Anyone who knows anything about torrenting. Since you don't understand seed ratios, maybe you go back to the kids' table and let the adults talk.
Did you even read TFA or just see "torrent" and since you installed bittorrent you think you're an expert? If you aren't torrenting movies this discussion doesn't concern you. No one that uses bittorrent to download Linux ISOs is being targeted. Did you really think the suggestion was that they should just come to do the door of anyone that uses torrents and try to make them pay for a movie?
Also, MPPA should offer a "get legal" license, where you can buy a license for downloaded material for personal home use. This would allow you to keep the material you like and give the MPPA a way to get downloaders to "come clean" when they find them
"Hi, we noticed you shared out first run movie hundreds of times. Give us $9.99 and we'll call it even."
I'm getting real fucking sick of the "Won't someone please think of the millionaires and billionaires?!" argument.
Who said that?
It's a fallacy to think money loses value as it you get more of it. $850M is always $850M which is a shitload of money, to anyone and everyone, even to an industry with a revenue of 300x that (also, revenue != profit). It just doesn't work like that. Regardless, that's the industry, which is composed of thousands (or more) individuals and companies. It's not some gigantic hegemony all under one roof.
Anyway, this sort of thinking is dangerous because it can be used to rationalize all manner of crime. Is it less of a crime to slip a steak into your shorts at the local grocery? They have a revenue of tens of millions of dollars a year, and that steak is only work $12. Is it less of a crime to break into your neighbor's home if that person makes 10x your wages? 5x? 2x? They have a nicer car than yours?
Ya like when apple said it was not throttling iphones
Ya like when a YouTuber discovered that Apple's new laptop was throttling excessively and then Apple said they'd fix it in a patch and then a day later they did? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Oh sure, how right. For example, nobody remembers "you're holding it wrong".
I know right! Apple's stock has TANKED due to "you're holding it wrong". It's cited EVER DAMN DAY as a reason to avoid Apple products. Touche my friend!
So anyway, you remember the things you remember, and not the ones you don't. Do you think if we googled for a few minutes we could find a few Apple missteps that you didn't quote here today, maybe proving my point? How about the 1993 Macintosh TV! What a flop, people STILL haven't gotten past that screw up! Or remember the Ping social media service? I don't, but still, it shows how these mistakes really stick with us and hurt the Apple brand.
Again, if you can prove that this software fix actually resolves the problem and doesn't merely mitigate it, then I'll retract the above.
And if you can prove that it won't, I retract what I said.
All we have to go on now is that Apple said it would. Being that I doubt Apple would claim something publicly that is clearly false and knowing there's a giant community just waiting to prove them wrong, I tend to believe them.
Yup, but genuine dissidents can go the extra mile. Use something else than whatsapp, something not used by the unwashed masses. (vpn, ssh, tor,...) They are trying to do something about 'mob rule', so they need accountability for what 'the masses' uses. Apparently, these masses uses whatsapp.
How do we decide who gets to use the technology that disallows tracking, and who has to use the technology that tracks them? The government? Or will each person decide on their own if their cause is criminal (in which case they must allow themselves to be track), or for the better good of society (in which case they can justify use of the non-trackable technology)?
It's a real good plan. Just a few kinks to work out.
No different to the US. US history is littered with such incidents
Dude, this isn't US v. India. Everyone here that hasn't murdered someone because social media said so is free to judge those that do as retarded monsters. Because they are. No matter where they live.
Either way Apple is culpable as well. In fact many of those mac rumor comments support that position. Apple's hands are not clean here.
All hardware ships with buggy software to some degree or another. And this is extremely minor as it exhibits itself under very specific scenarios and in most cases artificial workloads and the end result is a slightly slower CPU and nothing else. We're not talking about a data leak here. This only makes the news because every tech "journalist" is looking for the latest Apple scandal to garner a bunch of clicks / views.
It would have been much, MUCH worse for Apple to miss their hardware release date. No company, when faced with a choice of shipping hardware with a minor software bug that can be patched later, and slipping a hardware release would choose the latter.
Eventually these channels will get enough traction to be noticed and shut down.
Yeah, that never happens. The only reason videos get removed is for copyright or sexist, racist content. Nothing has ever been taken down for having a controversial political slant.
Already smaller channels who tried to push a pro-worker narrative and agenda found themselves de-monitized
De-monetized != censored. De-monetized videos are still accessible in all the same ways as monetized videos.
I think you could use a lesson in Youtube's revenue model. Big companies pay Youtube to advertise their products with Youtube content. If those companies say they don't want their products advertised with political, etc. content, that's their prerogative (and yes they did that).
Despite the fact that Youtube gets zero revenue for those de-monetized videos, they still host them, which is awful nice of them. These creators are free to monetize their videos however they want, on their own.
The same place the HTML/JS/CSS and images come from. It's just another asset.
Dude are you trolling me? If so, great job because you had me riled up my entire drive home.
HTML5 provides a video playback mechanism? The method of playing the video is completely irrelevant to the technical challenge here. The issue storage and bandwidth.
Do you think replicating Youtube is just about as easy as plunking the video onto whatever website you want? Do you have any idea what sort of resources it takes to host petabytes of video and have the capacity to stream HD or 4k video to hundreds of thousands of people simultaneously? Do you understand what sort of development and admin it takes to build a system like that?
Are you aware of what it would cost an individual to host videos from wherever their other web assets are located? You know the difference between a 10k HTML page and a 10GB 4k video clip? Just a factor of 1,000,000x larger that must be transferred at 50+ megabytes / second, to thousands of people at the same time?
Anybody can host videos with a free or cheap web site
Go ahead and link the free or cheap website where I can host hundreds of gigabytes of 4k content. Make sure the site has the capability to stream that video in 4k to hundreds of thousands of people simultaneously.
[a href="blah.mp4"]blah video[/a]. I don't understand why this project exists, except that perhaps some (many) people simply don't understand how the web works.
Lump yourself into that group.
This isn't about the video player frontend. Obviously there are unlimited choices for playing a video. It's about providing a distributed *backend* (hosting) to store the video data. Which in spite of your claim above is a technically challenging expensive endeavor.
The solution to all of this is to stop being fucking wrong. 1 KB = 1024 B. But hell - they don't even teach English spelling and grammar in US public schools.
Slashdot Mirror
The OP claimed they'd never fix the thermal throttling issue which is the topic of this thread. They did, the next day.
If you have other beefs about it's performance characteristics, leave me out of it. I said nothing about that.
Anyone who knows anything about torrenting. Since you don't understand seed ratios, maybe you go back to the kids' table and let the adults talk.
Did you even read TFA or just see "torrent" and since you installed bittorrent you think you're an expert? If you aren't torrenting movies this discussion doesn't concern you. No one that uses bittorrent to download Linux ISOs is being targeted. Did you really think the suggestion was that they should just come to do the door of anyone that uses torrents and try to make them pay for a movie?
let alone movies
If you aren't torrenting movies they wouldn't have targeted you in the first place. Who knows what you are even talking about.
Seriously, Apple has a long history of arguing stuff is "by design" which rationally shouldn't be. It's an argument that's nearly unfalsifiable.
Except they didn't claim it was by design, they admitted it was a bug, and they already fixed it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
we just have to wait for the dinosaurs in charge to the content companies to die for legal streaming to blossom
Streaming is legal. Ever heard of Netflix? Amazon?
Also, MPPA should offer a "get legal" license, where you can buy a license for downloaded material for personal home use. This would allow you to keep the material you like and give the MPPA a way to get downloaders to "come clean" when they find them
"Hi, we noticed you shared out first run movie hundreds of times. Give us $9.99 and we'll call it even."
Good luck with that.
I'm getting real fucking sick of the "Won't someone please think of the millionaires and billionaires?!" argument.
Who said that?
It's a fallacy to think money loses value as it you get more of it. $850M is always $850M which is a shitload of money, to anyone and everyone, even to an industry with a revenue of 300x that (also, revenue != profit). It just doesn't work like that. Regardless, that's the industry, which is composed of thousands (or more) individuals and companies. It's not some gigantic hegemony all under one roof.
Anyway, this sort of thinking is dangerous because it can be used to rationalize all manner of crime. Is it less of a crime to slip a steak into your shorts at the local grocery? They have a revenue of tens of millions of dollars a year, and that steak is only work $12. Is it less of a crime to break into your neighbor's home if that person makes 10x your wages? 5x? 2x? They have a nicer car than yours?
Ya like when apple said it was not throttling iphones
Ya like when a YouTuber discovered that Apple's new laptop was throttling excessively and then Apple said they'd fix it in a patch and then a day later they did?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Seems like we didn't have to wait for long for an answer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Again, if you can prove that this software fix actually resolves the problem and doesn't merely mitigate it, then I'll retract the above.
... ?
Oh sure, how right. For example, nobody remembers "you're holding it wrong".
I know right! Apple's stock has TANKED due to "you're holding it wrong". It's cited EVER DAMN DAY as a reason to avoid Apple products. Touche my friend!
So anyway, you remember the things you remember, and not the ones you don't. Do you think if we googled for a few minutes we could find a few Apple missteps that you didn't quote here today, maybe proving my point? How about the 1993 Macintosh TV! What a flop, people STILL haven't gotten past that screw up! Or remember the Ping social media service? I don't, but still, it shows how these mistakes really stick with us and hurt the Apple brand.
Again, if you can prove that this software fix actually resolves the problem and doesn't merely mitigate it, then I'll retract the above.
And if you can prove that it won't, I retract what I said.
All we have to go on now is that Apple said it would. Being that I doubt Apple would claim something publicly that is clearly false and knowing there's a giant community just waiting to prove them wrong, I tend to believe them.
Yup, but genuine dissidents can go the extra mile. Use something else than whatsapp, something not used by the unwashed masses. (vpn, ssh, tor,...) They are trying to do something about 'mob rule', so they need accountability for what 'the masses' uses. Apparently, these masses uses whatsapp.
How do we decide who gets to use the technology that disallows tracking, and who has to use the technology that tracks them? The government? Or will each person decide on their own if their cause is criminal (in which case they must allow themselves to be track), or for the better good of society (in which case they can justify use of the non-trackable technology)?
It's a real good plan. Just a few kinks to work out.
No different to the US. US history is littered with such incidents
Dude, this isn't US v. India. Everyone here that hasn't murdered someone because social media said so is free to judge those that do as retarded monsters. Because they are. No matter where they live.
The woosh can sting something terrible. I recommend a salve.
Either way Apple is culpable as well. In fact many of those mac rumor comments support that position. Apple's hands are not clean here.
All hardware ships with buggy software to some degree or another. And this is extremely minor as it exhibits itself under very specific scenarios and in most cases artificial workloads and the end result is a slightly slower CPU and nothing else. We're not talking about a data leak here. This only makes the news because every tech "journalist" is looking for the latest Apple scandal to garner a bunch of clicks / views.
It would have been much, MUCH worse for Apple to miss their hardware release date. No company, when faced with a choice of shipping hardware with a minor software bug that can be patched later, and slipping a hardware release would choose the latter.
Fix it before you release it to the public and you won't have to apologize and tarnish your reputation.
It's way, way more important for them to meet their hardware release dates. In 2 weeks no one will even remember this and they know it.
Eventually these channels will get enough traction to be noticed and shut down.
Yeah, that never happens. The only reason videos get removed is for copyright or sexist, racist content. Nothing has ever been taken down for having a controversial political slant.
Already smaller channels who tried to push a pro-worker narrative and agenda found themselves de-monitized
De-monetized != censored. De-monetized videos are still accessible in all the same ways as monetized videos.
I think you could use a lesson in Youtube's revenue model. Big companies pay Youtube to advertise their products with Youtube content. If those companies say they don't want their products advertised with political, etc. content, that's their prerogative (and yes they did that).
Despite the fact that Youtube gets zero revenue for those de-monetized videos, they still host them, which is awful nice of them. These creators are free to monetize their videos however they want, on their own.
Who pays for all this? It's a question I ask of any decentralized service.
The peers pay for it. You pay for it. You pay for it through your ISP bill and the storage space and electricity to run your computer.
You can do it cheaply by basically having a web-app front-end to a torrent and the app streams the data from the torrent.
Yes, you just restated exactly what's talked about in TFA.
The same place the HTML/JS/CSS and images come from. It's just another asset.
Dude are you trolling me? If so, great job because you had me riled up my entire drive home.
HTML5 provides a video playback mechanism? The method of playing the video is completely irrelevant to the technical challenge here. The issue storage and bandwidth.
Do you think replicating Youtube is just about as easy as plunking the video onto whatever website you want? Do you have any idea what sort of resources it takes to host petabytes of video and have the capacity to stream HD or 4k video to hundreds of thousands of people simultaneously? Do you understand what sort of development and admin it takes to build a system like that?
Are you aware of what it would cost an individual to host videos from wherever their other web assets are located? You know the difference between a 10k HTML page and a 10GB 4k video clip? Just a factor of 1,000,000x larger that must be transferred at 50+ megabytes / second, to thousands of people at the same time?
Anybody can host videos with a free or cheap web site
Go ahead and link the free or cheap website where I can host hundreds of gigabytes of 4k content. Make sure the site has the capability to stream that video in 4k to hundreds of thousands of people simultaneously.
[a href="blah.mp4"]blah video[/a]. I don't understand why this project exists, except that perhaps some (many) people simply don't understand how the web works.
Lump yourself into that group.
This isn't about the video player frontend. Obviously there are unlimited choices for playing a video. It's about providing a distributed *backend* (hosting) to store the video data. Which in spite of your claim above is a technically challenging expensive endeavor.
Um, what?
Where do you think the video that is referenced by the tag is going to come from?
The solution to all of this is to stop being fucking wrong. 1 KB = 1024 B. But hell - they don't even teach English spelling and grammar in US public schools.
1KB = 1000 bytes.
1KiB = 1024 bytes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Stop being fucking wrong.
"And, you know, an almond doesn't lactate, I will confess."
it's time to get abreast of the labeling language
it will be hard for Fuchsia to provide these functions
That is likely impossible for Fuchsia,
Google has a lot of employees and a lot of money.