Posts by El Presidente 451 publicly visible posts • joined 19 Apr 2011
Ever considered that the public is sick and tired of adverts ? The first thing most savvy web users do is install AdBlock on their browser. Indeed, it was one of the first addons available for Firefox on the Nexus 7. Next thing a savvy user will do is get root on their devices to block other adverts.
Astroturfing .. paid adverts .. sponsored TV programmes .. shill reviews .. the list is endless and it's the usual suspects: multinationals, Big Corp flogging the same old rubbish.
What's to be done ? David Leigh him out of the 70's (massive hair, brown leather jacket with the collar UP LOL) is suggesting today in the Graun that there ought to be a universal broadband tax of £2 per user ostensibly to prop up left wing prop rags like, you guessed it, The Graun, which is losing millions of pounds per year peddling tired old sub sixth form left wing prop.
"Slapped the 'superhubb' into modem mode and added a linksys wrt320n (and stuck ww-drt on it)"
"Superhub looks f-ugly, has the cables in the wrong place"
"Now I know why all of a sudden I could not talk" ..
on VOIP on my new N7 when prior to the R36 brownware update I could on any number of Android devices.
There must be tens of thousands of customers in the same situation.
The Superhub has designed by committee written all over it and as is commonplace with projects of this magnitude by the time it's released to the paying public the real world has moved on.
I think the idea behind the Superhub was once device = cheap support.
I'd rather have my own kit. At least I know it would work as described.
With adblock plus on my phone and N7 = no adverts. If I like an app enough 'll buy the ad free version.
Occasionally, I encounter a website which doesn't want to play well with Firefox and all of the security and convenience addons I have installed on my workstation and I have to resort to Internet Explorer.
Ye gods, how some people view web pages! It is incredible!
It's a wonder anyone can concentrate on the body of the page what with all the flashing and spinning adverts.
"Could El Reg clarify if this (and the other Sandforce) articles are paid for by the companies or are genuine news articles? Reads like a lot of marketing bs to me"
Churnalsim: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churnalism
Company issues a press release:
http://investors.micron.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=698758
Hack hacks press release about using copy and paste.
Sometimes, a hack manages to turn the result into an article.
(option) steal a picture off the web.
Add byline. Profit.
Not saying that's the case here bit Churnalsim is rife online and in print.
But that's what Apple does:
1) Find something that already exists
2) Leave the hardware as is but make it look "pretty"
3) Sell an fantasy lifestyle idea of superiority to the susceptible and the gullible
4) Add 50% markup over the original "ugly"
5) Claim to be doing original work
6) Profit
7) Litigate the competition with absurdities
Plus: make the units non user serviceable, no battery swaps, stupidly expensive proprietary leads, cables and adapters, planned in obsolescence, faults as features, charge 400% markup for basic RAM upgrades and 500% for hard drives ...
Apple buyers are mugs and if RBS are and IT company with a banking license then Apple is a marketing powerhouse with some pretty looking if sub standard products.
"The first iPhone was unveiled by Steve Jobs, then CEO of Apple, on January 9, 2007,[1] and released on June 29, 2007" (wikipedia)
Here's a picture of the screen of an iPaq from 2003 .. almost 10 years ago when most of the Apple fanbois here and apple lawyers were still in nappies, judging from their ridiculous arguments.
http://user-guides.mobiletopsoft.com/hp/hp-ipaq-h4000-series-user-guide/img/hp-ipaq-h4000-series-user-guidex42x1.jpg
There's a touch screen, icons and the device has rounded corners. Three years before the iPhone.
Search google images, even the very first iPaqs from 15 years ago had touch screens, icons and rounded corners and at the time were as useful to me as they were revolutionary to the end user.
The idea that Apple invented any of these or has a monopoly on them is demonstrably wrong and truly laughable. The real danger in this case is that the judge, through technological ignorance and isolation from IT in general, might believe the Apple woo and hand Apple some leverage.
... can already constitute a criminal offence as well as a civil infringement, we call on all organisations that regularly use and resize pictures, such as broadcasters and newspapers, to agree a voluntary [Oh Dear] code of practice in which they publicly commit to: (1) end the practice of stripping metadata from images and (2) refuse to use images for which there is no metadata attached.
Yeah, right.
If the likes of Mail Online and the BBC ALREADY treat images in a way which "can already constitute a criminal offence as well as a civil infringement" according to the law then asking them to stick to a lame code of conduct is rather pointless, especially if pre-existing laws are not enforced. © The Internet by Daily Mail Reporter ?
What''s needed is a strong disincentive. Like fines, big ones, and a 500% fee uplift for non permissioned use.
https://www.plusregistry.org
On which posts requesting support are answered *days* after being posted.
Brilliant!
At least with the usenet system there was instant support from peers which had to reduce considerably the workload for support staff. Usenet was too difficult for the average VM user so the support service was dumbed down, as usual, instead of educating the user base.
Last call I had to make to VM support it took me 17 minutes to get through to a chap in India who fumbled the greet, said hello a few times and cut me off.
For shame, my four year old son now knows the word w@nker :(
Never had anything but 100% from my cableinternetwebpipe whether from Telewest, Diamond Cable or Virgin Media. Have actually selected where to live based on cable vs DSL. Am sad for those who do have real issues with crap service.
Never had anything approaching 100% from Virgin media customer services, not without a 2 month letter writing campaign to head office and an intimation to a press officer that 'this is good stuff for my article'
But I'm really peed off at being lied to about the upgrade on the back of a 'Glom on to the Olympics' Hussein Bolt ad campaign and anyone who pretends that 'it's for free so there's nothing to complain about' is either a consumer dimwit, a serial apologist by proxy or a company shill.
Watchdog, wherefore art tho ? Wilt thou not fine VM TREBLE the cost of their false advertising campaign then order them to knock that significant sum off the bills of their customers for taking the ...
Copyright holders are controlling the flow of original content.
Remove copyright and the flow will turn into a trickle.
It's the licensor(s) who control the flow of money, either collected from advertisers or via subscription and paid to the copyright holders to create content. That's your directors, film camera people, editors, writers, stills ... then there's the vast industries supporting the creatives .... Everything from catering to wardrobe to stunts to runners.
If the licensor(s) can't see a clear way to profit then they won't pay for original content.
Copyright is the least problematic of the so called "problem" yet vopyright it's the main focus of so many misguided commentards.
Preserving copyright is key to providing an incentive for people to create the sort of content viewers want to watch. Remove copyright, remove incentive. Get even more bland homogenised content.
"Creatives spend more time on trying to get copyright clearance for the works than actually creating the new works. Frequently the cost of copyright clearance destroys the commercial viability of making the new work"
let me fix that for you:
Creatives spend more time on trying to get copyright clearance for the works than actually creating the DERIVATIVE works. Frequently the cost of copyright clearance destroys the commercial viability of making the DERIVATIVE work.
Genuinely NEW works created by creatives do NOT require any form of copyright clearance but if you want to use my work in yours you DO need to ask and if your use is commercial then there will be a fee.
Not in any way difficult or overly time consuming, really, is it ?
"Indeed. The fact that people need to bang on about this whole "copyright = stealing" position implies an insecurity surrounding the strength of the argument"
Twisted logic.
The fact that people attempt to deny this whole "copyright = stealing" position implies a paucity of coherent defence of what is, by all legal definitions, theft.
"Copyright is not the same as stealing"
You're right! Copyright is not the same as stealing. Copyright is the protection from abuse of original works.
Use of those works without licence, payment or permission is *breach* of copyright which *is* stealing.
Hope this helps :)
a. Not wanting unsuccessful artists to claim benefits when they should be doing a regular job.
Petty and envious. Disallowed.
b. Not liking it when hacker friends get locked up and intimidated by lawyers for explaining how to do something.
Yes, we agree, the law is an ass but stripping content creators of their rights isn't the answer.
c. Not liking it when local historians can't afford to do new publications on recent history because of excessive copyright clearance costs.
New publications need new content. Why can't the local historian create that new content instead of plagiarising, sorry, heavily referencing the content of others ? Too lazy ? Deluded ?
d. Not liking having my net connection spied upon, and being threatened with disconnection, because someone else is claimed by copyright owners to be abusing my network address .
Yes, we agree, the law *is* an ass but stripping content creators of their rights isn't the answer.
Reading through the posts above, that the main reason for seeking to diminish the rights of artists is envy.
There are those who say of creatives 'good luck to them' and there are those who say 'how dare they'
Primarily because they have neither the wit or talent to produce something original. If they did have the wit and wherewithal to produce something original and if they did have the opportunity to pass on publishing rights to their offspring, *all* of them would. Except the ones who hate their own kids and judging by the convoluted arguments some 'tards put forward in defence of their habits I'm sure there would be a few who do!
Ease of opportunity is the gateway to freetardism but simple *envy* is what drives freetard philosophy.
"... dentist/surgeon/lawyer/mechanic generally gets paid for every time he/she performs the task they're being paid to do, they don't just do something once and then make infinite duplicates of it to sell at an inflated price point"
Still a performance of ability though, isn't it ?
You wouldn't pay a back street dentist £10 for a filling any more than you would pay .99p to listen to a song made by someone unable to play an instrument.
If it were possible to digitise, for ease of copy, the services of a dentist/surgeon/lawyer/mechanic then I'm sure the freetard movement would come up with many a justification for what is, essentially, putting people out of work so the freetard can get free stuff.
Freetardism empowers the corporations.
Freetardism sticks it to the individual, not the man.
Freetards don't wish to pay for music so musicians should get 'real' jobs and professional musicians should downgrade themselves to hobbyists simply to accommodate the freetards.
Good job freetards can't download the services of other professionals, isn't it ?
Dentistry, for example.
Had your teeth put in for stealing music by an angry hobbyist wielding a guitar? Download some teeth!
Broken leg? Download some surgery!!
Being sued ? Download some defence. Need your car fixing? Download a mechanic ...
WTF ? First up, why would photographers "distribute without charge the resultant photos to the press and internet" ? The idea is to sell images to the press, to make a living, not give them away.
You know, like a job only for less pay with fewer safeguards.
Secondly, there's no e on the end of lens.
Yeah, just before the Europeans turned up. Was paradise on earth apparently.
America was founded as a means for people to escape tyranny. The first settlers went about escaping tyranny with a Festival of Genocide and pillaging which some people say is still going on today.
..into this morning's DEA press briefing "for reasons of space"
OFCOM official statement or on the spot decision by some jumped up little PR bod who thinks it's their job to say NO to journalists despite being paid (by us the tax payer) to say yes ?
The PR and communications business is, ironically, chock full of people like that :(
6 thumbs up & 4 thumbs down so far ?
WIN!
If you disallow the 4 thumbs down votes, clearly from the equally deluded / offended iNobs, move them over where they should be, to the thumbs up column, the iNobs score 0 and the rest of us get 10
I'd call that conclusive proof that Apple kit is about 40% overpriced.
Nice screen though.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
