"This is totally blown out of proportion and misconstrued. Apple made fairly accurate statements that jailbroken phones may not function properly and can cause issues to OTHER consumers on the network. (page 11, last paragraph)."
Even that's still an stupid and inaccurate statement, if this was a real issue we would have all the non apple phones (and jail broken iphone) causing problems to the networks for years and guess what? Does not happen
The whole iPhone lock down is about one thing and one thing only, apple controlling what you can and cannot do with your purchase after the point of sale, anything else is an excuse trying to justify something that non apple product users would find totally unacceptable
Did the suits matter? No but not because they reasons behind them were wrong, rather because they not only took way way to long to reach a conclusion (some are still going as you pointed out) but also because in some cases MS were pretty much allowed to bribe themselves out of them (USA ones)
If they had been short and stuck to their stated chosen aims (stop MS using their OS dominance to try to take over the web interface) we would probably be at least 5 years ahead of where we stand in regards to online tech
Only reason we now have the likes of Firefox now is because MS won the browser wars and then did absolutely nothing for years in that area except sit on their collective ass's congratulating themselves.
If they had not done this Mozilla/Firefox would probably never been even started never mind successful, only thing that got them moving again was once Firefox started to take off and started threatening the control of their market
"talk about a waste of resources and a gathering of the stupidest people ever"
And this is a good, could you imagine if they had no "home" anymore, they would spread everywhere else
Actually they are following common sense, problem is you are misunderstanding their objectives.
Reducing prostitution is not the objective (Politicos are the working girl/guy best customers after all), getting in the headlines looking proactive is
hmm according to to wiki now moot's (site owner) own isp (Cogent Communications) is blocking 4chan
If this is true got feeling this whole thing will be related to the DDos attacks, if you look at 4chan status page they were under DDoS attack themselves just over a week ago
"The BBC spends more time advertising their own shows than ITV or Channel 4 spend on adverts."
Because programs made by other networks (or by the BBC for selling to other networks) are geared to be an odd 40 minutes of showtime and 20 mins of adverts to fit in the hourly slots. BBC have to fill those 20 minutes with something to keep roughly to the hourly scheduling system
"The BBC is the most blatant product placement channel in the UK. You just have to watch the news and see how they spend 30 seconds focusing on an Apple logo."
Total crap, they are actually specifically banned from product receiving money or benefit in kind to do product placement. The only placement you will see is if the show was bought from another network/producer
"I always find who support the BBC have the same argument - I like it so keep it.
How's about this as a novel solution to the license fee. If you want it, YOU pay for it. Stop being a cheap bastard and having the tax payer subsidise YOUR television subscription."
For a good example of why this does not work check out sky, an satellite subscription service
At the start it was no ad's and quality programming.
Then it only ad's on main channel.
Then it was ad's on nearly all channels and the 100001 rerun of the Simpsons. Non blanket subscription then makes program planning a commercial concern and commercial concerns equal lowest common denominator entertainment to maximize profits
In the US, yes you would be safe, but come to the European union (or in the case of Yahoo, any of it's exec's) and they could be arrested
And it was the USA that started that messy precedent during the whole internet gambling ban by grabbing execs from gambling companies while they transferring flights on US soil
Extra: Even worse for UK citizen's, due to the Gov stupidly if you break US law while in the UK you can get extradited with no legal recourse
Sounds like they are saying the court order is basically a "fishing expedition", as whatever is on the site is behind security. As it's behind security how can the publishers know (legally) if anything on the site in violation of copyright.
Court Orders are meant to be backed by "probable cause " before they granted.
Otherwise anyone could get them at anytime to invade someone else privacy
Though the whole "not publicly available because behind a password thus not a copyright violation" argument sounds so dumb I highly doubt it is accurate, sounds more like reporter not understanding what he is talking about
Re: Re: Re: And you people talk about the decline of journalism?
"said that this article was a poster child example of what professional journalists are claiming is wrong with blogs."
Honestly, see just as many "professional journalist" articles that are just as shoddy as this one.
But one key difference, TechDirt don't claim to be "professional journalists"
@Mike, Though got to agree with the others, rather shoddy work on this article, as others have noted the reasons for the shutdown are well known and two seconds of thought combined with a few minutes of reseach could have answered your headline question.
The chinese farmers are doing what they always do, farming non Chinese servers to sell gold to the rest of the world.
"Citizen reporters in theory are good, but in reality they can be selective in what they report."
Yeah and professional reporters are not selective in what they report
"The fact that the Prime Minister didn't eat the wafer is offensive to devout Catholics and pretty unremarkable to most others."
Actually, if he is not Catholic (or belonging to another church that practices Sacrament of the Eucharist) and had taken it would have been more offensive to Catholics who know something about their religion, as you are not meant to partake until you have either had your First Communion or RCIA
The correct thing to do if in a RC church during mass (and not eligible) is to just remain seated during reception of the sacrament
*always knew all those hours of arguing with my religious studies teacher would come in handy one day*
Sorry but this had nothing to do with safe harbour protections or the lack of them.
Case to point, just look how much inaccurate, misleading or just plain false advertisements/documentaries/news reports there on TV at any given moment, has the lack of safe harbour protectiosn stopped this?
This was quite simply a case of two groups,
First group has a limited advertising budget, probably will only run the one series of ad’s and then Comcast would never hear from them again
Second group is one of the largest car manufactures in the country, advertises to the tune of tens if not hundreds of millions per year, year in year out
Second group did not like what first group said about them, Comcast just followed the money
Even if they had been safe harbour protections Comcast would have done the exact same thing
So the article was kind of correct, he did get charged by a site called pirate bay, just not The Pirate Bay
Though fool will be probably really pissed when he figures he just gave his cc details to a scam site and his credit card company call up to ask about his 100's or 1000's of dollars worth of purchases in Russia or Nigeria
"When I speak of rights, I don't always mean Constitutional rights."
Yet you specifically mention which law/amendment you believe was violated...and get it wrong
If you had just actually kept it to “rights” you would not have looked such a fool, but you did what the far right do time and time again, bring the constitution and the bill of rights, as if they were holy grails, into the argument and either get it totally wrong or twist things so much that black is white and white is black
(and it is generally only the far right, not your average middle of the road republican)
Here is simple facts:
Palin got an easy ride at the start (all the press could go on about for weeks was how she was good looking, hocky mom, great speaker, Mccains ace in the hole, so forth), then she did a handful of interviews, ended up looking totally stupid/ignorant, got called on it by the press, so she tossed a hissy fit and refused to do any more interviews.
Press then did what they also do when someone they want to focus on has turned nasty and will not oblige their desire for more column inches, they dig up dirt
She brought on the negative publicity on herself and continues to do so.
Now how anyone can say with a straight face that that someone who cannot even manage the press for a week or two (it was actually about 5 weeks but 3 in the middle she was basiclly "incommunicado" and she had some of the best advisers in the business) is good enough to run a country and handle its internal and international politics is beyond me.
LOL you asked for proof you got it then you deny it because the source nicely groups it all together for you, one wasting their breath here is myself.
Just as you proved on the 3rd link, Obama had showed his birth certificate (which he would NEVER have been asked for if he had not been black) and what did they do? Call it a possible fake.
But even before that story was never news worthy, why? because the guy was a state senator for some 7 years and US senator for 4 years. You think secret service don't do in depth background checks?
It was just mud slinging from the right that they hoped would stick, along with the 101 "accidental" Osama's instead of Obama's
On the post: Is Apple Suggesting That The DMCA Prevents Terrorism?
Re: You are off base
Even that's still an stupid and inaccurate statement, if this was a real issue we would have all the non apple phones (and jail broken iphone) causing problems to the networks for years and guess what? Does not happen
The whole iPhone lock down is about one thing and one thing only, apple controlling what you can and cannot do with your purchase after the point of sale, anything else is an excuse trying to justify something that non apple product users would find totally unacceptable
On the post: Looking Back At The Microsoft Antitrust Suit: Did It Matter?
If they had been short and stuck to their stated chosen aims (stop MS using their OS dominance to try to take over the web interface) we would probably be at least 5 years ahead of where we stand in regards to online tech
Only reason we now have the likes of Firefox now is because MS won the browser wars and then did absolutely nothing for years in that area except sit on their collective ass's congratulating themselves.
If they had not done this Mozilla/Firefox would probably never been even started never mind successful, only thing that got them moving again was once Firefox started to take off and started threatening the control of their market
On the post: Student Files Lawsuit After Teacher Demands Facebook Password, Logs Into Account & Distributes Private Messages
Re: cha-ching
On the post: Apple Says No To Google Voice On The iPhone
Re:
This is number one why i don't like apple, i buy a product i want to do what i want with it, i paid for it after all, i did not rent it
On the post: AT&T Blocks 4chan Over DDoS... But May Not Like What Happens Next...
Re:
And this is a good, could you imagine if they had no "home" anymore, they would spread everywhere else
My 4chan live forever
On the post: And Of Course: Grandstanding Anti-Craigslist Politicians Still Not Satisfied
Misunderstanding their objectives
Reducing prostitution is not the objective (Politicos are the working girl/guy best customers after all), getting in the headlines looking proactive is
Thus common sense says: Sue Craiglist
On the post: AT&T Blocks 4chan Over DDoS... But May Not Like What Happens Next...
Now owners own ISP blocking him
If this is true got feeling this whole thing will be related to the DDos attacks, if you look at 4chan status page they were under DDoS attack themselves just over a week ago
On the post: Now BREIN Says The Pirate Bay Should Block Dutch ISPs
On the post: Is The BBC An AP Parasite?
Re: Re: Re: Brittan Licensing fees
Because programs made by other networks (or by the BBC for selling to other networks) are geared to be an odd 40 minutes of showtime and 20 mins of adverts to fit in the hourly slots. BBC have to fill those 20 minutes with something to keep roughly to the hourly scheduling system
"The BBC is the most blatant product placement channel in the UK. You just have to watch the news and see how they spend 30 seconds focusing on an Apple logo."
Total crap, they are actually specifically banned from product receiving money or benefit in kind to do product placement. The only placement you will see is if the show was bought from another network/producer
"I always find who support the BBC have the same argument - I like it so keep it.
How's about this as a novel solution to the license fee. If you want it, YOU pay for it. Stop being a cheap bastard and having the tax payer subsidise YOUR television subscription."
For a good example of why this does not work check out sky, an satellite subscription service
At the start it was no ad's and quality programming.
Then it only ad's on main channel.
Then it was ad's on nearly all channels and the 100001 rerun of the Simpsons. Non blanket subscription then makes program planning a commercial concern and commercial concerns equal lowest common denominator entertainment to maximize profits
On the post: Belgium Fines Yahoo For Protecting User Privacy On Its US Servers
Re: Unenforceable
And it was the USA that started that messy precedent during the whole internet gambling ban by grabbing execs from gambling companies while they transferring flights on US soil
Extra: Even worse for UK citizen's, due to the Gov stupidly if you break US law while in the UK you can get extradited with no legal recourse
On the post: The Reality: Not As Many Actual Apps In The iPhone App Store As You're Told
Re: Misleading title, really
It's akin to saying there are something like 108,810,358 different internet explorer's available (Aprox number of websites worldwide)
On the post: Swedish ISP Refuses To Give Up IP Addresses; Appeals Court Order
Court Orders are meant to be backed by "probable cause " before they granted.
Otherwise anyone could get them at anytime to invade someone else privacy
Though the whole "not publicly available because behind a password thus not a copyright violation" argument sounds so dumb I highly doubt it is accurate, sounds more like reporter not understanding what he is talking about
On the post: But Who's Doing All That World Of Warcraft Gold Farming While WoW Is Down In China?
Re: Re: Re: And you people talk about the decline of journalism?
Honestly, see just as many "professional journalist" articles that are just as shoddy as this one.
But one key difference, TechDirt don't claim to be "professional journalists"
@Mike, Though got to agree with the others, rather shoddy work on this article, as others have noted the reasons for the shutdown are well known and two seconds of thought combined with a few minutes of reseach could have answered your headline question.
The chinese farmers are doing what they always do, farming non Chinese servers to sell gold to the rest of the world.
On the post: But Who Will Cover City Council Meetings?
Re:
Yeah and professional reporters are not selective in what they report
On the post: YouTube Takedown Again Being Used To Try To Block Newsworthy Content
Actually, if he is not Catholic (or belonging to another church that practices Sacrament of the Eucharist) and had taken it would have been more offensive to Catholics who know something about their religion, as you are not meant to partake until you have either had your First Communion or RCIA
The correct thing to do if in a RC church during mass (and not eligible) is to just remain seated during reception of the sacrament
*always knew all those hours of arguing with my religious studies teacher would come in handy one day*
On the post: Should Safe Harbors Apply To TV Advertising As Well?
Case to point, just look how much inaccurate, misleading or just plain false advertisements/documentaries/news reports there on TV at any given moment, has the lack of safe harbour protectiosn stopped this?
This was quite simply a case of two groups,
First group has a limited advertising budget, probably will only run the one series of ad’s and then Comcast would never hear from them again
Second group is one of the largest car manufactures in the country, advertises to the tune of tens if not hundreds of millions per year, year in year out
Second group did not like what first group said about them, Comcast just followed the money
Even if they had been safe harbour protections Comcast would have done the exact same thing
On the post: Fact Checking? Reporter Claims It Costs $27 To Use The Pirate Bay
Haha, know where he got the $27 from...
So the article was kind of correct, he did get charged by a site called pirate bay, just not The Pirate Bay
Though fool will be probably really pissed when he figures he just gave his cc details to a scam site and his credit card company call up to ask about his 100's or 1000's of dollars worth of purchases in Russia or Nigeria
On the post: Palin Threats To News Organizations Seem Misguided
Yet you specifically mention which law/amendment you believe was violated...and get it wrong
If you had just actually kept it to “rights” you would not have looked such a fool, but you did what the far right do time and time again, bring the constitution and the bill of rights, as if they were holy grails, into the argument and either get it totally wrong or twist things so much that black is white and white is black
(and it is generally only the far right, not your average middle of the road republican)
Here is simple facts:
Palin got an easy ride at the start (all the press could go on about for weeks was how she was good looking, hocky mom, great speaker, Mccains ace in the hole, so forth), then she did a handful of interviews, ended up looking totally stupid/ignorant, got called on it by the press, so she tossed a hissy fit and refused to do any more interviews.
Press then did what they also do when someone they want to focus on has turned nasty and will not oblige their desire for more column inches, they dig up dirt
She brought on the negative publicity on herself and continues to do so.
Now how anyone can say with a straight face that that someone who cannot even manage the press for a week or two (it was actually about 5 weeks but 3 in the middle she was basiclly "incommunicado" and she had some of the best advisers in the business) is good enough to run a country and handle its internal and international politics is beyond me.
On the post: Palin Threats To News Organizations Seem Misguided
Re: Re: Re:
2nd Amendment = Right to bear arms
Nothing to do with "responsibility" or any one of the items in the first admendment
No wonder you people think Palin is so great, you are just as ignorant about your own country as she is
On the post: Palin Threats To News Organizations Seem Misguided
Re: Fact as Fiction
Just as you proved on the 3rd link, Obama had showed his birth certificate (which he would NEVER have been asked for if he had not been black) and what did they do? Call it a possible fake.
But even before that story was never news worthy, why? because the guy was a state senator for some 7 years and US senator for 4 years. You think secret service don't do in depth background checks?
It was just mud slinging from the right that they hoped would stick, along with the 101 "accidental" Osama's instead of Obama's
Next >>