I quite enjoy using twitter as an easy way to keeping in touch with people and making contacts, but they need to develop a trust and rating system of some kind. Trying to follow a busy "channel" is impossible when it's being bombarded with crap. Because channels are effectively filtered tweets grepped via a search engine, there's no uniform way of rating down a user who insists on trolling or spamming. Have a look at #gaza - i bet about 3 out of 10 tweets are worth reading.
It's an interesting idea, but there are some notification that I will want to click on. Amarok popping up that I have a new song playing is fine, that's something I don't need to interact with, but Pidgin telling me I have a new message is something I need to respond to. Having to click into Pidgin sounds like a cumbersome option, rather than just being able to click the IM notification when it first appears.
Say, your iPod isn't working well - the battery is worn out and you're having to recharge every two hours. If you go to an Apple store, you will have to book an appointment at the 'genius bar' to sort it out. It's their tech support.
It's not a breach of human rights, in less you consider destroying any detainee's reputation and denying them their liberty a breach of human rights. It's damn near the bone, I think.
I don't mind advertising, but until Adobe and Mozilla fix flash transparencies, AdBlock Plus is staying installed. Some news sites are unreadable without it.
The problems B3ta posters have had with Nuts and Zoo magazines spring to mind. Hey, these guys aren't making money from their amusing images, so its OK if we publish them and fail to credit you or even ask first.
But that's currently not even an issue with the iPlayer - which barely works on desktop PCs let alone mobile media players. The issue of convenient TV is not at stake - rather I would prefer it if the open source community took their legal battles to firms which weren't beleaguered public service broadcasters which, like I say, have enough problems to deal with (a reduced licence fee settlement, impending cuts, harrasment over whether the BBC is impartial or not, a educational department stuck in stasis, a new bureaucracy which checks and double checks anything before the BBC can go ahead with a change) without yet again having to withdraw a service because its annoyed a part of the business community. 4oD and Sky also use this Knotiki and WMV DRM, but noises been made about that? I would expect this from predatory parts of the media who want the BBC's audience by other means than developing content worth watching or listening, but not the open source community.
However much I'd love the beeb to be using a opensource version of the iPlayer, they have bigger fish to fry right now than this. The BBC Trust process has meant that the iPlayer is incredibly late, considering its been in planning for several years. More legal trouble could mean the Player never leaves beta at all - leaving the BBC even more irrelevant. In addition, each move the Beeb makes is analysed and scrutinised by a jealous commercial opposition who see new markets which the BBC has picked up and feel threatened by a well-funded, well liked public broadcasting upping the benchmark. It never used to be a problem but it has already seen the death of BBC Jam - the online schools service, leaving their education department in limbo - and has meant that iPlayer is not the product that was originally intended. The ability to download a series has been ripped out, for example.
Now the open source movement wants to harass them as well? This needs to stop. In time the BBC will realise that the Kontiki platform is poor, sucks away bandwidth without asking and renders all their material unportable. They can do that on their own terms with consultation from their users - they do not need more legal trouble which will take up time and leave the BBC even more vulnerable. The public corporation is not the for-profit corporation's bitch.
According to the Human Rights Act, which codifies the European Convention of Human Rights into UK law, every company and individual in the country is entitled to a legal remedy in the courts if they believe their freedom of speech has been infringed. In the case of Man Hunt, it is effectivly Rockstar's freedom of speech which has been stepped on by the BBFC's outright ban. Although the HRA only technically applies to public bodies, case law exists by where courts have been obligated to act as public bodies on behalf of people/firms who believe their human rights to have been infringed.
Of course this all relies on whether a video game can be classified as "speech", but regardless I'd really like to see this go to the courts if it fails at appeal of first instance. No film gets banned in this country any more, yet its fine to take games off the shelves? Hmm.
The kind of people who call their web browser "the Internet" and use MSN Messenger.
By that reckoning Friendster is populated by 20-something Brits, most of whom who have contact with the net in the last six years have an MSN messenger addy. I don't know about the US, but MSN has always been huge here.
If you look at the original interview with J Allard, Microsoft's justification for the seperate Zune product seems to be paper thin:
We've also found that there's a category of customers that say, "Give me a brand experience, advertise it to me on television; I want to be part of the digital music revolution, and that solution [PlaysForSure] doesn't work for me." So they're two complementary solutions -- not everyones gonna want Zune and not everyone's gonna want PlaysForSure. They're different paths there, and we're okay with both of them.
I call bullshit, sir. What hordes of music listeners are waiting for Microsoft to give them a "brand experience", only to end up with a player which resembles their iPod and being totally unable to play any mainstream downloaded song they've purchased? That solution doesn't work for me, and won't work for anyone else - except gadget hungry idiots and people who believe what they read in press releases.
First, the IRA is mainly concerned with Britain, and it would indeed be worthwhile to profile for IRA there. They don't care much about attacking the US, so profiling for them here would not be useful. Second, observe that the IRA and Britain are also in a religious conflict. See a pattern here?
You're either a troll, or ignorant. Anyone who thinks that the Troubles was a religious conflict is demonstrating a complete lack of knowledge of the area.
The IRA is not concerned with the US, are not that large in numbers, and don't do nearly as much damage as the muslims do in the middle east. To me it simply looks like you can't count.
What a stupid comment. A chat with Omagh bomb victims and relatives (Real IRA I know, but a splinter group of the IRA) and other atrocities conducted by Northern Irish terrorist groups would reveal that they did enough damage, thank-you-very-much.
Slashdot Mirror
I quite enjoy using twitter as an easy way to keeping in touch with people and making contacts, but they need to develop a trust and rating system of some kind. Trying to follow a busy "channel" is impossible when it's being bombarded with crap. Because channels are effectively filtered tweets grepped via a search engine, there's no uniform way of rating down a user who insists on trolling or spamming. Have a look at #gaza - i bet about 3 out of 10 tweets are worth reading.
It's an interesting idea, but there are some notification that I will want to click on. Amarok popping up that I have a new song playing is fine, that's something I don't need to interact with, but Pidgin telling me I have a new message is something I need to respond to. Having to click into Pidgin sounds like a cumbersome option, rather than just being able to click the IM notification when it first appears.
Say, your iPod isn't working well - the battery is worn out and you're having to recharge every two hours. If you go to an Apple store, you will have to book an appointment at the 'genius bar' to sort it out. It's their tech support.
It's not a breach of human rights, in less you consider destroying any detainee's reputation and denying them their liberty a breach of human rights. It's damn near the bone, I think.
Sadly it uses ActiveX... So useless on Linux.
That's the most amusing trollbait I've seen all year. Thanks!
wow, i've seen press internships that are less generous.
GMail's J2ME app ain't bad either. Does the job and does it quickly and attractively.
........ Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh! Please try again.
I don't mind advertising, but until Adobe and Mozilla fix flash transparencies, AdBlock Plus is staying installed. Some news sites are unreadable without it.
Is this the only factory in the world making modification devices? Somehow I doubt it.
I'm sorry, but a Tikka Masala is like asking for a something spicy, and then chickening out by chucking in a dollop of cream. It's curry for cowards.
Mod parent -1 Yuck.
The problems B3ta posters have had with Nuts and Zoo magazines spring to mind. Hey, these guys aren't making money from their amusing images, so its OK if we publish them and fail to credit you or even ask first.
But that's currently not even an issue with the iPlayer - which barely works on desktop PCs let alone mobile media players. The issue of convenient TV is not at stake - rather I would prefer it if the open source community took their legal battles to firms which weren't beleaguered public service broadcasters which, like I say, have enough problems to deal with (a reduced licence fee settlement, impending cuts, harrasment over whether the BBC is impartial or not, a educational department stuck in stasis, a new bureaucracy which checks and double checks anything before the BBC can go ahead with a change) without yet again having to withdraw a service because its annoyed a part of the business community. 4oD and Sky also use this Knotiki and WMV DRM, but noises been made about that? I would expect this from predatory parts of the media who want the BBC's audience by other means than developing content worth watching or listening, but not the open source community.
However much I'd love the beeb to be using a opensource version of the iPlayer, they have bigger fish to fry right now than this. The BBC Trust process has meant that the iPlayer is incredibly late, considering its been in planning for several years. More legal trouble could mean the Player never leaves beta at all - leaving the BBC even more irrelevant. In addition, each move the Beeb makes is analysed and scrutinised by a jealous commercial opposition who see new markets which the BBC has picked up and feel threatened by a well-funded, well liked public broadcasting upping the benchmark. It never used to be a problem but it has already seen the death of BBC Jam - the online schools service, leaving their education department in limbo - and has meant that iPlayer is not the product that was originally intended. The ability to download a series has been ripped out, for example.
Now the open source movement wants to harass them as well? This needs to stop. In time the BBC will realise that the Kontiki platform is poor, sucks away bandwidth without asking and renders all their material unportable. They can do that on their own terms with consultation from their users - they do not need more legal trouble which will take up time and leave the BBC even more vulnerable. The public corporation is not the for-profit corporation's bitch.
Hang on a sec...
According to the Human Rights Act, which codifies the European Convention of Human Rights into UK law, every company and individual in the country is entitled to a legal remedy in the courts if they believe their freedom of speech has been infringed. In the case of Man Hunt, it is effectivly Rockstar's freedom of speech which has been stepped on by the BBFC's outright ban. Although the HRA only technically applies to public bodies, case law exists by where courts have been obligated to act as public bodies on behalf of people/firms who believe their human rights to have been infringed.
Of course this all relies on whether a video game can be classified as "speech", but regardless I'd really like to see this go to the courts if it fails at appeal of first instance. No film gets banned in this country any more, yet its fine to take games off the shelves? Hmm.
No, that's numberwang.
Has netcraft... never mind.
I'm English and the majority of my friends, and most of my family, have MSN buddy names. But yes, friendster sucks :D
The kind of people who call their web browser "the Internet" and use MSN Messenger.
By that reckoning Friendster is populated by 20-something Brits, most of whom who have contact with the net in the last six years have an MSN messenger addy. I don't know about the US, but MSN has always been huge here.
So, so that's the Windows Genuine Advantage!
Buy stuff, get to take part in class action lawsuits...
/me patents the bluetoothed, camera phone, mobile TV equipped underpant.
First, the IRA is mainly concerned with Britain, and it would indeed be worthwhile to profile for IRA there. They don't care much about attacking the US, so profiling for them here would not be useful. Second, observe that the IRA and Britain are also in a religious conflict. See a pattern here?
You're either a troll, or ignorant. Anyone who thinks that the Troubles was a religious conflict is demonstrating a complete lack of knowledge of the area.
The IRA is not concerned with the US, are not that large in numbers, and don't do nearly as much damage as the muslims do in the middle east. To me it simply looks like you can't count.
What a stupid comment. A chat with Omagh bomb victims and relatives (Real IRA I know, but a splinter group of the IRA) and other atrocities conducted by Northern Irish terrorist groups would reveal that they did enough damage, thank-you-very-much.
Please read up on Irish Republicanism and the Troubles before continuing to comment on something you know nothing about.