* Posts by blades

3 posts • joined 30 Jan 2012

Netbooks were a GOOD thing and we threw them under a bus


i have two and a half netbooks at home...

a first generation aspire one with an extended battery that easily does me a full day. got rid of windows, installed arch linux, bumped up the ram, and there's a small, light, and reasonably quick machine to play with. added bonus: fits neatly into the pannier bags on my bike, so perfect for day trips to client sites.

my only complaint was the woeful resolution, so i picked up a sony vaio netbook with a better resolution. as of yet, it's stock, but i'll boost the ram and battery on that, too. currently, it's a dual-boot between windows xp and arch, but only because it came with xp and i found that my harmony remote software only runs on windows, and i'll be damned if i shell out for something that i only need to use for one program when i've got a freebie that works just fine.

the other netbook... that's kinda special. it's actually only half a netbook - no screen. i thought the original netbook's motherboard was toast, so i bought a replacement. turned out it was a cable, so after replacing that i had a perfectly functional motherboard. so i bought a shell for it, and a pcie video decoder card, and put xbmc on it: perfect for watching 1080p movies from our server in my daughter's nursery back when she still needed night-time feeds.

so, yeah, i'll miss netbooks a lot. but i still have hopes that the next generation of tablets-with-docks will finally be able to give them a run for their money.

'Gaia' Lovelock: Wind turbines 'may become like Easter Island statues'


If your name's not down, you're not coming in... [sorry, but the mistakes were driving me nuts]

i think you've missed the point. you should probably try actually reading the article, because in it lovelock clearly states that nuclear and/or lower-emission natural energy sources (e.g. fracking, gas) would be far more beneficial than wind turbines. the facts and figures also agree with this assessment.

Media groups propose anti-piracy 'code of practice' for UK search


i keep thinking that they're basically trying to get everyone else to pay for their policing...

what i can't help but think is that if there's a real monetary loss for these companies, then they should have a vested financial interest in the recourse. if there's a significant financial loss to them, they should have no problem in pursuing it themselves from the profits that they're still clearly making in the middle of a recession. this would have the added advantage that, at some point, the losses they're incurring would be less than the cost of pursuing them, at which point they'd be fools to chase it further. personally, i think they're probably already at that point, which is why they're trying to get others to pay for their policing instead.

ultimately, they appear to miss the fact that if you provide goods for reasonable prices that are what people actually want, then there's no need for piracy. as an example, i could buy a pvr that records content from, say, the bbc in hd. it will, however, store the content in an encrypted format that i can't access from any other device that i own, despite the content being paid for by my licence fee. so, to access this content that i've paid for in the manner that i choose that's convenient for me, i have no choice but to find a drm-free source instead, or to break the encryption, or use a third-party tool that (as an example) could pull it down from iplayer and store it drm-free. and that's content that i'm legally obliged to pay for.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022