Re: Re: Why is your so anti-IP?

It is quite hard to parse your sentences because they are so long and contain many clauses, but I'll give it a shot.

I think what you're saying is that "intellectual property is theft" (artificial and unfair), so stealing it back is morally equivalent.

The point is: if you want to strip human rights from individuals - and be honest with yourself for a second, this is exactly what you imply should happen as a 'solution' - then we want to hear a jolly good justification for doing so. It's never been necessary before, remember.

New technologies do sometimes require copyright to get a legislative tweak - because they usually add new rights to the existing bundle. Not the removal of rights.

By the way try not to use the word "troll". You seem very keen to label ideas and arguments that you don't like, and don't want to tackle, as "trolls" or "trolling". Perhaps you imagine that this somehow, magically, invalidates those arguments? It doesn't really work like that.

And why are you so terrified of using your real names alongside their argument? :-)

Re: Why is your so anti-IP?

Only the rich, eg trustafarians, can afford to work for nothing. Lucky duckies.

As Mark Bide pointed out here recently - people tend not to give a tuppeny fudge about either privacy rights, or their creative rights, until they need them - and realise they've lost them.

As for ripping people off in the name of the Common Good - I presume you've seen Hot Fuzz?

Re: Why?

"What do the Bureaucrats get out of damaging Copyright?"

Quite a lot.

In a market system, which is how most rights are traded, there's very little place for bureaucrats. But in an Extended Collective Licensing system, there are lots of new opportunities for regulators and jobsworths. Setting the price, vetting the participants, censoring things they don't like, and general poking around, etc.

All this comes at the expense of future opportunities for people wanting to trade those rights - because the markets don't exist. But it does ensure jobs for children of regulators who want to be regulators when they grow up.

Perfect, really.

Re: "Technical work will be undertaken by experts from across the media industry"

"Given the basis of copyright as a tool to secure a social good"

Indeed it is.

"...perhaps involving more than just those set to benefit financially might appropriate?"

You want to start a committee? :-)

I'm not necessarily disagreeing - but it certainly hasn't been necessary so far, because creative markets ensure that all the interests are aligned.

The brutal reality today however is that the people who benefit financially from the content are not the creators of that content. They get a free ride. Perhaps you might want to start there?

Fair point, thanks.

You're right, we can, but it will take a while.

It's been done - this was very common practice a few years ago:

see “I poisoned P2P networks for the RIAA” – whistleblower

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/01/17/i_poisoned_p2p_networks/

posted 17th January 2003

Re: Re: Irony? No.

Woooosh.

Re: Re: Misleading

Now that's what I call spin.

Re: Andrew - we know what you're against

If you're paying, I'm writing.

Re: Post deleted

Now there's a headline.

Re: Re: Fashion business

Nice one SleepyJohn.

Really parody of David Icke+style freetard nuttiness.

Re: Fashion business

Fashion is an IP industry. Amazed that anyone could think it isn't.

Re: Re: Britain's IP laws...... We are all Criminals

Politicians can pass laws making copyright last a million years and it wouldn't make any difference. If you can't enforce a law, it's meaningless. That's the point, and you've missed it.

(Because you have the need to feel that The Man is "screwing you")

Copyright term online is now about 45 seconds - and infringing online is pretty much guaranteed to be totally safe and free of a knock on the door.

So carry on Torrenting by all means, but don't pretend that you're being persecuted - it just makes you look nutty.

Re: Re: Britain's IP laws...... We are all Criminals

One company, Google, outspent Hollywood and the RIAA on SOPA lobbying.

Tech industries had more lobbyists and more access. The "buying laws" line may have been true once but isn't anymore. Nothing gets through. Or hadn't you noticed?

Re: Britain's IP laws...... We are all Criminals

Yes, good point: our jails are heaving full of parody writers and format shifters.

Is impersonating a Chelsea Pensioner still illegal? I think it is. Until recently it carried the death penalty.

So copyright needs a bit of perspective. But there's no room for it in the paranoid freetard mindset, where the punter is always being victimised by The Man.

Re: Re: Having followed the line of reasoning in this article as carefully as I can.........

Your numbers don't add up. The domination is imaginary, and tiny compared to established networks (US) and the BBC (UK).

What you're saying is:

"I really, really hate Murdoch, and I don't think he should be allowed to do business where I live."

Which is fine. But don't throw your toys out of the pram when people point out you're being irrational and medieval.

As for politicians: did Gordon Brown *really* have to invite the Murdochs to his daughter's funeral? Did Cameron *really* have to employ Andy Coulson?

Re: Burn the witch

Neither were nicked, neither were nicked part-way through a series.

Sky paid more money in deals on the open market.

And the new Mad Men got only 47,000 viewers on BSkyB, costing it £5 per episode per viewer. A real flop for BSkyB.

Re: Re: Counter historians

And the Guardian sub headline on that story?

EXCLUSIVE: Paper deleted missing schoolgirl's voicemails, giving family false hope

Followed by:

Milly Dowler's mother tells Clegg deleted messages gave her hope (BBC)

She's picked up her voicemails. She's alive!' Murdered Milly's mother tells Leveson Inquiry of the moment phone hackers gave her false hope (Mail)

etc

Re: Re: Brandon defies belief

The deletions gave the parents false hopes. This caused the outrage.

If I need somebody to tell me elephants can fly, Brangdon, you'll be the first person I call.

Re: Interesting article...

Very perceptive. The market share doesn't support the myth.

This is not a popular view, because people want their Keyser Sose:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/21/rupert_murdoch_more_myth_than_mogul/

Re: Re: Orlowski gets it wrong

No.

Next question?

Re: Counter historians

@Tim:

A story claiming that elephants can fly does not become true (or 'not false') because the story also happens to (correctly) point out that elephants have trunks.

"What seemed fairly certain was that they were not maliciously deleted by the NotW or it's agent in order to make room for more messages - something that was being alleged."

Yes.

Re: Orlowski gets it wrong

The Guardian story insinuated that NoW staff deleted voicemails giving the Dowler parents the false hope that their daughter was alive.

This caused huge public revulsion, leading to the NoW closure and Leveson. It was wrong: NoW staff did not delete emails. Voicemails were removed by the system as they were replaced by newer voicemails on a FIFO basis.

Your bias is preventing you from acknowledging this.

Re: Having followed the line of reasoning in this article as carefully as I can.........

Yes, there was no rational basis to refer the takeover on competition and plurality grounds. To block the merger on these grounds, Ofcom had to bend the rules. This is what it did.

As for "suitability", YMMV. But that's a separate argument.

Hunt referred the bid to the CoCo after BSkyB withdrew the undertakings, it had basically changed its mind about the takeover by then.

The rest of your post is interesting but speculative.

Re: Re: macros VB for apps?

"There is far, far to much teaching of button-pushing and nothing about the actual fundamentals (and how to tinker)."

Amen.

Teaching everyone the basics of network architecture, "what's a server?" would be useful.

Optional programming is fine by me.

Specialising earlier (as in France) is probably a very good idea.

But Mystical Rory's claim that we understand "the digital world" better with a bit of coding - induction? osmosis? - is weird.

Re: Really?

"What we have now is the beginnings of a global, indefinite tax on future culture. "

And giant shapeshifting lizards run the world, I hear.

Re: The the good, the bad and the ugly

Ross, I didn't dive into the issues because it's a mailbag not a soapbox.

Cracking interview coming up putting the case for programming in schools.

Is there are actually any disagreement that ICT today is rubbish, and that programming should be an option? None that I can see.

Re: Let the Flame wars begin.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/24/educating_rory/

Enjoy!

@Bob: Talking of scientists spouting off...

...there's a nice roundup of Hansen's predictions here:

http://hauntingthelibrary.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/james-hansen-1986-within-15-years-temps-will-be-hotter-than-past-100000-years/

@JMac

If a food industry reporter thought venison was a vegetable, I wouldn't "want to work with them to correct their errors".

Correcting that isn't point-scoring.

@Ruli

I was in danger of agreeing with you Ruli, until you mentioned compulsory LOGO lessons.

Compulsory LEGO, I have no problem with.

Re: Sigh.

You missed the bit where I did.

"childern"

"barate"

"chariterisation"

It would be daft to teach children coding when they leave school unable to spell.

(A cheap shot, guilty as charged).

Re: A couple of "really not corrects"

Extending copyright to APIs: well, you know what I think about that.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/17/google_oracle_copyright_on_languages/

I'm really surprised more people haven't picked up on it, because it has huge disruptive effects on the industry. And not in any good way.

The Lindholm email is just what it is. Page asked a very knowledgeable Java veteran what to do. The guy said: we need a license to do what we're doing. Google chose to poker bluff its way into court instead.

Re: Prohibition doesn't work

"Essentially, these bodies are fighting a war they cannot possibly win."

A bit of wishful thinking.

"When will these idiots realise"

As I wrote during the SOPA storm, legislation will keep coming back - creative industries (in music this is mostly small not large players) need to enforce their rights. Calling them idiots and pretending they don't have rights just makes sure nobody listens to you.

If you don't want legislation, enlightened self-regulation will do. Be part of the solution.

Howay! @Ross:

"Fracking is fine if they do it safely, but it;s a fairly big if."

...Driving is fine if they do it safely, but it's a fairly big if

...Open-heart surgery is fine if they do it safely, but it's a fairly big if.

...Commercial flight is fine if they do it safely, but it's a fairly big if.

(etc)

Let's find out how big that if is, then. And the benefits. CBA.

They need to innovate, and make buying stuff simpler. But you're living in 2003.

Re: OK for sharing, no good for secure backups

"And the difference between that and Dropbox is that the US Justice Dept. haven't shut Dropbox down yet ?"

It must be Talk Like An Idiot Day.

Megaupload deleted files which weren't accessed, and told uploaders *not* to rely on the service as a backup. Dropbox doesn't.

Megaupload was a criminal enterprise designed and used for copyright infringement. Dropbox isn't.

If you're finding any of this difficult to understand: just stay clear of the fat kid with the STONED, GUILTY and HACKER number plates.

Andy the Hat:

" legitimate account holders are now fighting to get their data "

Too bad. It is conceivable some legitimate users were hurt. Just about. The clues that this was a huge, honking criminal enterprise was not hard to spot. Even for a freetard. Megaupload warned people not to use it for backups.

"Why shouldn't any virtual host provider be subject to the same incompetent, iron fist approach?"

One you don't need me (or anyone else) to answer.

Re: Re: It's ridiculous...

Herr Spart,

"...and requires parties to pander to the reactionary middle ground"

Translation: "they don't pander enough to raging eco-zealots, like me"

But actually, you'll find MPs do little else - and the 0.5M rule is a terrific example of that. So are ROCs, the wonderful CO2 reduction targets legislated in Climate Change Act, which passed by 463 votes to 5, and so on.

If "reactionary middle england" objects to these proposals, it may be because it's the people who are paying the bill for the cranky ideas. As the costs and benefits become apparent,

"I'd recommend these MPs watch 'Gasland' and after that get some facts"

Including the faked footage?

Ah, but

... neither does Jimmy Wales, who has doctored the truth in his own entries several times. Thereby setting a precedent for "the encyclopedia anyone can edit"

If it's sauce for Jimbo, then it's sauce for the gander.

Re: A good article

"You can delete the whole journalist doing HTML part from the article and lose nothing."

That's very true, but I thought Rory's article was illustrative of the make-programming-compulsory campaign's mindset. And his Tweets were quite revealing too: kids won't start coding unless the authority figures says so. Really? It's very patronising.

Your point about Excel is a really good one: instead of "teaching programming" shouldn't we be teaching skills which use just happen to use computers? Excel can help with calculating NPV and regression analysis, the important thing here being the NPV or regression analysis.

"I also find it somewhat bizarre to find anyone arguing for the status quo in education today"

I would as well. But that bit has been inferred and was not implied.

Re: Andrew - you are wrong.

@RobL:

You make a good argument for teaching any one of 500 (or 5,000) subjects. It's not an argument for compulsory programming.

"how many great potential coders are there out there that don't even know it?"

Fair point. How many great potential pastry chefs or brewers are out there that don't even know it?

You're making the case for a broader education, not specifically for why programming should be a compulsory part of the curriculum.

" it'll expose them to something that completely inspires them and harnesses their analytical and logical skills."

Really? HTML. Drag and drop smartphone apps. Now you're projecting.

Re: A little bit of knowledge does no harm - it's essential

@Ian McNee:

- ICT is a compulsory part of Key Stage 3.

- The campaign is to include programming as part of ICT.

- Therefore, programming becomes compulsory.

It's quite simple. Logic really isn't your strong point, is it?

Re: Hobble-de-hoi

"There's nothing in the idea of teaching all children to do some programming that means we can't teach some children to be real programmers."

There is, and it's called opportunity cost. Teaching time is not infinite, so he one hour a week spent getting 30 pupils to dick about with HTML is an hour not spent doing teaching the good codeers those conceptual and analysis skills.

Re: Missed the point? or did I?

I dunno James, you're not selling it to me. Let's agree there's a dearth of good (elite) coders, that the UK economy would benefit from more, and encouraging the talented (maybe by streaming) in the education system would help create more.

What in buggery has that got to do with 15 year olds learning HTML?

Re: It might help give children a better model of what a computer is and does

Excel is a tool for doing lots of things. Eg,

http://www.economicsnetwork.ac.uk/themes/excel

A spreadsheet is essential for running a budget, or a business. Why would anyone have a problem with schoolchildren learning something so useful?

Re: The great land grab of the 21st century

Bakunin. Collectivist anarchism. Nobody owns anything, good will prevails.

Remind me again: how well has that worked out?