The DNC is live-streaming this year. What a great time to invoke the Copy-Restriction Robots. Not because I have any issue with the DNC, but a live-stream failure would drive-home issues directly to those who can do something about it....
Actually I think people are cheaper, even rich people are cheaper than you give them credit for.
Any service on the 'Net that charges any amount, my instinct is not to say "ah what the hell, I'll try it". My instinct is to say "Hmm... Their going to automatically charge my CC and there won't be any way to cancel or reach a customer service rep to allow me to cancel this subscription"
I am more than happy to pay for items on the 'Net. Sometimes even spontaneously. I will even buy things from eBay that seem "too good to be true". But I reject almost every "subscription" offer that comes to me.
Even if it were just a $1. Because at that point it's principle not cost.
You can thank Intuit, McAfee, Norton, Cox, and Verizon for my jaded view.
A "white-flight" I believe (talking in sheer ignorance here) will take the form of class and business - not on race.
People hide behind (intentional or not) avatars, pseudonyms and online personas. (Just look at this site, myself included.) You don't have a real clue if the person you're chatting with is black, white, or otherwise, and even gender is unknown.
But you can quickly determine (perceived) class and ideology. Much in the same way that MySpace became a white-trash haven by encouraging the use of the purple blink tag and music, Facebook became the everyone's suburbia with more control and homogenous view on the private world of it's members.
App.net may be trying to offer a clean experience with the end-user in mind. But this will really be limited to a certain type of user: Read "corporate". While it keeps the "rift raft" out, it also keeps the growth in check. No free content means limited readers. Limited readers means limited writers. Limited writers means limited content. Limited content is not particularly social.
Google+ Had the clout to pull off a facebook alternative. But there were no users there. No users means an awfully lonely social experience.
And this is why I say it will appeal to the "corporate" user. Think socially motivated PR Newswire. It's really about blabbing (advertising)... not socializing.
"...Lamar Seeligson Smith is the U.S. Representative for Texas's 21st congressional district, serving since 1987. The district includes most of the wealthier sections of San Antonio and Austin, as well as nearly all of the Texas Hill Country...."
How does a Texan, Republican, career politician get so cozy with Hollywood. I thought they were the enemy?
"...da·ta·base (dt-bs, dt-) Computer Science
n. also data base
A collection of data arranged for ease and speed of search and retrieval. Also called data bank.
tr.v. da·ta·based, da·ta·bas·ing, da·ta·bas·es
To put (data) into a database...."
I think what was "spyed on" is everything that when through a public junction box. They may not even know how many calls. It's more like "If you called or received a call from the following area codes the '102, 103, 104.....' then you conversations was electronically scanned for key words between Jan 1 2002 and today."
The reality is they spied indiscriminately on all Americans. The reality is that they probably don't have a clue how man American's they spied on.
Or maybe the Occupy movement had no singular focus or actionable outcome. What started off as a good bitch-fest ended in tragedy in multiple parts of country.
They weren't fighting for "equal rights" or even "equal treament" they were fighting for corporation to "not be evil". Of course everyone wants this, but there is nothing concrete to be able call a victory.
While it seems outrages on the face of it, if you give it some thought and you can quite easily see why he may be right.
I don't know if this is the way it happens... but it makes sense to me:
If you have algorithms that basically triggers on word patterns over massive amount of streaming data, that streaming data is still "anonymous" until it triggers. Once the trigger happens, then the call is analyzed further and the details (who, who to, what, when, where, voice recognition of caller, voice recognition of receiver, etc) can be databased.
This way you're only tracking calls that matter to you, or at the very least eliminating mundane family chatter that you don't want to waste resources on. If 90% of the stream is ignored, then even though the calls have been "listened in on", it's filtered out - and the NSA doesn't have to waste its resources (which are finite) - and more to the point, what is filtered out is unknown (and mostly the NSA doesn't care about this filtered out "crap").
What you're asking the NSA to do when you want to know how many American's are spyed on, is for the NSA to go back to the stream and re-run it, this time cataloging EVERYTHING. Because the only way to get a count of callers is to know how many distinct callers there are in your stream.
Now you're forcing the NSA to actually database what hadn't been databased before. This not only provides you the number of American's spyed on, but it also has the undesired effect of creating records and tracking US Citizens, there-by violating their privacy.
Because it's not a simple matter of categorizing by phone number (more than one person uses a phone, one person uses multiple phones) there is no simple way to come up with the answer without analyzing what was filtered out.
Short Term Telecos/ISP will continue to tighten, filter, block, reroute, shapen, etc with or with out legal authority and help. Some of it "just makes sense" from a technical perspective. Some of it "only makes sense" from a business model perspective.
But this will only happen while consumers don't care. Eventually Comcast will try to extort money from content providers and eventually content providers will give them the middle finger, and shortly after Comcast won't be able to provide its customers with anything more than a "view" onto the Internet and those customers will jump ship as soon as an alternative is available.
The alternative will be open/low cost mobile/wireless ad-hoc/mesh type network. Eventually there won't be a need for a back-bone ISP because the technology/skill will be affordable at such a low denominator that hardware will just "work" right out of the box without having to specify any specific network connection. Local/private networks will be in software only, and will float on top of the "global net".
What happens? Another democratic seismic shift. ISP/Mobile operates become as relevant as the News-print Industry. We'll experience another 20-30 years of a struggling industry come to terms with it's demise, but not before it tries to prevent or change the inevitable via lawsuits, lawyers, and lobbyist.
Google still allows (several of) their APIs to be used for free. In fact their free versions don't even require a key.
What requires a key is Google Earth - which is free "to a point" and their mobile api which is much more limited.
This makes sense to me. The free API drive traffic to Google's sites and ad revenue. The pay-for APIs are really targeting the Apples and other large users - and as stated by previous posters - Google doesn't benefit from supporting their largest competitors who are not also driving ad-revenue back to them.
Also, not sure about the rest of the users here.... I'm not seeing the Exodus. Every once in a while I see a Bling map - and that is really it. And no one has an API that is as fast or as polished as Google's (and yes I'm talking about Google's free service) or as supported by such a huge developers community.
Every successful company will have its haters. But it's sad to see hating just because of success. Google's not abusing its power here, and I think they are well aware of where their success comes from - which parallels very closely the values found here on Techdirt.
Sure IP protection is part of it... but maybe it's really about creation. The Internet has become the distribution channel that anyone can utilize for virtually pennies. (probably 100% free if you tried hard enough).
It may not be a truly concerted effort, but listen to how media "controllers" have tried to stem their "members" from using Twitter and keeping reporters from "blogging" (See MLB, NFL, Reuters, AP, etc).
The democratization of publication is the real threat. Performers making (real) money without the need for record contracts or multi-million dollar tours / ad campaigns - wow - if that's not a threat to the recording industry.....
Plus honest reviews, people getting what they want, when they want it - wow again. The media strong hold is really losing control. They can't control the message, the merchandise, nor the content. What is their reason for being? No wonder they are freaked out.
I have an idea that I think would be fun to try. You see everything in digital form is nothing more than numbers. In fact the entire collection of all digital stuff can be boiled down to one single number (albeit a huge number).
But with a little math fun, you can make those number more accessible, and with a the right "player" you can turn those numbers into songs, videos, games, text, etc.
A sight can list Songs (or videos, or games, or stories, or PDF, or word docs or what-ever favorite content type is). And associated with that content will be number. That number can be a hash number.
So this is not linking to content. This is not holding content. This is not a copy of the content. It's simply a hash number of the digital streams of 1 and 0 that make up that content. The thing about hash codes it's that they are not unique. They are "unique enough" to verify content, but you can't simple look at the hash and figure out what the content was..... Unless you know how many iterations to go through.
So beside the hash code is an iteration count. So with three pieces of information: The title, the hash code for the content, and the iteration number of the hash, you could devise a player that could expand a hash-code to it's original content. The three pieces of information could even be spread out among 3 different servers.
My guess is that if this were to take off, new laws would eventually be created to prevent the hashing of copy-righted content. But in the meantime.....
I'm anxious for the day when Apple can't sell any of it's products, Sony can't import Playstation, Artist can't record music for record companies, and drugs can't be made by anyone.
When Fox Searchlight is kept from production because it's getting sued by Disney, when Pixar can't create new rendering techniques to show off in a new movie because they violate software patents, and the NFL can't be broadcasted over the air because it contributes to piracy.
That will be a good day. Because then all these media-moguls and patent abusers die. What will survive? The coming (3d) desktop revolution, indie productions, and direct-to-consumer goods, services, and entertainment.
As soon as as the law favors copy-right holders to the extent that simply thinking that someone is infringing requires a take-down notice, the first thing I'm going to do is write a script to send take-down notices for everything Viacom produces, everything Clear-Channel broadcasts, everything Disney exploits, and everything Fox reports on.
I love the show... but I noticed once the "Interns" started doing stuff that their approach to "safety" was much different than Adam's and Jamie's.
In one episode you could see Adam and Jamie seething with anger after "the kids" built a device in some sort of hanger that nearly killed them. After that episode it's been rare to see Adam and Jamie on the set when the "kids" were doing something explosives related.
This is just my impression - maybe wrongly.
I also have a beef with Adam and Jamie. Those who watch and dare I say worship them, are the Makers and Geeks of the DIY / Open Source / Open Hardware / Open Data movement. They seem to be insulated from this fact, and I think it's sad.