Just a minor nitpick:
It's the Pirate Party UK, not the UK pirate party...
/me is a member.
/pedant :p
regards,
Vijay
On 17 March 2010 00:37, Tim Dobson li...@tdobson.net wrote:
Hi there,
I've just found out that Andrew Robinson, leader of the UK Pirate Party[1]
will be speaking in
AFAIK there's no competing Peoples Front of Judea ^W ^W ^W ^W Pirate
party. It's just important to maintain a brand image. That, and I'm a
pedant.
Vijay.
On 17 March 2010 11:32, Alex Mace a...@hollytree.co.uk wrote:
Is this the Judean People's Front?
Alex
On 17 Mar 2010, at 11:18, vijay
) The Director General shall also be the editor-in-chief of the BBC.
As such, he shall be accountable for the BBC’s editorial and creative
output.
On 5 March 2010 12:55, vijay chopra vjcho...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, ultimately he's responsible fore everything, but he must delegate
operational
Yes, ultimately he's responsible fore everything, but he must delegate
operational matters.
Vijay
On 5 March 2010 12:20, Brian Butterworth briant...@freeview.tv wrote:
That will be the Editor in Chief, otherwise known as the DG Mark Thompson.
On 4 March 2010 20:44, vijay chopra vjcho
Another 16 here if anyone wants one.
2009/11/27 Tim Dobson li...@tdobson.net
Brian Butterworth wrote:
Hi folks,
I have some Google Wave invites left .. please let me know if you would
like one.
I also have 16 left. If you'd like one, you're welcome.
I wouldn't get excited though.
The problem with varying copyright terms by medium is that it gets confusing
for the average person, however I (and a majority of the PPUK) agree with
you about copyright being used for reasons other than purely financial. This
is one of the reasons for the debate about when the 5+5 copyright term
There's only one way to be sure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQYPCPB1g3o
2009/2/25 David Greaves da...@dgreaves.com
So here we are, a month after Which? gave out the same dumb advice the BBC
follows:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technology/newsid_791/7910045.stm
Compare that link with http://www.google.com/chrome1
It seems as though they're going to put somthing there. Also see the last
line of the slashdot story:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/01/162224
*While Google provided the URL www.google.com/chrome there's nothing up
there yet.*
I googled the first part of their email tryphenaconsultancymarkets and got
this: http://www.tryphenaconsultancymarkets.co.uk/ , but they seem to be
unrelated (their contact adress isn't a hotmail one), so not only is it spam
but it's trying to impersonate somone else. I believe deception is a
.
2008/5/15 vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Right, it was Cridland on a drunken rampage wasn't it? ;p
On the topic of the website redesign, which one of you guys sent the
email
that made it into Private Eye this week (Eye 1210 p12 Birtspeak 2.0) It
was
a masterpiece.
regards
these error messages less verbose, for obvious
reasons...
Aaron
(Product manager, BBC blogs)
--
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *vijay chopra
*Sent:* 15 May 2008 12:20
*To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
*Subject:* [backstage] Who
][mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]https://mail.google.com/mail?view=cmtf=0[EMAIL
PROTECTED]]
*On Behalf Of *vijay chopra
*Sent:* 15 May 2008 14:50
*To:*
backstage@lists.bbc.co.ukhttps://mail.google.com/mail?view=cmtf=0[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
*Subject:* Re: [backstage] Who spilled coffee on the server
At work today we were pointed in the direction of the Beebs Webwise course:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/course/
(Not for us, I work in a Library; it's a useful resource for our less
internet savvy users)
Whilst playing around I had a look at the jargon buster:
Hi guys,
does anyone else get a 502 error when trying to post to Justin Web's blog:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/2008/04/letting_it_all_out.html#commentsanchor
Times of London indeed... he's gone all colonial ;p
Vijay.
On 27/03/2008, Adam Leach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 23:46 +, James Cridland wrote:
* Yes, yes, RealPlayer. I'm working on it, though, for radio. Expect
to see changes in May.
Does this mean we might finally get something similar to the streams
that are provided
To play devils advocate:
I don't think it's the politics. From what I understand through recent
discussions on and off list, it's more to do with (as always) keeping
rights' holders happy.
I think that the actual BBC staff would love to hear the various hacks that
people here come up with (be
It seems that Mr Highfield is another person who thinks that being able to
change your user agent makes you an evil h4x0r.
If he persona in real life is the same as that BBC PR dept. projects I feel
really sorry for those of you on this list he line manages, or indeed any of
you who need to talk
I like the way that the article suggests I'm suddenly a 1337 h4x0r because I
can chnge the user agent on my browser.
Vijay.
On 13/03/2008, Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thought that people might find this interesting:
to
mislead: propaganda. Though I probably shouldn't attribute to malice what's
adequately explained by stupidity.
Vijay
On 13/03/2008, Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
vijay chopra wrote:
I like the way that the article suggests I'm suddenly a 1337 h4x0r
because I can chnge the user agent
I'm sorry I just despair for the journalists in this country. In theory they
should be a paragon of virtue, holding authority to account, uncovering
misdeeds and campaigning on behalf of the citizenry.
Instead we get dumbing down and catering to the lowest common denominator;
and then they wonder
First there is no such thing as the EUCD law, all EU member states
interpret and implement EU directives how they want.
I believe that the UK implementation of the EU copyright directive is The
Copyright and related rights regulations 2003
Are you sure you haven't got the font size turned up in Opera? I know that
I've had to turn it up/down in both IE and firefox before having
accidentally put it up for one reason or another.
I can't remember how it's done in Opera (and being at work I can't check)
but it's ctrl + or ctrl - in
On 21/01/2008, Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The one that says Don't push this button
.cf Licencing discussions ad infinitum...
Cheers
Maybe he pressed it to see what happens...
Aren't License flame wars fun? ;p
FWIW I personally prefer BSD\MIT style licenses as I consider
On 11/01/2008, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Suggestions for how developers can make decisions on these issues
rationally would be welcome :-)
I'd say just use some common sense: i.e. in your examples linking to Amazon
is probably OK as it helps the artist, but linking to Ebay
Wow! I leave it for a night, and the debate rages on. I not going to write
an essay on the subject, so I'll try and address the important points as I
see them, in a concise a manner as possible.
First, Michael I can confirm that I am in fact a male (it's generally a male
name, though you will
On 06/12/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I disagree totally. Code functions; it does stuff. There is a craft to
making code, and that can be compared to the craft of making artwork,
but artworks themselves do not function.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree.
But its
On 06/12/2007, David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMH(umble)O:
GPLv3 cares about making the code available and, if forced to, would
rather not
benefit people who won't share than allow them not to share.
You care about making your code (re-)usable, but, if forced to, would
rather
On 06/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
benefit people who won't share than prevent your code from being used
by
Why would you want to benefit selfish people?
It's called leading by example.
However, this is your choice
On 06/12/2007, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, so we're not concerned with our users unless they behave in the
right way and share the same interests and abilities as us.
No, if people wish to use any software (yes, even non-free) they need to
learn how to do it. If they
On 06/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just because you don't like or because it challenges your beliefs it
doesn't
make it FUD, it's a legitimate argument about the nature of freedom
and
how it relates to software freedom
On 05/12/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 04/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I expect the BBC will use an in house licence to fit it's needs as set
out
in the charter.
I strongly hope that the BBC will not contribute to the problem of
license
On 05/12/2007, Matt Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see that quote on that page. Please don't misquote us :)
I apologise, it wasn't deliberate; the point however stands, what about
TIVO's
freedom to run the program, for *any* purpose
(emphasis mine)?
They comply with the rules, you
On 05/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 05/12/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 05/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My usual response to this argument is that essentially you are asking
for the freedom to restrict the freedom. This is patently
On 05/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Free expression is totally different from free action. While I think
you should be allowed to state a racist opionion I do not thinkk you
should be able to take action on it.
Code is just expression, thus it's like any other form of
On 05/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would you argue that we don't live in a free society because I am not
allowed to gag you when you're saying something I don't like? By your
arguments I should have this freedom.
Your analogy would only hold true if code was an action or
On 05/12/2007, Brendan Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We haven't used a custom license for releasing code yet, and I don't see
why we should start now...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/opensource/licensing.shtml
Fair enough, in that case for this project the BSD or Apache licenses make
the most sense
That's exactly my argument Andy,
As you say, you are free to disagree, but in every society there has to be a
balance of freedoms (even free speech doesn't extend to yelling fire in a
crowded theatre), I think GPLv2 was OK, and something I could just about
live with (despite it's many flaws);
On 05/12/2007, Matt Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The idea of the 'tivoisation' clause is to ensure that if you buy a
piece of hardware that runs GPL licensed software, that the source code
made available to you, by the manufacturer can be modified and run on
the hardware.
The issue with
On 05/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My usual response to this argument is that essentially you are asking
for the freedom to restrict the freedom. This is patently absurd.
Actually I'd compare free speech; it's not free speech unless it difficult
to hear what I'm saying.
On 04/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IANAL and I haven't properly read the GPLv3 (so I may be talking
bollocks) but I am under the impression that things have been changed
ensure greater protection for the users freedoms. That the licence is
more complex is a testament to the
On 04/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can I suggest that you licence the code under the GNU Affero GPL v3
please.
I expect the BBC will use an in house licence to fit it's needs as set out
in the charter.
As an aside I still don't understand the need for GPLv3, as far as I can
Ah, good old Panorama, now more sensationalist and less reliable than your
average blog.
For what it's worth, I also made a complaint about that episode to Ofcom;
they claimed that it was outside their remit* and referred me to the BBC
Trust. I didn't pursue it any further.
I read this somewhere
On 28/11/2007, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
**
So can you give us any indication of when the technologists will have
completed the prototype of the journalist that doesn't need food or shelter?
I believe that it's called the professional
On 28/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
So can you give us any indication of when the technologists will have
completed the prototype of the journalist that doesn't need food or shelter?
Apparently it's already with us. It's called a 'blogger. Can't
generally write for
On 27/11/2007, Nick Reynolds-AMi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me play devil's advocate for a moment.
Making more things free and open only benefits a small group of
technologists who are clever enough to know how to use the results.
I see no problem with this, in fact it's a good thing, it
, when you get HURD running, then you can call it a
GNU operating system.
Vijay.
On 20/11/2007, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20/11/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20/11/2007, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aside from the OS itself, I use (almost) exclusively
On 20/11/2007, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Windows is an operating system. GNU is an operating system.
Ubuntu is a brand name for a particular combination of the GNU/Linux OS
plus other software. Linux is a registered trademark for a kernel.
If Ubuntu replaced Linux with another
You can't deliberately invoke Godwins law:
http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/G/Godwins-Law.html
So the silliness is set to continue.
Vijay.
On 09/11/2007, Martin Deutsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/9/07, Matthew Cashmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hitler
A rather crude invocation of
On 09/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1149.html
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2549.html
Hehe, RFC1149 never fails to make me laugh, I've never seen RFC2549 before
though:
Avian carriers normally bypass bridges and tunnels but will seek out
worm
I understand why you have to react this way Matthew, but after the
discussion on netiquette and politeness, you must admit that was expleteve
deleted hilarious.
Vijay.
On 09/11/2007, Matthew Cashmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going to say this once and once only - this is not appropriate
On 08/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In fact it is not. RFC 1855 says
You *may* shorten the message and quote only relevant parts, but be sure
you give proper attribution.
http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html
Please stop making up your own rules and then calling
On 08/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That makes you a noobie in my book! There is nothing polite about
making up your own rules and then claiming that they are netiquette.
But by following (someone else's) just as random rules makes you teh
1337 netequette god
On 08/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 08/11/2007, David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brian Butterworth wrote:
Yes, I am sure you do. That's your opinion. I'm sure I probably
don't
agree with it as I'm sure that I regard etiquette as something for Mrs
. with no real problems. Exactly what is
the problem DRM is supposed to solve again?
Vijay.
On 06/11/2007, David McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
vijay chopra wrote:
Of course, this raises the question, is he misleading deliberately, or
just
misinformed? Considering his recent faux pas it's
On 07/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NEVAR JOKE! TEH INTRAWEBS ARE SERIOUS F**KING BUSINESS.
And here I was thinking that they were just an ordinary series of tubes...
I stand corrected.
Vijay.
On 06/11/2007, Richard Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/11/07 18:29, vijay chopra [EMAIL
PROTECTED]https://mail.google.com/mail?view=cmtf=0[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I notice Ashley's misleading people again. From his blog-post:
We do maximise the reach
Just read
thishttp://www.tech.co.uk/computing/internet-and-broadband/news/bbc-not-in-bed-with-bill-gates-over-iplayer?articleid=36522951
interview with Mr Highfield
Highfield used the numbers of non-Windows users visiting bbc.co.uk as
justification for the corporation's XP-only release. We have
of a mistake made somewhere down
the line :)
--
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]https://mail.google.com/mail?view=cmtf=0[EMAIL
PROTECTED][mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]https://mail.google.com/mail?view=cmtf=0[EMAIL
PROTECTED]]
*On Behalf Of *vijay chopra
*Sent:* 01 November
On 31/10/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
your unalterable right to copy what you
want, when you want. You don't say you should be able to make limited
'fair use' copies for... - no, you repeatedly state that it's your
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Removing one revenue stream. There are obviously other revenue streams.
Live gigs (although this isn't an option for some artists), merchandise
etc. However, the concept of selling records is critical to most
professional bands.
On 31/10/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW I think it's a more powerful argument to state that the value of
a recording per-se is now tending towards zero, digital tech having
removed scarcity from much of the value chain.
The business models which recognise this will thrive
On 31/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not it isn't.
You failed to show either of the only 2 things needed:
1) That the software is not Open Source.
2) That the software is not DRM.
What was stated was that there is no open source digital rights
management.
Your
On 30/10/2007, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However it's nowhere near as simple as just copying the files and
burning them to DVD
...
My point? it's not always as easy to take an off air broadcast and put it
online.
I see you've never tried Myth TV, my box is in the process
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
copying someone else's work when they've specifically asked you not to,
and giving it away is theft - it is NOT sharing.
Rich.
Actually, that's copyright infringement, not theft; big difference, one's a
criminal act, the other is a
On 30/10/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's rubbish. Utter, utter rubbish. You copy a CD and give it to
your mate, that's all about money - or rather it's all about not wanting to
pay money. Your friend may think that CD's overpriced and so wouldn't pay
the (say)
As I said in a previous email, as well as the legal differences, there is a
big ethical difference; with one I don't deprive the original owner of use
of their property the other is theft.
Vijay.
On 30/10/2007, Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andy wrote:
Copyright Infringement is NOT
On 27/10/2007, Gordon Joly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Media Wiki (it's not just for Wikipedia)
I know. I run at least four wikis using Mediawiki
Gordo
Out of interest, why did you choose MediaWiki out of all the Wiki engines
out there? Recently I've been looking at Wiki technology,
On 25/10/2007, ~:'' ありがとうございました。 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David,
the most significant issue is that no open source project outside
possibly wikipedia is truly popular.
NB wikipedia is not an application or tool.
That would explain the unpopularity of a LAMP development envionment then
On 18/10/2007, Simon Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finally we might be able to do things propery!
We've been working on a podcast browser for iPhone which is in alpha at
the moment
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/podcasts/directory/iphone/ -- note: requires
Safari to view, or an
On 16/10/2007, Dan Brickley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Barry Carlyon wrote:
I had heard that one of the student radio stations was building a flash
player for their radio stream for the wii…..
FWIW Flash works in Opera on the wii,
http://www.opera.com/products/devices/nintendo/
Dan
On 17/10/2007, Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Davy Mitchell wrote:
Anyone tried the DS Browser? Was considering it but the fact it loses
cookies when powered off makes me wary :-)
Yes - it's a nice little tool, elegantly implemented. It has the
potential to be a really nice
On 17/10/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I want Apple to team up with Nintendo, then we could have the iWii...
Personally I think the Wii looks as though it was made by apple anyway, It's
certainly one of the best looking consoles that have ever been made, and has
an apple
On 08/10/2007, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was with you up until this point:
- probably the most pioneering (Radio 1) media brand online in the UK
But that's probably just because I can't stand Radio 1...
Personally I think a much more valuable contribution to society, and
On 26/09/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Remember that ALL the voting where you are asked to pay for the call or
text are simply revenue collection systems, not statistically valid ones.
The adjudicators (on Big Brother for example) simple verify that the
number of calls
On 26/09/2007, Gordon Joly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most of my sites are built with Emacs...
Gordo
We all know you love vi really... ;p
Personally I use notepad++
http://notepad-plus.sourceforge.net/uk/site.htm for my web development
needs; I've heard it's good with other languages too,
Whilst I applaud your effort, I inherently distrust online polls, and cs
disclaimed on a site that we're all familiar with:
This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers,
dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything
important, you're insane.
So
On 26/09/2007, Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leaving the last digit from the last octet out would be fine, though?
Then you could group by IP addresses for purposes like fraud checking and
suchlike. I'm sure the BBC sites always say that standard information such
as browser and
I saw that as well. though I signed the petition, I'm not really bothered
any more. I just use my windows partition and just strip all my iPlayer
downloads of their DRM with the help of the guys over at doom 9:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=127943 . That way I can watch them
wherever I
James, you may be interested to know that that link (presumably your blog)
is blocked by Websense (yes, I work Saturdays); apparently:
The Websense category Social Networking and Personal Sites is filtered.
What exactly do you have on there. I'm intrigued... I'm certainly going to
check it out at
Hehe, I know the people who run my local web cafe, fortunatly they're
nothing like that and still let people do virtually anything that dosn't
take up large amounts of bandwidth. They use Deep Freeze (
http://www.faronics.com/html/deepfreeze.asp) to limit ant damage.
Personally I like to confuse
it asked why Mr
Highfield hates children...) about two months ago, and I reported it too...
http://www.ukfree.tv/fullstory.php?storyid=1107051264
On 21/08/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL
PROTECTED]https://mail.google.com/mail?view=cmtf=0[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So I finally decided that iPlayer
Exactly where in the T Cs does it say thou shalt not port iPlayer to
another platform?
(If someone point's out a clause in the EULA, I shall point and laugh).
Personally I'd think that Auntie would be glad for the help, the Beeb is
comitted to making iPlayer platform neutral, right?
Vijay.
On
in these Terms and to the extent permitted by law;
I think Google call this the usual yar di dar...
On 22/08/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL
PROTECTED]https://mail.google.com/mail?view=cmtf=0[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Exactly where in the T Cs does it say thou shalt not port iPlayer to
another
others with the BBC iPlayer Library in whole or
part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms and to the extent
permitted by law;
I think Google call this the usual yar di dar...
On 22/08/07, *vijay chopra* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Exactly where
No slashdot it?
http://it.slashdot.org/faq/tags.shtml#tags300
Soon we're going to have more social bookmarking icons than actual
content...
Vijay
On 21/08/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For any PHP people out there, here's a function I wrote to do these
bookmark things...
On 16/08/07, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The general population have an interesting respect laws and rules -
demand complete and total implementation of the ones they really like,
whilst ignoring the ones they don't. You only have to look at how many
people break the speed limit
On 15/08/07, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If a drinks company is giving away a can of drink free at a railway
station (which happens), does that entitle you to go into Sainsburys and
take one without paying for it?
No, that would be stealing, I would be depriving the original
It seems you made it to the slashdot frontpage!
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/15/1721229
Vijay
On 15/08/07, Matthew Cashmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well. When I was interviewing at about 10:45 there were 12 people
there
(that's when I took the photos) Ian then came down
PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/08/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You missed the goings on at DefCon:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/03/232227from=rss
,
Though technically that was last week, it's the funniest (tech related)
thing I've seen in ages.
Vijay
Indeed
On 13/08/07, Matthew Cashmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For everyone else sending in links it may be an idea to send them to me
off-list so it doesn't become a mess of links every week.
Yeah, I realised I probably should have done that right after I clicked
send...
Also, where did you find
You missed the goings on at DefCon:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/03/232227from=rss ,
Though technically that was last week, it's the funniest (tech related)
thing I've seen in ages.
Vijay
On 10/08/07, Matthew Cashmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or rather 10 things that made us
On 02/08/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
secondly who buys a PVR that DRMs your recording?!
My friends tell me that their Sky+ boxes are highly restrictive.
Again, who (that is assuming sanity) buys the ridiculously overpriced
monstrosity that is Sky+ ?
On that note, what
On 02/08/07, Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And, now that Sky have dropped their £10/pm fee for the Sky+ features for
all customers, the V3 box has gone down in price too and it won't be much
longer until it's £30/40/free! I'd love to have a TiVo setup for Sky, but
that idea died
On 01/08/07, Paul Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The choice of the BBC not to use these is almost certainly because of the
ability to hack them. Imagine if they released a system based on something
open and it got hacked within 3 days?
There's already a hacked version of iPlayer, it's
On 01/08/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/08/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not advocating eye patches and peg legs here, but personally I don't
see
a moral difference between getting something that's available on demand
free
from iPlayer via other means
Hi Dave,
Sun opened Java a while ago: http://www.sun.com/2006-1113/feature/
it's free now.
Vijay.
On 27/07/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Another glimpse at the future of television:
http://www.rulecam.net/ted/
(Free software under MIT/X11 style licensing, although its
On 24/07/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, to summarise; we couldn't implement the player on all popular
platforms then (which we realise is a problem), but we are working to
do it now, and we'll get the system out to the majority of users now,
hitting our initial target launch
On 25/07/07, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We really don't mind talking about this...
thanks
Jem
I know that you guys don't mind talking Jem; the intent of my FOI request
was to get full, detailed *documentation* behind many of the important
decisions behind iPlayer.
I have to say
On 25/07/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You won't get anything, the FOI Act makes provision for the witholding of
documentation relating to commercial negotiations.
The whole point of the BBC is that it's not a commercial entity (at least
domestically). Besides, if I don't
On 24/07/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More seriously, if there's no announcement about (at the least) a
release date for a version for Mac by the end of the year, they may
have a point, but at the moment I still say the BBC are doing
absolutely the right thing, given the
1 - 100 of 189 matches
Mail list logo
