2400 posts • joined 11 Apr 2006
@Erik Re: Is this actually warranted?
There are two sides to this coin.
IBM is kind of in a catch-22.
Over the past decade IBM has made record profits by cutting to the bone. Buying back shares to help reduce the number of shares on the market to help boost their stock price.
Now they have a problem.
No SO customer will buy from IBM if IBM can't provide the skills required. That makes the SO employee dead weight. What good is an employee who knows lotus notes when the market wants someone to support Outlook?
Or if an Oracle DBA is certified on their regular products but not Exadata?
Or they don't know 'Big Data'....
So IBM has to retrain their employees. Those who don't skill up are gone.
IBM also has to figure out how to subsidize the cost of the training. After all, you can't charge the client if your employee is off training.
This isn't a good thing for IBM. It says long term, IBM is toast because they can't attract the necessary talent and they don't invest in their people.
To your point, on US contracts, customers don't want offshore labor onshored. They will beat up IBM on this and reduce IBM's profit margins.
This is definitely yet another warning sign of IBM's impending doom.
@Jeffy Pooh Re: 'Honey Boo Boo' in 4K glory
You owe me a new laptop. Mine shorted out when I puked at the idea you suggested.
But to your point... What's the sense of 4K TV when the content itself is crap?
I think that's going to be the larger problem. (As pointed out by the 4K movies that are available...)
@AC Re: My dog is Murphy.
And if you don't want service dogs in your car, then don't drive for Uber or any of those other car services.
Go and read the ADA. There's the Federal Law, then each state has their own, and most cities even have their own. Actually its not just ADA but also Fair Housing and other laws that deal with discriminatory practices and what constitutes a protected class.
If you decide to drive for Uber, then you have to follow the law. It is Uber's responsibility to make sure that their drivers know the law and that they follow the law. In these cases, both the driver and the service are on the hook. (The driver is not an Uber employee and has no shield.)
Suspension of the driver doesn't go far enough. Drop the driver from the service. Period. That driver is a risk for repeat offenses and there are more drivers willing to do this.
Re: Sounds very suspicious ..
And the moon landing was faked.
Do you know how many rides the woman had with Uber?
So could it have been that she's relied on Uber and of the times she's called, Driver X has selected 12 of those times?
Keep in mind that blind people don't drive so they are more than likely going to need transportation. So at a minimum 2 times a day if they are just going to and from work.
Again here's where this so called disruptive service flagrantly disregards the law.
No set up required.
Can you say Spark?
@PleebSmash Re: Back to the drawing board
TAMR is already taken.
One of Stonebraker's companies. This one out of MIT.
Re: They're not the worst offenders
Besides Harvey Birdman?
Actually its a slam dunk class action lawsuit.
Of course you have to own the website in question, or make sure that the T's and C's don't force you to accept that the photos on the site are automatically licensed under terms in Creative Commons...
If its your photo, your site and you've got the copyright... GO FOR IT!
Here's the thing.
Getty is a stock photo house. The article and the article referenced talk about Getty using the images from their stock. (If you have a problem of Getty stealing your photos. By all means sue them.)
I did a simple test.
I tried getting images from a local hadoop user group on getty.
Guess what? Using the search term 'Hadoop' I got back 15 images from a stock photo that was used in a Bloomberg article.
I then did this with Microsoft's Bing tool.
Got back member photos and group icons.
Now, if I had to say... The reuse of the indexed photos and images by Microsoft would clearly be copyright infringement.
If you have to pick a fight... its Microsoft which is clearly violating the copyright holders rights and they should be sued.
Am I missing something?
Didn't one of those vanity custom phone makers already use sapphire glass in their handsets?
Vertu, I believe.
And of course I believe a previous El Reg article pointed that out... so neither Apple or Huawei are first to the punch.
So it must be a slow news day...
Go Team Lohan!
@ phoenixat44 Re: Title goes here
I think you missed Alice Dobb's point.
Outside of the plastic printers, there are metal 3D printers who can produce metal components (think aerospace industrial grade).
One company did produce a 1911 made from such a printer. (Not sure how many rounds were actually fired.) They did it just to show that it can be done and that you can produce parts that can withstand the pressure.
Of course the company didn't say how much this gun costs, other than one could purchase several regular guns combined, far cheaper.
Where the 3D printing can be interesting isn't producing the gun itself, but in producing the silencer/suppressor. (Again metal printer. Not plastic)
Re: You've got it all wrong....
Its called LIDAR.
That's how you do 3D Mapping. No photos necessary.
No comments on FB?
I mean do you realize how much information they can collect from FB on these guys?
Oh if I were the CIA or NSA, I could have a lot of fun...
Its a Data Scientist's wet dream.
Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.
There's this thing... enemy combatant.
The trick is for the US Government to find a lawyer who can successfully argue to sanction the guy and that it wasn't illegal. (It had been done.)
The point is that its a bad argument on the point of DAM (Destroy All Monsters) .
Re: Recognise the voice?
There are other ways to identify the individual.
Re: WWII TECH RECYCLED FOR PATENT PURPOSES
Sorry but the Dam Busters is a totally different tech. You have two beams of light focused so that they intersect when you are X feet above the ground isn't the same.
But to your point, using radio frequencies to triangulate the source of the transmission is something that has been around for a while.
There are a couple of ways you could triangulate an object so its not clear if they should or should not have been granted a patent.
The key question is how obvious is the solution before the solution is presented to you.
Its not a clear cut issue which is why we have lawyers to argue the finer points of law.
This is also why we have a rule that when the revolution comes, and it will, the first to be up in front of the wall are lawyers.
Bollox! Re: Price has a lot to do with it
"From a number of points of view, that makes it unstable and unreliable until an opensource driver is available."
That is pure bunk.
Some things proprietary will outperform 'open source'.
And if you toss out the argument that you're going to want to tweak it... more pure bollox
Just a thought...
Did he manage to capture the GPS location of the snapped pic?
No real news here...
I have an old iPad 1 that I replaced with an iPad 2 because I wanted the telco option not just wifi.
Both are working fine... Will I buy another? sure when one of them breaks down to the point it is no longer usable, or is outdated.
Apple would have to introduce a new killer 'must have' feature for me to upgrade...
Re: prior art
Bose did a lot of research on sound waves. Anything in terms of noise cancellation is definitely related to his research at MIT.
I forget the model of his point source speakers back in the 70's and early 80's.
Definitely cool stuff.
The point is that Bose was an innovator and if they hold the patent, you can bet there's no argument for prior art.
Re: prior art
Do you even know anything about Bose?
Not just the company but the man behind the company? (I believe he's dead...)
The guy was *the* man when it cam to audio (speaker) technology.
An MIT professor who's life work is a list of patents.
Any prior art is from Bose.
Re: alternate reality??
I'd say that while the US has a greater diversity, almost all countries have the same problem.
He must be a Rangers Fan!!!
Title says it all!!
Re: The Green Brigade
Re: May as well save the $1 billion
For there to be a lawsuit, you have to show that you were harmed as result of the infection.
Not an easy thing to do...
@AC Re: Our Mission
If you can afford to drive around in London, then you really can't complain about the cost of parking.
Outside of the tube strike, the tube is extremely efficient in terms of getting around town. Its one of the cities where public transportation does seem to work.
I wonder if Archer will add this as aprt of a plot twist in their next season.
Re: I lie to them
You do realize that they capture enough information from various sources that they know who you are and how old you really are.
First, its against the law for you to connect to a network without permission to do so. (Theft of Service)
Second... you get what you deserve. (You never know who's watching...)
Third, there was evidence in the snarfed data that contained personal information including passwords.
(yes some systems still send passwords and connection data in plain text.)
But back to your point about mapping open wi-fi...
It would essentially be a 'free lunch' for google to track your android devices and then piggyback on unsecured wi-fi to send that information back to google for analysis.
Do you not see how illegal this would be?
Of course we'll never know if they 1) Tried this. 2) intended to try this...
Re: No Shock Here...
I guess commentards who down voted haven't looked at relevant case history.
It gets down to what is a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Walking naked on to a bus in the middle of the day and they trying to sue someone for taking a snap... claiming that they violated your privacy? Sorry that's going to fall flat.
Fighting the charges that you got caught listening to your neighbor's 900mhz analog phone. (Again showing my age), claiming that since they were broadcasting over the open air between the handset and base station that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy? Good luck fighting that one.
It goes back to the SCOTUS case where a guy when in to a public payphone to place a call to his bookie in another state. What he didnt know was that the Feds had set up a wire tap, but failed to get a warrant.
SCOTUS tossed the conviction because the recording was obtained illegally. The suspect had a reasonable expectation of privacy by going in to a phone booth to place a call.
That was in the 60's and there are cases going forward that show how SCOTUS feels about protecting one's privacy.
WAR DRIVING, even done by a corporate giant. Is still illegal.
No Shock Here...
Google's arguments fell flat because even if you don't secure or know how to secure your network, there's an expectation of privacy.
If you look at SCOTUS decisions going back to the 60's where there's a reasonable expectation of privacy, the courts will always favor it.
Google would be best served by quickly and quietly settling this case.
Expect to see a 10Q filing on the cost of the lawsuit and settlement.
@Paul, Re: @Justin... Flip the coin
The issue isn't the question of storage of your individual copies.
The issue is if you store your copies on the cloud, and then make them available where people pay a fee to view your copies. (Meaning that they don't own their own copies.)
That would be illegal.
Here's a grey area... suppose you offer a service that allows people to upload their videos.
Now suppose you take the checksum of the videos and decide that if they match an already stored video, that you instead of storing an additional copy, you just store a link to the existing copy. If someone removes a video, you remove the link and when a video no longer has any links, you remove the file.
Would this be illegal? I honestly don't know, and I think that it would be legal, as long as the video content itself was legal. But IANAL and that too would have to go through the legal process up to SCOTUS.
@Adrew ... Re: Good. Now it's time to end retransmission fees.
"There is a compulsory license regime for US cable companies - so they can use the free-to-air transmissions and TV companies can't stop them, but they must pay a statutory below-market rate."
This isn't exactly true.
Satellite provider Direct TV can't rebroadcast Over the Air channels like ABC, CBS, NBC in areas where the local affiliate doesn't grant them permission, if there is a local affiliate in the area. So even if you're unable to get the over the air signal from the local affiliate, if they say no, you don't get that channel on satellite.
Its not always a simple thing.
@Anatak Re: @Justin... Flip the coin
Suppose I want to take my over-the-air or any other broadcast that I receive at home and use my computer as a DVR. Then suppose I want to store that copy 'in the cloud'... I then want to play it back on my TV or PC, I should be able to do so. However, the moment you share it... you're going to be afoul of the law.
Yes, if 100's of people does this, then there are 100's copies and each of you are paying for the storage and costs of streaming. But it would be legal.
Re: Pyrrhic Victory
That's pure bunk.
Most people in cities get their TV from either Sat or Cable.
In a condo, where do you hang your antenna? ;-)
(You know what I mean...)
So you get OtA tv already. You're not missing a thing.
@Justin... Re: Flip the coin
In some of the articles, the authors say that the courts saw through the sham.
That is to say that there are 'hundreds' of antennas and that there is one per 'customer'?
Ok and that suppose they all wanted to 'record' the US vs Germany in World Cup action.
How many copies does Aereo actually make and retain?
If you believe 1 per antenna... I've got some swampland in Florida you might be interested in.
The difference between you recording your own shows using hardware so that you can watch it anytime and virtually anywhere... (assuming you have the correct software) is that you're not providing the recording as a service and are charging for that service. Were you to do that, then you'd be on the hook like Aereo.
Note that if you look at what you want to do with 'over the air'... google hulu.
While I agree with your article. I do have to argue that disruption is a term that has significant meaning.
Looking at Hadoop for example, it is a truly disruptive technology. If you've ever walked in to an enterprise where everything is in silos, then introduce a horizontal platform... truly disruptive. In a good way.
Re: But what if I choose to..
you would actually have a stronger argument than Aereo did.
You're not reselling a service. Were you to do that... then you'd be in trouble.
Re: Why fibreglass cows?
Again, you've never been around cows...
While they are usually passive and want to get away... you corner them, any animal, and they will panic.
Not good. I've seen a cow (not a bull) rip apart a pen trying to get out because she was being crowded and spooked by the farmhand trying to get the cow into the chute.
(And yes, I've 'volunteered' to work the cattle when it became time to give them their medicines ...)
Trust me. Even a spooked calf can be dangerous.
Re: Why fibreglass cows?
I guess you've never been on a farm with cattle.
Cattle are herd animals and the herd will wander away from crowds of humans.
So all of your hotspots will be away from you. ;-)
Re: Makes someone happy?
@AC.. whatever floats your boat. :-)
But its not legal in the US.
I could have said "an app that lets me find the spot market price for meth and negotiate a free delivery to my doorstep with no police intervention?"
Would that be better?
Oh wait, its called Craigslist. :-P
Re: Makes someone happy?
Sorry, but when you cut a single sentence taken out of context...
The point was that just because something brings enjoyment to someone doesn't mean it should be made legal or right.
In the UK there was a show on football hooligans. Those who love to go and get in to fights for the sake of fighting. They enjoy it. Should it be legal?
Uncontrolled/Unregulated prostitution. Should that be legal?
By the argument espoused by the company, it should when it shouldn't.
Then there's the city's side. Its illegal to try and profit from a public resource.
Suppose its a very hot day and you want to take a drink from a public drinking fountain. (Yes, I'm showing my age because today you'd buy a bottle of water.) But when you got to the drinking fountain there were a couple of tough guys who told you it would cost you a couple of bucks to take a drink...
You get the idea. So by the company's perspective... that would be legal.
To look at it a different way, under the law, the person who's selling a public spot doesn't own the public spot or rights to the public spot.
Makes someone happy?
""This applies also to companies like Airbnb, Uber and Lyft that are continuously facing difficulties while delivering something that makes users happy," he said."
Sorry but an app that lets me contact an escort of my choosing and negotiate a haggle free price up front? Now that would make me happy, but that still doesn't mean it should be legal.
Food for thought...
i'm sure I'll get massively down voted, even if I am saying something that is factual.
"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."
Thats right. For one to put Snowden's actions in perspective, one must look back on history and the reasons why things are kept secret. Unfortunately when you look at history, you'll find that its against Snowden. Go back over the past several hundred years of recorded history...
We look at Manning and Snowden, there is no whistleblowing. No purpose, but a smash and grab of confidential (top secret) data and then an eventual dump of data. No crimes were ever shown from the data breech. To use Manning as an example... all of the war documents... not one evidence of a war crime. (And I should point out that war crimes do happen in every war on both sides. The US was guilty on several crimes, however none of them were reported by Manning.) Snowden? No crimes were found also. Note that the current law(s) support the assertion that the NSA could capture the metadata of the phone calls, yet they had to be careful when combining that data. The NSA actually had better security and protocols for data access management than the companies that produced the data itself.
The point is that like Manning, Snowden is a criminal. He joined the company as a subcontractor specifically to go to the NSA and steal their data.
Now Snowden is attempting to defend his actions.
Sorry, but he can rot in Russia. No sympathy here.
Re: Slip of the pen/tongue?
No, he'll be prosecuted under the law
He'll probably piss someone off in prison and get himself shiv'd
He's a total prat.
@Fluffy Re: Why would Sweden send him when we haven't...?
The US hasn't indited him so no charges. No charges, no extradition request.
But, by an accident of birth, he's Australian so you're stuck with him.
Re: >"where he will be persecuted for leaking thousands of American and British diplomatic cables"
What apparently scared Assange is that in the Article 32 hearing the allegation was that Assange helped with the theft.
Small detail that has serious implications.
Re: oh but that's just the start...
Yes, there is an Ecuadorian embassy in Australia.
But Assange has to fly and land in Australia. That takes time.
He has to be processed in.
That takes time.
He could be held for a short period of time by the Aussie government. (He's a bad boy now..)
The Ecuadorian Embassy may not want him after 2 years as a guest.
Lots of things can happen.
Re: oh but that's just the start...
I suggest you go back and check out the charges. He would be charged where the one count carried a maximum of 4 years.
In the US that would be a felony and not a misdemeanor. You don't swear out an EAW for a charge that carries only a fine. (Seems you've been listening to Assange's spin.)
Again, the US hasn't filed any charges so he faces nothing in the US. Right now the threat of US is of a paranoid man child. But then again, only Julian knows what he did and maybe he has a guilty conscience?
And yes, he'll eventually end up in Australia. He's Australian and that probably should scare him the most.
You must be mistaken. Sounds like you were visiting Ann Arbor Michigan.
- Breaking Fad 4K-ing excellent TV is on its way ... in its own sweet time, natch
- Was Earth once covered in HELLFIRE? No – more like a wet Sunday night in Iceland
- First Irish boy band U2. Now Apple pushes ANOTHER thing into iPhones, iPods, iPads
- Top Gear Tigers and Bingo Boilers: Farewell then, Phones4U
- Updated iOS 8 Healthkit gets a bug SO Apple KILLS it. That's real healthcare!