93 posts • joined Tuesday 10th May 2011 18:22 GMT
Re: If you want to see some of the tax money...
Alternatively, give advance notice that there will be rate hike next year. Amounts to the same thing without loss of revenue.
Re: Dear Appletards
The problem with that is you really can't avoid Google's ad-pushing services (and Google Analytics) on 3rd party web pages. These are (or can be) used to collect profiles as well (IPs which Analytics collects and keeps are as good as cookies in most cases, or actually better in that they are globally unique identifiers at a given point in time).
Since I didn't see it explicitly mentioned I'd like to register my displeasure with a) the disdainful attitude these US companies have towards EU privacy law, which amounts to b) pushing the US law (lack thereof, really, when it comes to privacy) unto us.
If this was only about collecting profiles for on-line advertising, something like do-not-track might be good enough. However, the underlying general issue is privacy in a world where collecting, combining and looking up information on an individual has been - and continues to be - completely transformed by technology, hence something along the lines of a blanket ban on collecting and using information that *might* be personally identifiable is needed. This would then have narrow exceptions, most importantly allowing collection and use with consent (= opt-in) with the provision for opt-out later (= the right to be forgotten i.e. having the data relating to you deleted, or, failing that due to technical or legal reasons, only used as strictly necessary for those technical or legal reasons).
A bottom-line hurting fine would seem deserved and necessary or else the essential take home message is that EU competition law and the authorities enforcing it need not be taken seriously.
> "may appear extremely rich or altogether distasteful to some"
Something sort of akin to a wee bit of not totally unlike that, yes.
Re: This is serious
I do agree about the demise of proper journalism being a serious issue. I wonder whether a viable micropayment sceme where you'd conveniently pay a couple of cents / pennies /per article as you go would make a difference. (This was talked about in the 1990s if not earlier, still no such thing, apparently? Technically, at least, it shouldn't be that much of a problem ...).
Currently it would seem that on-line advertising is in for a rough ride. End-users can effectively filter it out and increasingly do, for perfectly good reasons (such as privacy concerns, avoiding annoyance, faster load times, ...). If this means the demise of advertising in general down the line, it might be just as well: advertising is commercial propaganda, where the punter pays for being manipulated and misinformed (as a part of the price of a product or service). Also, it is worth noting that such propaganda undermines the premise of well-informed parties on the 'free market' i.e. in its current form advertising or marketing in general amounts to a serious systemic problem in a market economy.
A related thought: How do you trust a professional propagandist to give you accurate information when buying the services of the same or contemplating doing that?
A revenue-friendly alternative
... to a tax holiday would be raising the tax rate and announcing this well ahead of the change taking effect :).
Re: Perfect Example
A counterexample: the private healthcare system in the US vs. the public ones in the rest of the 'advanced' countries: in the US this takes ~18 % of GDP, OECD average is ~10 %, yet ~50 million people in the US are not covered.
A good start would be legislation making it a serious criminal offense to collect, keep, release, receive, process or otherwise use any data where there is any possibility that the data could be connected to a person, living or dead, unless:
1) The data is strictly needed to provide a product or service requested by the aforementioned person, and
2) The aforementioned person has given explicit, informed consent to the aforementioned use, and
3) The consent mentioned in 2) can be withdrawn at any time with the effect that the aforementioned data is kept and used only as strictly necessary for technical reasons or to fulfill a legal obligation.
(There would need to be exceptions for things like government records (tax, court / criminal, ...), credit information and such of course ... 'technical reasons' above is intended to include backup tapes and such ... )
Re: Still haven't separated OS and Data
I wanted to move the profile directory (Windows 'home directory') to another 'disk' (drive letter) with a Virtual Box installation I set up for running Lightroom on XP on a Linux host. I wanted the OS disk (C:) / image file to contain the barest minimum of stuff so that it would be easy to back up, while all the user data was to go on what XP sees as a network drive provided by Virtual Box, in reality a directory on the Linux side for easy access and backup (from the Linux side). The short of it is that it apparently couldn't be done.
The registry edit relocating the profile directory didn't work for a network drive, nor did junctions*. I suppose setting up a samba server on the Linux side for the profile directory might have worked, I didn' t try that as it seemed far too complicated for such a simple thing.
For my purposes moving the 'My Documents' directory to the 'network drive' was good enough and for this the Virtual Box network drive worked ok: it seems Lightroom puts most of its data there by default**. Lightroom gave me trouble about its 'catalog' (picture database) though, it didn't like this being on what seemed like a network drive to it. Turns out one can overcome this by using 'subst'***, which apparently always appears a local drive.
* I seem to recall the target should have been on a NTFS partition on a local physical disk.
** The only exception, I'd recall, was the raw converter cache, which, of course, was configurable from within Lightroom.
*** That is, 'My documents' is on the drive created by 'subst', which, in turn points to (a directory on) the 'network drive' provided by Virtual Box, which, in reality is a directory under my home directory on the Linux side (where I can use symbolic links to further map things around.
I'd rather not have Google collecting a profile on my web searches, page visits and whatnot. Hence I'd rather avoid being constantly logged on to a Google account (which the app store requires) which (greatly) facilitates their data collection. I'm even more reluctant to give Google the opportunity to tie my real world identity to such a profile. Hence the change to conveniently get apps from Amazon and even (maybe) to buy some as well as other content is welcome; I don't think I would have ever bought anything from Google Play, as that would have meant giving out my credit card information (i.e. my real world identity).
'Modern UI' ... I guess that makes the current one 'Retro'.
Re: Not due process
Indeed. Rejecting ACTA is absolutely necessary, if only not to encourage similar attempts in the future.
AFAIK ... it is a parilamentary system: 'cabinet' (commission) proposes 'laws' (directives, regulations), these must pass the 'two chamber legislature' (EU Parliament + council of ministers). Also, the commission needs the 'confidence' of the parliament: the parliament votes on the approval of the roster of commissioners, (in theory) there could also be 'a vote of no confidence' dismissing the commission in mid term.
Summary: bitch, moan, whine, whine.
So they intercept the HTTP requests (replies?) and add (substract) their own stuff (headers at least)? (If so one wonders to what end and with what excuse.)
>Seriously though, what the hell is going on in that country?
A theory: vile, cynical propaganda making use of ignorance and prejudice for political gain with the ultimate motive of financial gain (i.e. greed) and power for its own sake.
Humbug. Strict opt-in. A summary execution for violations.
1) make copyright non-transferable (*) to decouple content creation from distribution to bring competition to the latter i.e. copyright holder willing to sell a work is obliged to publish a price schedule for licenses and sell them to anyone who pays the price.
2) in order for copyright for a digital version to apply, a copy must be submitted to a public repository from which anyone can have a copy after the copyright has expired (which would be, say, 20 years from submission). The repository would charge a fee for submissions to cover its operating costs.
(*) law = a contract with that effect is null and void. This should work directly for individuals (such as authors, composers and musicians), for movies and such found a special purpose limited liability company that takes the investments, handles the production and then distributes the profits until it is dissolved due to going bust or the copyright expiring.
How about VMs?
What effect will this have on running Windows 8 on a VM BTW? That is, do VM providers have to get a key from Microsoft (who would thereby be in a position to screw them)?
Condemning a bomb threat goes without saying ,hence, having followed the antics of TTVK I would not put it beyond them to fabricate something like this (mind you, I'm not saying they did that, just that I wouldn't be surprised *at all* if this somehow turned out to be the case).
Heh, maybe this guy should apply for asylum in a 3rd country :).
> I also know they have completely demolished the guilt I once would have felt ...
+1 : Actually, these days I feel kind of guilty paying money where some of that will end up with them.
>Windows isn't closed source, if you're a big company or a governmental organisation.
Then again it is not open source, in the sense of (potentially) having gazillion eyeballs looking at the source (finding bugs, reducing deep to shallow and whathaveyou).
Sounds like an invitation for Russian hackers and whathaveyou with the net effect of making the information available to world+dog (for a small fee, perhaps). The nasty thing is that once something has been leaked it stays leaked, forever. Hence I'd much rather have these systems strictly isolated. Having a standard format for the info would make sense though so that the same could be, say, burned to a CD (*), sent as a registered, signed-for letter, added to the database and the CD dropped to the shredder when done. This on a per-patient basis when requested by the patient in writing.
(*) encrypted with the public key of the receiving GP / hospital / ...
Surprised that they would do what they can to hamper an investigation, destroy evidence, ... not really. A bit surprised that they might have got caught doing it ... yes. (Would be rather suprised if the officials can make the allegations stick though, unless they just sacrifice a pawn.).
Bundling the device and the contract when devices and networks are in fact designed to interoperate is evil. Also bad for competition (avoiding which seems to be a fundamental business principle, while the right for business to exist is predicated on the same).
... and the money to pay the bribe comes from the de-facto Windows desktop (+ Office) monopoly (that is, from customers without the benefit of free-market choice / competition).
Well, sure, the underlying human / civil rights are the really important stuff, but right now and likely moreso in the foreseeable future the Internet will be an essential facilitator of these, so ensuring access as was done with the phone system in the US (and more recently with the Internet in Finland (*)) would seem like a good idea. Also, for the same reason cutting someone off from the Internet for a offense as petty as file sharing for personal purposes is patently disproportional.
(*) Not exactly as a 'human right', merely as a right to have a connection in any part of the country for a not-inflated-as-much-as-to-void-the-provision-in-practice price.
I suspect the root cause of Paypal (Ebay) being like this is their main criteria of hiring the people that actually process the disputes is the lowest possible pay and the job description is essentially to process the maximum amount of complaints /hour. Be that as may, what they do about items claimed counterfeit varies.
Personally I bought a a lens filter from an Ebay seller, paid with Paypal. The description was that of a known brand-name item. What arrived was obviously a counterfeit: besides being shoddily made in general, the text on the flip side of the box had the description of another kind of a filter and the EAN code did not map to the item.
Contacting the seller got me the suggestion of returning the item for a refund after which I sent an email to Ebay expaining the issue with a photo of the flip side of the box to Ebay. Ebay instructed me to return the filter to the seller for a refund at which point the only practical option was writing that off as a loss: any sort of tracked delivery would have cost maybe half of the price of the filter and besides I did not want it getting back into circulation, also might be an offense to send something over when you believe it is a fake.
I looked into this a while back and it seems the Windows installation script 'tattoos' the HD restore image with some sort of a HW (copy) specific key. The restore CDs / DVDs created after installation probably get the same. This seems like a (half) measure against making a copy of Windows by HD cloning, but also, in practice, means 'encouraging' an upgrade in case of HD failure translating into a pretty penny in total.
Is it just me or does this seem kinda reasonable? Pay for it and get to play it on two consoles at any one time (as opposed to, say, OEM Windows which is supposedly to be used with only the one PC it came with).
I suppose the natural progression of things would be 1) management promising/insisting on a speedy release of a (n all) new, great product. This results in 2) getting out something so-so at best ( 2a) late, more or less). Then 3) much effort goes into fixing this which results on a strain on R&D which 4) guarantees similar or worse results with the next generation product (if any).
The discovery of phosporous is usually credited to the alchemist Hennig Brand trying to make gold from urine in around AD 1669 :).
Maybe it was deemed that this was as likely to produce a chunk of, say, U-235 or Pu-239 as it was Au-197. (Maybe the chap even had it in what would have been a critical configuration ;).
It is interesting to see if (when) various services (skype, gmail, facebook, twitter, ...) able to map an IP to the real-identity of a user start to sell this info to each other and 3rd parties.