
What is the problem with ANSI joins in Oracle?
They work now, in my experience of working with Oracle 9i, but they *are* a relatively recent innovation (introduced in Oracle 9i I think). Certainly SQL Server supported ANSI joins well before Oracle did; perhaps grandparent is remembering an older version of Oracle.
...and digital PVRs simply record the exact MPEG2 stream sent from the TV station, no additional processing is involved. And at high bitrates you would be hard pushed to identify MPEG2 artifacts in any case (try zooming on on a well authored DVD and identify the artifacts).
This argument about "lossy compression" comes up again and again. You could say that everything is "compressed" from the original reality; it's a matter of whether you do stupid compression (drop the sampling rate) or intelligent compression (removing things that can't be heard/seen). It's all about getting the maximum perceived audo/picture quality with a given data rate. So, taking the same data rate, would you prefer "uncompressed" 8-bit video at 320x240 say, or MPEG4 "compressed" HDTV at 1920x1080?
In fairness to you, the figures quoted in the article are 'earning less than $2000' and willing to spend 'more than 5% of annual income'. But my point is just that there is a substantial number of people between the horrendously poor earning $1/day and the richer western countries where a majority of the population can afford a computer. I'm thinking China and India to start - that's over two billion people already (he is starting his trials in India, incidentally.)
On the other issue my point had nothing to do with the code quality coming out of India/Pakistan but rather the benefit to the local economy, which I think is undeniable. Since you brought it up, as time goes on and experience is gained the quality will improve (as will the economic benefits). In my experience many of the problems outsourcing to this part of the world tend to be communication and HR management-related rather than the quality of the people.
...I've never had a hard disk fail on me, but I have had a flash card fail.
the grand majority of those 4 billion people not only live on less than $2000 a year- they live on less than $365 a year (since the going wage at the bottom of the third world is $1/day)
Hmm... Can you see where you made a mistake? "Bottom" != "Grand Majority". There are a lot of people for which this device could be affordable. He says in the article that he is targeting people where the cost represents 5% of yearly income - perhaps roughly the same as the proportion of a normal computer cost to average annual income in the western world. Getting computers into the hands of more people can only be good for skills development and the future of these countries. Look at India or Pakistan's software industry, for example.
Consideration in the legal sense is not that they have "considered" the contract, but rather it is the thing that is exchanged. In this case, the consideration you receive is your salary.
See Consideration.
In fairness to Sony my experience was a few years ago when they were moving their European repairs from France to (I think) Belgium. But it wasn't just the delays, their attitude was patently offensive - front line support were all courteous, but it was clear that they didn't know anything about what was happening with my laptop and couldn't do anything about it. They also admitted to me that things were majorly fucked up with the move. Management were just plain rude.
They eventually gave me a new C1, (note: this is their policy if something has to be returned three times) but only after I threatened to sue them. At that point, I had long got another computer and sold the C1 when I got it back; they had the computer in repairs for longer than I had actually been using it. I got the first Crusoe one as soon as it came out - a year or so later it was majorly depreciated, and a new model was out.
I've had to send a R600 docking station back since and that did go smoothly (they sent a box for it, and I had it back within a week or so.)
We ordered three servers, one Red Hat and two Windows Server 2003. We don't get any email confirmation or anything else sent with the spec on it. Then suddenly the servers arrive, and I note from the labels on the outside of the boxes that while the Red Hat server is as ordered, the Windows servers are Windows 2000, not 2003. I *do not open the boxes*, and call Dell right away, presuming that they would (a) swap them or (b) send us Windows 2003.
They say that I selected Win 2k on the website (I didn't) and point blank refuse to do anything to help, other than offer to sell us Windows 2003 at the full retail price. One person that I was talking to actually admitted that there was something strange with our order in their system, that it had been modified at some point, and appeared to have *both* Win2k and 2003 selected, but his supervisor denies this. This goes on for a few weeks, with them refusing to do anything, and we need these machines in a hurry, so we start using one of the Win2k ones.
Eventually we just did a chargeback on the whole transaction on the grounds that we didn't get what we ordered (you can only do it on the complete transaction). They picked up the remaining Windows box within a few days... I don't know if we actually ended up paying for the other two that we kept at all, they certainly didn't seem organised enough to charge us again...
That's my story, but I've also heard others in which Dell send out machines with a different (hardware!) spec than ordered, and then refuse to do anything about it (co-worker's laptop was one.)
...my first Picturebook was DOE, so I needed to get another one - that went though the supplier, not Sony, so all was OK - got a replacement within a few days.
It was when the second Picturebook went wrong, a few months later, that the nightmare started - this had to go back to Sony, under the terms of the warranty. They hung onto it for a few weeks and then sent it back - still broken.
So I sent it back again. Took about a month this time. Again it came back - still broken.
So it had to go back a third, and then actually even a fourth time. And the delays this time were longer - in total, they had the machine for *nine months*. When I called, they didn't even know if they *had* the machine. I had to actually buy another notebook while I was waiting.
Quite a contrast to my experience with Compaq, which varied between their sending someone out on-site with parts for a desktop, or a courier with a three-day turnaround for a notebook...
...although even some cameras that are theoretically "USB2.0", like the Nikon D70, still only transfer at USB1.1 speeds (see the very bottom of the page).
And while USB2.0 is theoretically faster than Firewire, it's well known that it is not faster in sustained transfers - I've got a Maxtor Firewire/USB2.0 external hard drive that bears this out; even the manufacturer quotes a higher speed for the firewire interface. (See here for example stats.)
I'm sure it can be hacked if you're good. Turn it into a nice little PDA and check TV listings from it!!
The Philips iPronto TSi6400 actually does this - has 802.11b built-in and automatically updates a program guide on the remote. Also has a web browser. Linux-based OS too, I believe.
...$2.7bn?
Despite the 'funny' mod, I think you were actually serious. (Or possibly trolling.)
...encourages investment, which is a good thing for the economy.
Copyright holders *knew* it was 50 years when they first got the copyright.
...is the tone of the article - it doens't even consider that original idea that copyright might be about balance, a privilege accorded with the intent of fostering creation. Rather, it is simply accepted that the natural expiration of these copyrights, which the holders knew would happen, is somehow causing a property loss to the current holders.
Imagine if you obtained a 50 year lease, and then at the end of those 50 years, the owner wanted the property back. Would you moan to the government about extending your term unilaterally, with no other compensation to the actual owner?
Then there is the 50 Hz VS the correct 60 Hz electrical system (correct because of timing with a second and the human brain)
Well, 50Hz gives us a 25fps television system in PAL against your 30fps NTSC. Which means we can have a one-to-one frame correspondence to 24fps movies, avoiding all that 3:2 pulldown stuff while also allowing a higher resolution (albeit at the cost of running films 4% faster).
...my suggestion about using an impossible domain was connected to stopping the private (non-spam) email that was occasionally bounced on to me. Including, in one case, credit card details.
Heh. I actually registered that to put up a parody/protest about sitefinder. The domain turns out to get a lot of spam; some stuff from people who obviously just typed it into a form, but also however from people who had their mail systems configured to divert their spam/bad mail to nonexistentuser@nonexistentdomain.com (or some variant). All were happy to stop when asked, but if you must configure your mail like this, possibly better use an *impossible* domain (I did get a fair bit of private email bounced on to me by badly configured mail systems).