alexqgb

39 ms·

361.
by alexqgb 12y ago
What you just described would increase the amount of work involved by a factor of 10 (in round numbers). So "should" it? Given that you paid nothing for it, the better question is why should anyone give a fig about what you think
362.
by alexqgb 12y ago
No questions, just wanted to say that this is magnificent work. The "X miles to Baghdad" is an especially nice touch.
363.
by alexqgb 12y ago
That's EXACTLY the problem. If there's one set of people on planet Earth who Comcast should absolutely, positively NEVER be allowed to hire it's the people who are currently overseeing them. Frankly, it should go without sayi
364.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Believe it or not, regulators actually maintain some independence from the Executive. Were that not that case, this would be more of a scandal, as opposed to the standard sleaze that has become (ahem) par for the course in DC.
365.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Um, we're talking about regulators (i.e. law enforcement) and the people they regulate. If the former sees the latter as "a potential business lead" thing have already gotten way, way off track.
366.
by alexqgb 12y ago
The problematic part is being robotic. Being stone-cold is another matter entirely.
367.
by alexqgb 12y ago
If you're a decent regulator, it's your job to be a cold. That's basically the whole point. You don't need to be an asshole, but you should damn well insist on deference and distance. By way of analogy, can you imagine
368.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Seems foolish to change. Unlike every other app Adobe offers, LR is also a library. Renting access to your own assets is categorically different from renting access to software which is already somebody else's IP and is also getting (m
369.
by alexqgb 12y ago
It's not that they're mixing signals from multiple antennas, it's that they're running all the signals through the same transcoding system before delivering them, which breaks any concept of individual streams from recep
370.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Putting aside the smoke and mirrors of the "individual antennas" for just a moment, the basic issue is unavoidably clear. (1) These were retransmissions. (2) They were commercial. (3) That is illegal. If Aereo was run as a co-op,
371.
by alexqgb 12y ago
No it's not and no they aren't. You are not Aereo and Aereo is not you. That's the point. You can pull down content for your personal, non-commercial use, and Aereo can pull down content for its personal, non-commercial use,
372.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Here's how the arrangement was described last year in a Gigaom article. "the antennas are “multitenant” which means that, when one Aereo subscriber is not using an antenna at a given time, it is available to all other subscribers
373.
by alexqgb 12y ago
>Is it just because one involves repeated payments? No, it's illegal because it involves reselling streamed or broadcast content (as opposed to content on physical media which can be resold under the doctrine of first sale) which is
374.
by alexqgb 12y ago
The critical difference with Aero is that it's never your antenna. It's leased, not owned, and moreover, Aero treats the antennas themselves on a fungible basis, meaning that they they simply maintain a 1:1 relationship between th
375.
by alexqgb 12y ago
They're only out of luck if the owner refuses to install an antenna. But assuming that an antenna exists and that it sends connections to each apartment, then they're back in luck. If the owner amortizes the cost of this antenna a
376.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Define "maintain". If you mean "pay the guy who installed it to keep it in good working order", there's no problem. But if you mean "pay the guy who installed it to record everything that comes off the antenna
377.
by alexqgb 12y ago
"No need to be rude." Sorry, but I take offense at arguments that are stupid or dishonest. The Geek Squad analogy is not even remotely applicable since nothing owned or operated by the Geek Squad touches the content stream. Given
378.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Wait, do you not see the difference between a one-time transaction with a third party that installs equipment they neither own nor operate and that has nothing to do with content, and an ongoing service relationship with a company that both
379.
by alexqgb 12y ago
If the person you're paying is doing the work, then it's obviously not for their personal use. It's for yours. So they're doing it for money on someone else's behalf, which throws the "personal, non-commercia
380.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Limiting themselves to the philosophy of science may be the problem. Far better to start with a history of philosophy in general. Not only does this provide a better introduction to philosophy qua philosophy, it also provides the necessary
381.
by alexqgb 12y ago
GM, in the bad-old-days of planned obsolescence, was focused on screwing their customers. The F-35 program is designed to extract as much money as humanly possible from the US Treasury. There are pharmaceuticals designed the same way. In ta
382.
by alexqgb 12y ago
A 27" 4k touch-screen iMac would be perfect.
383.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Not actually the point I was making but an interesting paper nonetheless. When I said "relative" I meant "relative to the population as a whole", not "relative to the members of one's class from prior generatio
384.
by alexqgb 12y ago
And yet, for the last 30 years, the number of those who are successful relative to the rest of the population has suffered sharp decline. Do you honestly not know this? Or are you simply the sort of person who just doesn't mind?
385.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Outside of the SV bubble, it's extraordinarily difficult to fail without seeing your credit take a serious hit. And boy howdy is getting back on your feet hard when you (a) can't get an apartment, and (b) find yourself getting scr
386.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Don't kid yourself. There's a wide gulf between a worldview based on a few anecdotal successes and the more realistic picture emerging from a flood of statistics, which not only show the rarity of mobility, but indicate that it&#x
387.
by alexqgb 12y ago
That's not how divide and conquer works. Divide and conquer works by turning two groups against one another and not joining the fight. Instead, you wait for them do the most resource intensive damage first, then swoop in and conquer
388.
by alexqgb 12y ago
UX on the turn by turn directions is peerless. But the original promise (a search box for the real world) keeps coming up short. Indeed, the results seem to be getting more unfocused and incomplete as time goes by.
389.
by alexqgb 12y ago
My 2010 MBP, which is obviously getting long in the tooth, saw its battery life double with the Mavericks upgrade. That alone made the transition worth while. Plus, there were a ton of small refinements that I got used to very quickly. I
390.
by alexqgb 12y ago
Actually, they would, since doing so would cause their finances to implode. Defaulting to Google is how they keep the lights on. http://www.infoworld.com/t/open-source-software/who-still-pa...

More ›