As The Wired already explained a couple of days ago ( http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/07/google-china-fiction/ ) what Google and Chinese government agreed on is pure fiction. Google doesn't redirect Chinese users to the Honk Kong search engine automatically, but there is a button to easily switch and google.hk is left uncensored in China, meaning that the Chinese can still search Google without filtering.
The article linked by Slashdot as the source presents the Chinese official version of the story which obviously hides the above fact.
To me it's essential to read a few reviews (even very short ones like "too sentimental" or "powerful and original") by people I know to have a similar movie taste to me. That's why I like the two websites I mentioned above -- they exactly tell you whose opinions you should care for and whose you can safely ignore.
On the other hand, http://jinni.com/ and http://clerkdogs.com/ have some pretty cool ideas as well - they suggest you movies based on your mood and your taste. Still in beta though, so it does not always work as expected, but worth trying anyways.
Does anyone find Netflix recommendations any good anyway? I used http://criticker.com/ for quite a while and was very happy about the recommended stuff. Recently switched to http://filmaster.com/ (which is a free service) and it's equally good, even though both probably use a pretty simple algorithm compared to Nextflix.
Here is a related (p)review of latest revision of KDe 4.1 (not the exact alpha just released): http://polishlinux.org/kde/kde-4-rev-802150-work-in-progress/
"Plasma has gone under major API changes and is still a bit wonky, Dolphin gets tabs (hell yeah!), Phonon gets a Gstreamer backend, KWin gets wobbly windows (hell yeah!), and KInfoCenter and K3b get KDE4 ports. KDE 4.1 will be sure to blow your mind."
A bit more comprehensive and screenshot-rich than the ArsTechnica article.
It seems that the thing isn't as obvious from the legal point of view as it was first assumed (probably by police as well).
There was a statement by the Polish Court like this before:
"By judgement of Highest Court from 23.01.2003: The making of translation of word layer of audiovisual creation does not make processing of it as a whole. Thereby it can be spread without consent of the maker of original work. The translator have copyrights to translation."
The situation concerned a case where one person allowed another to translate some commercial (2-3 lines of text) from French to Polish and then use it in TV. The businessmen later had an argument and one accused another of theft of material goods (pencils to be exact) and copyright violation of the commercial text.
This is true that in this case the act of translating was not considered a crime and even publishing it in TV was not considered a violation of copyright. Still, it is uncertain whether publishing the much longer subtitle text without any agreement between the author and the translator on the Internet is a crime or not. It is however certain that the police thinks it is since they held the Napisy.org website admins and translators for that.
Anyway, whatever the law actaully says, I believe this situation is really sick and it shows the complete mess in priorities of the police actions (there are hundreds of Nazi websites in Poland for example and nobody does anything about it!), I just want to say that according to law, the case is not obvious.
Slashdot Mirror
As The Wired already explained a couple of days ago ( http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/07/google-china-fiction/ ) what Google and Chinese government agreed on is pure fiction. Google doesn't redirect Chinese users to the Honk Kong search engine automatically, but there is a button to easily switch and google.hk is left uncensored in China, meaning that the Chinese can still search Google without filtering. The article linked by Slashdot as the source presents the Chinese official version of the story which obviously hides the above fact.
To me it's essential to read a few reviews (even very short ones like "too sentimental" or "powerful and original") by people I know to have a similar movie taste to me. That's why I like the two websites I mentioned above -- they exactly tell you whose opinions you should care for and whose you can safely ignore. On the other hand, http://jinni.com/ and http://clerkdogs.com/ have some pretty cool ideas as well - they suggest you movies based on your mood and your taste. Still in beta though, so it does not always work as expected, but worth trying anyways.
Does anyone find Netflix recommendations any good anyway? I used http://criticker.com/ for quite a while and was very happy about the recommended stuff. Recently switched to http://filmaster.com/ (which is a free service) and it's equally good, even though both probably use a pretty simple algorithm compared to Nextflix.
Here is the Polish translation of this article: http://osnews.pl/problemem-nie-jest-gates-lecz-bariery-ktore-stworzyl/
Here is a related (p)review of latest revision of KDe 4.1 (not the exact alpha just released): http://polishlinux.org/kde/kde-4-rev-802150-work-in-progress/ "Plasma has gone under major API changes and is still a bit wonky, Dolphin gets tabs (hell yeah!), Phonon gets a Gstreamer backend, KWin gets wobbly windows (hell yeah!), and KInfoCenter and K3b get KDE4 ports. KDE 4.1 will be sure to blow your mind." A bit more comprehensive and screenshot-rich than the ArsTechnica article.
Guys, this is an April Fools joke! Here is the real story, basing on the Jason Matusow's blog post from today: Microsoft admits manipulation, abandons OOXML.
- Linux distros ovieview: http://polishlinux.org/linux/
- BSD family ovieview: http://polishlinux.org/bsd/
- Distro chooser: http://polishlinux.org/choose/quiz/
- Distro comparisons: http://polishlinux.org/choose/comparison/
And you're all set. If not, there's always DistroWatchIt seems that the thing isn't as obvious from the legal point of view as it was first assumed (probably by police as well). There was a statement by the Polish Court like this before: "By judgement of Highest Court from 23.01.2003: The making of translation of word layer of audiovisual creation does not make processing of it as a whole. Thereby it can be spread without consent of the maker of original work. The translator have copyrights to translation." The situation concerned a case where one person allowed another to translate some commercial (2-3 lines of text) from French to Polish and then use it in TV. The businessmen later had an argument and one accused another of theft of material goods (pencils to be exact) and copyright violation of the commercial text. This is true that in this case the act of translating was not considered a crime and even publishing it in TV was not considered a violation of copyright. Still, it is uncertain whether publishing the much longer subtitle text without any agreement between the author and the translator on the Internet is a crime or not. It is however certain that the police thinks it is since they held the Napisy.org website admins and translators for that. Anyway, whatever the law actaully says, I believe this situation is really sick and it shows the complete mess in priorities of the police actions (there are hundreds of Nazi websites in Poland for example and nobody does anything about it!), I just want to say that according to law, the case is not obvious.