182 posts • joined Saturday 24th December 2011 02:23 GMT
it's not spelt rara
it's spelt rah rah, dahling
What's the purpose of O2 now anyway?
I mean, they're bloody expensive, they use half the bandwidth of other mobile providers (so making a call sounds like making a long-distance call in the 1960s in a thunderstorm), their customer service is now going to be rubbish, I'm not seeing a raison d'etre.
@TeeCee Re: Get yourself issued with two notices for two different car parks at the same time
No you can't be "done" for attempting to pervert the course of justice if you tell the truth, because the burden is on the prosecution to prove their claims to an extremely high level of certainty (i.e. "beyond a reasonable doubt"), not on you to prove your innocence - Woolmington v DPP (the famous "golden thread running through the criminal law"). Given your claim is true, the prosecution cannot prove it is not. If law enforcement agencies don't have the means of distinguishing such cases from those in which an individual is being dishonest, the principle of habeas corpus tells us that's a problem for the agency (and society) but not the defendant.
However in this instance, insurance policies are all centrally recorded: there would be a record of the Aussie's insurance for the period concerned. If they didn't have insurance, an affidavit would suffice. Car icon for obv reasons lol
They're not rebranders of Foxconn,
they're rebranders of Hon Hai Precision Industry Company, Ltd.
It's not a Gerald Ratner moment
because Ratner owned Ratners, whereas Mudcrock doesn't own MySpace.
Re: "endangerment of life"
How is it not endangerment of life to divert to repairing vandalism, resources which would otherwise be spent on looking after the public?
@ David WilsonRe: Crime != Punishment
Not just stupid because forbidden. Forbidden because wrong. What those advocating such attacks - indeed all of those attacks for which the lulzsec-ers were convicted - seem not to realise is the government isn't just some autonomous organisation. It *IS* the people. Agent, representative, protector, and personification.
Re: They missed "Impatient Bastard"
"I'll usually order a CD online and then fire up bitTorrent and download it. I know I could probably use a service like iTunes for more instant gratification, but I do prefer having a physical backup of my property."
The "honesty-box" market model you describe, i.e. individuals voluntarily deciding to pay for things, is not a market model at all. Markets require individuals to have to pay if they want their desire to be fulfilled.
I say fraud
These things don't exist yet. The history of 'invest in our amazing not-yet-in-existence and yet soon-to-be-mass-produced cheap laptop/tablet/etc' is a history of massive cost and time over-runs, bankruptcies, and outright frauds.
If you're selling a mass-produced consumer item which doesn't exist yet, you sell it to resellers or rebranders or investors. If they don't want to buy then it's probably for a good reason.
If you sell to end-users, that's a whole new business entirely.
You as retailer have to spend the same money again for marketing, customer service, sales, aftersales, repairs, replacements. The sheer unaffordability of that alone should put off anyone from buying a phone from a clearly soon-to-be-bankrupt company.
"a lifetime ban from Amazon (plus immediate revoking of rights to acces all exisitng kindle "purchases")"
while they can do the former, they could be estopped from doing the latter (legal term meaning 'prevented by a court, under its 'fairness-related' jurisdiction, from going back on a promise which you relied on to your expense/detriment'). that would be expensive for them both financially and reputationally. alternatively it could be an unfair term per the unfair terms in consumer contract regulations, and again they'd be dragged through the courts and lose.
actually yes, mine has opera mini installed and a few other bits
Re: I expect more from the Register than this
Quite so. 80% of SMEs paying £35-65k - nonsense.
Probably 50% of SMEs don't even have that as TURNOVER.
Re: In any commercial relationship, ... profits must ... be placed above customers' interests
"Only a company in a monopoly position or with a strong lock-in can afford to annoy their customers and MS did that extensively."
Well that's a really good point about MS, at least their GUI problems suggest they've not focussed as hard on customer experience as Apple, and maybe that's because they've not been as pressured to compete. That said, if we consider whether Apple competes - maybe it doesn't, because it's in the luxury goods sector: people queue up to burn their dollars at the fruity altar. So it may be difficult to compare it properly with MS.
You've changed the point I made by omitting "long-run" and "in an either-or scenario". You're right about commercial relationships sides finding a common interest, but that doesn't address the point I made. Your previous post appeared to feature the premise that it was possible for companies to ultimately, i.e. in the long run, put the customer's interests above their own. That's fallacious.
There may be convergences of interests, as you say, but outside of the luxury goods sector, these are fought over fiercely in the marketplace and aren't defined until the customer / seller agree a price between them. The minute it is clear to a company that its activities must ultimately cost them more than they will get back, i.e. no longer be profitable, they're no longer a commercial entity. For this reason, the whole of their existence they must fight the customer to establish price points as favourable to themselves as possible. Likewise the customer.
Re: Sounds nice...
"After two decades of MS shenanigans and a clear drive to put monopoly profits above the customer's interests, they need to offer something exceptional for me to take notice. I wonder if I am the only one?"
You write of putting profits above the customer's interests - yet in any commercial relationship, long-run profits must on balance always be placed above customers' interests in an either-or scenario.
Yes MS have tried to behave monopolistically sometimes. They may even have done some good things too (gasp). And their old boss may be doing good things with his money, like trying to cure malaria. But ethics aside, the relative merits of their mobile browser should be what matters here. Sometimes bad people can make good things.
Re: Build it and they will come
Yes that's all very nice but that's not how intellectual property works. It's made by people who need to have to have things to sell so they can buy things so they can eat them so they won't die.
"...the Tory-led coalition's agenda to get more of the population online so as it can deliver many more public services over the internet rather than deal with people face-to-face."
The cynicism of this take is shortsighted. Why should people not be encouraged to use online services where possible in a way which allows savings to be made to pay for needed services such as care?
"It's argued that the government's pursuit to change those web usage stats is a vanity exercise for poshos bent on helping those who live on what MLF once described as "horrible council estates"."
What's been said here is that people determined to help the poor are doing so out of vanity (not altruism, no!) and that they're posh and therefore somehow their efforts are less valid. The implication of this argument seems to be that those 'poshos' should fuck off and work in the city fucking the poor over instead of helping them, because they're going to get no thanks for the latter. This is a disgusting and infantile argument.
I don't think people will touch it because one's arms aren't conditioned to lift up and out that far (and then tense incredibly to let the finger perform a delicate/gentle touch) on a regular basis. If they do touch it regularly that might be an RSI risk.
@ Mad Mike 08:13 Re: Karma's a bitch
“Ah yes. The you have to follow the law, but I don't sort of response. “
No, legislatures with a code on copyright generally include explicit fair use clauses, including among other for satirical, journalistic, and educational purposes. But use of a logo for purposes of description and identification is also pretty universally accepted as 'fair'. This isn't a case of 'passing-off', or a case where goodwill or material benefits are being unjustly enjoyed without a morally and/or legally proper level of permission and/or recompense. It is a very far cry from Pirate Bay destroying human beings and industries and art through stealing the fruits of peoples' professional lives. TPB has no mission. The copyright org here has a very important one. Weighing these factors will always play a role in any judicial balancing of harms.
“The you broke the law (allegedly) first, therefore I can break the law argument.”
This isn't about breaking the law, as I said, the law is flexible and intelligent enough to discriminate between people's purposes.
“All completely without merit and with much case law showing the argument is total b**locks.”
“If the anti-piracy group has broken copyright (and we'll await the court case to find out), they're guilty.”
But consider the provisions, this isn't even an if, there is no case to answer.
“Whether the victims are convicted criminals or not is irrelevant. Even criminals are allowed the use the legal system against others.”
We're not talking about protecting convicted criminals, we're talking about preventing very serious ongoing and utterly unjustified industrial sabotage, i.e. crime, on a massive scale. But the criminality isn't the problem, the consequences of it are the problem.
“Terrible, but true. When you get into power, you can correct this gross injustice of criminals having access to the law.........................”
But this isn't the law, you have no law or actual moral case on the side of your argument, otherwise you would have included even the slightest smidgen. In the event, all you could say was “oh it's not good to deprive criminals of justice”. If you accept they're criminals, presumably you accept they're also continuing themselves to commit crime, and calling for others to do so too, with hugely damaging economic and social consequences, on an ongoing basis through their activities. This is the real question at issue: how to stop them, and doing so is an important cause which will be weighed by a judge in the unlikely event he or she ever admits this “case” for hearing.
Re: Karma's a bitch
What else? Tosh. It's a stonkingly, ridiculously misguided and meritless case and argument as usual from TPB and they will lose money.
'Good cause' alteration of a logo of a non-commercial organisation (TPB), where there's no chance of confusion in the minds of consumers between the two orgs, and where the pro-copyright org is clearly fighting a bunch of thieves and vandals trying to destroy others' property rights for nothing other than the titillation of getting others' efforts for free, comes under many legal labels of "allowable".
As for karma, that will arrive when TPB users are asked to work for the rest of their lives for free, "y'know, to promote their product".
Question whether this works with standalone computer monitors with HDMI
The article spoke of HDTVs; might anyone please know whether this tool will work with standalone monitors, please? I searched 'monitor' on this page and nothing came up.
The fact you think that at all important tells me artists' incomes, jobs, prospects, and likewise those of people who those artists freely choose to appoint to work to support and enable them, are not really on your mind...
Re: "O'Dwyer's supporters maintain he broke no UK criminal law. This isn't actually true."
@ AC 20:07 GMT, I don't know why re number 1, it's an interesting question.
However in your citing number 2 as some sort of claim that O'Dwyer is innocent of wrongdoing, I have to point out that the presumption of innocence isn't an ethical principle but a procedural requirement in criminal (not civil) trials. It absolutely doesn't mean someone who does wrong is innocent of it simply because there hasn't been a trial.
It was articulated by Lord Sankey to overturn the heavy presumption of malice in those being prosecuted for murder. It's not whitewash for bad people.
"One disgruntled owner told Reg Hardware that the company re-"captured" his Mac Mini weeks ago to asses the issue and only recently replaced it, doing so with a model that packs a slower processor and basic-level hard drive. He wasn't too chuffed to say the least."
Your contract with the retailer is for the goods you ordered; a replacement should be of equivalent or greater specification. The goods in this circumstance are effectively undelivered - the retailer has unilaterally varied a term of the contract. Whether that's a lesser or vital term depends on the response of the other party: if you don't protest, you can be deemed to have affirmed the variation in the contract and waived your rights. You can protest through any durable medium, well, any medium actually, although any electronic text e.g. twitter, facebook PM, counts as durable, which is important should it go to small claims.
Remember always to buy these things on a credit card, as if the retailer fails to fulfil their obligations under the Sale of Goods Act, then the credit card provider is liable to you for purchases over £100, under S75 of the Consumer Credit Act.
I realise this is all common sense. Having begun a law degree I feel less able than ever before to make clear assertions about the law :-/
Re: More than good enough for me (and many others I suspect)
Actually the earlier model (the G300) handles Flash and the like with aplomb, I own one and for the first time the web has been pretty much my oyster, there's nothing stripped-down or obviously limited about its functionality, that's what's quite astounding about the phone, given the price.
Re: It looks like a MacBook Air
"It'll fall to bits and break in half the time..."
I paid £2k for my Powerbook and it fell to pieces within two years. My mum paid £400 for a Toshiba laptop and it lasted five years. I don't believe Apple make things to a higher durability spec than anybody else. The contrary, actually.
Re: She's more likely to spray herself
Absolutely correct: you're not meant to handle anything that's even TOUCHED chilli powder without washing your hands really, really well afterwards - there's basically contamination, such that if you touch your eye, or any sensitive bit, you can get burned agonisingly and actually damaged I think.
Having a pepper spray as part of a phone case means regular casual handling and pressure on it, and that you don't have that necessary quarantining of the materials, to keep you safe from coming into contact with it.
Apple potentially liable for SOGA claims in UK
"That battery array, however, is glued tight to the new iPad's case. "Since batteries are consumables that wear out," iFixit notes, "the trend of glued-in, hard-to-access batteries in iPads and other Apple devices is unfortunate."
Lol Apple could find themselves with quite a few individual claims that the product is not 'reasonably durable', with findings of liability against Apple, if its life is as long as its battery's life...
They're going to reap what they sow on that front (although that depends on individuals' willingness to threaten and/or make small claims in the face of what's always really annoying resistance).
I suspect Samsung users have lives. If I had five hours spare I'd rather spend it with my loved ones, or writing, or at a concert, than shivering alongside a bunch of identity-deficient virgins.
Bomb under publishing industry
Drastically reducing the price of books (in this case to free) may be good for retailers who can use it as a promotional tool for their other product, but it's not good for the publishing industry, and it can't be good for writers and writing.
This seems to me an extraordinary turn of events whereby Amazon does what the eff it will with the book rights it's piled up: what will they do with the rights next - give them away with every Amazon-branded lollipop?
If these books are by living authors who are selling OK, this measure is a bomb under the publishing industry.
Re: GooPad's eight-incher gives Apple fans cheap relief
Oh god, that phrase...
When will they make a horror film with that as the main script? It's only a matter of time...
Apple shot itself in the foot with this stunt
We English love our common law system, and I don't think Apple are going to win friends over here by having a go at the judiciary, on the contrary.
Re: Yes but
Cooler, I'd say. It dons a balaclava and bares its ass at Apple's altar.
Re: Hey up, what's the state of play with these cheap tablets?
What was the cheapo Chinese one you bought called, please?
Re: You know what?
Separate private companies there briefly (who are subject to the Data Protection Act), and you're left with government and emanations thereof, trying to run a state, i.e. protect us from one another. Distinguish that from a bunch of kids who on a whim put up these number plates so as to help one another evade the state's crime control activities, and whose activity gives the police yet another job (getting new plates) and in both senses, hindering the police in doing their proper job, and you'll see the state and the kids "slurp[ing] up information" are very different propositions indeed.
We do need the state, you know! People don't automatically play nice, as some sort of consequence of getting their libertarian jollies!
Re: The future
Let's see - so you're saying that whoever the artist has appointed as their agent (because the artist wants to spend time making art, rather than doing admin, marketing, HR, contracting, sound recording, record distribution, PR, mixing, catering, rights management, accountancy, sales, negotiation, and all the rest), is somehow not a legitimate choice of that artist to act on their behalf?
There are other record labels, you know, it's not like artists have no choice - they go with the label who offers them the best deal, the most support. These labels do compete with one another to support artists. What you call 'most of the profits' are merely the actual costs of doing business. You're not helping artists by stealing music and refusing to pay for it. That's money artists need to eat and labels need to pay them so they can do so.
Re: Ding !
What slightly concerns me here is the thought what Anonymous may most passionately object to is having to pay for content, a stance not completely inconsistent with much of what is said on here.
You mean "Fruity Phone Fans Fucked" lol
The way to extract the best from German Google translations
Is to translate them back and forth between English and Deutsch until they create something both poetic and highly offensive!
Re: No Thanks...
@AC 00:28, "most people are happy to buy and use products that are fairly well designed out of the box with no need for much customization."
Sure, but iOS not allowing me to do away with swipe-to-access aggravates my RSI, and having its unintelligible symbols stand in for menu options at every turn, is deeply irritating and confusing, means my mother cannot work her iPhone, and feels more a design flaw than anything else - it's something Android remedies.
Ultimately it's the user who legitimately decides what is a good design or not; and price is part of utility. I am not happy with the contention a gold-plated gizmo is objectively good design: as would you not be were it insisted you drive only a tractor. Suitability is good design and it is relative. It doesn't suit me to pay £1000 for a toy where -£10 can buy the same incl airtime (see my previous posts).
Re: No Thanks...
Do you mean 'friendly' as in 'hello there ickle babby want to play with nanna?' or as in 'user-friendly, e.g. permits tweaking of almost all settings and features to suit the user'? Because I think they're quite different. As for slick, a Disney cartoon is slick too, but I wouldn't want to look at one every day.
Re: Whatever happened to free at a tenner a month
OK, here is how to get to cheapskate heaven:
My Huawei G300 Ascend cost £100; the new phone I'm about to buy on a 24-month contract sells for £110 (incl rebates) more than the total full-term line rental cost, (with 300 mins pm, 250mb pm data, a bunch of texts, no charges for data overuse), so it should touch wood work out at minus 50 pee per month for the next couple of years, assuming I don't go over my minutes...
That sounds a bit anticompetitive.
Re: Trouble is...
Arrant assclown tosh. Dragon has to be purchased separately for Mac just as it does for PC. If the inbuild voice recog in OSX was enterprise quality dictation software, god knows Apple would shout about it, but it isn't, and they don't.
Please could you say which is the " £60 headphones [and] £15 rubbish headset with a little treat [that should be battery] booster box"?
- 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?
- Analysis Spam and the Byzantine Empire: How Bitcoin tech REALLY works
- VIDEO Herschel Space Observatory spots galaxies merging