As you say, nothing says content provider can't use DRM to stream movies, EFF are simply arguing that DRM should have no place in a standard.
I personally have no problem with that. Open standards should be about ensuring as wide a interoperability as possible and DRM goes directly against that.
The other thing to note is that the DRM being talked about is not a DRM implementation, it's a common interface for DRM plugins, so we still have lots of different proprietary DRM plugins and we will still be no better off than we are now..
He didn't go there with a camera crew and "hurt the environment", he got out his cellphone and shot a video.
But how can the Nepallese determin that if permission is never asked for before hand. All they know is that climbers need permission to make broadcast films and this guy made a broadcast film without permission.
The idea Nepals' laws are just behind the times and therefore can be ignored is a slippery slope (a slippery slope... on everest... get it... boom boom).
If you are in another country, you respect that countries laws and customs.
Yes, they used to be a great ISP, now they are just a good enough but cheap ISP.
Personally I think BT use them like a shield against small ISPs from getting too big, everytime a small company starts making inroads, Plusnet seem to have a better offer which they can afford because although they present that small ISP image they have BT's wallet to back them up.
That leaves BT free to compete against the likes of Virgin and Sky on bundled features rather than price.
Please give me a scenario where someone gets more back from their taxes than they pay in.
How are you defining gets back more from their taxes than they pay in? Are you trying to compare what you pay in tax to how much you think you could buy the same services on a voluntary basis?
For example you pay $200 for fire but you could get an Fire Insurance policy for $150?
How do you compare the taxes you pay for services you don't use? Is that just a huge negative section which drags the overall evaluation of whether tax pays or not?
For examlpe, you pay $200 for school services but you don't have kids? Do you see that as $200 you shouldn't have to pay at all?
Apparently, these nowhere companies hold "apple intellectual property" . So if you somehow get your hands on OSX source code - perhaps you can share it without punishment. But how would you get that without breaking into apple headquarters
Code isn't the only IP, just start using the trade name and logo's on other stuff.
Even better would be to put it on really crappy stuff. The point isn't to make a profit after all, it's to force the company to declare where the company holding the IP is incorporated and force them to justify why US courts should enforce their claim to it.
So when I'm looking at photos of a loved ones' visit to the Taj Mahal, Google says that they're going to push *lots* of other people's photos of the Taj Mahal at me.
Thats not how I read the summary, it more a case of you upload all your photos and Google will use the ones with recognised landmarks as the special photos for you, use them as album covers etc.
They are working on the basis that you are uploading everything you take a picture of and then want to sort through them to find that 1 special photo and that photos with landmarks probably hold more significance for you because it probably means a trip or holiday.
Personally I think they are making some false assumptions there, number 1 being that I think the stuff which gets online has already been selected by the user to some extent.
I think the price for Win 8 was more an acknowledgement from MS that Win 8 was a critical release for them and that they knew it was going to be a tough OS to sell.
The article linked in the summary showed Googles own job titles and descriptions for the London offices as being Sales, and one of their own clients saying all the sales contact he has with Google is based in London... with the exception of the address on the invoice being Dublin.
OK, it's not 100% proof, but it is certainly enough to ask whether Google were truthful last time around.
Why does this guy get to explain himself? In my country, the IRS just sends me a letter...
This isn't the HMRC, this is a special parlimentary committee who are trying to work out how the companies are legally avoiding tax.
The companies questioned (Google, Amazon, Starbucks + 1 other I can't remember off the top of my head - probably MS) were all choosen because they pay very little tax in relation to the turnover the companies are reporting in the UK, and are therefore either very badly run or are engaged in some very effective tax avoidance.
Some of the answers given by the executives were extremely funny, the Amazon executive especially didn't perform well, but Google actually came out of it looking reasonably good, they seemed to be quite honest saying they based most of their operations in Ireland because of it's lower Corporation Tax level and that it wasn't hiding anything while Amazon twisted and turned trying not to say the exact same thing about it's luxembourg HQ.
The Google executive is being brought back because it's now been shown that most of the Google operations are based in London, not Dublin and he was therefore telling porkies.
He's not being brought back in to explain his tax affairs, he's being brought back for lying to a government committee.
silt and rocks in the river fall out, so over time, the efficiency of the dam goes down, since it's not storing as much water and so you don't have as much pressure head to produce power.
The pressure of the water is determined by the height of the water level, not the volume of water behind the dam.
Volume would affect peformance by reducing how long the turbines can be used when the supplying rivers are providing less water than the turbines are using. The bigger the volume the better the buffer and since we are talking about annual rainfall cycles the buffer does need to be huge and silting would be a problem.
It would just need your own website (so you trust the operator not to strip metadata) being indexed by Google.
It wouldn't need to be all over the web.
I want to use that application... you know the one... lets you draw stuff, I used it to make those Christmas cards last year... I know it's installed on here somewhere... if only there was a nice hierarchical list of applications where things are laid out logically rather than based on most recent use then I could find it.
The problem with Windows Phone isn't the OS or the hardware
Personally, the problem I have with Windows Phone isn't the OS or the hardware bit.. it's the MS bit.
As consumers, we had to put up with MS business practices for decades because there was no viable alternative, and everytime a reason alternative got going, a file format or API would mysteriously change breaking interoperability. This wasn't done for the customers benefit, it was done to keep MS in the dominate position.
I have no desire to see them... or anyone else... ever given such a dominate position within a market segment ever again, MS has proven themselves untrustworthy and hence neither I, nor anyone whose opinions I can influence on mobile technology (*1) will touch a phone/tablet from MS.
Note 1: Basically my parents and girlfriend, I'm the first to admit my influence does reach far, but if other geeks feel the same way my personal influence doesn't have to.
Liability insurance for developers does not cost very much.
But is that because the programmers/companies which do take out insurance are exactly the group who care about their reputation and business and so would be less likely to need to use the insurance anyway?
If you start mandating that all companies need insurance, then I think you'll see premiums increase because the ratio of bad to good developers will increase.
Slashdot Mirror
As you say, nothing says content provider can't use DRM to stream movies, EFF are simply arguing that DRM should have no place in a standard.
I personally have no problem with that. Open standards should be about ensuring as wide a interoperability as possible and DRM goes directly against that.
The other thing to note is that the DRM being talked about is not a DRM implementation, it's a common interface for DRM plugins, so we still have lots of different proprietary DRM plugins and we will still be no better off than we are now..
But how can the Nepallese determin that if permission is never asked for before hand. All they know is that climbers need permission to make broadcast films and this guy made a broadcast film without permission.
The idea Nepals' laws are just behind the times and therefore can be ignored is a slippery slope (a slippery slope... on everest... get it... boom boom).
If you are in another country, you respect that countries laws and customs.
which is a terrible indictment of US vehicle training
I'm pretty sure you are reading the wrong books.
Well for one thing, it shows a bit of concensus for the idea.
Yes, they used to be a great ISP, now they are just a good enough but cheap ISP.
Personally I think BT use them like a shield against small ISPs from getting too big, everytime a small company starts making inroads, Plusnet seem to have a better offer which they can afford because although they present that small ISP image they have BT's wallet to back them up.
That leaves BT free to compete against the likes of Virgin and Sky on bundled features rather than price.
How are you defining gets back more from their taxes than they pay in? Are you trying to compare what you pay in tax to how much you think you could buy the same services on a voluntary basis?
For example you pay $200 for fire but you could get an Fire Insurance policy for $150?
How do you compare the taxes you pay for services you don't use? Is that just a huge negative section which drags the overall evaluation of whether tax pays or not?
For examlpe, you pay $200 for school services but you don't have kids? Do you see that as $200 you shouldn't have to pay at all?
Code isn't the only IP, just start using the trade name and logo's on other stuff.
Even better would be to put it on really crappy stuff. The point isn't to make a profit after all, it's to force the company to declare where the company holding the IP is incorporated and force them to justify why US courts should enforce their claim to it.
*stratches head*
Thats not how I read the summary, it more a case of you upload all your photos and Google will use the ones with recognised landmarks as the special photos for you, use them as album covers etc.
They are working on the basis that you are uploading everything you take a picture of and then want to sort through them to find that 1 special photo and that photos with landmarks probably hold more significance for you because it probably means a trip or holiday.
Personally I think they are making some false assumptions there, number 1 being that I think the stuff which gets online has already been selected by the user to some extent.
You are worried about parasites in an insect but happily eat other mammals whose parasites are far more likely to be evolved to infest us?
Parasites in insects can be dealt with in the same same humans deal with almost parasites in our food, we cooked the meal first.
I think the price for Win 8 was more an acknowledgement from MS that Win 8 was a critical release for them and that they knew it was going to be a tough OS to sell.
We live as part of a community, tax is a way of paying for the collective costs of that community, who do you think you were winning against before?
The article linked in the summary showed Googles own job titles and descriptions for the London offices as being Sales, and one of their own clients saying all the sales contact he has with Google is based in London... with the exception of the address on the invoice being Dublin.
OK, it's not 100% proof, but it is certainly enough to ask whether Google were truthful last time around.
This isn't the HMRC, this is a special parlimentary committee who are trying to work out how the companies are legally avoiding tax.
The companies questioned (Google, Amazon, Starbucks + 1 other I can't remember off the top of my head - probably MS) were all choosen because they pay very little tax in relation to the turnover the companies are reporting in the UK, and are therefore either very badly run or are engaged in some very effective tax avoidance.
Some of the answers given by the executives were extremely funny, the Amazon executive especially didn't perform well, but Google actually came out of it looking reasonably good, they seemed to be quite honest saying they based most of their operations in Ireland because of it's lower Corporation Tax level and that it wasn't hiding anything while Amazon twisted and turned trying not to say the exact same thing about it's luxembourg HQ.
The Google executive is being brought back because it's now been shown that most of the Google operations are based in London, not Dublin and he was therefore telling porkies.
He's not being brought back in to explain his tax affairs, he's being brought back for lying to a government committee.
The pressure of the water is determined by the height of the water level, not the volume of water behind the dam.
Volume would affect peformance by reducing how long the turbines can be used when the supplying rivers are providing less water than the turbines are using. The bigger the volume the better the buffer and since we are talking about annual rainfall cycles the buffer does need to be huge and silting would be a problem.
The basic logical of the theory holds true, the date at which we hit Peak Oil moves a bit further out.
The only way the theory could be substantially wrong would be if fossil fuel is produced far faster than we current believe.
It would just need your own website (so you trust the operator not to strip metadata) being indexed by Google. It wouldn't need to be all over the web.
Why do you think EA has to buy development companies?
Depends on whether they have switched to LED lights yet :)
I want to use that application... you know the one... lets you draw stuff, I used it to make those Christmas cards last year... I know it's installed on here somewhere... if only there was a nice hierarchical list of applications where things are laid out logically rather than based on most recent use then I could find it.
Personally, the problem I have with Windows Phone isn't the OS or the hardware bit.. it's the MS bit.
As consumers, we had to put up with MS business practices for decades because there was no viable alternative, and everytime a reason alternative got going, a file format or API would mysteriously change breaking interoperability. This wasn't done for the customers benefit, it was done to keep MS in the dominate position.
I have no desire to see them... or anyone else... ever given such a dominate position within a market segment ever again, MS has proven themselves untrustworthy and hence neither I, nor anyone whose opinions I can influence on mobile technology (*1) will touch a phone/tablet from MS.
Note 1: Basically my parents and girlfriend, I'm the first to admit my influence does reach far, but if other geeks feel the same way my personal influence doesn't have to.
But is that because the programmers/companies which do take out insurance are exactly the group who care about their reputation and business and so would be less likely to need to use the insurance anyway?
If you start mandating that all companies need insurance, then I think you'll see premiums increase because the ratio of bad to good developers will increase.
i don't think we're in kansas anymore toto
Critical Mass and Vendor Lock In