Spork Boards

Loonie Legislators and that Wacky Webernet Thingo

John Willoughby's Avatar Picture John Willoughby – December 31, 2007 10:13PM Reply Quote
The topic that just keeps on giving.

johnny k – October 18, 2012 05:47PM Reply Quote
It's not that. It's "If you want to authorize users to print your models, you have to pay us." I doubt it will stand, but if it did, it might encourage non-DRMed models to avoid the patent.

John Willoughby – October 18, 2012 08:02PM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
I'm worried that it will get baked into the printers and, in typical DRM overreach, end up strangling a nascent technology.

ARL (Moderator) – November 08, 2012 02:51PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!

John Willoughby – November 20, 2012 11:27AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
It turns out that that a bill intended to protect Americans' online privacy turned out to be a great place to add amendments stripping them of that privacy.

Feel like the FCC and SEC and 20 other government agencies ought to be able to read your e-mail without notifying you or a judge? Then this is the bill for you!

Otherwise, Americans should contact their senators (http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm) and tell them that you are opposed to Leahy's amendments to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/20/2012 11:28AM by John Willoughby.

John Willoughby – November 20, 2012 11:58AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!

John Willoughby – November 20, 2012 12:41PM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!

El Jeffe – November 20, 2012 01:32PM Reply Quote
What a journey.
Is it cynical to think they see Apple as a Democratic-leaning company with of all people Al Gore on their board as partially a drive to unseat Apple?
I dunno.

James DeBenedetti – November 20, 2012 02:04PM Reply Quote

Almost only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.

johnny k – November 20, 2012 03:18PM Reply Quote
That's too bad - what have Republicans got to lose now? They've proven ineffective at blowing donors' money on campaigns; might as well appeal to the techno-literate/youth vote with something of actual substance.

Leahy has been doing this shit for a while, which makes me think he's just an old confused coot. But hey, electronic civil liberties is not a left/right divide, at least not in a world where Obama is on the left. I think it's more of a corporate interests thing. New senators on both sides are less beholden and more principled about this stuff, like Franken and some of the Tea Partiers.

James DeBenedetti – November 20, 2012 04:50PM Reply Quote
Quote
johnny k
That's too bad - what have Republicans got to lose now? They've proven ineffective at blowing donors' money on campaigns; might as well appeal to the techno-literate/youth vote with something of actual substance.

What they have to lose is the primary. As the moderates leave, the shrinking remainder of the party will move further rightward, to the point where it's completely irrelevant - like the Republicans are now in California.

ARL (Moderator) – November 21, 2012 12:33AM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
Quote

House Republicans: Copyright Law Destroys Markets; It's Time For Real Reform

Wow - kudos but we're officially in opposite-world now...

James DeBenedetti – November 21, 2012 05:50AM Reply Quote
Not really. There was no chance it would ever happen. I would take it less seriously than Republican plans to eliminate the Federal Reserve and return to the gold standard.

John Willoughby – February 14, 2013 09:20AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!

ARL (Moderator) – February 14, 2013 04:37PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
I can't believe he said that with a straight face...

ARL (Moderator) – February 14, 2013 04:38PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
DPBD!

Quote

"He’s the conductor of his own crazy train," one of Smith's fellow legislators told Fox News.

Gold.

ARL (Moderator) – February 15, 2013 04:44PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
TPBD!

This is more "loonie software CEOs" than legislators.

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/adobe-has-its-head-in-the-clouds-over-pricing-20130215-2ehat.html

Quote

The main questions journalists wanted answered were to do with Adobe gouging Australians on price when it comes to selling software such as Photoshop in Australia. As pointed out by many, including tech website Gizmodo, it's actually cheaper to pay for a return airfare ticket to the US and purchase one particular collection of Adobe's software there than it is to buy it here in Australia - and even then you'll end up with $601 worth of savings, points and a holiday!

Frankly, I think the Australian govt should provide further assistance to help these companies price themselves out of the market. Say, a 100% tariff, the proceeds of which are used to subsidise and promote cheaper competitors with international parity pricing policies.

Or maybe Australia needs to threaten to "do a china" and instruct law enforcement agencies to place a "lower priority" on copyright infringements of know price-gougers.

That'll never happen of course, there's so many companies on that list that law enforcement authorities wouldn't be policing anyone.

John Willoughby – January 23, 2015 07:38PM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
Wow. Touch ID is insecure. Write down an ID number for every transaction. Quick and rock-solid secure. This guy's got his finger on the pulse of the Future.

El Jeffe – January 24, 2015 03:30AM Reply Quote
What a journey.
heard on TWIT MBW where some shops have been asking for ID, signature and/or PIN, iirc. regardless of this.

I am more a precious metals guy. these bits and bops don't mean nuthin'

ARL (Moderator) – February 15, 2015 04:00PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
How's that metadata thing going in the US, btw?

I understand it's helped with exactly one (1) terrorism related case (some cab driver silly enough to donate money to a terror group online).

But never mind that, our Attorney-General, who has such a clear nuanced grasp of what meta data is wants to bring in mandatory data retention for 2 (maybe 5, they're not sure yet) years, even though they admit people can avoid it by simply using hotmail, yahoo or gmail.

Because freedom.

Freedom for Hollywood studios prosecuting copyright cases.

A snippet of Senator Scott Ludlum grilling some Bureaucrat:

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4172660.htm

Quote

SCOTT LUDLAM: So if my email account is an @iinet.net.au address, it will be within scope. And if my email is an @gmail.com, it'll be out of scope.

WILL OCKENDEN: That's Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, who was quizzing the Attorney-General's Department as part of a review by a Senate Committee of the Telecommunications Interception and Access Act.

SCOTT LUDLAM: All I need to do to avoid mandatory data retention is just to take a webmail service.

WILL OCKENDEN: Webmail includes services like Gmail, Hotmail or Yahoo.

Anna Harmer is from the Attorney-General's Department.

ANNA HARMER: I don't know that it's quite as simple as that for the reasons that I set out previously in relation to the Telecommunications Services.

SCOTT LUDLAM: Why is it more complex than that? If I use a cloud hosting provider or Gchat, or something like that, I won't be caught.

If I use an iinet or an Internode address, I will be caught. If it's more complex, please explain how it's more complex.

ANNA HARMER: So it's correct that iinet, Internode as an Australian carrier service provider, depending on which part of the entity you're using, is subject to the obligations.

Gmail itself, or Google as an entity, is not subject to the obligations. So that is in relation to the provision of the email service.

WILL OCKENDEN: Because services like Gmail use encryption for users who send mail via the web browser, it makes it very hard for authorities to know who is talking to who.

Which is a pity for the metadata retention scheme, as that is the entire point of it.

SCOTT LUDLAM: Are you trying to drive people away from Australian service providers?

ANNA HARMER: I think we've articulated the intent of the bill and the Government's articulated the intent of the bill in terms of its coverage.

SCOTT LUDLAM: Is that an unintended consequence, that you will be driving people away from Australian service providers?

ANNA HARMER: No, no Senator.

SCOTT LUDLAM: It's intended?

ANNA HARMER: I wouldn't frame it in those terms, Senator. I think, you know, the Government has made it clear that the obligation applies in relation to service providers who maintain their business and their infrastructure here in Australia.

ARL (Moderator) – March 15, 2015 04:57PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
DPBD!

Well, at least this guy gets it:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/media-and-marketing/netflix-ceo-ready-for-fight-with-stan-and-presto-20150316-142av3.html

Quote

Mr Hastings said he had no concerns with estimates that as many as 200,000 Australians are already using virtual private networks to access its US service using location-faking technology.

"At least they're not torrenting or pirating," he said. If the company succeeds with its goal of completing international expansion by 2016, "there will be no need to VPN".

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login