524 posts • joined Thursday 28th July 2011 21:58 GMT
Re: Buy the IP for the books...
Lot of sense spoken there, which is why it won't be listened to. After all, why change the way you source educational material? That sounds like a lot of work when you can rewrite the rules to stop paying without changing your behaviour.
What confuses me...
is why they need to borrow money to fund tax payments - I'm not an expert but surely tax is based on profits received? How can they expect the situation of both having tax to pay and not having money to pay the tax?
Surely this is just another way of saying "we want more money now instead of later."
Unless whatsisface wants to bump the shares up as high as they can go before dumping the lot and walking away.
Re: Math, it's too hard for crime fighters... or commentards
You're only looking at cardholder not present fraud.
"Total losses on credit and debit card scams fell seven per cent to £341m in 2011"
I get that to be a drop of £25.6M at least, dwarfing the increases.
I would say attempts to block the right to strike very much involves the Unions.
Re: The E-Commerce Regulations
I would say El Reg would be okay under these regulations - They pass the checks of not initiating or selecting the receivers of the transmission, and although they reserve the right to not show posts, I would argue this is not selecting or modifying the information contained in the transmission (not carrying the message at all being different to amending or only carrying part of it, either of which could open them up to being at least part author and therefore responsible for the content.)
Not to mention of course
that Google probably don't want the powers that be or public opinion coming up with a verdict on 'their' results, given that this largely means extracts of other people's content. It's a grey area at best.
Re: Re: A fool an their money
At least the poor kids only lost a dollar this time around (leaving aside the dangers of rogue software on their kit.) Back in my day if you bought a Mega Drive game that turned out to be atrocious, you had just thrown forty to fifty quid down a well.
It could certainly be a worthwhile technology, if it could be trusted. You'd need a hell of a lot of safeguards though, and given that they're obviously nervous enough to not allow it on rooted phones I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.
Either they don't understand the risks, or they know there is a specific risk and have released it anyway. Neither option fills me with confidence.
As an aside, how hard would it be for a rooted phone to tell apps it hadn't been rooted?
What's really needed
Is better regulation of the right to sue (I think I've seen it called standing on here?) Companies with patents should have a more limited time to either licence them out or make something based on it themselves. If they can't show that they are working to bring something useful to market either on their own or in partnership with manufacturers then they do not need or deserve legal protection of their idea. Patents should also not be sellable unless someone can come up with a legal framework that bars patent trolls from suing without putting off genuine companies from buying the right to make a product.
Ofcom would be better served
looking into BT's insistence in an engineer callout to allegedly enable your line for ADSL. In the last two flat moves I have been stung for callout charges, and both times my broadband activated at 12.01 on my activation date, no engineer necessary. I find it hard to believe that it's not possible to end service with one provider and be ready to rock with a new one same day. Can you imagine if the gas or lecky companies thought they could get away with giving you an "activation date"?
Something's just occurred to me...
If I recall correctly, Apple insist that anything sold through their app store can only be sold through other channels at the same price - doesn't that sound suspiciously close to price fixing?
when I read the headline
I thought this was going to be an article about wearable computers. I didn't even catch on when I read to the bit about cheaper infrastructure.
"What are they going to do, knit network cable?"
I would imagine they just punt anything that looks dodgy. If a comment sails close enough to the wind I would personally drop it long before I considered which legal domains would find it appropriate or not.
I would trust them on it because they make money by providing services to customers who are (or think they are) stuck with IE6 for various reasons. Why would they lie about their potential customer base? Exaggerating the figures isn't going to magic more customers into existence for them.
More likely they only wanted to use the media to promote themselves, presumably in the hope that there are still a few more managers out there pooping a lung over the IE6 dependency they need to deal with.
Also worth noting if anyone goes through a lot of diuretics, some very important minerals can be depleted from your system as well as the potential dehydration. Speaking as someone who has seen a family member suffering from Potassium / Sodium deficiency, it's a fucking terrifying thing to see (not least because symptoms can be similar to that of a stroke.)
Well yes, but that's civil suits. Last I heard Google's board weren't in custody awaiting a criminal trial? And two hundred million, while a very tidy sum, is surely a drop in the ocean compared to Google's net worth. And providing for future damages is light years away from having the entire company's assets frozen.
How much extra power would it take to dump the space garbage on the moon? Surely if it's even slightly feasible we should be leaving our space tat up there in the hopes that one day we are advanced enough to use it as raw materials and build our space stuff in situ.
It's not a gimp suit, it's a space suit.
Nintendo are a relic
I would dearly love for them to be a worthwhile competitor to MS and Sony, but the fact of the matter is they just can't cut it these days. The fact that the article mentions super Mario just goes to show how stuck in the past they are: When was the last time Nintendo took a gamble on a new intellectual property? Yes, the other two milk cash cows for sequels but that's not exclusively their lineup, unlike Mario 400, Zelda 92 and Kirby 10. They do occasionally have a massive hit (like the Wii) but then fail to implement or capitalise on it properly (Graphics less capable than older consoles, motion tracking turned out to be shit.)
Interesting to note
The use of the words "smaller schemes" in relation to the reduced rate - a cynical mind might wonder if the cuts are to be mainly focused on the little installations? Any chance of more detail on this angle from El Reg or Out-Law?
(for my 2p worth they should scrap all the solar subsidies anyway so I'm not sure why I'm bothered, it just seems a bit shady to be playing favourites with the handouts.)
"If you can successively **undercut** the pirates price for full quality stuff, you will drive them out of business!!"
While I would agree that pirates who steal material for the sole purpose of selling it themselves are pretty much scumbags, how do you expect honest creators to undercut such pirates? Almost by definition pirates have at the very least significantly lower (if not zero) costs because they didn't pay to create the content they are selling.
Strikes me as being a bit lazy on the technical side. I checked it this morning and it seems to provide your article as normal and then slap the blackout notice over it a split second later.
I can't be arsed checking but I imagine an extension like AdBlock or NoScript could stop the notice from displaying and reveal the article in full after a little tinkering. In fact there could be users who haven't even noticed that there's a blackout on the go.
That's a lot of assumptions there: IF outstanding coverage everywhere becomes the norm (unlikely - there will always be demand for better) and IF the networks can't differentiate on services and IF they then drive prices as low as they can go (they won't; there's a point where less customers paying more is more profitable than more customers paying less), then yes, we will have "a number of operators with coverage everywhere, no service differentiation, and all having prices that will never fluctuate."
But no variation does not equal no competition. If we did get to the position of having super reliable networks at the cheapest possible price, it would be a massive victory for free market competition in terms of benefit to the consumer - we should be so lucky.
Almost without exception I've been on Orange for a decade or more without any issues, but recently I've struggled to get reception in my city centre flat. You're far from alone in considering jumping ship.
I can't see the defence against the interception charge standing up under scrutiny - the idea of reading only the 'in the clear' data before the encryption stage does sound plausible, but at the end of the day someone is monitoring broadcasts in the full knowledge that they are not the intended recipient, and furthermore they had to build/buy specific equipment to do this.
I was hoping no-one had posted "You're typing it wrong" yet.
Of course it's obvious that you can flail an appendage to regain balance. Which is why it was looked into hundreds of years ago, as you mentioned. The difference here is that the boffins have come up with a working prototype that has the potential to improve the capabilities of useful remote vehicles.
As for them not being bothered about solving the problem or doing the math, do you have the faintest idea how complicated it is to understand an instinctive action like correcting a fall in terms (Mathematical/logical) that you can then 'teach' to a robot?
Agreed - it's looking more and more like a big f-up for Canonical lately. If they really aren't expecting tablet Ubuntu until 2014 why has the touch/smallscreen-centric interface been made the default option now? Also re the 2014 earliest tablet date, how do they propose to be relevant when the big boys have had 2-3 years of refining existing products and entrenching themselves in the market?
It's a bit like the FCC and Sprint are playing chicken...
Call me cynical, but I think with the way things have developed they both want LightSquared to go away but don't want to be first to blink. Like the article says LightSquared are running out of funds so the FCC might hope they can dither long enough that the problem ceases to exist.
Hear hear. From what I can glean from the article, it seems to hinge on the 12 Dec 2011 cutoff point being illegal, but it is still unclear why. Is it because the consultation ended after that? Inquiring minds want to know!
It'll probably be an unsecure webpage pretending to be an app. Which will be found by enterprising hacks or members of the public and extensively discussed long before the PM sees it. Anyone willing to wager a beta version with amusing test functions like "Nuke Canada" also gets found and causes a stir?
I seem to remember that a company found guilty of anticompetitive practices can be fined a significantly higher amount if they are later found guilty of doing it again - I would speculate they are managing their future risk by 'buying' and end to the investigation that won't move them up the fine scale. Anyone with a better knowledge of cartel law care to elaborate?
Sounds like Deutsche Telekom have played a blinder
$4Bn straight profit for doing sweet FA coming right from the pockets of a major competitor. A competitor that will likely have to raise prices and become less competitive to recoup the loss.
AT&T got hustled!
SSL *System* is broken
The SSL system is more than the internet protocols - If the entire system is not doing what it's supposed to then it is broken. In this case agents in the system which have to be trustworthy for the whole shebang to work have been shown to not be trustworthy.
It sounds like you have interpreted the headline as El Reg claiming that the SSL protocols have been cracked, which is not what they are doing.
If only she were still around to do the voice. I hope Google boldly go and find a soundalike so I can pretend I'm in Star Trek without all the dressing up.
Any chance of backing that up? I'm not having a go at your post, I would genuinely quite like to know more about the browsing recording bit. Not that my browsing history is anything to be nervous about of course - "everything you saw was legal - *in the country it was filmed.*"
Re: Why don't we just apply the current laws of driving without due care and attention
The police need to prove you are driving without due care and attention; in the past in the UK they would often follow drivers talking on the phone until they did something dumb like waver onto the pavement or have a near miss (or occasionally a crash.) They eventually built up enough video evidence to show that people on mobiles almost always had a significantly reduced command of their vehicle, and the ban on non-handsfree mobiles was introduced. Nowadays if a copper eyeballs you on the blower while driving, he can book you straight off the bat.
Seems to be a growing preference
The only reason I have a TV is for the HDMI and computer monitor ports. I spend enough money on TV I'll probably never watch with the still-in-the-wrapper DVD collection growing in my cupboard.
what no-one has considered is that he was convicted of "gross-indecency". Was this charge exclusively leveled at gays, or was it a catch all for unacceptable behaviour of the time? This has implications for the pardon all convicted of this crime argument, as the charge might have been used to prosecute genuinely reprehensible behaviour as well.
Personally I don't think he should be pardoned or exonerated. Not because I think he (and others in the same situation) didn't deserve better, but because it's too late to do anything for him now, and Britain should not shy away from or try to 'tidy up' its history, especially the more shameful parts. What we need to remember is that casual/socially accepted hatred or ignorance destroyed a great man and did untold damage to scientific progress - and this is just the big visible example of the damage done to society.
Acknowledge we were wrong, recognise that the situation is somewhat better but not perfect today, and strive to do better still in the future.
He's absolutely right
Now that my smartphone can browse the internet properly, I've thrown my PC out the window.
It's a harsh lesson, but one that needs to be taught. If someone is sufficiently unaware of their surroundings to collide with a full grown adult, they could just as easily walk into a hazard or trample a child.
If I recall correctly Apple were fond of the old 'Sin and beg forgiveness' in the early days of the iTunes store weren't they? Proof (if I remember true) that such a strategy can pay off, if a hell of a gamble for a non-MegaCorporation.
It's a shame fighter planes need a big runway - if an emergency came up and we had to, we could probably buy a big civilian ship with a flat deck like a tanker and tart it up with some missiles and other military capability.
If only we had some form of military jet capable of short or even vertical takeoffs...
Rule of thumb
If the general consensus is it's nice or at least interesting to look at (or listen to, etc) on its own merits it's art.
If someone has to explain what it is / is about to the onlookers who are thinking it's just a hard drive then it is attention seeking twaddle.
If this rolls out I'd put money on the facial recognition / lip reading having a Western / USA bias a la the recent problems with Siri. Only question is which nation will be the one that Kinect thinks is constantly angry/upset? (Reg hacks*: Pretype your headlines now)
Icon is a smiley face, you're just reading it wrong.
* in the term of endearment rather than pejorative sense (like boffin)
Much as I agree it should be (and probably is) illegal, Phorm was a slightly different concept in that it was intercepting (website) information the user had specifically requested, while it could be argued that what a phone broadcasts while in standby is not technically (personal) communication - merely an automatic method for staying connected to the phone network.
Although thinking about it as I type it out I realise a lot hinges on what constitutes a communication in the relevant laws on interception.
- 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