Given that this scientist is about to attend a judicial inquiry I'd say it does make some kind of sense that she shouldn't be talking to the media. In fact isn't somewhat standard practice that people brought before a judicial inquiry don't talk about the subject matter of the inquiry in any great detail?
At least so far as I can see that's what happens in the UK. Maybe Canada is different and those called before a judicial inquiry immediately give all kinds of interviews to as many media organisations as possible.
I think people are jumping the shark here. I don't see anything fishy happening just yet. Let the inquiry run it's course and then see if this scientist takes the bait and gives an interview.
If this case demonstrates anything it's that the US market is no longer a viable place to do business. It seems you can't design, manufacture, market, buy or sell anything in the USA any longer without someone trying to sue you for some patent or copyright infringement.
In fact I'll probably be sued for this post.
Personally think this case is a lesson in drawing proper contracts and making sure all the i's are dotted and all the t's are crossed.
I'd be surprised if this is the first time a court has taken the laws of another country into account when it comes to dealing with cross border business disputes. But given that we're all part of the American economic empire anyway what's all the fuss about?
Ah the Patriot Act. I wondered when that would raise it's ugly face again. So glad I'm not American.
The KGB? Did we just time warp back to 1950? Oh wait science has declared time travel impossible. Science must be wrong!
I wonder what would happen to music industry sales figures if we all stopped talking about music, stopped singing along to the lyrics, stopped sharing mix tapes, stopped telling each other about new and cool bands we've discovered? Would be an interesting experiment. I think we should do what the industry wants. Stop promoting their product and watch their share prices crash.
In the last ice age much of the northern hemisphere was under miles of ice. I guess you better get ready to move to Brazil. ;)
When the Earth gets hot, the poles become tropical and the tropics become in hospitable dry desert wastelands where anything that can burn generally does. ... It won't get that bad.
Actually TV channels, news papers and magazines advertise on each others networks and in each others publications all the time. Late night TV news broadcasts even review the news papers content before they go on sale.
I don't recall Google banning search results For Firefox or Opera or Windows Phone 7 or Blackberry. But these are all direct competitors to Google. Google even pays Mozilla to make it's search engine the default in Firefox. Even though Google has it's own browser.
Seriously why would a genuine terrorist care. These nutbars drive around in cars packed with explosives intent on killing as many people as possible. Does anybody think they'll postpone a massacre because they have no licence?
This is stupid even by American standards.
This story reminded me of something that was touched on in a documentary I saw. I think it was Zeitgeist or some such. Anyway it was stated that the goal of the "real world leaders" was to have everybody fitted with an RFID chip. We would then all access our money or credit through that chip alone. If someone caused a problem by speaking out? Their chip would be turned off and they would be left penniless.
What's happening here is too far from that imagined goal.
In the UK people complain about the police hiding behind bushes with their radar guns to catch speeding motorists. While I would agree this does seem a little underhand. At the same time all motorists are supposed to know the speed limits of the roads they are driving on. Nearly all roads have their speed limits clearly marked and for the few that don't their are clear guide lines as to the likely speed maximum limit being imposed on that road.
At the end of the day the public have a clear idea of the law on these matters. We're not talking about some lawyer using a little known loophole to bait and trap someone.
If you are in possession of drugs or other illegal substances or are breaking the speed limit for the road you're driving on or drunk at the wheel then you're breaking the law irrespective of being caught or not.
In that sense I see little justification for a law abiding citizen to make the claim they "need" these apps. Unless there are broader implications here I don't see why this should be an issue.
I'm just wondering how long it will take Apple to sue someone for circumventing their bubble universe. But here's the really stupid thing. The web has always been there to deliver content. Why did content providers like news publishers ever go down the native iPhone app route in the first place?
Could it possibly be that Hollywood just didn't want to invest in this project leaving the young scamp with few options? Kickstarter isn't like a tax taken from your top rate of earnings. You only contribute if you think the project is worth it right? I just don't see an issue here.
Actually I think people have been stupidly naive if they thought the large corporations and lobbyists would let them use the "cloud" to move their data around without restriction. It was never going to happen. If everybody could do that the big 4 record companies would never have gotten $150 million upfront from Apple.
The really sad thing is all of these music locker services can be replicated with a bit of web space and a secure ftp server. Instant mountable network storage solution you can access anywhere.
Even better. We can set all of this up from home. The likes of D-Link allow consumers to register a URL that will always point to their router and by extension their very own server at home. You can take your music with you anywhere you go for the cost of broadband + electricity.
Really glad I live in a country where only very few highly trained police officers have guns and are then only used when needed.
I have criticised Apple in the past for copying their competitors. Not because copying is "bad". But because Apple likes to pretend it invented everything and refuses to share when in fact they were shown how to build a GUI at Xerox PARC. Without being handed that innovation on a plate, Apple simply wouldn't be the company it is today.
In a similar sense Apple has taken a lot from the open source world. So it does sting quite a bit when Apple acts in such a hostile manner to open source competitors just because they're doing a better job.
Speaking of which Apple have invented a revolutionary new innovation in GUI design. Full screen applications! Apple in it's infinite wisdom in it's finite bubble universe has realised "it's just better to use some applications that way". Really? Wait a minute. Haven't we seen that idea somewhere before?
"The Iranian government is also looking to install a new basement (if we follow the "new internet = "ground floor" analogy -- and I guess we will). It intends to roll out its own operating system to replace Windows within the coming months. Ali Aghamohammadi, the Iranian Head of Economic Affairs, has expressed his confidence that the government-approved internet and operating system will also be deployed by other Muslim countries."
Personally I'm amazed no one has done this before. If it succeeds it won't just be Muslim countries following suit. China will be close behind, followed swiftly by France. Except France will ban all non-Microsoft OSs or invent a special tax for them.
Apple are just annoyed because their bubble universe just burst. Apparently Mac users have just discovered "full screen" applications. I mean seriously?
That would be an absolute nightmare scenario. Think about it for a minute. What is so different about I.E. that sets it apart from Firefox or Chrome? They all do the same job. Some better than others. But they all serve the same end purpose.
Software should not be patentable. At best I'd settle for copyrights. Copyrights work fine for books and audio and films. I don't see anything special about software that warrants a patent.
Thank god I don't live in America.
All Old People Are Terrorists!
Every child knows old people can't be trusted. I think the TSA have only fallen short on their measures regarding old people in that they don't shoot to kill on sight.
.
.
.
.
Note to TSA: I am so totally not being serious.