Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
In the piece, Dana Blankehorn argues that that the only gains to be made on the Facebook stock offering were made by insiders and that the mainstream media helped pump up the insiders' gains.
A few of Mr. Blanenhorn's past articles have been featured on slashdot, including "Open Source Complaint Against IBM Gets Support" (http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/06/25/149228/open-source-complaint-against-ibm-gets-support) in June 2010; The War Is Over, and Linux Has Won (http://slashdot.org/story/06/11/10/2336218/the-war-is-over-and-linux-has-won) in November 2006; and "Does It Matter Where Open Source is Based?" (http://slashdot.org/story/06/07/07/2112250/does-it-matter-where-open-source-is-based) in July 2006."
Link to Original Source
There's been an Audience chip included in the iPhone 4 since June 2010. When iFixit tore down the iPhone 4S and noticed the chip wasn't there, it was assumed that the chip was either integrated into the A5 design or that Apple opted to do noise-cancellation without the need of an Audience chip.
It's true that the A4 chip doesn't have an Audience subprocessor in it but it doesn't mean that the iPhone 4 doesn't have the chip included somewhere else on its motherboard. The conclusion that the iPhone 4 can't do Siri is absolute garbage. The conclusion that the iPhone 4 can't do Siri technically because of this kind audio subprocessor is not being included in the iPhone 4's design needs to have their head examined and start doing some research. This entire thing is hogwash.
Hirai has also been shuffled into a half dozen different positions in the last decade and some of them even were created specifically for him. Sony's been doing a yearly "April 1st" shuffle since at least 2009. Hirai has been progressively working up the ladder around and before this time. It's really hard to say how involved Hirai was in key decisions about the Playstation brand in the last five or six years.
My bet is that he's far from the voice of reason in the executive consensus at Sony and that he may be a large part of the problem. I'm guessing plans enacted years ago regardless of circumstances got him this job. I don't see Hirai going away for good at least in the short term unless the Playstation Vita has a dismal year of sales.
You can't get a refund for anything on the Playstation Network. Trust me, I tried. After SCEA turned the keys over to SNEA (or whatever abbreviation Sony's using for their digital networking division) and the hacking that bought PSN down for a month, I wrote a letter to Sony explaining that I've lost faith in their digital service and their ability to secure vital financial and personal information and could no longer A) Be their customer B) Agree to their new terms because it's not the service I signed up for in November of 2006 (and it might have never been with the way EULAs are crafted). I can either have to forfeit your ability to log in or accept the new terms.
EULAs have become this living contract that only favors the company and totally, unconditionally screws the customer. Period. Sony is a case example of excessive abuse of EULAs because of their management and business shortcomings and have a total disconnect with their customers.
The basic principle of regulation is missing from the US regulatory puzzle. You have a market where the telecommunications companies function as their own regulators. They set their own prices, place their towers where they can make the most money (particularly AT&T here)/screw expansive infrastructure and actual mobility, stipulate the kinds of phones that are on their network, and create a barrier of entry revolving around contracts/subsidies and credit checks. Spectrum allotment is an obvious technicality so everything works but in this case, it's a fancy way to pad and line a few wallets.
It's super cozy if you can set all the conditions and variables in your market and be the one or two companies in it. FCC and FTC basically function as agencies willing to do anything for the highest bidder and the companies only care about themselves. The problem is obvious; the customer is completely left out of the equation. It's not a free market and if it was, it's been perverted out of one.
Somewhere, somehow, it hasn't been made an issue, yet. I wonder if and how AT&T will work up the muster to get rid of it's unionized workforce with this acquisition/merger, if it does happen.
Marco Arment explains his version of the situation in his blog. Basically, the FBI has this "drug bust" proximity to the evidence must also be evidence mentality to executing a search warrant. Anything unrelated to the crime could have been loaded on adjacent servers. Did they only need one search warrant for DigitalOne?