NO he is dead right. If the only thing saving his users was incompatibility to the filesystem then his system is wide open and vulnerable. He hasn't actually protected anything.
how about because they AREN'T pirates. It is perfectly legal to bypass geo-blocking in many countries. e.g. Australia. Why do we do it, because the local services are shit and even with the cost of the VPN + Netflix it is still cheaper than the shit local services.
The issue is likely a bit more complicated than that. The content owners likely have existing agreements in place with 'legacy' providers in each region (satelite/cable...) that prohibits them from licencing the content further.
As quickly as Netflix etc are expanding, they don't yet have the subscriber base of these legacy services, and will be unable to beat the payments that are currently being made for the prime content.
Yes they do have those contracts. But this is not a new phenomena, they have had more than a decade to reform and change those contracts, instead they just renew them and try to hold onto an out of date business model. The world has moved on, it is global market now, nothing the content distributors can do can change that, they either need to use that to their advantage or lose business. No amount of laws, contracts, trade agreements or license restrictions is going to make people obey such outdated models, evolve or die.
did your mummy let you out of the basement again? just because you have no life doesn't mean others don't. If I lose access I will simply pirate the very little content I use and spend more time on other hobbies. Not everyone is so insecure in their life as you.
yes I suspect when they open in Australia the content will be lacking as Foxtel still have content exclusivity licensing for a lot of it. If the content becomes decent I would happily swap to using them locally instead of via the US, but will have to wait and see. Would even happily pay a little more, maybe 15 bucks or so, but only if the content is there. I just don't watch enough to justify spending more, 3 years ago I had foxtel for around $120 a month and for the few hours of content I watched a month it was just insane pricing and now that I got rid of them I would never dream of going back. at around $12 a month (including my smart DNS service) I get all the content I need. I might watch at most 1 hour of TV a day on average so my upper limit of what I am willing to pay is $20 and I consider that simply a fee for not having to watch god damn ads which make free to air TV completely unwatchable for anything except news.
We already have free trade agreements and the laws have remained. They aren't their specifically to allow geo-blocking bypass, more to get past the huge price gouging that takes place by international corporations in Australia where we sometimes pay 50-100% more for items than other countries, in some cases it is cheaper to buy a plane ticket to another country, purchase the item and fly back to Australia with it than buy it here. The price gouging the laws are intended to prevent are actually far more important to the government than helping out the media mafia as without them Australia is far to small to prevent being screwed, they have even dragged the heads of various corporations to front parliament to try to justify the consumer gouging that is taking place.
Geo-blocking isn't actually illegal, it just isn't illegal to bypass it so they most definitely can legally stop us. They are free to implement various measures to prevent it and enforce it, we just won't be in any legal trouble for doing our best to get around it.
I use a smart DNS service in Australia to get my Netflix access. If they do end up blocking it (currently still works fine), I will just go back to pirating my content. I am happy to pay reasonable services a reasonable rate for the content I consume, but be fucked if I will accept being forced to pay for the overpriced poor content supplied locally in Australia.
As someone that just started to use AWS where I work, I feel you are being far to complementary, a first year computer grad could come up with a better interface. The API's they provide aren't a whole lot better either.
Microsoft had supposedly had a very large influence over which chip went into the IBM PC. supposedly they are the reason IBM went with a 16bit chip instead of an 8 Bit one as they talked IBM into changing and they were also considering a 32 bit chip from motorola.
exactly, he never made the statement he is quoted as saying. There is a massive difference between what he is quoted as saying and what is said in that presentation. He also discusses in other interviews how he wanted the limit to be higher but was restricted by the chip architecture but thought it would be good enough for the lifetime of the architecture, he was actually pretty close to being right.
Actually the quote is just an internet myth, at least no one has ever found a source for it or anyone that even reports to have heard him say it and gates denies having said it as well.
REally? where? apologies if I am wrong but I see nothing about user available space for any of the iPhone models on their purchasing site http://www.apple.com/iphone/co...
Ah yes the old "lets throw responsibility on the ISP's story". while I agree ISP's need to do more and should be playing an Active role in shutting down some of the more obvious crap (some are), it really is unreasonable to expect them to bear the cost of becoming the internet police unless perhaps you are proposing every internet user should pay a compulsory extra 10% for their ISP to cover this cost?
seriously is it that hard to understand more than one attack happened over the last month. For fucks sake, just read the god damn article, this relates to the DDoS attack on PSN and XBL, not the sony hack (which probably wasn't actually NK anyway).
Many of these companies have a mix of salaried and CONTRACT employees, or they also pay overtime rates so $0 is likely far from the truth. Also their online component isn't just about letting you play games, they also sell a lot of content through the online capabilities, how much was lost in sales due to that? don't know myself but it would likely be in the millions. Many countries also have laws that state you CAN'T exempt refunds for services in the case where the service was not supplied.
Microsoft and others were forced to change how they advertise there devices because of complaints of how storage is used by the OS. While I agree this lawsuit is idiotic vendors really should be more forthcoming with information like storage, it isn't an insignificant amount that is taken on devices in this form factor and the average consumer doesn't know that he isn't really getting 8GB for photos and games, it wouldn't hurt there sales to be more open and honest, e.g. Microsoft now puts it directly on there site and even provides a table of how much storage is user available for each device. Would it really kill apple to do the same? currently the only thing apple adds is "1GB = 1 billion bytes; actual formatted capacity less."
I don't think its terribly biased to imagine a future where consumers aren't paying a 3% spread to some mega corp for the right to spend their own money online, especially when the security and other guarantees by those corporations are fairly weak. Who hasn't had their credit card stolen? Risk and fraud analysis only get you so far, they are after-the-crime measures. Bitcoin has built security from the ground up.
As opposed to the security provided by bitcoin which is NON existant. .
Nobody should have lost any money unless you were dumb enough to buy Bitcoins.
I see your memory faded faster than the retirement accounts that were fucking liquidated from the financial meltdown in 2008, which involved exactly zero digital currency.
HUH? I think citation is required for such a bold statement.
you need to look up the definition of fraud. You most definitely can defraud people without hacking, especially when you are on the inside such as those within MT Gox. taking coins from peoples accounts and selling them is defrauding them and would require no hacking from someone within Gox.
you need to read more than a "idiots guide to economics", what you describe is disastrous from a economics perspective, it stops people spending and encourages money hording, this leads to a downward spiral as no one wants to buy anything as they know soon it will be cheaper, as a consequence businesses go broke and the spiral continues downward to one god aweful depression.
Given the gradual decay in prices and there being absolutely no reason for the average person to ever want to use bitcoin as it has all of the disadvantages of real money with none of the legal protections of credit cards or bank accounts. It is a insane risk for the average consumer with zero upsides.
Seriously you work on WikiLeaks and you use an American based email provider? why not just CC them on everything you send and receive and save them the 10 seconds of effort.
Slashdot Mirror
NO he is dead right. If the only thing saving his users was incompatibility to the filesystem then his system is wide open and vulnerable. He hasn't actually protected anything.
how about because they AREN'T pirates. It is perfectly legal to bypass geo-blocking in many countries. e.g. Australia. Why do we do it, because the local services are shit and even with the cost of the VPN + Netflix it is still cheaper than the shit local services.
perhaps they could also show Slashdot how to block dupes.
The issue is likely a bit more complicated than that. The content owners likely have existing agreements in place with 'legacy' providers in each region (satelite/cable...) that prohibits them from licencing the content further.
As quickly as Netflix etc are expanding, they don't yet have the subscriber base of these legacy services, and will be unable to beat the payments that are currently being made for the prime content.
Yes they do have those contracts. But this is not a new phenomena, they have had more than a decade to reform and change those contracts, instead they just renew them and try to hold onto an out of date business model. The world has moved on, it is global market now, nothing the content distributors can do can change that, they either need to use that to their advantage or lose business. No amount of laws, contracts, trade agreements or license restrictions is going to make people obey such outdated models, evolve or die.
did your mummy let you out of the basement again? just because you have no life doesn't mean others don't. If I lose access I will simply pirate the very little content I use and spend more time on other hobbies. Not everyone is so insecure in their life as you.
yes I suspect when they open in Australia the content will be lacking as Foxtel still have content exclusivity licensing for a lot of it. If the content becomes decent I would happily swap to using them locally instead of via the US, but will have to wait and see. Would even happily pay a little more, maybe 15 bucks or so, but only if the content is there. I just don't watch enough to justify spending more, 3 years ago I had foxtel for around $120 a month and for the few hours of content I watched a month it was just insane pricing and now that I got rid of them I would never dream of going back. at around $12 a month (including my smart DNS service) I get all the content I need. I might watch at most 1 hour of TV a day on average so my upper limit of what I am willing to pay is $20 and I consider that simply a fee for not having to watch god damn ads which make free to air TV completely unwatchable for anything except news.
We already have free trade agreements and the laws have remained. They aren't their specifically to allow geo-blocking bypass, more to get past the huge price gouging that takes place by international corporations in Australia where we sometimes pay 50-100% more for items than other countries, in some cases it is cheaper to buy a plane ticket to another country, purchase the item and fly back to Australia with it than buy it here. The price gouging the laws are intended to prevent are actually far more important to the government than helping out the media mafia as without them Australia is far to small to prevent being screwed, they have even dragged the heads of various corporations to front parliament to try to justify the consumer gouging that is taking place.
Geo-blocking isn't actually illegal, it just isn't illegal to bypass it so they most definitely can legally stop us. They are free to implement various measures to prevent it and enforce it, we just won't be in any legal trouble for doing our best to get around it.
I use a smart DNS service in Australia to get my Netflix access. If they do end up blocking it (currently still works fine), I will just go back to pirating my content. I am happy to pay reasonable services a reasonable rate for the content I consume, but be fucked if I will accept being forced to pay for the overpriced poor content supplied locally in Australia.
As someone that just started to use AWS where I work, I feel you are being far to complementary, a first year computer grad could come up with a better interface. The API's they provide aren't a whole lot better either.
Microsoft had supposedly had a very large influence over which chip went into the IBM PC. supposedly they are the reason IBM went with a 16bit chip instead of an 8 Bit one as they talked IBM into changing and they were also considering a 32 bit chip from motorola.
exactly, he never made the statement he is quoted as saying. There is a massive difference between what he is quoted as saying and what is said in that presentation. He also discusses in other interviews how he wanted the limit to be higher but was restricted by the chip architecture but thought it would be good enough for the lifetime of the architecture, he was actually pretty close to being right.
Actually the quote is just an internet myth, at least no one has ever found a source for it or anyone that even reports to have heard him say it and gates denies having said it as well.
REally? where? apologies if I am wrong but I see nothing about user available space for any of the iPhone models on their purchasing site http://www.apple.com/iphone/co...
Ah yes the old "lets throw responsibility on the ISP's story". while I agree ISP's need to do more and should be playing an Active role in shutting down some of the more obvious crap (some are), it really is unreasonable to expect them to bear the cost of becoming the internet police unless perhaps you are proposing every internet user should pay a compulsory extra 10% for their ISP to cover this cost?
seriously is it that hard to understand more than one attack happened over the last month. For fucks sake, just read the god damn article, this relates to the DDoS attack on PSN and XBL, not the sony hack (which probably wasn't actually NK anyway).
Many of these companies have a mix of salaried and CONTRACT employees, or they also pay overtime rates so $0 is likely far from the truth. Also their online component isn't just about letting you play games, they also sell a lot of content through the online capabilities, how much was lost in sales due to that? don't know myself but it would likely be in the millions. Many countries also have laws that state you CAN'T exempt refunds for services in the case where the service was not supplied.
Microsoft and others were forced to change how they advertise there devices because of complaints of how storage is used by the OS. While I agree this lawsuit is idiotic vendors really should be more forthcoming with information like storage, it isn't an insignificant amount that is taken on devices in this form factor and the average consumer doesn't know that he isn't really getting 8GB for photos and games, it wouldn't hurt there sales to be more open and honest, e.g. Microsoft now puts it directly on there site and even provides a table of how much storage is user available for each device. Would it really kill apple to do the same? currently the only thing apple adds is "1GB = 1 billion bytes; actual formatted capacity less."
I don't think its terribly biased to imagine a future where consumers aren't paying a 3% spread to some mega corp for the right to spend their own money online, especially when the security and other guarantees by those corporations are fairly weak. Who hasn't had their credit card stolen? Risk and fraud analysis only get you so far, they are after-the-crime measures. Bitcoin has built security from the ground up.
As opposed to the security provided by bitcoin which is NON existant. .
Nobody should have lost any money unless you were dumb enough to buy Bitcoins.
I see your memory faded faster than the retirement accounts that were fucking liquidated from the financial meltdown in 2008, which involved exactly zero digital currency.
HUH? I think citation is required for such a bold statement.
you need to look up the definition of fraud. You most definitely can defraud people without hacking, especially when you are on the inside such as those within MT Gox. taking coins from peoples accounts and selling them is defrauding them and would require no hacking from someone within Gox.
you need to read more than a "idiots guide to economics", what you describe is disastrous from a economics perspective, it stops people spending and encourages money hording, this leads to a downward spiral as no one wants to buy anything as they know soon it will be cheaper, as a consequence businesses go broke and the spiral continues downward to one god aweful depression.
Given the gradual decay in prices and there being absolutely no reason for the average person to ever want to use bitcoin as it has all of the disadvantages of real money with none of the legal protections of credit cards or bank accounts. It is a insane risk for the average consumer with zero upsides.
Seriously you work on WikiLeaks and you use an American based email provider? why not just CC them on everything you send and receive and save them the 10 seconds of effort.
I feel sorry for north Koreans, haven't they suffered enough? Being given that dogshit movie could count as a war crime.