I’ve been trying to resist, but I know that, come November 9th, I’ll probably be in a queue somewhere for an iPhone.
“Dozens if not hundreds of users are reporting extremely slow transfer speeds to and from .Mac servers in Europe. This Apple Discussions thread harbors a number of the complaints.
In most cases, users report that when they connect to a .Mac Gallery they are unable to download content at speeds faster than 80 KB/sec, regardless of connection type, making the Gallery feature virtually unusable for both Images and Video. However, downloads or uploads to iDisks take place at normal speeds. This would seem to indicate some sort of cap on transfer speed for the former (.Mac galleries and hosted sites).”
“There’s a little problem, though. Even by the woeful standards of the bespoke research industry, this study is a crock. It’s not just bad; it’s absurd.
What the authors have done is to define the ‘fair-use economy’ so broadly that it encompasses any business with even the most tangential relationship to the free use of copyrighted materials. Here’s an example of the tortured logic by which they force-fit vast, multifaceted industries into the ‘fair use’ category: Because ‘recent advances in processing speed and software functionality are being used to take advantage of the richer multi-media experience now available from the web,’ then the entire ‘computer and peripheral equipment manufacturing industry’ qualifies as a ‘fair-use industry.’ As does the entire ‘audio & video equipment manufacturing’ business. And the entire software publishing industry. And the entire telecommunications industry. And – hey, why not? – the entire insurance industry. Stock markets and commodity exchanges? Sure, throw them in, too.”
What is it about debates that means that, so often, both sides think it’s OK just to talk shit and hope no one notices on the grounds that “he did it first”?
As I tend to oppose the more whacky fringe of anti-copyright partisans, I sometimes get mistaken for one of those rabid pro-MPAA loons. Nothing could be further from the truth, but I thought I’d state, once and for all, what I believe about copyright.
1. Copyright itself is a good for society. It gives artists a time-limited monopoly on their work, thus providing them with an income and an incentive to do more original work.
2. However, the present copyright terms have twisted that benefit largely away, to the point where it’s easy to make the mistake that copyright itself is a bane. Because copyright terms are now so long, for some artists it has removed the incentive to continue creating new work in favour of seeing work as a form of “pension plan”.
3. Hence, what we need to do is reduce copyright terms to a more reasonable level. My suggestion would be a straight 25 years, with copyright ending when you die. I see no reason why the children of content creators should make one penny from the work of their parents. It’s not like anyone else’s work carries on making money after their death.
So there you go. That’s my view on copyright in a nutshell. I have long essay that I’m working on at the moment, in which I think I’ll be able to demonstrate that the only people who would benefit from an end to copyright would be large corporations, but that’s for another day.
The inventor of DNA fingerprinting has offered to act as an expert witness in the Madeleine McCann case.
Sir Alec Jeffreys said DNA matches alone did not establish guilt and all Madeleine’s genetic characters would be found in at least one family member.
I hope that Sir Alec will be making the same offer to the hundreds of people in the UK convicted every year because of "infallible" DNA evidence.
When looking at this case, I’m reminded constantly of one simple fact: according to the NSPCC, nearly 80% of child murders are committed by the parents. Given that fact alone, the police would be negligent if they weren’t investigating Mr and Mrs McCann very closely indeed, and regard them, in the absence of other evidence, as the main suspects in the case. No matter how painful that might be, it’s simply a fact.
If you’re using Windows, then you might want to go and check out Windows Live Writer, which has just had an update. It’s one of the nicest blogging applications on any platform – up there with MarsEdit for Mac (although that’s great for different reasons).
Some highlights of this release:
Insert videos using our new ‘Insert Video’ dialog
Upload images to Picasaweb when publishing to your Blogger blog
Publish XHTML-style markup
Use Writer in 28 additional languages
Print your posts
Justify-align post text
Better image handling (fewer blurry images)
Dan Frommer thinks not:
“So is 1 million a good number or not? It’s not — not even by Apple’s own low-ball public sales goals. Jobs has announced plans to sell 10 million iPhones by the end of 2008 — a year and a half after launch. But a million iPhones in 74 days works out to a little less than 5 million iPhones per year — if you’re selling them at a consistent rate. Apple sold 270,000 machines in the first two frenzied days it was on sale, which means it took 72 more days to sell another 700,000 phones. That’s a 3.6 million annual run rate, which would give Jobs a total of 5.8 million by the end of 2008…”
Of course, as Frommer points out, the iPhone is only available in the US at present, and a good European launch might well see it through. But it will be interesting to see just how well the iPhone sells, and if that 10 million phone target can really be met.