Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Tone down your rhetoric (Score 1) 348 348

> You make it sound as if I have a right to the content other people produce.

Yeah, you do, we all do, once a work is performed/released it is in the public domain, that is what the term _means_ "in the domain of the public"
Copyright is an abrogation of that basic right in limited circumstance and for limited time because the _default_ is and will always be public domain.

The purpose of Copyright is to make sure that works are produced because it recognizes the value they provide to our culture. Those works contribute to and inform our culture, they become a part of it much like we do. Copyright is nothing more than a tool to further the _base_ function of enriching our culture. The relationship between the work and or culture _is_ the most important part otherwise Copyright wouldn't exist.

It's _all_ about culture.

Comment: Re:Must be nice (Score 1) 401 401

Yes it is nice, having the BBC that is.

State _funded_ TV with a charter for the betterment of the populous has set the standard for TV in this country that and (somewhat) mitigated the "race to the bottom" that is being run more rapidly in countries that don't have that stabilizing force.

The BBC should be compared with other media organisations when talking about openness not wings of government, apples and oranges.

Comment: Re:Must be nice (Score 3, Informative) 401 401

It's a colloquialism. To receive live TV you must have a TV licence, buying a TV is orthogonal to this. If I own a computer and use BBC iplayer to watch live TV I also need a licence, the fact you have bought a physical TV or not is irreverent, the question is are you receiving live TV signals.

IMHO the BBC is a public funded body that functions as an independent news service by royal charter, it is not an organ of government and thus should not be subject for FOI requests just like any other news service

Comment: Re:*sigh* Another worthless virus alert (Score 4, Informative) 129 129

None, same way there are none for Android. including the malware included in the OP. If it doesn't propagate of it's own accord then it isn't a virus it's just a malicious app AKA malware.

The OP mentions that "website that is designed to push Loozfon on the user's device" this is currently impossible unless there is an explain that is currently un-discussed and if there was such a thing it would be _very_ important, if (as I suspect) this is just another download-this/manually-install-the-app/accept-all-the-permissions/become-screwed idiot-trap then it is hardly news. And BTW there are plenty of these types of app for a jailbroken iPhone

Comment: Re:This Poll is Dumb (Score 1) 436 436

This is not like Win3.1 to Win95 this is like going from OSX to iOS
We have a new interface paradigm that MS is pushing _hard_ that is _only_ available to apps that are graced with the MS app store "magic"
To repeat, there are _system_ GUI API that you cannot write applications for nor link to without paying MS and getting their approval for an app.
This is also the _only_ way to get your app onto Win8RT

I don't care that it looks different, (It is half assed but you get used to that) I care that it's screwing both hobbyist and indy developers.

Comment: Re:Ok, Sherlock, your mystery is not a, uh, myster (Score 1) 363 363

Actually it's forced secure boot _by default_. On x86 hardware MS requires the ability to add keys or switch off secure boot, true, but they also require any PC that is Win8 certified to refuse to boot anything else _unless_ the user disables secure boot in the BIOS. It's all about barrier to entry,

Comment: Re:Good to Know (Score 1) 365 365

I can't help but think that the difference here is between academic knowledge and vocational experience. Working in an industry gives you the latter but only _maybe_ the former.

For example, WRT fracking I'd like to see more judges with a background in academic geoscience _not_ ex oil-industry workers

Comment: Re:a clarification (Score 2) 79 79

Digging in the _kernel_ I.E. in existing open-source code to figure out the interface, and using a shim to intercept system calls This is using the binary blob as a black box, in no way has the driver been decompiled nor abused in any way.

This is the correct way to implement an open-source driver. I think you have a broken understanding of what's going on here.

Comment: Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score 1) 336 336

Actually it is not just a right it's a natural law. Anything that is broadcast with the potential to be heard and/or seen is automatically in the public domain. That is the default! Some governments specifically added the grant of a limited monopoly on distribution of a work (copyright) "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" because the default was thought to not encourage progress sufficiently, this would not be needed without the recognition that the default is the public domain.

Now your legal or moral obligation to obey that grant is a highly relative issue, and as should be discussed, but the right to transfer knowledge and experience you have received is almost as basic as it comes, even if that happens to be a reproduction a performance.

Comment: Re:Please port this to Linux A.S.A.P. (Score 1) 164 164

A push button dialler has _more_ functionality than the older rotary dialler (at least additional items "#" and "*")
The transition from rotary->push button is simply one of mechanical reimplementation, not of simplification.
Now we have address books, how would people feel if you _only_ had address books, you couldn't add any new numbers you could only choose from the numbers that were somehow "blessed" by your tellco or phone manufacturer. That is a more accurate comparison to the iPodification of tech.

I'm all for UI's that hide complexity as long at they always allow you to express the full power of the system in question, even if they hide much of it by default. However that is rarely what these UIs do, generally they simply remove needed features.

Comment: Only if I can dupe my existing SIM (Score 1) 395 395

I'm not going to be using my phone data and tablet data at the same time (to any great degree) so I see no reason why I should pay an additional £15 a month for a tablet data plan. Android tethering all the way, and I don't need to pay for another radio in my tablet, win-win.

Comment: Re:What's different (Score 1) 231 231

No it doesn't. iOS literally doubles the phone app pixels, it's a terrible way of doing things due to the fact that iOS was not built for resolution independence. Android have been allowing for variable screen sizes and dpi since 1.6. Android apps don't "re-scale" they simply conform to the available space (assuming they are written well)

Comment: Re:Really, really bad point. (Score 1) 231 231

Nonsense, iOS is almost identical between the iPad and the iPhone, your artificial separation of "mini-app" and "full-size app" makes no sense. The only difference is the layout of the UI nothing about the core of the app needs to change (assuming the API is flexible enough)

Sure there may be apps that are fundamentally impossible to build using a small screen. But mostly the formula is "two panes, one for navigation the other for content" rather than "one screen leading to another" That is easy to do on Android even without honeycomb.

"There is such a fine line between genius and stupidity." - David St. Hubbins, "Spinal Tap"

Working...