Any move towards deliberately forcing tech companies to undermine security and privacy protections for users absolutely is a backdoor and will be used by countries with much less regard for the privacy of its citizenry.
There are countries with less regard for the privacy of its citizenry than the US??? Do you mean the UK?
"We’re not going to sit back and let the disrupters just disrupt,” Iger said. “We’re going to participate in some of that disruption. And we’ll decide when the time is right to be more disruptive than we have been if we really think the business model is shifting rapidly. So far we do not see that."
Is it just me, or does that read like someone who's just leant a brand new buzz-word that everyone's telling him is important, but he's not quite sure what it means?
DRM is coming to Daz and there's nothing users can do about it.
Presumably there are, in fact, at least two things the users can do about it: 1/ Vote with their feet and use some other software 2/ Go find the inevitable crack for the software that makes the added DRM not such a problem.... i.e. pirate it.
Not sure either of those helps Daz out much though.... Gosh! Looks like the DRM might be counter-productive! Who knew?
I believe what Warner really wants to buy is Schrödinger's Streaming Service; it offers innovative, easy-to-use, on-demand, flexible access to all the content in the world at a price so perfectly balanced at to make customers flock to it while cheating a healthy profit-margin, while simultaneously providing no real competition to infexible, piece-meal, overpriced pay-TV.
Actually getting the source of the problem right DOES matter.
Yeah, not sure that's what he meant as such... I've been in exactly the same position so many times even with different teams in the same company.... Get a problem and the server guys instantly blame the network guys or the storage guys; the storage guys blame the server guys or the network guys; the network guys blame the server or storage guys... and everyone blame either the 3rd party software or the user.
The correct response to this is always "I don't give a shit what you think it is, how about you stop making assumptions, work together and find out what it actually is!"
Added to that, even if some other device on the network is found to cause the problem it still doesn't mean that there isn't a problem with the Nest; A number of times I've seen a device not cope with another device working perfectly because of it's own problem... And this one's supposed to talk to other things, so the answer is still "I don't give a shit, try being part of the solution".
Well you can find a non-"smart", big TV.... but chances are it costs 2-3x as much as a similar screen with all the extra "functionality". I also went for the "buy the 'smart' one and keep it dumb" approach.
The school and the police have acted responsibly and proportionately in looking into a number of potential concerns using a low-key, local approach," it said.
Oh, yeah.. I'm sure the cops showing up at their door, barging in, searching their house, and questioning everyone at length because of the "schoolwork" of a kid under 11 felt super-responsible and soooo "proportional" to the family in question.
You have to wonder if the "solution" isn't more likely to "radicalise" said child way more effectively than whatever it is they thought he'd been "exposed" to.... I know I'd grow up pretty pissed-off if I got pulled in and scared the shit out of for schoolwork...
In the modern world, it ought to be easy to get a direct democracy - certainly for all important decisions - but instead whenever the subject is brought up, all you hear from politicians is how it's all too hard and too susceptible to fraud (like current elections can't be rigged!). As usual it's all about giving up power rather than the interests of citizens of supposedly democratic countries.
I've always been somewhat with Winston Churchill who claimed "the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter"... but looking at the US and UK (and other countries) today, I can't imagine that the populace could do worse than politicians even if you limited voting to the 2 million lowest IQs in the country!
The people who’ve traded down have tended to not be sports fans, and have tended to be older and less affluent. We still see people coming into pay TV.
OK, Mr. ESPN..... let's examine that for a moment: 1/ Old and "less affluent" you say? Well since these are departing customers, clearly they used to be young and rich enough to afford and want your service and aren't interested any more. Given increasingly long lifespans and the skew of population towards the elderly, isn't ignoring that demographic dumb all by itself? 2/ Not sports fans? But these people are "trading down" their package, right? So why did they have (presumably) sports before, then? And how does them not being sports fans make them giving you less money a better thing for you than if they were sports fans? 3/ Still see people coming in to pay TV, huh? Good for you... and how many would that be compared to the ones leaving? Are they taking as many services as the ones leaving? Seems a little vague to me... care to elaborate?
Looks like deja moo.... I think I've seen this bullshit before.
The kind of person paying little or nothing for the film is not the kind of person who would otherwise be lined up at the theater to hand over $20 for a ticket to the film.
Actually, close but no cigar... Some Of the people (maybe even most) paying little or nothing for the film isn't the kind of person to line up to pay $20 to see it.
But equally, some are the sort of people that'll still line up and pay to see it, even after having downloaded it. Some more are the sort of people that'll line up and pay to see it after having downloaded it if it's not a total pile of shite.
Were I "Hollywood", I'd be less concerned about people downloading films and more concerned about people like me; Those who are increasingly of the opinion that most of the wank coming out of the major studios recently isn't worth wasting 3 hours of their life to see, free or not!
Do I have this straight? Technology is this wicked, demonic thing used primarily by criminals to commit all sorts of foul and terrible acts and needs to be carefully regulated, controlled, limited and broken. Guns are cute, cuddly toys that everyone should have and are at best only peripherally involved in crime.
With a veritable banquet-sized alphabet soup tureen of federal agencies all squabbling over funding pie, with recognition from "daddy" government based on "results" (i.e. convictions), this kind of crap is sadly not only unsurprising, but inevitable.