In other words, "people are stupid".
17 posts • joined 3 Nov 2007
Of course it's exactly this sort of chilling effect that makes the IWF system wrong. There are no clear criteria for what's illegal. The IWF go about their work in secret, yet they can potentially devastate someone's business and they are completely unaccountable for their actions.
If we are going to have censorship, then it needs to be moved out into the open, and performed by an accountable public body.
Meanwhile, sign the pledge: http://www.pledgebank.com/boycottcensors
Thin aluminium is far too flimsy to use for a (fairly) large portable device. I've got a PowerBook with an aluminium shell. Never again! It scratches and dents in no time. If you take it apart the whole thing flops about alarmingly.
Until Apple start using titanium again, I won't give them a penny. I'd rather have a plastic EEE - at least it'll bounce!
The Leopard version is a massive step backwards, both in terms of usability and stability. It crashes on me every single day - so I'm not surprised there are security flaws too.
Hopefully this will make Apple get off their collective arse and fix it. Sadly I suspect they'll spend five minutes patching the crashing bugs and leave the rest of the app in its current parlous state.
Now, if it were open source I'd have fixed it myself months ago...
I've only got anecdotal evidence, but the EEE seems like a breakout success to me.
A friend of mine bought one, and I've personally seen two other people go straight out and buy one for themselves, just on the strength of playing with his for a few minutes. My friend knows of another two people who also bought one after they saw his.
These are all non-techies. They get really excited by the EEE, and immediately want one. When they find out how cheap it is, they just go and buy it there and then.
It that kind of viral success is widespread, then in a few months everyone will have one...
The sub-text here of course is that members of the Government may have exceeded their authority and committed a crime. That's pretty unlikely, because UK law gives the PM very wide discretion to basically do whatever he likes. However, we have signed up for the ICC, which means (at least in theory) that politicians who breach some "international laws" should be prosecuted.
So, how much evidence do we need before the CPS is compelled to take an interest?
Changing the rules after the fact is always a bad idea. Cliff Richard's part in this ended 50 years ago - nothing we do now will encourage him to work harder 50 years ago. Extending copyright now is just asking Cliff Richard's present and future fans to pay him *again* for work he's already done.
Nobody's arguing that artists recording *now* need this extra payment... a clear indication that the current copyright term is quite sufficient.
I'm got a 12" PowerMac, and I must say I'm very happy with it, except for the flimsy aluminium shell.
Even the smallest drop deforms the case. It's virtually impossible to open up (to change the hard drive, say) without crinkling. Oh, and it scratches easily.
Next time I buy a laptop, aluminium will be a deal breaker. Carbon fibre or titanium-only for me.
I don't think that UK law is as clear-cut as you think. The statutes don't mention photographic reproductions. The assertion that a photographic reproduction is a 'new' work is, um, not self-evident.
Until English case law is established, we won't know whether the Bridgeman vs. Corel decision will be echoed over here. Even in the US, the situation is not 100% clear - the Bridgeman vs. Corel case was decided in a lower court - the precedent could be overturned by the Supreme Court.
Until the situation is clarified, Wikipedia is quite right to make the best use they can of what's available to them.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021