* Posts by Andrew Orlowski

1435 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Sep 2006

Stephen Fry's truly terrible mistake

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Slightly off topic...

If the Synology box acts as a UPnP server, then it should. If not, you'll have to plug it in directly. But I'm still testing...

Mystic Met is serial Strategy Boutique john

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: @ So, does anybody actually know

"Never let the evidence get in the way of your computer model".

Ireland debuts Fone-a-Freetard lottery

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: re:Andrew Orlowski

Your research needs to be much better before you post long essays of advice for the media industry. Advising them to do things they've tried doesn't show a firm grasp of the subject. It's just wasting your time.

I can see why you don't want to put you name next to it. I wouldn't...

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Actually...

Firefly ain't coming back, get over it.

>> To the advertisers: Gather a team of people who can judge the viability of script ideas. You are now in a position of greater power than you've ever been before. Don't screw it up <<.

I can't wait.

If I were you I'd get up to speed on the reality of the ad business, because most of what you recommend has already been tried. It crashed and burned.

Pacific islands growing not shrinking, says old study

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Escrow...?

Or even better, don't hand out any money at all.

By all means, feel free to chip in if you want to. You can send your cash to:

The President's Office

Boduthakurufaanu Magu

Male'

Republic of Maldives

Phone: (+960) 332-3701

FAX: (+960) 332-5500

Email: info@presidencymaldives.gov.mv

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Re: What?

First you need to demonstrate the climate had become 'destabilised' -- and that's something you can't do.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: What?

"we should not work to eliminate pollution leading to climate change?"

I presume what you mean is that you think CO2 is a pollutant, and that reducing CO2 is the only option here.

We should do whatever harms the fewest people and benefits the most, naturally.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Land reclamation

But that's not what you want to do if you want the world to think your island is sinking.

Steve Jobs fears Nation of Bloggers

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Didn't miss a thing.

So if you had perfectly "neutral" newspapers - supposing such a thing was possible - then Americans would suddenly start buying them again?

Righto.

Greatest Living Briton loses £30m

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Oops

You've confused budget deficit with national debt.

"don't we need to take account of the following (advised by a friend who works in Central Govt.)"

The bank bail out cost £850 billion (NAO figures).

So your friend in Central Government can't tell the difference between the deficit and debt. That explains a lot.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Its coming...

You're bonkers.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Semantic webs etc.

Quite.

It's a career CompSci academic's version of the perpetual motion machine. For perpetual grants.

£15 a month for legal P2P?

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Too costly

OK, you spend £10 a year on music and none of it is new.

I'm surprised the market researchers aren't beating a path to your door.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Conflict of Interest

>> The inherent contradiction is that the telcos involved claim they must examine everything all users send/receive in order to check for naughty P2P traffic <<

I don't know any who make that claim. And they positively don't want to, because it's expensive and pointless. Ask ISPA.

Have you been eating the cheese that fell behind the fridge again?

Music biz pot calls Apple black

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: "new ways of offering us music"

If you can't find good music now, that's probably because you don't like music.

Murdoch's paywall: The end of the suicide era?

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: "And whatever else Murdoch may be, he certainly isn't stupid."

Mogul only has one U.

Photographers slam British Library's mission creep

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: this must be done

You haven't just missed the point. You've run past the point with your eyes shut, screaming.

OFT won't block BBC's über set top box

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: £500? Bargain.

I'll forward the money for you.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: indeed

You need to address the cartel question.

This might involve thinking, though.

'Martin Mills you are a LEGEND!'

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: @Andrew

Now you're just being silly.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Now that's off your chest

You're still arguing that creative people ...

a) get poorer not richer

b) give up rights, so somebody mean doesn't have to pay

These aren't progressive values. In fact, they have more than the whiff of fascism about them. They show an abnormal sense of entitlement.

Most labels are small, most performers get very small amounts in royalties.

I haven't seen a technological advance since the printing press that has made creative people poorer, less autonomous, or have fewer rights.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

You've missed out quite a lot of evidence

What you're saying is that you know a lot of musicians whose output isn't very marketable.

You then say the only people who desire to market their rights also fail your Anonymous Coward Morality Test: they are either synthetic or greedy. (Or both). In other words, they don't deserve to market their rights.

From this you imply that these music rights should be destroyed, and nobody would mind much.

But there are lots of people who do have marketable rights, and are entitled to pursue them. Your argument takes rights away from people, only you don't quite like it when it's spelled out so clearly.

The question is why anyone would listen to self appointed moral arbiter who can't describe things honestly.

One of the reasons musicians output isn't marketable may be that they're not very talented. Another is that they can't afford to - and by removing marketable rights, you actually make that even less likely.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Really?

hi Ed, I wasn't making an aesthetic judgement on RW either way.

Merely that there are some artists want to be mega-world-famous, the market supports some mega-world-famous artists, and this market exist in the future, it's not going to go away. The majors are undeniably very good at this.

Google to be bookseller by summer

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Yes, but

Since Editions will be accessible on every device, that cancels out any advantage Android may have.

Microsoft releases Symbian Communicator

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Mail for Exchange

So you don't need HTML email? Or multiple access points? Quite a few people do.

But thanks for sharing.

Music biz defends ISP from music biz

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: In t'olden days

Because there are two copyrights - the composition and the recording itself. The format that the recording comes from doesn't change that.

Nokia's lost weekend ends with N8?

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Close, but no cigar

A Nokia PR has confirmed the battery is sealed, and not removable.

Epic Fail: How the photographers won, while digital rights failed

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Bit of a low blow?

I'm glad you finally found the comments section Francis.

You were certainly the most prominent legal opinion associated with ORG, and you were given a full story to yourself in The Register (via Out-Law). I'm also glad you've been able to profit from the Act professionally.

:: I suspect it will waste a lot of people's time and money and absorb a lot of energy and effort.

Funnily enough, so do I. But these measures have been discussed since 2006 and were promised by Triesman over two years ago. There has been plenty of time to lobby against it, building the kind of coalitions I describe.

:: Next time: why not get in touch with me before writing about me?

You answer this question a bit earlier:

:: I doubt I had any real influence over the strategy either ORG, the music industry or anyone else for that matter deployed in fighting over the Bill.

Indeed.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Wishing the plague

:: I'm with Austin Mitchell on this one, a plague on everybody's houses.

It is tempting to succumb to fatalism, but it might be more constructive to think about how both industries could profit from the technology, create new markets, and make money.

I appreciate this outside your area of expertise.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Sizes

anonymouse > unless on 7 May the incoming Conservative Government repeal the act

Why would they do that?

> "If Tory MPs only supported it because ORG annoyed them"

You seem to accept a little bit more reality with every post. What you're having trouble with is the idea that patient, rational argument can go along way to eventualy political success.

Some nerds lack empathy and are happy doing student gesture politics forever though. (And not just nerds)

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Everyone to blame but ORG

Perhaps an "Open Letter to Andrew Orlowski" should have actually have included me as a recipient. You forgot to do that, so it's really "An Open Letter About Andrew Orlowski Addressed To Nobody In Particular" ;-)

Your point about grey Tories doesn't make much sense:

> The Tories always knew they had limited capital to exert influence during the parliamentary wash-up.

The Tories actually had the Government by the balls, this is the nature of wash-up. They could have thrown out any parts of the bill. There would be no Digital Economy Act worth speaking.

Either you can learn the lessons, or keep losing - it's really up to the activists on what the goals are. Some obviously like losing, it's good for business.

Trebles all round.

It seems to me your determination absolve the most prominent activists of ANY BLAME you're really struggling. I'm not sure why you want to do that, maybe they're friends.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Tories supported photographers not pirates

Chris Marsden > "Once it got to the Commons, why would the Tory front bench bother to annoy the copyright industry (Murdoch before an Election)"

Well, you weren't following this, because that's exactly what they did.

Chris, as an "academic expert" you really ought to pay closer attention. If you didn't know that the Tories had helped kill c43, then you must be getting your information from some dubious (but no doubt, politically-correct) sources. Twitter perhaps? ;-)

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Re:Re: Sizes

"If ORG hadnt existed, would the legislation have passed or not?"

Nobody played the Trump Card. No.2. If a group had started making that case two years ago, then no, I don't think the Tories would have backed it. The Tories would prefer a pro-business anti-regulation position on most issues. They were pushed into a Law and Order one instead.

"I dont see how ORG made it worse."

see above.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Sad, sad times.

"the music industry is stealing alot more from them than what the average teenager is doing in his bedroom."

That old chestnut.

aka,

"Two wrongs make a right"

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Re:Re: Size of opposition

Epic fail:

"As a freetard try competing with a billionaire and his bloody great yacht moored somewhere in the Med offering various luxuries to those onboard..."

It's a really pathetic line of argument. You're resorting to conspiracy theories when you should be fixing your arguments. Now mull on this:

ORG made legislators more sympathetic to the BPI position. I didn't hear this complaint from legislators about ISPA, Which? or other consumer groups which were allied to ORG.

So there is something about the style or substance (or both) of ORG specifically that made something bad, much worse.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Sizes

ORG made legislators more sympathetic to the BPI position. I didn't hear this complaint from legislators about ISPA, Which? or other consumer groups which were allied to ORG.

So there is something about the style or substance (or both) of ORG specifically that made something bad, worse.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Size of opposition

If you want to succeed, you look at what you did critically and learn from mistakes.

If you want to fail, keep the same crew that failed, keep the the strategy, and repeat the tactics.

You'll keep failing. But some people are comfortable with that.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Huh?

No one thinks it's illegal to put out material on your own terms. Even shout-at-the-bins lunatics don't think that.

It's actually your rights under copyright that allow you to sue Microsoft for putting your code into Windows, not the CC or GPL.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Re: What about the degrees of opposition to the opposition?

blackworkx-

I believe Ofcom is obliged to throw away the sticks if it isn't impressed with the reciprocal carrots. If Ofcom judges that the music business has failed to come up with attractive new services (the carrots), it must refuse them the sticks. Parliament can also do this.

So there will be opportunities to deploy the Trump Card (Point No.2 in my article) - but I think the activists are still getting their rocks off on the Ooman Rights arguments.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Garble

I wish I could understand what you're getting at. What do the police have to do with it? Where are the horses? Are you always this good at getting your message across?

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: What about the degrees of opposition to the opposition?

No, it was even more powerful than the music business.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Uh huh

Like the NHS, The Register is free at point of service.

If people don't want to read it, that's totally up to them.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Expectedly biased summation of events

" what was the actuall opposition that Stop43 fought off?"

Have a read of the website: Murdoch, the BBC, large publishers, etc.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Spot on about Jim Killock

I agree.

Electronic voting, data protection are too important to be left to serial bunglers.

Mark E Smith pens World Cup ditty

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)
Coat

Especially...

...Hip Priests. They're not appreciated.

Mystic Met closed Europe with computer model

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: damage

Running a marathon is difficult too, if you decide to tie your hands and feet together. You then have to hop 26 miles - it takes a lot longer.

You have so comprehensively missed the point I am tempted to think you drove past it deliberately, HW.

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Vulture 1 + Balloons? How exactly?

We'll send them balloons. Maybe you can chip in.

Broadband boss: 'The end of freeloading is nigh'

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Can someone explain...

Are you really a sysadmin?

"It's doesn't weigh anything. It doesn't require any sort of "heavy lifting". It's just electro-magnetism"

Electricity doesn't weight much either. Is that free to generate and distribute?

Why doesn't Nokia buy Palm?

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Clueless

You missed a few out: Nokia helping to broker a lasting Middle East peace agreement (Q3), Nokia Research proving room temperature cold fusion (Q4) then commercialising it (1H 2011).

A user's timetable to the Digital Economy Act

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Litigation not mentioned in the timetable

A letter that has no legal validity is junk mail. We're about to see a blizzard of letters with no legal validity. Whether you want to call them junk mail is up to you: the people sending them prefer to say they will be educational.

Hopefully you will eventually learn the difference between an empty threat and a valid legal threat before you are too badly scammed. The unscrupulous tend to target individuals who are ignorant or mentally infirm, who can't tell the difference.