Correct! Most people think its ok to smash into people making an illegal maneuver: a friend of a friend recently lost his car because he was illegally parked and someone smashed into it. He got a parking ticket, they got an at-fault accident, point deductions, hefty fine etc. etc. As a driver it is your responsibility to know where you're going and if you're able to safely proceed, it is NOT your right to randomly punch the gas because someone else is breaking the law.
You're right. But if in the event that a professional is lacking knowledge in a certain area it is their ethical duty to consult someone who does. In their case they're plugging their ears and whistling tunes while the experts cite facts that go against the opinion of the corporations backing the bill. Its not even fair in this case where the experts are coming forward in droves to lend knowledge to the matter and they're being silenced in favor of half-baked opinions loosely tied to anecdotal events that may or may not be actually true.
Its not just about youtube, it also includes every website on the internet. So what does that mean? It means if I want to start an online business that happens to have a high profile competitor they might not take a liking to me existing and just use SOPA to bring me down. What if I'm an established seller and someone big decides to branch into new markets and doesn't like me. That could be equally detrimental to my livelihood if I am unable to afford a lawyer to fight this frivolous crap coming out of the USA (hint, I'm not American).
I sort of tire of the ol' Slashdot jumping to conclusions but here's how it works:
1. They visit public tracker websites.
2. They query the tracker for a list of peers given a torrent hash (not difficult)
3. Dump all data into the database that can be searched through their website
That means your data is not on there if you're a torrent user because you're using a tracker they aren't indexing or you have a dynamic ip that they haven't categorized yet. In the same way this is why you can get false positives. All this B.S. about honey pots or fear mongering is dumb considering how straight forward this website is.
Why is TV Broken to the consumer? Because no one wants to wait for anything. I want to watch show X *now* and I don't want ads. I want to be able to rewind, pause and everything else that comes great with a TV viewing experience. Has PVR solved this? Kind of, but it still is at the mercy of TV where you only get to watch what you've recorded and space can be limited.
People have realized all these faults. That is why so many people move away from TV now towards over-the-top offerings that have the "on demand" nailed down. How are we going to save TV? By providing features that pre-recorded alternatives can't offer. For the most part that means enhancing Live TV. You want to see sport stats of the player that's up to bat? Good, its right here. Can't decide what to watch? Have your TV remind you when favorite shows are coming on based on your viewing history. Want a little trivia info on the current movie/actor? Bam!
TV was traditionally passive and it failed. I don't want to watch reruns and I don't want to have to wait 15 minutes for the next episode to start because its borrrinngggg. TV needs work to keep people interested or else they'll go to streaming options. Don't fight it. Don't pretend its not an issue because it is. What makes me think I can speak on the subject? I work for an telecom that has IPTV offerings and spent about a year doing application development and server administration for the IPTV service. A lot of that time was dealing with marketing and understanding the trends in the market to keep my job.
I disagree.... a person lacking confidence would probably be pissed no matter what and was just looking for validation. My friends and I in the same field openly discuss our wages/benefits only to know what's available out there. Am I getting screwed? Why is my pay lower? Is the grass *really* greener? No one openly gets upset with it.
Depends on where you're from. In parts Canada we have privacy laws that state that if a company is going to receive private information from you they have to explicitly disclose how/where it will be used. Failure to notify the customer when you are about to use the data for an unintended purpose can weigh a hefty fine on the company.
Where the ambiguity comes in is where we draw the line as "private information". Is your conversation or web history considered private? You'd have to convince the courts should you take it that far.
Source: Ex-programmer for telecom provider within Canada from the billing and revenue software department. We had privacy laws rammed down our throat due to our access to production databases.
realized writes: We have all heard of soft caps put on by cell phone carriers. AT&T, Verizon and others alike have all said that they will (and have already started to), “throttle” users in the top 5% of data usage. With LTE starting to be deployed to multiple markets now this seems to be more of a problem. AT&T and Verizon are selling LTE phones and once users realize they can watch movies, download games, etc without lag on the new technology, are overnight getting capped. At LTE Speeds of 30-50MB/sec it’s very easy to hit the “soft cap” in place. The cap, according to some XDA members, seems to be anywhere from 4gb to 8gb/month. What is the point of offering LTE if you aren’t able to handle the small percentage of users that have LTE devices in those areas? Is this a bandwidth problem or a licensing problem with the wireless spectrum? Is 4, 6, or even 10 gb/month really abuse?
Haven't we already learned this from such "discussion mediums" as the Slashdot comment section? Its easier to lie when you don't have to cover your body language, quivers in voice or other "give aways".
Am I the only one who thinks that since they failed to do their mandated job they shouldn't have that job any longer? If I was given an explicit task (and not an overly abstract or vague one at that) and told to complete it by a certain date, I'd be expected to produce something at the very end. If what I provided was a list of places I could point my finger then I'd be out on my ass!
But why was it "Angry Birds" instead of "Alternative minigame X"? That's the point of writing articles/researching topics like this. What made Angry Birds the winner and not something else? In many cases its simply Marketing or Timing that win the pot but it doesn't mean it can't be fun to investigate deeper reasons.
You're right... but it doesn't mean he's wrong. I was a "hardcore gamer" in highschool and university (until I took uni seriously). I graduated and have almost everything you list to care for but it doesn't mean I still call myself "hardcore" because I *know* that's a lie. The torch has been passed. These 14 y/o squeeky things I find online are the new hardcores and as much as it pains me to say it... they're better.
So yeah I'm a casual. Most of my friends are too. We want instant gratification, not 50hrs of learning curve before "enjoyment" starts because 50hrs of play can be upwards of 6 months to a year and by then another game we're interested in has been released.
The article states that since low end "smartphones" are being installed with Android it is costing carriers more in warranty and repair costs. It has nothing to do with the Android platform and is more of a side effect where the cheap manufacturers elected to go with Android over another OS.