2976 posts • joined 25 Mar 2008
Another pernicious and uncalled for piece of legislation that will soon be singed into law by the EU. I'll give them credit for one this, they've made no pretence about this being democratic with their closed meetings and lack of public scrutiny.
When the government turns against the people, what are the people meant to do?
Oh, I see, bend over over and take it. Eh, @AC at 20:48.
@AC at 12:45
I did not avoid the argument, I simply do not like the use of the work "pirate" or "piracy" for infringement. In the same way that I do not like the use of the word "hack" or "hacker" for the breaching of security (that'd be "crack" or "cracker").
I just fed it
@AC at 09:51
I think you'll find piracy tend to occur at sea and generally involve physical violence, murder, rape, kidnap and/or the removal/destruction of goods.
There is no comparison between that an copyright infringement. None. It is disgusting moral relativism to equate the atrocities of true piracy with someone making unlicensed copies of a CD/DVD.
"Any site knowingly carrying copyrighted materiel should be accountable to the law of the land and be legally obliged to make efforts to police itself."
I think you'll find that all sites carry copyrighted material and so they should, it's their material. The law is not universal, some states allow more fair-use/transformative work than others.
"There are surely enough genuine FOS issues around the world to keep the hackers occupied."
And the destruction of cultural heritage is just one. Would you like Bach, Shakespeare et al to still be under copyright? That's the future we are creating. Corporate greed is perverting copyright, patents and trademarks into doing things that they were never intended to for.
The infringing material exists because the people hosting it are providing the service the legitimate owners should be providing, but don't because they are not prepared to change their business models. Sure, if they did provide the service infringing material would still exist, but that's not new but I would be prepared to say that the level of infringement would be much lower.
Case in point: I record something on my PVR, can I watch it on my PC? *NO*! Why? DRM and a lack of connectivity. Crap like that is what drives people to infringing sites. I don't want to make a copy of the stuff, I just want to watch it where I happen to be sat and not be restricted by some total ass-hat of a lawyer.
I could (if I was allowed to connect my own device to the cable) build a HTPC and stream/do what I want (even to mobile) without any need of their services and DRM crap. And once I am out of this contract I'll probably switch to Freesat for just such a purpose. Their tight grip on their media is costing them customers. It's their fault and they have no one to blame but themselves. Will they change? No, they'll just offer more bribes for more laws.
FFS we are talking about people who crow about a movie making billions and yet claim innocence when their accounts show it made a loss (e.g. Harry Potter). Both can't be right, one has to be a lie if not a fraud.
Morally bankrupt and a cancer to culture. Those are the people you are defending.
I'd like a SmartTV
It'd be great - just a shame that none are available. There are WalledGarden TVs and PartiallyImplementedTVs, but no actual SmartTVs.
In fact, what I'd rather have is a thick-as-a-brick TV-sized monitor (maybe with speakers) to which I can fit the device of my choosing. That way I don't have to endure the artificial restrictions put in place my the OEM. With XBMC now running on the Raspberry Pi, why would I need anything else?
Define some open standards so that the various tools and departments can interconnect and various modules be re-used.
Whoops! Not allowed to do that!
I have a G+
I think I've used it about 4 times. Why? Well, I don't want G+ knowing even more about me.
Diaspora is interesting as well, maybe I'll set-up by on status.net instance to boot.
Are people naive?
Am I one of the few who views donations to political parties/politicians as anything other than legalised bribery?
Just like Hulu
Why the hell the BBC simply doesn't let non-UK residents pay a "licence fee" to watch beats the heck out of me.
Oh yes....artificial barriers to free trade.
They can ram it
I have cable, I get ComedyCentral.
Can I use the ComeyCentral catch-up service? Can I cock.
There is one place, on Internet. Stop it already with the false barriers to trade.
Get a very large sack. It will have to be big.
Put all the Israelis in said sad.
Add all the Palestinians to same.
Proceed to beat sack with an iron bar.
You have no idea who you will be hitting, but this conflict has carried on for so long and with so many atrocities on both sides, I guarantee you that you will always hit the right person.
In the public cloud (e.g. DropBox, UbuntuOne etc) it would be cretinous in the extreme to no encrypt personal/sensitive data.
In corporate systems, one must trust that the procedures are in place and (as Ru rightly points out) all accesses logged.
Apple have pulled a blinder by getting their adapter accepted as a standard. Hopefully the EU will stick the boot in at some point (like they have with mobiles and chargers).
Heck, maybe we should just declare the Apple port as the official standard and thus unpatentable and allowed to be freely used without license?
After all, isn't competition good for the consumer?
@AC at 14:41
I have run Win8 DevPrev. It is probably one of the most vile things I have ever had to suffer. GnomeShell annoyed me but I could get things done, Unity was just terrible (I hear it's better now, not tried it of late) but Win8...of dear god. So many clicks to do *anything*.
Real work does not get done on a Metro app and I do not like having to go through that bull-crap swooshy change thing just to get a neutered desktop.
Seriously, it's dreadful.
And at some point I am going to have to write software for the bloody thing.
In that case I'd wait about 6 months after the Win8 tablets ship, by then UEFI should have been cracked and you can then install a proper OS on to it.
I think you mean
"MS legal department continues to go from strength to strength. "
They are gouging money from Android over untested patent threats. You may recall that B&N describes them as "trivial", has found lots of prior art and is fighting back. Good.
Maybe if B&N win MS will be forced into operating within a free market and facing some competition. If they do, it's use (the consumer) who will benefit.
The tablets will be heavily subbed to keep the prices down (hence why MS are demanding all ARM mobos be Win8 only) and pressure placed on OEMs to not ship/raise Android prices.
In short, they will leverage their monopoly on PCs to gain control of tablets and kill off any competition.
Unlike nature, MS adores a vacuum.
"What part of the word 'most' is causing problems here?"
Most of Google's money comes from ad revenue (if not all), so the amount they raise from ads placed beside links of infringing material is going to be pretty substantial. Perhaps not in relative terms, but certainly in absolute and possible on a par with (if not greater than) Megaupload. Have you asked yourself why Google opposed SOPA? Do you think it was really about freedom?
"You seriously believe that the answers are 'effectively the same'?"
Pretty much. Just because Google is big is no reason that they should avoid the law (even though I do not agree with said law). Actually, the best thing that could happen is someone going after Google in exactly the same way, then the law might get changed. But no, they would much rather chase down teenagers and get toadying governments to kowtow to them.
As I said at the start, I do not agree with depriving the artists/creators of income and I think they do deserve a wage (as determined by a free market, which might not be as much as they think they are worth). But the fact remains that the majors have not got their shit together and that is why the infringing services exist on the scale they do.
It is these services that are proving the people what they want. Ready access to content with no bullshit. And you know what, some creators do rather well by following such a model. Most of the infringing could be stopped almost overnight if the majors started playing fair (time an again surveys have shown that the biggest infringers are also the biggest legit customers, they are simply trying to by-pass the artificial barriers; e.g. region-lock).
There will always be some, such is life.
Attacking our on freedoms is NOT the answer to anything.
"For example, they don't go out of their way to do it, nor do they make most of their money from doing it."
Wrong, they do make money from it. Ad revenue.
They are not pirates AFAIK, no one has been pillaged, held hostage, raped or murdered.
As worst they are copyright license infringers. Or, rather, the people doing the uploads are.
If there was any infringement of copyright then that is a civil matter, it's not a reason for the doors to be kicked in and people arrested. That's doubleplus ungood.
The world has moved on, but rather than change the MPAA et al are trying to use new, draconian laws to enforce the status quo and ensure our future culture is controlled by corporations.
This will never work, all it will do is inconvenience the honest and force them into the arms of the infringers (who tend to offer a better service).
Why hasn't Google, Yahoo! or anyone else been shut-down for linking to infringing material? Yet a UK citizen is being extradited for what is, at worst, a civil offence?
Why weren't Sony execs jailed for the rootkit fiasco?
Why hasn't the RIAA been punished for torrenting infringing material?
The questions go on.
It is right that creators, distributors etc get a fair wage (as determined by a free market)
It is not right to restrict free trade or attack my freedoms simply to protect an outmoded revenue stream.
It is not right to hold our culture to ransom.
It is not right that elected representatives act against the wishes and best interests of the electorate.
This is what's wrong with the world
25% is not good enough.
50% is not good enough.
75% is barely acceptable.
They want short-term gains and they want them NOW dammit!
This is why we have the financial crisis, massive under investment in infrastructure, a lack of action on environmental damage, child labour and any number of other ills. Profit NOW and screw the long-term consequences.
It must be opt-in and only ever, opt-in. End of discussion.
In other news: BigYin Advert Validation Service
I will check your ads for impact, clarity and message delivery. A fee of £1 will be charged per ad and payable on every ad viewed.
If you do not wish to use this service, you may opt-out by contacting me. The display of an ad on my computer screen is presumed to be consent to my terms of service.
At 3am, wee Timmy should find that his PC is be blocked by the firewall.
ZFS and BTRFS to name but two (with varying degrees of implementation).
Of course, Windows can't use them.
...how does it stack up against the likes of BTRFS (also B-tree) or Ext4 or any of the other options available?
This just smacks of "N.I.H." syndrome and, considering it's MS, "Using an open system would increase competition".
@Sean Baggaley 1
Simple - it's all done on PFI and similar deals. This ensures that the contractors trouser lots of taxpayer cash and let the taxpayer carry the risk. It also guarantees MPs and other type fat directorships and consultant positions.
£9bill is the budget admitted to, allowing for future interest payments etc. it would be a good idea to treble that figure.
The Swiss are probably able to build their tunnel because they are not all a bunch of corrupt, self-serving bastards. It must be remembered that in the UK we rewarded the people who destroyed the banking sector, like to let companies off from having to pay their rightful taxes and do not prosecute public officials who have been found to commit fraud (expenses).
Gotta keep the free luncheons, dinners and trips to paradise rolling in. The public? Oh I am sure MPs have heard some rumour about "the public", but it's not as if they care (bar the 2 months before an election).
Hell, we have Labour blaming the Tories for the rise in rail fairs, yet it was the previous Labour government that royally screwed things up (and it was the Tory government before that who started the rot).
...the final word in the headline. Temporarily made for a much more intriguing story.
If it kept the idiots...
...off Facebook, it would be empty!
Heck, on a GNU/Linux box one should be running AV also - mostly to avoid passing infection on to the less fortunate. :-)
Heck, one should probably only use the browser from within a VM, that way any infection can be erased with a simple "Revert to previous snapshot".
@AC (why is it always a coward?)
I can only go by what I am told. The allowance I do get doesn't even cover the broadband.
I've already talked to my employer - they are blocked from doing anything more due to taxable benefits.
I have a very efficient mode of transport, it is half the price of public and (probably) less polluting. I never worried about jams. The monthly cost increase of the comms is about twice my monthly transport costs.
As for food, I always took a packed lunch.
I was more trying to point out that this site does not account for lots of factors and the assumption of "You're at home, you're green/saving" is facile, disingenuous and misleading at best.
Let's see...I had to pay for high-speed broadband (and government rules limit how much I can reclaim). This is consumer grade and there's no SLA, I simply cannot afford a "proper" connection.
I have to heat the home all day (more CO2).
I have to run all the PCs at home (I cannot reclaim those costs).
I still have my motor vehicle (so that fixed cost is still there).
IMHO working from home is a net environmental and fiscal cost.
It's not just Apple et al
Why do you think your trainers are so cheap? Your jeans? Your t-shirts?
In fact, ever thought about why everything you buy is so dirt-cheap and affordable?
As for Apple "truly addressing it", all the companies claim to be addressing the matter when caught and yet it continues. The simple answer is that hey all want to be seen to be doing something, but still go with the lowest bidder (who will more than likely use child labour as it is cheap).
Mr. Fry may know a great many things, but at times he has a rather insular and naive view of the world.
One would hope so, but I doubt the UK will push for any such measures seeing as how the caved into MS over the use of patent-free, open standards for government data.
Explains the lock-in
1) MS forces OEMs to lock-down ARM mobos to Win8 only
2) MS subsidises Win8 phones/tablets (as they did xBox)
3) MS dominates a new market by leveraging monopoly in other areas
4) MS (eventually) profits, innovation and competition suffer
1. The problem is the pressure that MS could bring to bear: "Oh, Mr. Asus; I see you are selling some ARM mobos that enable custom mode, good for you. Isn't it time we re-negotiated your OEM licenses?" i.e. abuse their desktop monopoly.
It has been alleged that something similar happened to Dell when they tried to ship Ubuntu units (which is why it ended up only being available on under-powered crap, hard to find and not as a general option).
The fact remains that MS should not be allowed to dictate to OEMs that they must restrict what end-users can do with hardware they purchase. Leaving "custom mode" and option on ARM (e.g. via a physical jumper) has zero effect on Joe Punter and still leaves the door open for competition.
2. I have tried it. It is complete vomit. You think Unity/GnomeShell is bad? You ain't seen nuthin' yet!
"Same state of affairs on Androidland, where there's Freedom(TM) and nobody is evil."
OK, cite where Google has demanded that all bootloaders be locked. Go on. The OEMs themselves locked the bootloaders and some (e.g. HTC) are now unlocking them.
Apple is both the hardware and software vendor (unlike MS), they are not imposing their demands on OEMs. Apple are also not a monopoly (Google could possibly be considered to be one).
And no, I do not think the sun shines out of Google's arse nor do I think that much of Apple.
MS is abusing its monopoly position (again) to restrict competition (again).
...because it's a monopoly player dictating terms to OEMs to ensure vendor lock-in.
ARM may mostly be on mobile/tablets right now, but it is coming to ultrabooks and will no doubt enter the desktop again. How relaxed will you be when you can't pick up an ARM mobo that isn't locked to Windows? Or when the next version of Windows requires you to buy new hardware?
This is just another in a long list of anti-competition, anti-open, anti-freedom steps taken by MS; and you can be sure Joe Punter will give a shit when the lock-in turns around and bites them in the ass. But by then it will be too late.
And beyond Joe Punter we must consider the effect of "the cloud" and the increasing demands placed on mobile/low-power devices by enterprise/government. Any sniff of non-Apple competition would be crushed by this dicktat from MS.
Allowing custom mode has no effect on Joe Punter if they like Windows 8 (have you tried Win8? Vomit); so why demand that OEMs remove the feature?
If it passes regulatory muster, you and I may well care about OS replacement but the matter could well be moot as the option has been removed (until some bright-spark finds a way around UEFI altogether - probably spurred on by the desire to do whatever they see fit with their own hardware).
"Go ahead and put linux on your iPad then if it's such a big deal. What? Locked? Surely not? And all those android tabs with locked bootloaders? How are they different?"
Straw man - I never said they were any different. But at least some of the Androids are being opened up, although it's on an ad-hoc basis.
"As for the UEFI thing, it's bogus click-driving and penguin-FUD. If UEFI secure boot was mandatory, there'd be no upgrade path so it won't be."
Apart from the fact it isn't. Did you bother to read the link? UEFI is mandatory for Win on ARM and that "Custom Mode" must be disabled.
UEFI in and of itself is not the issue, that's just the technology.
The only thing...
...the government should mandate is open, royalty free, patent free standards. But they won't as the nice people who pay for the big lunches said "No"
Not just those three...
...our friends in Redmond are keen to retain total control over you as well.
And they'll probably get away with it too.
Three step plan
1) Save on marketing;
2) Spend on lobbying;
3) Profit: http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/01/microsoft-hustled-uk-retreat-o.html
"The British government withdrew its open standards policy after lobbying from Microsoft, it has been revealed in a Cabinet Office brief leaked to Computer Weekly."
...they block the use of "killall"
I thought......the Aussies had already given Apple a boot to the conkers?
@AC at 13:45"Strange how he always seems to be on the side of the fence for the software patent "abuser" then isn't it." On the fence? Can you cite, please? "FM is a FUD blogger - how much exactly and all the parties is not known, only some of them are. " Well, can you please cite what is known? I've barely heard of the guy, checking Wikipedia shouws he admitted to an MS study in Oct 2011, that's it. And thanks (whomever) for the downvote it was a genuine question.
A shill.......for whom? He's anti-software patents it seems, so he can't be a shill for MS or Apple. Can you cite a source, please.?
Sounds goodAnd with the Raspberry Pi (amongst other) coming along, it could be just the ticket. I hope MS allow it to happen.
In the UK......the tax on importing the components makes manufacture impractical. It's cheaper to import the assembled box. Ask the Raspberry Pi people.
- Analysis Oh no, Joe: WinPhone users already griping over 8.1 mega-update
- Leaked pics show EMBIGGENED iPhone 6 screen
- Opportunity selfie: Martian winds have given the spunky ol' rover a spring cleaning
- OK, we get the message, Microsoft: Windows Defender splats 1000s of WinXP, Server 2k3 PCs
- Episode 4 BOFH: Oh DO tell us what you think. *CLICK*