Posts by Eponymous Cowherd 1596 publicly visible posts • joined 28 Nov 2007
But, apparently, these guys won't let them.
Browse through the Amazon Kindle store. Its a damn good bet that any e-book whose price makes you exclaim foook ME! will be published by one of those under investigation and have a "This price was set by the publisher" label in the description.
Ah, yes, the TRS-80 Model 1 clone?
That was my 2nd computer (after a kit-built ZX80) (went on to Spectrum, CPC6128, Atari ST then a bunch of x86 PCs).
Thing I remember most about this thing was playing space invaders. The game on the TRS-80 fired arrows at the invading hoards, but the Genie fired right square brackets.
IIRC, the sides weren't really wood, they were a sort of printed wood effect which wore off. Very '70's, though.
Actually a pretty good machine for its generation (coincidental with the ZX81), so a little unfair to compare it to the Beeb.
Something along the lines of:-
You can only buy a patent with the intention to implement it and must provide evidence of that intention to sue for infringement.
This only applies to bought patents, not those of the original applicant / author who, obviously, should be able to profit from their own invention.
As the article points out, HDCP, like any form of copy protection / DRM, does little to prevent "piracy", all it really does is right-royally piss off the average end user who just wants to make use of the content that has been paid for in the manner they wish.
Here's hoping this will lead to readily available cheap boxes that we can plug into our home kit.
The abysmal Flash based Android iPlayer.
What do you mean you want to listen to the radio with the screen *off*!!? You actually want people's mouths to be synchronised with their voices? You really want the play/pause controls to actually be hidden while you are watching (and not cover 1/3 of the screen)??? You want to actually use a *mobile* app while you are away from a fast broadband connection??? You want to be able to continue watching where you left off after taking a call on your *phone*????
Why would anyone want those things????
***"Why should one wrongdoer, by being filmed and broadcast, suffer much worse punishment than another wrongdoer who committed the same acts but was not filmed ? On what basis ?"***
On the same basis that some wrong-doers get away scot-free because Plod doesn't spot them at all. i.e. pure chance.
This moron was driving a large truck while talking on the phone and pissed up to-boot. If the chance of being pilloried on national TV stops others behaving like this (i.e. being a *massive* danger to other road users) then this is certainly in the public interest.
If someone had been filmed but *not* convicted, then, yes, they should have a right to full anonymity. This guy was bang-to-rights and deserved all he got.
First of all, yes, I have, actually, experienced 3D. Both on a friends domestic 3D TV ( A Samsung), and in the cinema. In both cases I was seriously underwhelmed.
Secondly, if you could be arsed to read properly, you would note that the fuzzy image was referring to the cinema experience.
Finally, unless you keep your eyes level and parallel to the screen, one of two things will happen. If you are sufficiently far away from the optimum viewing angle, either in terms of head tilt or angle to the screen, then you will lose the 3D effect. At less extreme angles I experience eye strain / headache. This has absolutely nothing to do with your vaunted 2011 plasma, but is a basic fact regarding how 3D TV / cinema works.
You're in trouble.
3D, honestly cannot be arsed. Pay extra for a fuzzier picture and a headache? No thanks.
And at home? The need to sit bolt-upright head perfectly level and directly in front of the screen for the entire film? No thanks. I want to relax at home.
***"And no, downloading a track via BitTorrent to begin with doesn't absolve you from that track's IP encumbrances either. Handling stolen property is still illegal, and it matters not one whit whether you were aware of its stolen status or not."****
Not sure if that qualifies as strawman or chewbacca.
Yes, handling stolen property *is* illegal, but downloading *isn't* handling stolen property (nor is the original unauthorised copying classified as theft). It is copyright infringement, a *civil* offence, unless the original media was protected in some way, in which case the circumvention of copy protection is a criminal offence in many countries (DMCA ECD, etc).
I'm sure the Taliban appreciate your support, BTW.
The Kindle is a mixed blessing as far as prices are concerned. There are plenty of books for reasonable prices. The excellent Space Captain Smith books can be had for £3.60 (compared to the £6.39 paperback price). This is a reasonable price for an eBook,, IMHO. Bought all three, and exceedingly funny they are too (Sort of cross between Red Dwarf and Carry on up the Khyber).
There are also plenty of free classics available.
On the other hand, there are also plenty of rip-off prices. eBooks more expensive than the hardback edition. The Jobs Biography, for example. Hardback £10. Kindle edition £12.99.
The key here is the line "This price was set by the publisher" in the Amazon description. This is because a loophole in the law allows publishers to effectively re-implement the outlawed "net book agreement" on eBooks and can tell Amazon the price they must charge.
There is no way I'm going to fork out £13 on something that has no residual value and can't even be given away or leant to friends. It is also unsurprising that it is usually these overpriced eBooks that appear at vastly reduced prices (£12.99 less, in this case) from alternative sources.
You don't "own" the contents of a CD, DVD, Blu-Ray, book, etc, But you do own the physical object that contains the copyright material. An object I can lend, sell on or give away as I wish, transferring the rights to the contents along with it.
If I buy DRM protected digital contentI can do none of those things.
Therefore, IMHO, digital content has a lot lower intrinsic value than the same content delivered on a physical medium. and should be sold a a much lower price.
But they aren't. They are often sold at prices *above* their CD / DVD / Blu-Ray / paper bound equivalents. People just see that as a rip-off, and that is why they turn to the "pirates".
***"having spent millions of dollars on marketing its kit to shiny loving IT professionals"***
Well, that's money wasted, isn't it?
Most of the IT pros I know are fairly immune to marketing bullshit, tending to make their own mind up by reading specs, reviews, etc.
Advertiser makes outlandish claim in ad.
Ad goes on-air and is seen by millions.
ASA tells advertiser that ad should not be shown again.
Advertiser makes another (different) outlandish claim in new ad
and repeat........
Until the ASA grows some real teeth/balls and has the ability to administer some real sanctions (fines or total ad bans for a period of time) then all an ASA adjudication is doing is showing the advertiser that the ad was doing its job (i.e. getting noticed).
Yes, I know the ASA can, supposedly, refer repeat offenders to the OFT or Ofcom, but when has that ever happened? The likes of Sky, BT and Virgin repeatedly appear in (upheld) ASA adjudications, often due to a complaint from another of this infernal triad, but, apart from having an ad that has already run its course banned, no other action is ever taken.
Android mostly uses widgets to display real-time information, like the lauded Window Phone tiles, as well as the notification bar.
The notification bar is useful for basic info (got mail, etc) while widgets are suitable for more detailed info (weather, train times, etc).
Android should actually come top in this category, as widgets are far richer than Windows Phone tiles, and may be freely mixed with other home-screen objects.
In fact, you missed a major category out, customisation. Most Android phones have 5 or more "home" screens, each screen can be fully customised placing widgets, shortcuts or folders onto each screen in a completely ad-hoc fashion. This allows me quick access to information (widgets), web pages and apps (shortcuts), and data (folders) in exactly the way I want. Neither Windows Phone, iOS or BB come close to this flexibility.
***"Ghioni said his "precise mechanism" would need the "collaboration" of operating system manufacturers such as Microsoft and Apple"***
And that's the rub, isn't it?
The only way this can *ever* work is if the operating system intercepts the data *before* it is encrypted, sent via a secure VPN, or otherwise obfuscated.
And that will require the cooperation of, not just Microsoft and Apple, but of all of the Linux distro providers, game console manufacturers (Sony, Nintendo), smartphone OS providers (Blackberry, Google), Internet TV, set-top box, blu-ray, etc manufacturers, and so on.
It ain't going to happen, and still won't account for legacy systems (or would the "authorities" intend to prevent all all non Mottified boxes from connecting?)
The bottom line is that if person A wants to communicate with Site/Person B over the Internet without anyone else being able to read/view the content of that communication, they are *always* going to be able to.
This kind of bollocks just gives the "authorities" a nice, cosy (but false) sense of security.
Assume that I use my visa card to go on a mammoth shopping spree.
Assume that Visa are allowed to, and do, track the purchases I make with that card.
I now go online and start browsing t'intewrwebs.
How do visa intend to tie my card purchase history to my web browsing? The only way they can do this is if they tie something that identifies me online (IP address, cookie, etc) to my card account, which means that they can only do this when / if I enter my card details online, which requires the collusion of web retailers.
Now, I'd imagine the last thing that an online retailer like Scan, Dabs, etc want is for me to be bombarded by competitor's ads because they pimped me to Visa.
Shocking proposal, in any case. Do these people not learn? Did they not see the shitstorm of bad publicity that arose from the BT/Phorm debacle?
@AudiGuy:-
He wasn't lying, that implies he either wasn't telling the truth when he said he believed that "stealing" was OK, or when he complained about it. What it shows is complete arrogance in his belief that stealing is great as long as its Apple doing the stealing.
I would have thought the owner/driver of the premier Twatwagon could appreciate the concept of arrogance arrogance ;-D
Apologies if you either don't drive an Audi, or are one of those rare Audi drivers that don't think they own the entire road.
Jobs goes on record in this biography, saying he felt so strongly about IP "theft" that he would be willing to, effectively, bankrupt Apple to destroy Android because they "stole" his ideas, while neatly forgetting that it was he, himself who is on record as saying "Good artists copy, great artists steal. We have been shameless about stealing great ideas."
That is one *hell* of a big RDF
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
