|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 08:44 PM EDT |
| n/t -- but if you don't get it, I'm *extremely* serious! Not! [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 08:48 PM EDT |
No, since you put a ? in the thread title that makes this the thread for
questions abut the off topic thread. :-P[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: reiisi on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 09:04 PM EDT |
PJ, I've mentioned Intel's desire to own the pipes on several occasions.
Here's an article about a company that explains the basic theory
behind the end game as justification for their business model: jumptap.
The article was linked to
by another article on xconomy's site about PARC's
decentralization project that was the kernel of the /. article on the content-centric next internet.
The internet was
originally designed to be totally de-centralized, and all the big players are
trying their hardest to avoid letting it happen that way.
This is why
Intel wants to own the pipes. They don't care which big player wins, they don't
even really mind if the end-user wins and we can go back to a true
de-centralized network, as long as they own the patents on the pipes we are
using. They want to take the former Bell Tel's place, preferably with no one
noticing.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 09:24 PM EDT |
The US Senate is currently debating a dangerous bill that, if
passed, would have broad consequences for press freedom and the public’s right
to know. EFF asks senators to stand up for government transparency and the First
Amendment and vote it down.
The bill’s provisions, buried in the annual
Intelligence Authorization Act, are intended to stop leaks of classified
information to reporters—a premise worrying in itself—but it is written so
sloppily it will also severely impair government transparency and prevent the
media from reporting on national security issues.
The problems with this
bill are extensive and severe.
Jennifer Lynch and Trevor Timm, EFF[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 09:35 PM EDT |
The Internet Archive is now offering over 1,000,000 torrents
including our live music concerts, the Prelinger movie collection, the librivox
audio book collection, feature films, old time radio, lots and lots of books,
and all new uploads from our patrons into Community collections (with more to
follow).
brewster, Internet Archive Blogs[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 11:55 PM EDT |
This is what Apple put up on National TV during the
Olympics. Boy Genius Ads gone viral and WRONG!
Within minutes of the series being posted to YouTube, they
were overwhelmingly Thumb'd Down.
I bet they thought everybody out there watching was going,
"Gee... am I glad I'm not that idiot". But is that what they
think their customers and licensed retailers are like?
You can watch all the Boy Genius Commercial spots on both
YouTube and Apple's own site. But at least they were smart
enough to NOT pay for Air Time on them anymore. I've never
seen Apple fail like this ever before on an Ad campaign!
They're basically saying "You all are too dumb to make your
own decisions, so ask a Genius or you may get conned into
buying an Android Device. Even at Best Buy, where they're
are Spies and Droids everywhere trying to con you into
buying one of their clones.
"So hey... don't make that mistake. Come to our Store and
you know that won't ever happen to you dummies".
In court today (8/7/12) Apple was attempting to press their
"Confusion" claims... again. Trying to get a list of
supposed buyers at Best Buy, who mistakenly bought Android
devices instead of Apple's far cooler and fruitier logo'd
models!
Bull!!! ...walk into any Best Buy and tell me you don't know
you're at the dedicated Apple iPad or iPhone table with
Apple and iPad Logos plastered everywhere. Along with the
fact that if ask where iPads or iPhones are, if they point
you to Android, then that's Best Buy's fault not Samsung's.
And if you're at the Samsung Android Table, all you see is?
...SAMSUNG and it's always conveniently placed on the back
of the device to if you turn it over. If you fail to see the
GREEN Androids everywhere, you might need your eyes checked.
Plus you'd have to be BLIND or STEVIE WONDER, when you get
to the checkout stand and didn't notice SAMSUNG on the box
as they unlock the case to pull one out for you. Next the
Box is confirmed by you to be SAMSUNG Tab. Then the Geek
Squad Sales Rep starts repeating this fact endlessly in
order to sell you Accessories for that particular model of
Samsung Tab 10.1 device. If you bought it anyway, then it's
your fault or Best Buy's Geek Squad!!! ....and no way
Samsung can guarantee that what you bought from a Best Buy
or any other store that you're not getting an Apple iPad
instead of a Samsung Tab 10.1 or GSII. If you bought it
anyway, that's still not Samsung's problem. Because you only
had to look at your Receipt or the Box to know that!!!
But here's the topper.... for this bogus "Confusion" claim.
If anything.... you are a whole lot more likely to walk out
the door mistakenly buying an iPad, than an Android Device,
whether that's a Samsung Tab or not!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRveuk_4Or0
Link to Apple pulling their boy genius spots:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57488152-71/apple-pulls-
its-boy-genius-ads/
Does Apple really think their customers are all that stupid?
....if so they FAIL!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 11:58 PM EDT |
Put a legal bid in for this or something very like this in to Judge Koh. Might
not fly (HA, Ha) but might be appealable. (My spell check doesn't like that
word)
I'm sure Apple's lawyers woud be all in favour since they obviously don't want
any jury members prejudiced.
Make sure to included all items from date of decision to sue to start of trial.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 08 2012 @ 12:45 AM EDT |
Microsoft
Reportedly Nets Nearly $800M
from Android Royalties
HTC pays Microsoft $10 per Android device
in patent
royalties, and Samsung pays between $10 and $12 per Android
device in patent royalties, according to an analyst firm.
I'm getting
really tired of this - $10 to $12 a phone is
daylight robbery! Is there
anything at all that we, the
common folk, can do to stop this?
First of
all, Microsoft's patents on FAT and ActiveSync
should fall under open
standards, since Windoze is so
prevalent and any device that users use needs to
support
Windows. (At the very least, no injunctions should be
possible based
on these patents.)
Secondly, there must be something we can do. Last year,
BuzzFeed filed
a "abuse of process" counter-claim against
RightHaven's
patents. Is there something similar that is possible - a
class-action against Microsoft for ridicoulously high patent
fees?
Just
anything? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 08 2012 @ 12:45 AM EDT |
OK:
http://soundcloud.com/braden-young/08-searching-the-cloud
I'm not crazy about "the cloud" myself and Braden is
not the greatest singer but he is a good writer. I
had a hand in the engineering so I'm a bit biased.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: sciamiko on Wednesday, August 08 2012 @ 08:27 AM EDT |
More commercial contracts tying up Joe Bloggs' normal expectations: Irish 3-strikes could land in European Court
The Irish Data Protection commissioner has put a shot across
the bows of the music industry, in a move that may end up in the European court
of justice. The case follows a complaint from an Internet subscriber on the
Eircom network. The complaint has resulted in a legal wrangle with the big four
music (yes, EMI is still counted) labels. The case has many twists and turns,
but in this latest development, the Data Protection Commissioner filed an
appeal last week in the Dublin Supreme Court. The appeal incorporated
questions that he would like the Dublin court to refer to the ECJ.
The case
concerns the Irish 3-strikes system, also known as the Eircom graduated response
protocol. The Eircom protocol is a private agreement between the network
provider Eircom, and the music industry companies. It requires Eircom to
implement a 3-strikes sytem taking copyright infringement allegations directly
from the music companies, forwarding notices and implementing sanctions. The
agreement arose from a court case filed by the music companies. It was reached
as an out-of-court settlement in 2009. Hence, it could be classified as a
‘voluntary’ agreement. It’s voluntary because there is no court order governing
it, and no means of auditing or regulating it.
I wonder what the
contract looks like between Eircom and its subscribers; and how many actually
read the contract or understood what it might mean? But it's good to see an
official response that is supporting the customer, and not big music. But what
was in it for Eircom to do this deal in the first place?
s.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 08 2012 @ 09:51 AM EDT |
(as if the DMCA hasn't gone off the deep end before)
http://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/08/loons-at-scripp.html
http://motherboard.vice.com/2012/8/6/nasa-s-mars-rover-
crashed-into-a-dmca-takedown
Well, NASA's own YouTube channel had content blocked...
NASA was the original source and a news organization, who is
but one recipient of the feed, decided that NASA's original
content infringed their distribution.
I wonder how many DMCA take-downs are like this?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 08 2012 @ 09:52 AM EDT |
(as if the DMCA hasn't gone off the deep end before)
http://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/08/loons-at-scripp.html
http://motherboard.vice.com/2012/8/6/nasa-s-mars-rover-
crashed-into-a-dmca-takedown
Well, NASA's own YouTube channel had content blocked...
NASA was the original source and a news organization, who is
but one recipient of the feed, decided that NASA's original
content infringed their distribution.
I wonder how many DMCA take-downs are like this?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 08 2012 @ 10:45 AM EDT |
| Here is the video.
Enjoy,
rherror4
04 [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 08 2012 @ 10:53 AM EDT |
Debian switches to XFCE as the preferred desktop!
Dumps Gnome because
it was too fat
(from http://forums.deb
ian.net/viewtopic.php%3ff=20&t=82786)
This ensures that
the desktop will fit on CD#1, which gnome currently does
not.
So, stay lean and clean.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 09 2012 @ 04:51 AM EDT |
More evidence of a
smear campaign against Samsung? - BBC: 'Samsung probes allegation of supplier's
underage workers'
"Based on the results of this CLW [1]
investigation of Samsung's supplier factory, it can be determined that working
conditions at HEG are well below those general conditions in Apple's supplier
factories."
[1] New York-based campaign group Child Labor
Watch
Isn't Samsung a major component supplier to Apple? So how can they
be worse than themselves?
It would also be interesting to find out why
this report was released now - is it simply because the court case between Apple
& Samsung makes them newsworthy, or is it because someone is trying to
create news?
As many people have already commented, an Alsup-style
anti-shill order would be very interesting for the Apple/Samsung case. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
