"consumers" implies there are producers and consumers, the latter producing nothing by themselves. I like the term "users" better, seems more appropriate to the internet age.
You elected Obama. The first time, because you thought he would fix things.
But the second time AFTER his betrayal.
What makes you think people still want to elect somebody to "fix things"? Because, apparently, now they elect the ones that fight whistleblowers, have people assassinated with drones, snoop on everyone and generally behave like fascist assholes.
This is totally great. Because Rutledge a) doesn't understand what this is all about (business, of course, making money), and b) an honest confession what HE thinks it's about: control (control, control, fuck the money, we're not here to do business, it's about control).
Let me rephrase that: We're going to put people into prison because of civil disobedience, because they've still got the morals to stand up for the state of law and help their fellow citizens and protect their human rights.
historically, as new technologies come along, copyright has a lot of trouble dealing with them.
Not quite true. While the US copyright first indeed ignored compositions, drawings and paintings, there is otherwise nothing new until the advent of the computer that would have made the copyright act of 1790 unworkable.
But other early copyright laws were much more generic. They speak of "work" and not of "printing" but only of "publishing", and they also don't have clauses for "sheets found in possession" and such, making them indeed work with any technology that comes along.
The only reason people are duct-taping around the copyright is because they perceive some new technology as threat. And not because the copyright itself couldn't deal with it.
I'm watching movies at a distance of 100cm on a 24" 1080p screen.
And I can pretty much discern 720p from anything less. I actually sometimes can't see much difference between 720p and 1080p, but anything below 720p really has a "bad quality" feel.
But then, I'm myopic, and my glasses don't correct everything, so it's entirely possible someone with better eyesight would really see a huge difference between 1080p and 720p.
Re: Re: So, just how far away will you have to sit from your gigantic television to stop seeing pixels at 1080p? Is your living room that large?
Ah, no. It doesn't matter how small the pixels are, all it matters is how BIG they are. Because you just don't want to see the pixels.
They can be as small as they want (and, with analogue films, they're really really tiny, they're the film grain), and you don't need to sit any closer because of that.
Of course, there could be more details to be seen if you go to the border where you nearly can see individual pixels, and it makes economical sense not to have pixels so small you can't discern them anyway, no matter the distance.
So for 136cm diagonal at 3m, 1080p is only "optimal" in the sense that you don't "waste" any resolution. Lean forward and you'll see pixels, go backward and the field of view gets smaller.
On the post: Burr And Feinstein Release Their Anti-Encryption Bill... And It's More Ridiculous Than Expected
Intelligence Committee lacking Intelligence
On the post: Hollywood Forced SlySoft DVD Ripping Software Out Of Business, Only To Have It Return As RedFox
Re: Screw DMCA
On the post: Hollywood Forced SlySoft DVD Ripping Software Out Of Business, Only To Have It Return As RedFox
Re: Re:
Piracy: 1 the practice or an act of robbery of ships at sea;
2 a similar practice or act in other forms, esp. hijacking.
On the post: Another Federal Judge Says No Expectation Of Privacy In Cell Site Location Info Because Everyone Knows Phones Generate This Data
Re:
We all know it's easy to open envelopes, so there can be no expectation of privacy regarding letters.
On the post: Head Of British Rights Group: Piracy Is Google's Fault Even If It's Not Actually Google's Fault
Re: Still waiting...
On the post: Head Of British Rights Group: Piracy Is Google's Fault Even If It's Not Actually Google's Fault
Rent-seeking
On the post: Terabyte-Sized 'Panama Papers' Leak Confirms The Continuing Rise Of The Super-Whistleblowers
Data is not an asset, it’s a liability
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/03/da ta_is_a_toxic.html
On the post: UK Law Enforcement Trying To Force Man They've Never Charged With A Crime To Decrypt His Computers
Re: Re: Re:
Like the RIPA act of 2000. So the Queen absolutely is to blame.
On the post: UK Government Pushes Forward With Insane Snooper's Charter, Despite Widespread Concerns
Re:
On the post: UK Government Pushes Forward With Insane Snooper's Charter, Despite Widespread Concerns
No Gentlemen
In WW2, gentlemen did read the mail of people that were obviously no gentlemen.
But now, it's the opposite. The knaves, scoundrels and noseys in the government are reading the mail of the gentlemen.
On the post: First Report From Inside Germany's New TAFTA/TTIP Reading Room Reveals Text's Dirty Secret
Re: Re: Convincing proof...
But the second time AFTER his betrayal.
What makes you think people still want to elect somebody to "fix things"? Because, apparently, now they elect the ones that fight whistleblowers, have people assassinated with drones, snoop on everyone and generally behave like fascist assholes.
On the post: First Report From Inside Germany's New TAFTA/TTIP Reading Room Reveals Text's Dirty Secret
Re: Re: Re: Rhetorical questions, german politician style
Why is the "sovereign" not allowed to "scrutiny"?
And now it does sound like the conspiracy it is.
On the post: Woman Files Ridiculous Lawsuit Against Twitter For 'Providing Material Support' To ISIS
Re: Material Support
Does she really want to sue her government and the US army?
On the post: Netflix CEO 'Loves' Netflix Password Sharing
Re: Re: Re:
We can only hope the market will fix this and throws him out.
On the post: Netflix CEO 'Loves' Netflix Password Sharing
Re:
On the post: UK Legislators Want To Toss Tech Company Officials In Jail If They Inform Users About Government Surveillance Efforts
Political Prisoners
On the post: Understanding David Lowery's Lawsuit Against Spotify: The Insanity Of Music Licensing
Duct Tape
Not quite true. While the US copyright first indeed ignored compositions, drawings and paintings, there is otherwise nothing new until the advent of the computer that would have made the copyright act of 1790 unworkable.
But other early copyright laws were much more generic. They speak of "work" and not of "printing" but only of "publishing", and they also don't have clauses for "sheets found in possession" and such, making them indeed work with any technology that comes along.
The only reason people are duct-taping around the copyright is because they perceive some new technology as threat. And not because the copyright itself couldn't deal with it.
On the post: Warner Brothers, Intel Begin Futile Legal Assault To Defend Ultra HD And 4K DRM
Re: Meh. Meh I say.
And I can pretty much discern 720p from anything less. I actually sometimes can't see much difference between 720p and 1080p, but anything below 720p really has a "bad quality" feel.
But then, I'm myopic, and my glasses don't correct everything, so it's entirely possible someone with better eyesight would really see a huge difference between 1080p and 720p.
On the post: Warner Brothers, Intel Begin Futile Legal Assault To Defend Ultra HD And 4K DRM
Re: Re: So, just how far away will you have to sit from your gigantic television to stop seeing pixels at 1080p? Is your living room that large?
They can be as small as they want (and, with analogue films, they're really really tiny, they're the film grain), and you don't need to sit any closer because of that.
Of course, there could be more details to be seen if you go to the border where you nearly can see individual pixels, and it makes economical sense not to have pixels so small you can't discern them anyway, no matter the distance.
So for 136cm diagonal at 3m, 1080p is only "optimal" in the sense that you don't "waste" any resolution. Lean forward and you'll see pixels, go backward and the field of view gets smaller.
On the post: Former UK Bureaucrat Whines About People Happily Looking At Mobile Phones Rather Than Fearfully Spying On Everyone Else
Advance warning
They do a "terrorist attack exercise" every time.
Next >>