Feeds

* Posts by Andrew Orlowski

969 posts • joined 6 Sep 2006

Page:

Reg slips claws across Nokia's sexy sixties handsets, fondles flagship too

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Number sequence

I suspect there might be, but there's not much left to cut from the 630.

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: A question

Didn't really have a chance to play with it. But they moved out synced MP3s, Podcasts, Radio, Xbox Music etc into their own apps, the "Music Hub" is no more.

1
0

Windows Phone 8.1: Like WinPho 8, but BETTER

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Rotation lock?

It came in with WP8 GDR3.

2
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Looks quite nice

Yes, I have a screenshot of that. I'll stick it in, and the Swype-y keyboard.

1
0

That's it, we're all really OLD: Google's Gmail is 10 ALREADY

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Shame about scanning emails to target advertising though

Exactly.

0
0

Newsnight goes sour on Tech City miracle

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: The emperor's new offices?

"posting something on Twitter and thinking it won't get made public? tsk ;-)"

A lot of people I respect have said that it was daft of me to do that. Even in a closed group. And particularly when I've written about photographers taking stuff off the web - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/03/12/err_bill_photo_consequences/ - because they can't protect their work.

But I gave her the benefit of the doubt, reckoning she might have forgotten she was taking something out of a Protected account, and making it public. Only someone looking for a fight refuses to delete a Tweet, after they've been asked *very* nicely. I didn't expect that at all.

btw, I think most of the growth touted for Tech City (26pc) comes from the redefinition of 'tech' to include marketing services, and businesses with 50pc of their business online. Marketing and financial services have rebounded strongly in the last year. But they were there anyway, and have nothing to do with "ye tech cluster".

4
0

So. Farewell then Steelie Neelie: You were WORSE than USELESS

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: One wonders if Mr Orlowski understands some of the points he's ranting about too

"When companies like Netflix offer, for free, the hardware to cache their video inside of an ISP's private network"

Netflix doesn't cache.

If you want to be taken seriously please stop talking like a meth head. Y'know: Random words. Sprayed around at random. It might work at Boing Boing, or Ars Technica, but it doesn't work here.

3
13

Is the World Wide Web for luvvies and VCs – or for all of us?

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

SGML was/is incredibly complex, formal, top-down, and bureaucratic. It was unapologetically "the book of everything". You needed to do a lot of work to gain some value from this complexity. So a document creator, unaided, wasn't going to bother.

But the protocol on its own doesn't define the future. Capital matters too. If VC money had made different bets in 1994, the communities and individuals writing would have had a different kind of help. WWW was one kind of kludge. Other kludges would have happened too. A mere fraction of the stuff that TBL omitted from WWW could be very empowering to people engaged in communities, needing communication tools, and help with documents. That "help" either never came, or only came via serve-side fiefdoms, like Facebook.

This was not inevitable. What is impossibly difficult one day can become easy, with tools, a few weeks later. We will never know.

"And if search engines were foolish enough to take the markup seriously, it would quickly become worse than useless as the markup became just another SEO toy."

Cause < > effect.

Search engines go where the people go. Gamers need something to game.

If a community of anglers, or Conservatives, or swingers, devise and popularise a language, or a tag set, then the search engine will follow. It will need to understand it. It has no option but to follow.

You ascribe some God-like omniscience and wisdom to search engines that simply isn't there. They are followers not leaders.

All I'm saying is: the web we might have had would look very different to the web we have today. The web we have today is the result of technical incompetence and the prejudices of finance capital, c.1994.

Replay the game, and you get a different result. That's all.

4
3

PM Cameron leaps aboard Internet of Thingies

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Competence

Posted without reading the last paragraph? I think you'll find it's there.

0
0

MWC: The good, the bad ... and the Galaxy S5

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: About the Jolla......

It looks slick, but it isn't easy to use. You're reflecting life from inside the fanbois bubble. It looks very different from the outside.

0
0

TV scraper Aereo pulled off air in six US states after tellyco court injunction victory

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Shooting themselves in the foot

"Aereo is a win for the broadcasters"

A few people seem to be posting from a time warp - my guess is 2003. Aereo doesn't do anything a TiVo or Sky+ box don't do today - and these are bundled with the cable/satellite service. I think I pay £1 extra a month to my UK cable monopoly for the TiVo+, and I can program it from any where, on almost any smartphone, phondleslab or computer.

There is absolutely *no* innovation in Aereo. Just someone betting on a loophole.

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: Crucial difference

Yes, there is some doubt whether the antennae are actually attached to anything.

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: How is this theft?

No, the confusion is entirely yours - you don't understand how the law treats a) personal time-shifting and b) rebroadcasting differently. Aereo was founded on the hope that the freedoms under a) would blow away the protections under b).

It's pretty simple.

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: Wouldn't this be making more money for the broadcasters?

"The thing is that now the broadcaster, cable company, content producer, and advertizer are all the same company"

The funny farm is on the left.

0
0

Nokia launches Euro ANDROID invasion, quips: 'Microsoft knew what they were buying'

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

They're not laggy. If you're used to a Galaxy 4 or an iPhone 5, then you won't be looking at one of these. If you're used to an Asha or a $70 landfill Android, then this is a step up.

2
1

Facebook pays $19bn for WhatsApp. Yep. $45 for YOUR phone book

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Yes, quite.

0
0

Official: British music punter still loves plastic

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: "The UK recorded music industry grew 1.9 per cent last year"

The music industry has been quieter about piracy recently because it wants to be loved. My advice to them is don't worry about being loved, just make yourselves useful.

Piracy has distorted the market sufficiently to make a difference. It is just one of many factors in the overall decline. Recordings' "wallet share" began to decline in 2001, then live share increased. It's harder to get into a gig for free.

http://prsformusic.com/creators/news/research/Documents/AddingUpTheUKMusicIndustry2010.pdf

0
0

Jean Michel Jarre: Je voudrais un MUSIC TAX sur VOTRE MOBE

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Not quite. Damages in LimeWire (not Napster) were collected on behalf of all the labels by IFPI (not the RIAA), but only went to the majors.

1
0

Nudge Unit flies into Nesta's arms: Is the hype justified?

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

@AC: "The unit improved organ donor rates "

"The unit improved organ donor rates "

No, that was a claim was made in a press release last year. It is not possible to support or disprove this claim, as it's too early to tell. To see how much of a difference the new advertising has made to registrations will require new research. If signups have increased it could be for a number of different reasons.

What has happened is that the marketing for donor registration increased. Is the ROI on that effective? We don't know. But there is no magic behavioural woo, here.

1
0

BlackBerry makes its devilish Android trickery official in OS update

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Leaps and bounds

We'll fix that subhead. I called it "pinch to zoom" which is (at best) ambiguous - and for most people will be very misleading. "Pinch to filter" would be much more accurate.

I haven't seen another device that allows you to filter messages instantly like this, and it's very useful..

0
0

Stephen Fry rewrites computer history again: This time it's serious

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Overreaction?

You conveniently overlooked "cracked". Which is the whole point.

20
13

Almost everyone read the Verizon v FCC net neutrality verdict WRONG

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

@Charles9

That would compel Google to either divest itself of YouTube, or dismantle its network (which is the world's largest private IP network). Google would also need to block its Google Fibre subscribers from using GMail or Google Maps - or give up on its Google Fibre initiative altogether.

I can't really see that happening - can you?

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Nice Rant, but missed the point

"Most of us in the United Snakes simply don't have two choices. "

Another myth.

89 per cent of US households have at least two choices of broadband.

86.7 have at least four choices.

http://broadbandmap.gov/

Interesting suggestion about dismantling vertical integration, though. Would you apply the content/network separation to the internet's biggest video company? Would you confiscate their network? If so, would you do so with or without compensation?

Shall I call Eric now?

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Number of "broadband" ISP options available in my neighbourhood

Thank the FCC for that one. They destroyed local competition.

All that energy expended over 10 years fighting for something that doesn't exist could have been spent campaigning for local loop competition, and making the giant telcos contribute to a healthy public backbone, and open and transparent public peering. What a waste of time.

1
1
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: the people will not notice thing...

"What we'd have is "priority services" being offered for a fee. So Netflix jumps on board and grabs the top slice of priority. They have a subscription service and can easily afford to pay for it. They get 2:1 in the queuing system. Then the ISP decides to launch its own local news & video service at the same priority. To maintain service, we now have a 4:1 ratio of priority services to non-priority services. Document HTTP probably won't notice too much. Ironically, bit-torrent probably won't care too much either since it isn't time dependent. And so it goes on."

I'm not sure what you think you're regulating, exactly.

YouTube has enormous market share. It doesn't touch the public internet. Netflix uses AWS. It doesn't touch the public internet.

They've already paid (directly or indirectly) to use private networks to get their video to you faster. Their edge servers are at the ISP. You are right that YouTube has a huge advantage but for the wrong reasons.

So I am left wondering if you would outlaw QoS in private networks. *boggles*

Also would you force the world's biggest private networks (eg Google's) to open up for common carriage?

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: the people will not notice thing...

"There is nothing that would prevent two ISPs in a given zone from having an agreement to screw a third party."

That's why you have Federal and state laws prohibiting that. And the DoJ the FTC and state attorneys able to prosecute such practices. Need I remind you, that's not an argument for top-down traffic regulation or Class II reclassification.

0
3
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Its not that people are stupid

"they will lay the blame with Netflix!"

Even when 50m Netflix subscribers at [One Evil Telco] are all screaming about it at all once on social media - and 50m subscribers at [Other Evil Telco] who haven't seen their service degraded are not?

Can't really see that. Unless you think every internet user never reads the news, or uses social media.

Of course, if [One Evil Telco] and [Other Evil Telco] collude to degrade equally, then Netflix complains and you have an FTC / DoJ lawsuit.

1
7
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Careful with axe of myths, Eugene!

@DestroyAllMonsters

What an excellent post.

Two points: The religious zeal for Public Choice Theory amongst some libertarians may be misplaced - they may have cause and effect backwards. Bureaucrats don't always create opportunity for more work for bureaucrats, but they sure know a gravy train when they see one. And they get so cosy with the people they're supposed to regulate (regulatory capture), it's like the gag about dogs resembling their owners. Or owners resembling their dogs.

Secondly, the FCC has for most of its distinguished lifetime dealt with two pressing issues: Bell Telephones and rude things - like swearing, and nipples. Today, nobody really uses landline telephones any more. And so, assuming Janet Jackson doesn't have any more wardrobe malfunctions, that's the FCC other great duty gone.

Is it safe to say this agency is now obsolete? And if that's the case, shouldn't Americans let it go - and (assuming they're serious about having competitive markets for internet-y things), think about how to make other agencies more effective?

4
5
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Remarkably?

"No end of campaigning can force a provider to do what a customer wants when they have no legal powers to force them to change or where momentum for change is too little to have an impact on providers that convinces them it is in their interest to change. Market forces simply don't work where there is no market or choice and only monopoly."

True, but where there are two, consumers can and will switch. See my other post on this.

0
10
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: That's why I come here...

Thank you

2
4
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: the people will not notice thing...

@Eric

"The consumer will see the internet works but netflix doesn't and contacts netflix. Netflix sees impact to their brand, and higher support costs, and it is not clear that the consumer will actually blame the ISP."

What you're describing is information asymmetry and it won a Nobel Prize for Stiglitz and Akerlof in 2000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_asymmetry

One of the wonders made possible by the internet is that the several million [Insert Evil Telco] subscribers who had their Netflix blocked or degraded find out pretty quickly that *only* [Insert Evil Telco] is doing it. Especially with Neutrality activists on the alert. So it's every implausible that [Insert Evil Telco] could get away with it. Word gets around.

The rest of your post describes very accurately how the access market was permitted to consolidate, because there was too much lobbying influence upstream - and agree with it 100pc.

1
2
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: I think you answered your own question (at leats in part)

Last mile competition is pretty vital, I agree.

2
1
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: You have no idea what you're takling about

But that's exceedingly rare - almost everyone has at least two choices, and two is all you need if consumers are willing to switch.

The two choices may be sub-utopian, and it may well be (thanks to the FCC, which destroyed local competition) a choice between two generally shitty corporations. But no company wishes to lose a customer, less lots of customers in a short space of time.

So as long as people have the information they need, are willing to switch and carry through on their threat, then you have something resembling a competitive market. It doesn't really matter that the choice is between two or five (as in the UK) or three (as in the most of Europe).

But the idea a punter will sit through endless disruptions and degradations and *not* switch is implausible. Unless you think a degraded internet is what people accept and/or deserve. Here, be careful what you wish for AC.

0
8

Microsoft buries Sinofsky Era... then jumps on the coffin lid

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: I'm not a fan of Sinofsky

I agree 100 per cent. The buck stops with the Management Team.

3
0

UK 'copyright czar' Edmund Quilty quits as Blighty's Director of Copyright Enforcement

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: "get paid for creating and selling their stuff"

In each of your last two posts, your argument rests on an entirely artificial choice. To avert ‘The End of the World’ we must { abandon / destroy / impair } the creator’s legal rights.

This typically arises when the real argument is flawed – it’s a rhetorical technique used to hide the real argument or agenda. And one doesn’t actually need to know a great deal about copyright to identify this is a false dichotomy. There is no apocalyptic or existential threat to ‘freedom’. Rights industries are struggling to be heard as it is. And in the history of technology and rights this has never been a zero sum game.

To make your case for abandoning or impairing creator’s legal rights you should explain the case for doing so rationally. You could try and show the terms of long-term economic benefits of your alternative, and submit them for examination. (The IPO tried to do this and failed) These calculations would have to show the impact upon a nation’s GDP of successful rights-based markets. You would also have to show why the benefits of strong individual rights – for example social mobility – are no longer important.

Perhaps studying why apocalyptic narratives (eg, War on Terror, Climate Change) have failed would also be useful.

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: "get paid for creating and selling their stuff"

This thread is a beautiful example of how copyright discussions often pan out, because copyright "reformers" have a pathological evasiveness when it comes to enforcing copyright. They think the Unicorn (or kittens) will get it. The story is about an Enforcement Director who didn't believe in copyright enforcement. The poster raises the lack of enforcement as the most urgent flaw with the current regime. And you respond with a long ramble about terms, etc.

You *do* actually mention the three "dimensions" of copyright: scope, duration and enforcement. You just don't like the enforcement dimension. Whenever enforcement comes up, activists invariably change the subject. I expect this is because there is a strong consensus against extending the scope copyright to new areas (like software APIs), and a questionable case for extending the duration of copyright terms. Not much controversy there. At least not from me.

But without enforcement the other dimensions are meaningless. You can pass laws 1,000 year terms, and they don't matter a jot if they can't be enforced.

When you *do* address enforcement it's to say that while bad guys use technology for infringement, good guys shouldn't use it to enforce their individual rights. This gives you the straw man your (a priori) argument needs: "Given the choice between..."

However what your conclusion ("I'll take no copyright") leads to is a world in which nobody has any privacy. Because once you've thrown your right to own digital data, then anyone can own you. You've erased the individual.

http://m.theregister.co.uk/2013/12/31/blame_silicon_valley_for_the_nsas_data_slurp_and_what_to_do_about_it/

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: "the bit that's original is what we value"

@Oh Homer:

If a work of art significantly imitates the work of others, then they are compensated. cf. George Harrison. Or the thousands of samples cleared every year.

I see you're keen to seize the moral low ground in this discussion. "Because an unfair thing happens - I'm OK with more unfair things happening." In some way you think wrongs make a right.

How about considering a different approach? Remember that from the act of creation to sale, a long value chain may profit from a work of art. If you remove copyright, then that chain will continue to profit - with one exception. The author will not. Copyright is the mechanism that keeps the people in the rest of the chain honest. If you're truly concerned about "fairness", you need to ensure that access to justice for the individual has been ripped off is cheap, easy and effective.

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: "get paid for creating and selling their stuff"

"Make no mistake though, this is not the intention of copyright and never has been."

Um, I'm sorry skelband but you really don't get it. I suggest you read up on the history of copyright and particularly the French contribution.

An artist's work is considered an extension of the individual, they can do what they damn well please with it. These moral rights developed in parallel with economic rights but are paramount. The very grudging (and you really do sound quite bitter - did an artist steal your girlfriend?) history of copyright that you parrot here is factually incorrect.

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: Excessive copyright term

"All creativity is derivative"

But the bit that's original is what we value. That's why we have IP, to encourage more of it. This is an argument of convenience - often trotted out by people who wouldn't know originality if they tripped over it.

0
1

Blasphemy! Finns trample over Windows Phone home screen

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: that screenshot - are you serious???

I think OS/2 got there first. v1.1 had "Program Groups" but the entries were text, and had no icons. 1.2 had groups with icons, and the resemblance is quite uncanny.

http://toastytech.com/guis/os212.html

3
0

Blame Silicon Valley for the NSA's data slurp... and what to do about it

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

It doesn't cost serious money in most cases. No matter how wealthy the infringer, the law favours the property owner.

Per-infringement statutory damages really focus the mind. Now imagine this for privacy infringement.

It will be an uphill battle because you'll be fighting both state propaganda (WoT) and Silicon Valley propaganda. But even Larry Page had to admit last year that your data ultimately belongs to you.

1
3
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: The law is not the answer

"So how would an average guy "defend" his rights to his data?"

The same way the law favours you when the Daily Mail steals your photo. Cheap and easy access to justice, with the deck stacked in your favour. I think you're struggling with the concept here a bit because you don't actually know what property rights you have today.

You are right about the individual being sovereign in the correct model - you just don't need a single physical point of failure - your ownership (as with copyright ) is automatic.

3
3
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: @Andrew Orlowski

Only since last year :-)

Without property rights there won't be any privacy. Google knows this as well as the NSA.

1
3

How Britain could have invented the iPhone: And how the Quangocracy cocked it up

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Why NESTA and who else?

A good question, one answered by the inventor in Part 2, which we'll publish on Monday.

The inventor himself in Spring 2004 urged Nesta to contact Apple, amongst other companies, to help fund and develop the work.

This was not something that would have interested a sort-term speculative VC, as there was no immediate "product" forthcoming in 12 months or so. Such is the nature of R&D. So it was quite natural that he thought a specialist arm of the state might be able to help.

3
1

You gotta fight for your copyright ... Beastie Boys sue toymaker over TV ad

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Re: Pretty much my thoughts too

JMII: Do you really think the "original intent" of the Beastie Boys Girls was to be sexist? That it was a sexist song?

Woah.

Maybe this parody thing is more complicated than any of us imagined!

0
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: VW Badge

Ooof!

0
0

Best budget Android smartphone there is? Must be the Moto G

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: So not landfill Android then?

@AC

http://reg.cx/28WN

Yes, I was very impressed, it's a bit of real quality and the best bargain out there for £130. It doesn't come gummed up with cruft like TouchWiz either - which makes a big difference. Moto cut all the right things. The profit margin is thin to non-existent, but Motorola needs to make a splash and this will do as a loss leader.

1
0
Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: So not landfill Android then?

It's horribly confusing - two writers having two different opinions.

We'll send round a Doctor, please have a lie down and keep away from sharp objects.

2
2

Moto G: Google's KitKat bruiser could knock out, bury Landfill Android

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Here is my proper review

"Since the article is not really a review "

Er, correct. It is not a review at all. The word "Analysis" clearly confused you into thinking it was a review.

So apologies for that :)

3
8

Lumia 1520: Our man screams into ENORMO new Nokia phondleslab

Andrew Orlowski
(Written by Reg staff) Bronze badge

Re: Eh?

You can use the mobile websites. But you can't use the social integration, since Microsoft stores your FB/Twitter handle (but not password) alongside a Microsoft ID.

1
1

Page: