"There are basically 2 doors that control the availability of apps to the vast majority of smart phones in this country. They are owned and controlled by 2 of the largest tech companies in the world, Apple and Google. If you want your app to reach any type of audience (yes there are other app platforms supporting phones on the margin, but they are tiny by comparison), you have to make Google and Apple happy."
This makes his argument sound a whole lot like the background spiel for mediagoblin and Sandstorm and similar open source web apps/app platforms designed to "break you out of corporate media silos" and their potentially unreasonable content policies (to loosely quote a description from a random person on the internet) at first, except then suddenly going off in a totally different direction that totally misses the point. It's kind of surreal.
It IS possible to genuinely uninstall these things (or any app) if you get Titanium Backup, but of course, you need to root the device to do that, and it's sometimes hard to tell when just going through its raw list of programs what's bloat and what's part of the ROM or might otherwise cause problems if removed.
I wish more computer/OS makers in general would design everything in a modular fashion where you can just remove everything you don't need. Part of the reason I stopped using GNOME and switched to KDE is that it wouldn't let me uninstall the few default apps without uninstalling GNOME too (I think I was trying to uninstall gedit, the Notepad-like program because I use jEdit, but no...); KDE unfortunately does that a little bit too by sometimes grouping big handfuls of coreish things together as in Kontact but at the very least I can uninstall the whole group if I don't need any of them.
Personally I tend to be the kind of person where when want to I watch a show I pay attention to the show, and when I want random background noise I open up libre.fm and have it choose some freely-licenced ambient music for me. If I want to listen to interesting content with words, I sometimes go to TEDTalks, or a couple of times I've gone to... I think TED radio hour may be the name of it? It's been a while since I've listened to it, so I've forgotten. Anyway there's always radio or radio-like services if you're not extremely picky about what you're listening to.
I think you might have misinterpreted what they were saying just a little.
i.e.: Target doesn't think those particular physical CDs will sell as well with the online version out, so it doesn't want to buy stock that will just sit around, because it doesn't think that's productive.
Now, it is still a little stupid since the CDs could have sold after all if they'd actually decided to carry them, but not the same kind of stupid.
By way of example, we are providing with this letter a non-exhaustive listof unauthorized copies of NBC Universal properties hosted on mediafire.com, along with theURL corresponding to each listed infringing file.
Am I reading the message wrong, or does it actually have a full list of "infringing" files they've already found on other people's mediafire accounts? And if so, what good does that do other than encourage people to download them?
Unless this is a clever plan to make people curious about the files and then accuse them for downloading, which I'd say it was if the CAS actually checked downloads other than torrents. Now I'm confused.
Compared with this, the Digirap was absolutely wonderful. (I actually thought it was okay, to tell the truth, though admittedly a bit more parody-like than good dub music should be from the middle on.)
If You use another's work uncredited in a reproduction ( Your Blog) you are, under copyright law required to credit the Author
Hang on. When you use another's work uncredited, you have to credit the author?
That is literally not possible. If you're using a quote uncredited, by definition, you can't credit the author at the same time. If you do credit the author while using the quote, it's no longer uncredited. Does On Press think that copyright law is supposed to be some kind of confusing Catch-22-type situation where it's impossible to follow the law because the law is inherently contradictory, therefore you are a violator? That... okay, that just makes my head hurt.
Also, even if you overlook that part by reasonably interpreting it as "you have to credit the author afterward", they almost make it sound like if you falsely attributed the quote, it would be way more okay than using it without any credit at all, since you only really have to credit the author if you previously used the work uncredited.
I actually thought the recaptchas were kind of neat. I mean, when you complete one of those, you're actually helping to digitise some kind of book or document. It almost made me feel a small sense of pride to know I was contributing to some kind of noble project to preserve knowledge just by filling out a silly scrambled-letter puzzle.
Although, after watching Solve's video, I guess I can agree that typing stuff out of ads is more fun than just watching them clog up a page. If this could reduce banner ads, I'd be all for it.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Takumi.