Re: Disposable?
The free 3year 1Tb of Google drive was worth more than the top of the line $1200 Pixel Chromebook
26111 publicly visible posts • joined 31 Dec 2009
Chromebook:
No need for AV
If users screw up then a factory reset is one button.
On the Windows competitor it's get an add-on CDwriter, hope you burned the recovery CDs when it was new, make sure you have a note of the license key.
Sit down to an hours worth of clicking OK to restart.
Reinstall all the other apps
Hope you had a copy of all your bookmarks, mail, documents,pictures etc
If we aren't buying Russian gas or coal anymore we better gets some pits opened fast if we don't want little-old-lady Icicles this winter.
But sales of batteries should go up when the country's energy demands has to be met by 2 windmills in Cumbria.
Generally parody allows you fair use of the material you are parodying
So you can rewrite a Billy Brag song to take the piss out of My Bragg - like Weird Al's parody of Nirvana.
But you can't use Mr Bragg's work to parody something else and claim your copyright violation is parody - like Weird Al using Gangsta paradise to parody the Amish
The intention is that for example, BP can't stop you protesting against BP by claiming that your use of their logo or pictures of one of their oil spills on your banner is copyright. But it doesn't allow you to use scenes from star wars for free in your attack of BP.
And a lot of money was wasted (or injected into the economy if you are an economist):
On audits - going around ticking off printer serial numbers
Preparing W2K compliance certificates - it's a printer FFS
Obtaining assurance of Y2K compliance from manufacturers -
Replacing it with a brand new expensive inkjet because Epson don't have a W2K compliance cert for an ancient dot matrix
Having staff on double time over the holiday - in case of any issues - for a completely non-critical product that nobody would be using until after the holidays when any problems could be fixed.
Presumably the photos were meant for the consumption of the celeb's special friend
Which means they have to be transmitted to, and viewable on, another device.
So you can have 97FA, require retina scans from all 3 eyes and a DNA sample - it doesn't really matter if you email them to somebody else.
Of course you could lock them to a single phone - but then having to go to your pet celeb's bedroom for her to unlock the phone and authorize it to display photos of her naked. While she is standing there - does seem to be a little counterproductive.
Yes it would mean a rise in armed robberies.
The original Great Train Robbers got 30years - to "send a message to these sort of people"
The message was, you might as well go in with a shot gun, since robbing some cash and killing a copper carried the same sentence.
Its the same with the medical profession.
Tried to launch a service where your click an app and have any pharmaceutical product delivered straight to your door. Our independent/freelance/innovative/entrepreneurial delivery partners would also perform any surgical procedure for a discount rate (provide your own knife) - but the amount of red tape was ridiculous
Steve Bong (official title: Lord Bong of #businessmodel) is the founder of Bong Ventures, an early stage investor and incubator focussing on innovative new technology start-ups based in Shoreditch, London. When he's not helping rear the next generation of business models, Steve enjoys parties, foreign travel, extreme cuisine, Open Data and draws his inspiration from Ayn Rand and His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama.
You realise that by posting the location of GCHQ you 'may' have just become a terrorist.
Section 58 Terrorism Act 2000 <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/58>:
(1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he collects or makes a record of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or
"Economic fact: There can be no cheap housing because landlords won't build housing to rent for lower profits"
If only there was some public organisation devoted to the common public good rather than profit. They could build housing and rent it for affordable rates, enough to cover further building. It would also be helpful if the same organisations were in charge of public transport and were able to decide which public land to use.
Next week Tim demonstrates the impossibility of having an army, since no customer would pay for a tank that might not be used to defend them.
Allow essentially unrestricted building in the south east
Builders want to maximise profit - they still need you to pay as much as possible for a house. So instead of building high density low price housing on vacant lots they build estates of million quid McMansions on 1/2 acre lots (just like every US city from Houston to LA)
You now have a suburb that stretches from London to Dover.
The density is too low for public transport to work so everyone has to drive into London
So you need to build 8 lane motorways into London (just like every US city from Houston to LA)
So you need to knock down a lot of cheap high density housing on the routes into the city.
Housing problem cured, transport problem is a matter or the government, can't expect developers to be restricted by red tape and costs of public transport, just privatise the roads - then economics will cure it.
"If I want to do or say something which I am only prepared to do or say privately, then it is an interference with my freedom of expression if I cannot do it or say it because it will be reported in a newspaper,"
I thought that was what 'D' notices are for? If a judge/politician/policeman says something that would be embarrassing and a newspaper finds out - just claim it's a matter of national security and ban the reporting.
Of course if you are merely rich, you need to just get a super injunction to ban talking about it.
What the UK doesn't have is any workable freedom of information laws.
The point of the article isn't that manufacturers enable extra features for extra money - that's reasonable.
But if somebody enables that extra feature without paying that is a contractual matter between the maker and the purchaser. Using a draconian copyright order to prevent a news site talking about it is unreasonable and is the point of the article. It is also becoming more common.
Whats next?
Report that a certain car bursts into flames when rear-ended? Can't do that anymore , any mention of the car comes under the DMCA.
A ban on explaining that they don't need to buy the expensive duplex version of a printer because they can turn the paper upside down and print side 2 ?
The required party line is hardly a neutral no-comment:
" Nonetheless, it’s worth restating that the Code Club board believe X are a tremendous partner. As a member of the board I am completely aligned with that view'.""
And this is a public volunteer effort aimed at kids. Imagine it was an oil company funding the National Trust, you wouldn't expect to be able to get away with saying that about fracking in a national park.