Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 10 Jul 2014 @ 11:05am
Re: Can I now get New York channels in Vancouver?
I think Aereo *chose* only to service the same areas the signals traveled, probably because of the ivi ruling.
But I agree, assuming the district court doesn't have kittens (even though the broadcasters are going to), this could enable Aereo to offer service everywhere, and let them do away with all the individualized antennas.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 9 Jul 2014 @ 10:49am
Re: Electronics?
"Houston demonstrated the dog's skills last month. Houston walked the dog through a room in which he had hidden devices. A second pass went more slowly, with Houston coaxing the dog. "Show me. Show me.""
I'm convinced that Houston cued the dog to the locations. It may not have been intentional, but if he was leading the dog, and he's the one that hid the devices, that test is complete bunk.
There's a reason that medical trials are double-blind. The patients don't know whether they're getting the medication or a placebo. The doctors treating the patients don't know either and are well insulated from the researchers who do know. If the doctors knew, they could influence the patients just by their manner.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 8 Jul 2014 @ 2:48am
Re: Re: Missing the point
You are very much missing the point. It would be little different than if every time there was some new law or court ruling that I just posted 'LOL' and threw a link to the Pirate Bay.
Sure, I agree with you that we're not bound by their silly ideas and we shouldn't let ourselves be. But that's missing the forest 'cause your staring at one broken twig.
There's a larger point. The type of thinking that led to someone coding up a cut and paste blocking script needs to be criticized. It needs to be argued against with reasoned debate, mocked for the shortsightedness, and otherwise shown the error of it's ways.
You're making the mistake that a lot of techies and geeks make, and I'll admit I make the same mistake myself from time to time. Just because you can get around the problem doesn't mean it's not there. You've 'fixed' the problem by creating a work-around. But the root cause is still there. You've cured the symptom, not the disease.
Technology should be making things easier. It should be enabling more content to be spread more widely, for lower (or no) cost. It should be enabling more content to be created and lowering the barrier to entry. And it is doing all that. But the 'other side' is using tech too. Admittedly, they're using it ham-fistedly, like the 3rd grade bully who beats up the other kids because he's taller and heavier than everyone in his age bracket.
Just because Aaron Schwartz wrote a script and wired a laptop into a network doesn't mean that we should ignore that scholarly research is being locked up. Just because Edward Snowden released some documents, and we can encrypt our emails, doesn't mean we should ignore the NSA wiretapping the world. Just because we can code around the stupidity doesn't mean we should have to continue doing so indefinitely.
We need to change people's minds. We need to show them that locking up ideas and culture behind 'intellectual property' is fundamentally a bad idea, both for them and for society as a whole. And one way to hopefully do that is to write up articles like the above.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 3 Jul 2014 @ 12:32pm
Re: Isn't it curious?
We're still dealing with bronze-age and earlier cultural tradition baggage where leaders found that one of the most effective means of controlling their societies was by hijacking/repressing/controlling that very strong urge to reproduce.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 2 Jul 2014 @ 6:02am
Re:
What the FTC is going after here are not SMS scams and doesn't have anything to do with SMS messages. It is specifically called "cramming" - and basically allows someone to add a charge to your phone bill by simply knowing your phone number.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 30 Jun 2014 @ 12:56pm
Re: Isn't there a middle ground?
If the user deleted the data after being made aware that it was part of an investigation, then it would be pretty easy to get a destruction of evidence charge added and would all but guarantee a win for the prosecution.
Only 3 lettered government agencies can delete/lose/mishandle evidence and not suffer consequences.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 30 Jun 2014 @ 8:54am
Re:
I feel for CBS because it's fighting a losing battle.
What battle?
CBS is a company, not a military fighting some war against an enemy that wants to kill them. All CBS needs to do to remain profitable is to supply consumers with a product or service that the consumers want at a price they are willing to pay. There is nothing but their own stubbornness stopping CBS from doing so.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 27 Jun 2014 @ 10:31am
Re: Re: Re: On a deeper look
If your game relies on trusting the client to the degree that it can that easily crash the server, then you have far more problems than people spawning cabbages.
I did some development a long time ago (geeze I feel old now) on a text-based MUD prior to graphical MMOs taking over. We didn't trust the client with any hidden information and anything coming back had to be well sanitized. I realize that a more complex 3D MMO doesn't quite compare, and there's some things you'd need to give the client, but there is no way the client should be responsible for creating items and anything coming back still needs to be thoroughly sanitized.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 27 Jun 2014 @ 10:01am
Re:
And I do not believe the purpose of a service like Dropbox is similar to that of a cable company.
What objective test can be made based on this ruling that supports your belief?
Say someone buys up some of Aereo's equipment - the antennas. They allow someone to specifically rent the antenna, and a connected server where they can configure the antenna, but do not provide any streaming service. A client does that, then installs other software on their server to upload things to Dropbox. The user then later streams that content from Dropbox.
The end result is the same as Aereo. Who is the duck here? The antenna provider? Dropbox? The software creator?
If none of those 3 are doing anything wrong, then how could Aereo doing everything itself be wrong?
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 27 Jun 2014 @ 9:25am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The solution
Exactly my point. Nor did the cable companies have the ability to transmit to only some customers. Retransmission fees were based entirely around the idea that they were rebroadcasting the entire channel to their entire customer base 24/7.
Even if you assume that Aereo is like a cable system, retransmission fees still don't make any sense.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 27 Jun 2014 @ 9:16am
Re: Re: Re:
how come there is nobody really rising the the surface to compete against the existing media companies?
For exactly the reason we're talking about. The media companies are famously litigious, and bizarrely even when it is against their own long term interests. They attack anything, anyone, any company even when it increases their markets and revenue. It takes a rare few to try to take them on when there's plenty of other ways to be a part of the next big startup.
Look at music. Streaming music only became a thing at least 10 years after it was easily achievable from both a technological and infrastructure perspective. And video? Despite its massive success, Netflix still can't get the content it needs from the media companies and is being attacked by the distribution side (cable and telcos).
I'm not saying the media companies will dissolve overnight. They'll keep limping along, fighting off everyone who tries to help them. They are leaving massive piles of cash on the table by clinging to their old model.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 27 Jun 2014 @ 9:00am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The solution
Maybe instead of throwing insults, you could check your post is understandable. You left out a word or two that makes it unclear what you were asking.
If you meant to say that cable retrans fees are computed by how often a subscriber watches a channel, then you're flat out wrong. At most, the cable company could only know that from two-way set top boxes and would significantly undercount cable ready TVs without such.
If you meant to derogatorily imply that it was impossible, then you fundamentally don't understand how Aereo worked and are just spouting bullshit (no surpise there, how's that for an insult).
Assuming Aereo survives, there's no reason they couldn't easily keep logs of what content was watched by their collective user base and make payments off that. Unless you're admitting that retrans fees are nothing more than a Mafia-like shakedown fee, there's nothing unreasonable about only paying the fee for the content that is actually retransmitted.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 27 Jun 2014 @ 8:25am
Re: Re: Re:
What is your problem with one company building a service on something (monetizing) given away for free by another company?
If I give away a car, I can't demand a cut of gas station revenue.
Is it greed? Is it some weird loss aversion thing? I really want to know so I can give you some reasoning that just might educate you and show how horribly wrong you are.
On the post: Ridiculous Lawsuit Filed (And Now Dropped) Against Tor Project Gets Even More Ridiculous: Now Involving Hate Group Leader
Re:
On the post: Aereo: Okay, Fine, If You Say We Look Like A Duck, We'll Quack Like A Duck
Re: Can I now get New York channels in Vancouver?
But I agree, assuming the district court doesn't have kittens (even though the broadcasters are going to), this could enable Aereo to offer service everywhere, and let them do away with all the individualized antennas.
On the post: Rhode Island Cops Now Using Dogs To Detect Hard Drives, Memory Cards And Other Electronics
Re: Electronics?
I'm convinced that Houston cued the dog to the locations. It may not have been intentional, but if he was leading the dog, and he's the one that hid the devices, that test is complete bunk.
There's a reason that medical trials are double-blind. The patients don't know whether they're getting the medication or a placebo. The doctors treating the patients don't know either and are well insulated from the researchers who do know. If the doctors knew, they could influence the patients just by their manner.
On the post: The Trials Of Being A Techdirt Writer Volume 1: Stupid Copyright Popups When Pressing CTRL-C
Re: Re: Missing the point
Sure, I agree with you that we're not bound by their silly ideas and we shouldn't let ourselves be. But that's missing the forest 'cause your staring at one broken twig.
There's a larger point. The type of thinking that led to someone coding up a cut and paste blocking script needs to be criticized. It needs to be argued against with reasoned debate, mocked for the shortsightedness, and otherwise shown the error of it's ways.
You're making the mistake that a lot of techies and geeks make, and I'll admit I make the same mistake myself from time to time. Just because you can get around the problem doesn't mean it's not there. You've 'fixed' the problem by creating a work-around. But the root cause is still there. You've cured the symptom, not the disease.
Technology should be making things easier. It should be enabling more content to be spread more widely, for lower (or no) cost. It should be enabling more content to be created and lowering the barrier to entry. And it is doing all that. But the 'other side' is using tech too. Admittedly, they're using it ham-fistedly, like the 3rd grade bully who beats up the other kids because he's taller and heavier than everyone in his age bracket.
Just because Aaron Schwartz wrote a script and wired a laptop into a network doesn't mean that we should ignore that scholarly research is being locked up. Just because Edward Snowden released some documents, and we can encrypt our emails, doesn't mean we should ignore the NSA wiretapping the world. Just because we can code around the stupidity doesn't mean we should have to continue doing so indefinitely.
We need to change people's minds. We need to show them that locking up ideas and culture behind 'intellectual property' is fundamentally a bad idea, both for them and for society as a whole. And one way to hopefully do that is to write up articles like the above.
On the post: NSA's XKeyscore Source Code Leaked! Shows Tor Users Classified As 'Extremists'
Re:
On the post: One Year After Granting Adulthood To Video Gamers, Committee Suggests Australian Government Reenact Ban On R18+ Games
Re: Isn't it curious?
On the post: SCOTUSblog's Best Trolling Of People Who Think Its Twitter Account Is The Supreme Court Itself
Re:
On the post: FTC Cracks Down On T-Mobile For Massive Bogus Charges And Fee Scam
Re:
On the post: Latest Cybersecurity Bill Could Actually Be A Backdoor To Destroying Net Neutrality
Re: Re:
On the post: Facebook Fighting Against Massively Broad Warrant From NY District Attorney For All Information From 381 Accounts
Re: Isn't there a middle ground?
Only 3 lettered government agencies can delete/lose/mishandle evidence and not suffer consequences.
On the post: Up Is Down, Day Is Night, And Aereo's Shut Down Is 'Pro-Consumer' According To CBS CEO
Re:
What battle?
CBS is a company, not a military fighting some war against an enemy that wants to kill them. All CBS needs to do to remain profitable is to supply consumers with a product or service that the consumers want at a price they are willing to pay. There is nothing but their own stubbornness stopping CBS from doing so.
On the post: Aereo Fallout Begins: Fox Uses Ruling To Attack Dish's Mobile Streaming Service
Re: Re:
On the post: The Aereo Ruling Is A Disaster For Tech, Because The 'Looks Like Cable' Test Provides No Guidance
Re: Re: Re:
If every step is legal for 3 separate companies to do, how can it be illegal for a single company to do all 3?
On the post: The Future Is Now: Cheating In Online Games Leads To Arrests In Japan
Re: Re: Re: On a deeper look
I did some development a long time ago (geeze I feel old now) on a text-based MUD prior to graphical MMOs taking over. We didn't trust the client with any hidden information and anything coming back had to be well sanitized. I realize that a more complex 3D MMO doesn't quite compare, and there's some things you'd need to give the client, but there is no way the client should be responsible for creating items and anything coming back still needs to be thoroughly sanitized.
On the post: The Aereo Ruling Is A Disaster For Tech, Because The 'Looks Like Cable' Test Provides No Guidance
Re:
What objective test can be made based on this ruling that supports your belief?
Say someone buys up some of Aereo's equipment - the antennas. They allow someone to specifically rent the antenna, and a connected server where they can configure the antenna, but do not provide any streaming service. A client does that, then installs other software on their server to upload things to Dropbox. The user then later streams that content from Dropbox.
The end result is the same as Aereo. Who is the duck here? The antenna provider? Dropbox? The software creator?
If none of those 3 are doing anything wrong, then how could Aereo doing everything itself be wrong?
On the post: The Aereo Ruling Is A Disaster For Tech, Because The 'Looks Like Cable' Test Provides No Guidance
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The solution
Even if you assume that Aereo is like a cable system, retransmission fees still don't make any sense.
On the post: The Aereo Ruling Is A Disaster For Tech, Because The 'Looks Like Cable' Test Provides No Guidance
Re: Re: Re:
For exactly the reason we're talking about. The media companies are famously litigious, and bizarrely even when it is against their own long term interests. They attack anything, anyone, any company even when it increases their markets and revenue. It takes a rare few to try to take them on when there's plenty of other ways to be a part of the next big startup.
Look at music. Streaming music only became a thing at least 10 years after it was easily achievable from both a technological and infrastructure perspective. And video? Despite its massive success, Netflix still can't get the content it needs from the media companies and is being attacked by the distribution side (cable and telcos).
I'm not saying the media companies will dissolve overnight. They'll keep limping along, fighting off everyone who tries to help them. They are leaving massive piles of cash on the table by clinging to their old model.
On the post: The Aereo Ruling Is A Disaster For Tech, Because The 'Looks Like Cable' Test Provides No Guidance
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The solution
If you meant to say that cable retrans fees are computed by how often a subscriber watches a channel, then you're flat out wrong. At most, the cable company could only know that from two-way set top boxes and would significantly undercount cable ready TVs without such.
If you meant to derogatorily imply that it was impossible, then you fundamentally don't understand how Aereo worked and are just spouting bullshit (no surpise there, how's that for an insult).
Assuming Aereo survives, there's no reason they couldn't easily keep logs of what content was watched by their collective user base and make payments off that. Unless you're admitting that retrans fees are nothing more than a Mafia-like shakedown fee, there's nothing unreasonable about only paying the fee for the content that is actually retransmitted.
On the post: The Aereo Ruling Is A Disaster For Tech, Because The 'Looks Like Cable' Test Provides No Guidance
Re: Re: Re: The solution
On the post: The Aereo Ruling Is A Disaster For Tech, Because The 'Looks Like Cable' Test Provides No Guidance
Re: Re: Re:
If I give away a car, I can't demand a cut of gas station revenue.
Is it greed? Is it some weird loss aversion thing? I really want to know so I can give you some reasoning that just might educate you and show how horribly wrong you are.
Next >>