So I was within 50 miles. Or twenty. Or even ten. So ****ing what?
As a recent TechCrunch article points out... "If [someone] stole/found your phone, couldn’t they also have access to information like your address, the addresses of friends/family, all your phone numbers, perhaps some passwords, maybe monetary information? Yes, but that’s not as sexy of a story."
"Oh, and if your phone had any app like Foursquare, Gowalla, Loopt, etc, they could just open those apps and get all your actual location information without hacking the device? "
With all of that other information available, having a rough idea of the places you've been, stored on your own physical device that someone else would need access to... is a NON-ISSUE.
If you're so concerned about not being tracked in this day in age, then do not carry ANY phone, because they all work the same way and use Shykook or Google to acquire location data. (Why the heck do you think they were recording WiFi information in their Google map cars?)
Where was I? Oh, yeah. Do not drive ANY car. Do not use ANY computer connected to the internet. Do not use ANY credit card, debit card, or store loyalty card.
Burn your wallet too, because if lost and found it could reveal your home address and the fact (via receipt) you were in a strip club last Tuesday night at 6:23 PM.
This is my last post on this, and as such, I'll give the Anonymous Coward his chance to get in the last word....
Agreed! I hate the way they support locked down hardware, appropriate code, reject open source and block open source projects, record and misuse customer information, and arbitrarily toss developers and applications out of their app store. Why...
Wait? Apple? I thought we were talking about Google....
They're not tracking the fact that you were at Joe's Bar at 123 Main Street in Memphis at Monday at 9pm. However, your phone knows that it was probably within a hundred miles of Memphis at Monday at 9pm.
Close enough for nuclear strike, I guess. And assuming, of course, that you didn't "check in" to Joe's when you arrived.
The data is needed to make the service work. It's not specific to you. Its gathering was covered under the EULA.
And the Feds, if they were interested, could just go to the carrier with a warrentless location tap and track your precise location in real time.
"This stuff is needed to make the silly thing work, but we'll alter a few things because some idiots are making a big deal out of the fact that someone with physical access to your phone or computer can figure out you might have been within 100 miles of a given point sometime within the last year."
"Oh, and to help build the list, we send an encrypted location and a list of visible towers and WiFi spots to an Apple server. This means that Apple absolutely, positively knows that one out of a hundred million iPhones was in that spot at that time."
I guess that depends on what you mean by "further separated"?
Are there not hundreds, if not thousands of Americans at Apple and elsewhere who create and design the iPads and tablets and write the system software for them? Right here, in the US?
Are there not hundreds, if not thousands of Americans running online stores like iTunes and the App store and Amazon and so on?
Are there not thousands of Americans busy writing iOS and Android and Windows 7 apps and software? Creating cases and accessories?
Are there not thousands, if not millions of American workers creating the books and music and articles and web sites we consume daily using these devices?
The ripple effects here are wide and deep.
iPads and tablets are disruptive technologies, true. But the horse breeders and saddle and buggy whip makers probably said the same thing about the automobile.
As I just said above, Mike appears to be manufacturing an excuse in that the music in question was for a "portfolio" of work, which is a fairly clear case of fair use. Sending out a copy of your portfolio is done all the time, and also standard fair use.
Now, we can argue back and forth about mixtapes themselves, and about how much fair use applies in sampling other people's music, whether or not it's an accepted practice, and so... but SELLING tapes for people to enjoy has nothing whatsoever to do with any consideration of fair use as applied to portfolios.
In short, the "reality" is that he probably views the mixtape as something of a portfolio of work has little to do with the situation at hand. After, neither you nor I are generally entitled to resell work produced while working for another company or organization.
And that's the point in the article I was addressing.
Mike appears to be manufacturing an excuse in that the music in question was for a "portfolio", which is a fairly clear case of fair use. Sending out a copy of your portfolio is done all the time, and also standard fair use.
Now, we can argue back and forth about mixtapes themselves, and about how much fair use applies in sampling other people's music... but SELLING tapes for people to enjoy has nothing whatsoever to do with any consideration of fair use as applied to portfolios.
"...the reality is that he probably views the mixtape as something of a portfolio of work that he's had some hand in, whether producing at his studio or via his former work at XM."
Ah. A portfolio of his work. All well and good.
But I'm confused about how this applies, since, as stated in the article, the raid happened because "...its owner, a popular DJ, was selling some mixtapes."
Selling. I understand SHOWING your portfolio, of course. But SELLING copies of it? For profit?
A few years back, a friend was shopping a new book around to publishers. Several were interested in the book, but each one wanted a detailed marketing plan from my friend on how *he* was going to market *his* book for them.
If you're a top name (or famous for some reason), then the publishers may market your book. Otherwise, their "marketing" seems to consist solely of putting the title of your book on their list and taking orders... if any.
So if you're going to be doing their work for them anyway....
The interesting point that you missed in regard to Amanda Hockling is that she's just 26, and almost all of her books are geared to the teen and youth market. (More vampires, for heaven's sake.)
So it follows that teens are buying her books, to the tune of 100,000 a month. Teens.
And as I doubt that many kids have iPads and Kindles, they're reading them on their iPhones and Androids and Blackberrys.
Talk to the movie studios and book publishers. They're still demanding DRM and restrictions.
As to apps... I'm actually in favor of Apple's approach. It's not like you can use an iOS app on any other device, and providing a base level of protection for developers seems to be ensuring a steady flow of high-quality, inexpensive applications.
"i'm willing to pay for all sorts of stuff like bandwidth, access, equipment, or convenience, but i'm not willing to pay for content."
You say that like it means something. Basically, you're saying is that you're willing [e.g. forced] to pay for all of the things that you can't easily steal.
As I responded to the other article, most of the younger kids and college types belong to the “more time than money” crowd. They’re willing to spend hours scrounging around the web trying to find a decent copy of the latest movie. They’re also willing to sit through ads if it means the content is “free”.
But as you get older, you begin to realize that your time has value, and you become willing to spend money not to waste it. And you generally have the income such that you can afford to do so.
I, personally, will pay for an iTunes movie rental or a Netflix subscription so that I can find and watch high-quality movies (format not content) quickly and easily.
I also tend to believe that the people who create the content deserve some form of compensation as well. As such, I pay.
Despite the fact that in doing so I'm also supporting the occasional parasite and free rider... like yourself.
Right.... I don't suppose Mike has seen this article concerning a PricewaterhouseCoopers study of consumer attitudes towards piracy. The study asked some 202 self-described pirates about their behavior and the reasons for it.
On the post: It May Soon Be Illegal For Doctors In Florida To Ask About Gun Safety
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Samurai sword ownership is somewhat lower....
On the post: Apple Takes Credit For 'Uncovering' Its Patented Location 'Bug' That Isn't Really Tracking You, But Which It'll Fix
Re: Re: Re:
As a recent TechCrunch article points out... "If [someone] stole/found your phone, couldn’t they also have access to information like your address, the addresses of friends/family, all your phone numbers, perhaps some passwords, maybe monetary information? Yes, but that’s not as sexy of a story."
"Oh, and if your phone had any app like Foursquare, Gowalla, Loopt, etc, they could just open those apps and get all your actual location information without hacking the device? "
With all of that other information available, having a rough idea of the places you've been, stored on your own physical device that someone else would need access to... is a NON-ISSUE.
If you're so concerned about not being tracked in this day in age, then do not carry ANY phone, because they all work the same way and use Shykook or Google to acquire location data. (Why the heck do you think they were recording WiFi information in their Google map cars?)
Where was I? Oh, yeah. Do not drive ANY car. Do not use ANY computer connected to the internet. Do not use ANY credit card, debit card, or store loyalty card.
Burn your wallet too, because if lost and found it could reveal your home address and the fact (via receipt) you were in a strip club last Tuesday night at 6:23 PM.
This is my last post on this, and as such, I'll give the Anonymous Coward his chance to get in the last word....
On the post: Apple Takes Credit For 'Uncovering' Its Patented Location 'Bug' That Isn't Really Tracking You, But Which It'll Fix
Re: Re: Re:
Wait? Apple? I thought we were talking about Google....
http://www.iSights.org/2011/04/hi-were-google-and-were-pretty-not-evil-1.html
Never mind.
On the post: Apple Takes Credit For 'Uncovering' Its Patented Location 'Bug' That Isn't Really Tracking You, But Which It'll Fix
Re:
Close enough for nuclear strike, I guess. And assuming, of course, that you didn't "check in" to Joe's when you arrived.
The data is needed to make the service work. It's not specific to you. Its gathering was covered under the EULA.
And the Feds, if they were interested, could just go to the carrier with a warrentless location tap and track your precise location in real time.
This is a non-issue.
On the post: Apple Takes Credit For 'Uncovering' Its Patented Location 'Bug' That Isn't Really Tracking You, But Which It'll Fix
"This stuff is needed to make the silly thing work, but we'll alter a few things because some idiots are making a big deal out of the fact that someone with physical access to your phone or computer can figure out you might have been within 100 miles of a given point sometime within the last year."
"Oh, and to help build the list, we send an encrypted location and a list of visible towers and WiFi spots to an Apple server. This means that Apple absolutely, positively knows that one out of a hundred million iPhones was in that spot at that time."
"All of which was covered in the EULA."
That about sum it up?
On the post: Congressman Complains That iPads Are Killing Jobs In The Paper Industry
Re:
Are there not hundreds, if not thousands of Americans at Apple and elsewhere who create and design the iPads and tablets and write the system software for them? Right here, in the US?
Are there not hundreds, if not thousands of Americans running online stores like iTunes and the App store and Amazon and so on?
Are there not thousands of Americans busy writing iOS and Android and Windows 7 apps and software? Creating cases and accessories?
Are there not thousands, if not millions of American workers creating the books and music and articles and web sites we consume daily using these devices?
The ripple effects here are wide and deep.
iPads and tablets are disruptive technologies, true. But the horse breeders and saddle and buggy whip makers probably said the same thing about the automobile.
On the post: Why Are Police Going After Mixtapes... And Why Are They Bringing Along RIAA Reps?
Re: Re: Selling Mixtapes...
Now, we can argue back and forth about mixtapes themselves, and about how much fair use applies in sampling other people's music, whether or not it's an accepted practice, and so... but SELLING tapes for people to enjoy has nothing whatsoever to do with any consideration of fair use as applied to portfolios.
In short, the "reality" is that he probably views the mixtape as something of a portfolio of work has little to do with the situation at hand. After, neither you nor I are generally entitled to resell work produced while working for another company or organization.
And that's the point in the article I was addressing.
On the post: Why Are Police Going After Mixtapes... And Why Are They Bringing Along RIAA Reps?
Re: Re: Selling Mixtapes...
Now, we can argue back and forth about mixtapes themselves, and about how much fair use applies in sampling other people's music... but SELLING tapes for people to enjoy has nothing whatsoever to do with any consideration of fair use as applied to portfolios.
On the post: Why Are Police Going After Mixtapes... And Why Are They Bringing Along RIAA Reps?
Selling Mixtapes...
Ah. A portfolio of his work. All well and good.
But I'm confused about how this applies, since, as stated in the article, the raid happened because "...its owner, a popular DJ, was selling some mixtapes."
Selling. I understand SHOWING your portfolio, of course. But SELLING copies of it? For profit?
I don't think so.
On the post: Best Selling Author Turns Down Half A Million Dollar Publishing Contract To Self-Publish
Marketing
If you're a top name (or famous for some reason), then the publishers may market your book. Otherwise, their "marketing" seems to consist solely of putting the title of your book on their list and taking orders... if any.
So if you're going to be doing their work for them anyway....
On the post: More Authors Realizing They Can Make A Damn Good Living Self-Releasing Super Cheap eBooks
Re: Re: Amanda Hockling
That's sginificant.
On the post: More Authors Realizing They Can Make A Damn Good Living Self-Releasing Super Cheap eBooks
Amanda Hockling
So it follows that teens are buying her books, to the tune of 100,000 a month. Teens.
And as I doubt that many kids have iPads and Kindles, they're reading them on their iPhones and Androids and Blackberrys.
On the post: Senator Schumer Says Websites Should Default To HTTPS
Re:
Exactly. IIRC, the rule of thumb was that a web site could handle 100 HTTP requests for every 10 HTTPS requests.
Is the good senator going to pay for all of the infrastructure upgrades he's mandating?
On the post: Restaurant Refuses To Serve TSA Agents
Re:
On the post: Sony Continues To Attack PS3 Jailbreakers: Threatens To Cut Them Off From PlayStation Network
Re: Re:
It may not be a DMCA violation, but may still be a breach of Sony's TOS, especially as it applies to their online network.
On the post: Death Of Nokia's 'Comes With Music' Shows That 'Free' With DRM Is A Losing Proposition
Re: Blindered approach to Apple.
As to apps... I'm actually in favor of Apple's approach. It's not like you can use an iOS app on any other device, and providing a base level of protection for developers seems to be ensuring a steady flow of high-quality, inexpensive applications.
On the post: Death Of Nokia's 'Comes With Music' Shows That 'Free' With DRM Is A Losing Proposition
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You say that like it means something. Basically, you're saying is that you're willing [e.g. forced] to pay for all of the things that you can't easily steal.
As I responded to the other article, most of the younger kids and college types belong to the “more time than money” crowd. They’re willing to spend hours scrounging around the web trying to find a decent copy of the latest movie. They’re also willing to sit through ads if it means the content is “free”.
But as you get older, you begin to realize that your time has value, and you become willing to spend money not to waste it. And you generally have the income such that you can afford to do so.
I, personally, will pay for an iTunes movie rental or a Netflix subscription so that I can find and watch high-quality movies (format not content) quickly and easily.
I also tend to believe that the people who create the content deserve some form of compensation as well. As such, I pay.
Despite the fact that in doing so I'm also supporting the occasional parasite and free rider... like yourself.
On the post: Death Of Nokia's 'Comes With Music' Shows That 'Free' With DRM Is A Losing Proposition
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Death Of Nokia's 'Comes With Music' Shows That 'Free' With DRM Is A Losing Proposition
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Death Of Nokia's 'Comes With Music' Shows That 'Free' With DRM Is A Losing Proposition
Re:
http://gigaom.com/video/piracy-consumer-attitudes/
To quote, "So what makes them pirate? 69 percent said the content being free was a deciding factor."
Next >>