dafunn - Slashdot User

Comment Re:convenience over quality (Score 1) 360

by dafunn on Wednesday December 07, 2011 @06:26PM (#38296320) Attached to: Netflix CEO Comments On Recent Decisions

Of course, I have to wonder, if they've got all these other vectors covered, they clearly have a development process that supports multiple platforms. Would it be that hard to also have a linux client?

I can't imagine so. Doesn't anyone know why else they would be forgoing a linux client?

I would assume that it has something to do with satisfying the MPAA requirements for DRM. But that's just a guess.

I suspect there is a part of satisfying MPAA requirements that comes into play, but I'd wager the decision is much more based on the heterogeneity of the Linux ecosystem. With Windows and MacOS (or any of the other platforms listed), you're developing to a fairly standard API with a fairly well-known set of associated dependencies. One can predict, with a high degree of accuracy, what libraries will be available on the target system.

Developing "for Linux" has none of this. Sure, one could specify the versions of various libraries that are required but when you start to discover that you're alienating the majority of the installed base with your reqs, and that trying to develop an app such that it includes the majority of said installed base is both time-consuming and cost prohibitive, the economics just don't add up. I see an installed base quoted at roughly 3% farther down, so you're talking about only being able to reach a subset of that base for roughly the same cost as developing to other platforms that enjoy 20% or 30% market share. From a business perspective, the economics just don't make sense.

I see a lot of this MPAA-boogeyman-won't-let-them talk in Slashdot comments and it's a little tiring. Generally speaking, the free market tends to iron out such inefficiencies, given enough time, and the lack of a Linux client for so many apps, across so many companies, should be a big clue to anyone that there are some real economic reasons why this isn't happening. Mind, and I say all of this as a guy who runs Linux as his primary desktop and is also a developer of Linux apps, so I've encountered the exact same issues I'm talking about in dealing with the randomness of available functionality in the installed Linux base.

Parent poster, I apologize if this comes across as being a rant directed at you - that certainly is not my intent here. I'm just a little frustrated by having seen years of the same "MPAA won't let them" comments in various threads any time talk of a Linux client for just about anything comes up. There is, in my mind, a pretty obvious explanation for this and it boggles me that we have to rehash this subject Every Frickin' Time.

But then again, I must be new here...

Comment Re:Opportunity for more pay (Score 1) 312

by dafunn on Sunday December 04, 2011 @07:46PM (#38261088) Attached to: Institutional Memory and Reverse Smuggling

If you RTFA, you would know if s/he did.

If you had read it, you would know whether to use "he" or "she".

I /did/ read it, and I'm a little curious to know where you think this was specified. Other than making a general assumption, I see no mention of the author's gender.

Comment Re:Camera Vandalism? (Score 1) 189

by dafunn on Monday September 19, 2011 @09:08PM (#37451438) Attached to: Atlanta's Growing Video Surveillance System

So far, they haven't decreased the crime rate even a single %.

That's a very good point - this system is obviously a complete boondoggle and waste of money because it has had absolutely no impact whatsoever on crime rates in and around Atlanta.

Oh wait, it couldn't be that an explanation for that was given in the first line of the article, now could it?

"Plans [...] will move forward this week with the opening of a state-of-the-art video monitoring center."

Submission + - RIAA Admits ISP's Have Misidentified "John Doe

Submitted by

NewYorkCountryLawyer

on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @12:46PM

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: "The RIAA has sent out a letter to the ISP's telling them to stop making mistakes in identifying subscribers, and offering a "Pre-Doe settlement option" — with a discount of "$1000 or more" — to their subscribers, if and only if the ISP agrees to preserve its logs for 180 days. Other interesting points in the letter(pdf): the RIAA will be launching a web site for "early settlements", www.p2plawsuits.com; the letter asks the ISP's to notify the RIAA if they have previously "misidentified a subscriber account in response to a subpoena" or became aware of "technical information... that causes you to question the information that you provided in response to our clients' subpoena"; it requires ISP's to notify the RIAA "as early as possible" as to whether they will enter the 180 day/"pre-Doe" plan; it mentions that there has been confusion over how ISP's should respond to the RIAA's subpoenas; it noted that ISP's have identified "John Does" who were not even subscribers of the ISP at the time of the infringement; and it requested that ISP's furnish their underlying log files as well as just the names and addresses, when responding to RIAA subpoenas."

The Pirate Bay, Featured in Vanity Fair 300

Posted by Zonk on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @12:16PM from the everybody's-a-little-bit-famous dept.

koregaonpark writes "Via the TorrentFreak site, an article in the latest issue of Vanity Fair about BitTorrent, movie piracy and The Pirate Bay. The Vanity Fair piece is lengthy, and covers the MPAA's struggle to stamp out piracy, Hollywood's increasing losses, and how the 'heartfelt testimony of Ben Affleck, a man who was paid $12.5 million to star in Gigli,' didn't help one bit. 'Pirates of the Multiplex' covers the saga of Pirate Bay in a very high-level, mass-market fashion. Did you ever think you'd be reading about TPB in Vanity Fair?"

Michael Crichton on Why Gene Patents Are Bad 367

Posted by Zonk on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @11:35AM from the life-finds-a-way dept.

BayaWeaver writes "Michael Crichton, author of The Andromeda Strain and Jurassic Park has made a strong case against gene patents in an op-ed for the New York Times. Striking an emotional chord, he begins with 'You, or someone you love, may die because of a gene patent that should never have been granted in the first place. Sound far-fetched? Unfortunately, it's only too real.' From there, he moves on to use logic, statistics, and his way with words to make his point. Arguing against the high costs of gene therapies thanks to related patents, he eventually offers hope that one day legislation will de-incentivize the hoarding of scientific knowledge. As he points out: 'When SARS was spreading across the globe, medical researchers hesitated to study it — because of patent concerns. There is no clearer indication that gene patents block innovation, inhibit research and put us all at risk.'"

Google Loses Cache-Copyright Lawsuit in Belgium 340

Posted by Zonk on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @10:51AM from the no-convenience-for-you dept.

acroyear writes "A court in Belgium has found that Google's website caching policies are a violation of that nation's copyright laws. The finding is that Google's cache offers effectively free access to articles that, while free initially, are archived and charged for via subscriptions. Google claims that they only store short extracts, but the court determined that's still a violation. From the court's ruling: 'It would be up to copyright owners to get in touch with Google by e-mail to complain if the site was posting content that belonged to them. Google would then have 24 hours to withdraw the content or face a daily fine of 1,000 euros ($1,295 U.S.).'"

Slashdot Top Deals