370 posts • joined Tuesday 19th April 2011 17:47 GMT
I've been part of the 24 hour news cycle
It's 98% utter crap, mostly just for the sake of it.
Only about 2% of what is presented as 'news' actually matters to the average person, the rest of it is Gonzo rubbish, journalists opinion, sport and sleb gossip. All of which is there to please advertisers and owners.
Re: Do these guys not understand copyright?
No, they don't.
Or, yes they do but, hey, they have beeeelions of dollars, they don't need to care either way.
They can and do just do as they wish.
Re: indeed !
Sounds like a line from a Robbie Williams track!
Re: Only if....
Northerner here, living in the south, getting corrected by my Son who insists the green stuff in the garden is graaas.
It's grass. It'll always be grass.
Look, that's a cat. It's not caaat, is it?
Re: Crown Copyright?
They buy the images from photographers, silly, they don't magic them up out of thin air.
And for all those saying watermark; you can't sell watermarked images.
When you sell a non watermarked imag and someone nicks it, strips the metadata ....
"I really can't see this Act doing anything except muddying the waters and giving the BIG GUYS more power, while not treating the little guys in the same way."
That's how it was designed. That is exactly its purpose.
A solution for a problem which didn't exist. Royally fucked is an apt description.
Re: I just read..
Very sad if true but aren't you doing what Reddit did? Speculating?
Remember: Two trusted sources or it didn't happen. Ask Reuters :)
No money at the Indy.
Yet someone can be persuaded to waste money on this rubbish.
Well thought out, workable, fair all round and it will have a positive impact on all involved.
Never be allowed to happen.
"At least the Conservatives argued that former basket-case nationalised industries, once privatised, rapidly became profitable and boosted corporate tax revenues."
Ahem. http://tinyurl.com/cxj28zk and http://tinyurl.com/cpop5yj
Exposed for 'handling'
Great headline that:
"the simple act of browsing the Internet could be copyright infringement"
Neatly lumping average web surfers in with parasitic content scrapers who only glom on to original content and never produce anything original themselves. Worry is that some befuddled old judge (what is this interweb of which you speak) will accept that sophistry and pass a judgement in favour of the parasites.
All the way. It really is a very tidy bit of kit.
The best thing about BitCoin is
It allows an individual to circumnavigate the established payment service's "just say no" government issued mandate whilst also neatly circumnavigating the government issue supply and demand mandate.
For us it's a 'private door to door' win win situation.
For them it's a fucking nightmare.
NIB's are filler. Analysis is killer.
Is 'waved through completely unchallenged' just an opinion or is it relevant?
If it ought to have been challenged, why should it have been and by whom?
If it was not challenged, why was it not challenged?
What does this mean for the end user?
And already my WTF meter has gone off the scale.
"Hands up everybody who kept the box their computer came in and know where the manuals that came with it are."
/puts hand up.
That's why my used tech/kit sells for a premium.
Story about people who handle stolen tech. On a tech website. Read by people who like tech and hate thieves.
Dunno why people are all hatin' on them, mate. (innocent face)
Re: To all the lazy Daily Mail readers here ...
Shut up with your pub talk legal nonsense.
Bought off dodgy bloke down the pub/souk? Check.
Boxed? Nope. Manuals? Nope. Original charger? Nope. Provenance? Nope. Cheap? Oh yes.
It's 99% certain to be nicked. Zero defence.
Your pics all over the web? Priceless.
OFF WITH THEIR HANDS!
Erm .. hang on lads .. I was just kidding !!
Re: Thatcher: Her achievement? People celebrating her death - justifiably
But she 'fixed' the post office, !!!
Re: What's more depressing...
You either don't understand or you're about 20.
Re: So very sad to see El reg delete comments
@ ukgnome: you could, you know, always start your own website :)
Re: One lasting change from Mrs T
@ Chris Miller: "Thatcher had been out of power for a decade when Tony and Gordon decided .... "
And who the fuck do you think *legitimised* Tony and Gordon's behaviour?
Re: Fixed the phones?
@Dr Stephen Jones
Solitary? There were 8 of us celebrating and the drinks were on me.
What did you get your doctorate in? Flower arranging? LOL
Re: One lasting change from Mrs T
We used to own our national energy policy. Thatcher changed that. Now foreign pension funds do.
Vast North Sea Oil revenue was squandered on welfare to drive down wage expectations. Now we have welfare culture and a pensions time-bomb that you, clearly a youngster, will have to deal with.
It used to be rightly difficult to get credit for consumer goods. Thatcher changed that. Now look where the UK is.
The City was regulated. Thatcher changed that. Billions have swallowed up bailing the banks out.
People had affordable places to live. Thatcher changed that. Homelessness and outrageous rents are now the norm.
Agreed. Scraping the bottom of the barrel, really, praising her for dismantling the PO.
Re: The discrepancy in law..
" especially if they have linked data from a 3rd party to the picture."
Re: The discrepancy in law..
"but making pictures, or reading email or receiving an SMS is never the issue. It's when it gets published that the problems start, "
There are many regulations in place. They work just fine apart from the occasional slip up.
"I don't think that the CALEA extensions are *specifically* aimed at Silent Circle"
Et al. Happy now?
"numerous government agencies have tried the service and there have been no moves to squash it on the legal front ........ Intelligence agencies are pushing for an extension of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) to require an automatic backdoor into communications software of this type"
"no moves to squash it on the legal front"
"extension of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act"
I'd say that's a blatant move to squash silent circle on the legal front
Re: Still not interested
Amen to that but that just makes the web2.0arhea ad-sales conglomerates more curious about you.
Why is this person not interested in our wonderful services and how can we make them interested.
> The actual answer is far, far simpler. If you cannot identify the rights-holder or get a license from them, don't use the asset. End of.
>> That would mean that you could never dare use an image from the public domain (which should really be *most* images) unless you could categorically determine its age to determine that it was indeed out of copyright.
What's wrong with that? It's so basic it's binary.
>> Since digital images that have no meta data don't really have an age, that might be rather difficult.
It's still so basic it's binary.
>> This is the main reason why a lot of people advocate for registering your copyrighted photos with a central authority and paying a nominal fee for that service.
Who are these 'lot of people' ? Who do they work for? Are they creators or lobbyists? Evidence, please.
>> If you really care about your image and its money-making potential, why wouldn't you?
Why should we? Who is anyone to say we should?
>> In this day and age, it would be simplicity itself to check against that agency as to whether or not the image was under copyright. With image recognition you could easily check your copy against the original lodged with the agency by the use of a web facility.
In any day and age it *is* simplicity itself to check if you have permission to use an image.
It's *still* so simple it's binary and your argument is looking more flimsy the more you work it.
>>The vast, vast majority of images around the interwebs are not money-generating works and don't need to be copyright protected. Assuming that all photos have copyright makes the job of making money from professional images so much more difficult. They are lost in a sea of what is mostly dross.
The vast, vast majority of opinions relating to "images around the interwebs" are generated by people who are lost in a (self important but irrelevant) sea (spout) of what is mostly dross and are astrotufing for orphan works industries. I have no evidence but that's not an encumbrance to this debate, is it?
>> It really isn't a difficult problem to solve. The biggest issue is the political will to make it happen.
Binary? Meet twisted logic.
Facepalm because, well, fail is too obvious.
Harsh but fair? You're entitled to your opinion.
My opinion of your critique is that it is shamefully uncharitable.
Don't argue with my opinion. Go out and take a better picture ;)
Re: *sigh* @ql
I hear what you're saying and I get your sentiment but you've self elected yourself for pseuds corner :)
Beer's on me.
Pic isn't that remarkable, really, is it? Other than being an absolutely outstanding example of how orphan works won't work and how people on the web will nick anything and believe any old rubbish. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that image has been print published many times and sold many times. Even by agencies and stock libraries.
Andrej Vasilenko should pop along to EPUK and read this:
Orlowski is on a proper roll this week, one slamming article after the other. Have a pint, fella.
Re: You'd have to be .....
@ IanK "It must give you a nice warm feeling to have the delusion that people could only disagree with you because they're retarded, ignorant, or both."
Downvote away, join the council 'workers' the freetards and Frytards whydontcha?
Re: Tried papers on tablets
"Private Eye, Evening Standard, BBC, The Register. Sunday Times"
Prolly covers all the news that's fit to read anyway unless you like knitting your own muesli.
Have a pint, sir.
"the Telegraph has disappeared up its own backside"
Quite a lot of long form journalism as gone the same way and a lot of output from erstwhile hacks these days is short opinion pieces presented as blog posts, neatly wrapped in click bait *Apple* surrounded by, I'm told, flashing adverts.
Not quite the same as reading a strong image followed by three broadsheet pages full of in-depth reporting on a given subject, with a couple of astute analysis pieces by other journalists as a follow up (with a couple of pints in't pub) is it :(
Re: What about PressReader?
Doesn't have The Times either, does it? And the adverts! They are all there in all their glory.
Re: BBC for the headlines @Ledswinger
"mail server operators would happily grass up the IP we're accessing the email from, which in fairly short order could have you named."
So what? Simple solution: Never say anything online you wouldn't say to someone's face and never say anything to anyone anyway which you can not substantiate with facts. It's not rocket surgery, is it?
BBC for the headlines
Blogs for analysis?
I'll only buy content from Big News when it's in dead tree format.
The best thing about the new paywalls is that the guardian's comments section will be swamped with exiled right wing nut jobs too tight to pay a few quid a month to vent their spleen. Popcorn anyone?
El Reg has some pretty astute commentards
But when presented with a well written, well researched article the swivel eyed loons don't half let the side down. The inability to see the long term issues surrounding things like Leveson and Freetardism is a sad indictment of selfish nature of kids toady. And it is kids. It must be.
You'd have to be very a sheltered adult, an immature adult or just plain ignorant not to see that.
Rusbridger of The Guardian
Wrote recently (http://tinyurl.com/cqa7euk) that the press should be allowed to continue to self regulate and have a year for their system to bed in. This falls well short of an apology for *that* article which it could be said was *the* catalyst for Leveson which, in turn, gave Hacked Off the boost they needed to attempt to overturn long established freedoms. Not even an offer of resignation.
Ironic that yet again 'The Left' prove to be less liberal than they bill themselves.
Thomas Paine 1791:
It is a perversion of terms to say that a charter gives rights. It operates by a contrary effect — that of taking rights away. Rights are inherently in all the inhabitants; but charters, by annulling those rights, in the majority, leave the right, by exclusion, in the hands of a few... They... consequently are instruments of injustice ... The fact, therefore, must be that the individuals, themselves, each, in his own personal and sovereign right, entered into a contract with each other to produce a government: and this is the only mode in which governments have a right to arise, and the only principle on which they have a right to exist.
Hugh "$20 Ho" Grant (et al)
"Hacked Off welcomes the cross-party agreement on implementing the Leveson recommendations on press self-regulation"
Leveson is as much of a bodge up as it is a stitch up and it is not fit for purpose. It defines 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater' and typifies the sort of incoherent policy and legislation that 'career' politicians churn out on a regular basis.
UKBA was given agency status
In order to keep its work at an arm’s length from ministers, in order to give ministers plausible deniability when the chit kept hitting the fan due to UKBA corruption, incompetence and a widespread culture of falsifying data.
UK Government policy means that everyone keeps their job, pensions etc.
Nothing to see here until the next episode. Move along.
The lady doth protest too much.
And so too doth Dr Sue!! Black ;-)
Re: And he's not a bad writer
I got one page into Moab Is My Washpot before having to put down the beautifully written but lengthy tome for fear that Fry's interminable prose and well practised yet over enunciated diction would forever infect and infest my previous ability to read a book without reading it with the voice of the writer usurping my natural if less eloquent internal diathesis.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire