One day some of these people are going to retire and spend a little time with their grandchildren. When that happens they are going to be shocked to watch the kids playing with tablets and playing around with apps, interactive websites, and videos on the web. I only wish I could be there when they dirty their diapers as they realize the advantages of spending more time with actual human beings when they were younger and in charge of a large corporation. Whatever ghouls are feeding them the information that the execs want to hear will be laughing as they go to their bank's website and count the money instead of watching their televisions.
In the context of sports this is not that different from broadcast television. If you try to watch a football game all you get is an endless loop of the two different commercials trying to sell the two different kinds of erectile dysfunction drugs. As far as I can tell the primary audience for football is aging men who are so senile that they need to be reminded to buy their boner pills every four minutes. Then again, these are the same people who like to spend their time on the beach lounging in a tub.
Too bad the second amendment folks cannot see past their gun sights and have not started talking about this as part of their second amendment rights. If encryption is a weapon then the government should be limited in how it can regulate it.
Another common method is to go to https://www.researchgate.net/ where people upload their work before they submit it to a journal. Not only that but you can use the system to send messages to request a copy of a paper. At worst you end up having to send an email to the author listed as the primary contact. I am not sure why you would need to use twitter.
I do not understand the ownership thing. So the DOJ is saying that anything Apple owns is something that Apple has to hand over if there are suspicions about a third party using it? Not just hand over but break into. If I rent a back hoe to dig a hole in my yard, do the police get to come back later and dig up the hole because the owner of the tractor says it is okay? What does ownership even mean? Can lien owners chime have a say too? Does my bank have an obligation to protect my rights if I get pulled over by the police, and they want to open my trunk?
At least he was not using his own personal email server. Oh wait... I think that Secretary Clinton screwed up with the email server and have been dismayed by her inability to come clean (but not surprised). If the US Congress is going to spend millions of dollars on her situation then they should be crawling up this guy's back side as well. What he did is just as bad if not worse.
Sorry, but I am going to take a contrarian view here, and I know this may not be popular. The author of the article is incorrect when he says that people will look at these gifs in lieu of watching the game. I find the images quite engaging and more than satisfy my need to watch professional football. These highlights are more than enough, and I no longer feel the need to watch people take part in an activity that is physically harmful and are usually only able to play for one or two years before their health declines too low. It is a game that mostly enriches a small number of people, called "owners," who are supported by taxpayers who build extravagant palaces for them to make up for whatever shortcoming they have which needs to be compensated for.
So yeah, a few gifs may indeed be enough to detract from the league's power to extract money from taxpayers and fans.
With respect to the student's classroom activities the university is constrained in what it can tell the parent because of FERPA. Unless the student explicitly gave the school permission to discuss her class performance with her parents they cannot share that information with the parent. As for the emotional state, the medical professionals on campus should have been on top of that.
I still do not understand why they think that google's competition, Apple and Microsoft, would be any easier to deal with. If they think that Google is an unreasonable company to do business with then they need to get a dose of the way their competition does business. Then again, I am sure Duck Duck Go would be just lovely for the MPAA to work with as well.
The other day I went to a restaurant and asked for a Coke. The crazy waiter man said, "We have Pepsi." It was horrible. My child started to cry. My wife was horribly embarrassed. We felt so bad for Coke to have to deal with this.
I hope Coke sues them for all they are worth, the monsters.
How many of these folks are also worried about the impact of government regulations in other industries? I seem to keep hearing about politicians complaining that the good old fashioned industries, like building cars, buildings, and producing energy, need less government regulations. Somehow tech is different, even though those other industries make things that can directly impact our health and well being. Personal privacy, on the other hand, is somehow different.
Ah, I miss the good ole days when it was drugs and rock and roll that turned young brains to mush and removed all desire to succeed. We all know the real root of the problem, though. The introduction of the tractor ruined everything. Before then kids did not have time for frivolous activities and could focus on the important things. Of course we were too tired for sex and our desires for worldly goods were focused on new leather accouterments.
Now please excuse me I have some googling to do and have to figure out how to turn safe search off.
How is this all that different from the situation before 3D printers? Plans and details about making weapons have always been available. For example, there is a youtube video about how to make an AK-47 out of a shovel out there somewhere.
The only difference is that it is easier to load the file. The convenience of being able to make a weapon should not make any difference with respect to personal rights to express one's self. The only difference is that a bumbling nerd like myself can use this and not someone who has a bit of skill at making things.
I am going to have to side with Comcast and Time Warner on this one. Think about how much money they lost because people were using Periscope rather than cable television. People were not using cable television since they could get it for free, and the cable companies are the big losers. In fact so few people actually watched it on cable that big cable may have to refund their money. A sad situation all around and another win for the pirates. Expect a surge in sales for eye patches.
It would seem that Rockstar has missed the whole point of making something. They should be trying control it and control the way people use it. Creating something is about wielding absolute control over it.
It is not about the money or the joy of sharing, capitalism is all about control and power. By giving up power over something they just show they are dirty socialist who want to destroy America.
Being "against corporations" is not an ideal. I personally do not like the market power and many of the privacy violating practices of google. That does not imply that every action against google is something to support.
Going after google is fine as long as it is for something they should not be doing. The problem with the actions in Europe is they do not have evidence other than "google is big." If they think that google is taking advantage of their market power then gather evidence and then go after them.
This is an argument that patent applications should be written in a form that is actually readable. Patent writing seems to be an arcane art with little regard to reading. It is nigh impossible to reproduce an implementation after reading the patent, and sometimes it is not even easy to figure out what the patent does. Some of the technologies in question can be lost simply because the records for their implementation are so hard to figure out and are a second form of trade secret.
When people ask why diversity is important the quotes from the speech given above are a strong example of how diversity matters. People who come from groups outside of the "mainstream" have a different perspective and a greater understanding of the potential impacts of what they are doing. It is much easier for someone like Cook to understand the potential for violating privacy then someone whose actions have little or no repercussion with respect to the majority view.