62722729
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
After seeing a drop in my DVD service from Netflix I got a customer service representative tonight to confirm that Netflix has ceased processing DVD returns on Saturdays nationwide. And that they did this without either notifying their customers, nor reducing prices to compensate for the reduced service. Given that the DVD selection still far outstrips their streaming selection, this may be news to others like myself who don't find streaming an adequate replacement for plastic discs. My experience up until recently, unlike Netflix's promise of a 1-3 day turnaround at their end which gives them lots of wiggle room to degrade service even further, had been of mailing in a DVD on day one, having them receive it and mail out my next selection on day two, and receiving it on day three. Now with them only working 5 days and many US Post Office holidays, they're still getting the same money for significantly less. Is Netflix still the good guy here?
18305586
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
Recently word leaked out about Amazon removing titles containing fictional incest. Surprisingly that ban didn't extend to the 10 titles of Science Fiction Grand Master Robert A. Heinlein that incorporate various themes of incest and pedophilia. Now, it seems that the censorship is expanding to m/m gay fiction if it contains the magic word "rape" in the title. Just how far is this going to be allowed to proceed in relative silence, and who is pushing these sudden decisions on Amazon's part?
12224520
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
Sharp Aquos brand televisions are making a big deal about their Quattron technology of adding a 4th yellow pixel to their RGB sets. While you can read a glowing review of it here, the engineer in me is skeptical because of how all the source material for this set is produced in 3-color RGB. I also know how just making a picture brighter and saturating the colors a bit can make it more appealing to many viewers over a more accurate rendition – so much for side-by-side comparisons. And I laugh at how you are supposed to see the advantages of 4-color technology in ads on your 3-color sets at home as you watch their commercials. It sounds more like hype to extract a higher profit margin than the next great advance in home television. So is it real?
11965336
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
I was informed by my publisher this week that they would have to raise my eBook prices because they planned to sell them through the Apple iBooks store. How could this happen? A lot of my individual stories sell in the $1 to $3 range, which is well within the impulse purchase amount for many people. In this price range a 50 cent price difference may well be the difference between a purchase and a pass. Meanwhile Apple is touting their new "Agency Model" whereby the publishers set the prices. However, it seems that Apple requires books sold in their iBook store have prices ending in .99 – nothing else. Furthermore, Apple requires that if you sell books through them that you absolutely cannot sell them for less through anyone else. To my understanding Amazon also requires this, so Apple and Amazon prices should be identical in the future, but Amazon doesn't force prices to end in .99. What this means is that an eBook that the author was quite happy to sell for $2.29 or $2.49 is now going to cost you $2.99 from everybody. While that sounds like only a few extra cents, it adds up over time and can lead to resentment against author for charging higher prices, even though they have little real control over pricing. I, for one, do not understand why Apple computers only understand numbers ending in .99, or just how Apple is making it better for the consumer this way.
3100451
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
For not the first time I notice a new film that hasn't yet even reached the theaters with hundreds of positive votes and/or reviews recorded on Netflix. This time the move is Inkheart. For a movie that doesn't even hit the theaters until January 23 it already has 428 votes and a rating of 4.3 (out of five) on Netflix. Seems more than a bit fraudulent to me. Also it has a review that doesn't even review the movie, but instead says the books are great therefore the movie should be too. Does the word "shills" come to mind? With millions spent just to promote a movie are a few hundred of that going to phony voters, or have that many people actually seen the film and just can't wait to rush home and log onto Netflix to vote? Just what is the responsibility here to provide honest ratings?
1284559
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
For years the figures of $200 billion and 750,000 jobs lost to intellectual property piracy have been bandied about, usually as a cudgel to demand ever more overbearing copyright laws with the intent of diminishing of both Fair Use and the Public Domain. Now ARS Technica takes a look into origin and validity these figures and finds far less than the proponents of them might wish.
507934
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
As reported on Fox News and The New York Times, some Muslims are attempting to censor Wikipedia because of images of Muhammad contained in the article about him. So does one religion get to tell the rest of the world how they must behave because they'll be offended otherwise, or does the Internet represent all views, even when that view may be offensive to some particular minority?
468706
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
As Microsoft drops support for older Office file formats, it looks like Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) is also going soon. Mac Office 2008 has dropped it in favor of enhanced support for AppleScript, and Office 2009 is scheduled to lose it in favor of Mac incompatible Visual Studio Tools for Applications (VSTA) or Visual Studio Tools for Office (VSTO). This sounds like the Mother of All Backwards and Cross-Platform Incompatibilities — especially since there appears to be no transition period where both the old and new scripting languages will be simultaneously supported. And as past experience with Visual Studio .NET has shown, upgrade tools are far less than perfect. So is Microsoft shooting themselves in the upgrade foot here?
205945
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
According to this article in The Inquirer and this Microsoft Knowledge Base article, a fix for some significant problems in many of Intel's most recent processors, including Core 2 Duo E4000/E6000, Core 2 Quad Q6600, Core 2 Xtreme X6800, XC6700 and XC6800 has been quietly released. Details on just what has been fixed are scanty (it's called a "reliability update"), however, it's probably more important than either Intel, or Microsoft, is openly admitting. Does this give the feeling of a cover-up?
203797
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
An article in Computerworld posits that the reason Microsoft has flip-flopped on allowing all versions of Vista to be run in virtual machines, is that it breaks the Vista DRM beyond detection, or repair. So is every future advance in computer security and/or usability going to be held hostage to the gods of Hollywood and Digital Restrictions Management?
197915
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
When The Consumerist published 22 tips for getting the best deal from Dell Computers, according to a self-described former Dell Sales Manager, Dell fired back with a take-down notice. You might want to look quickly, in the event it does get taken down.
80642
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
Is it possible to use The GIMP (or Photoshop) to improve my digital photos? I have a mid-range 7.1MP Olympus camera capable of shooting in Raw mode. When I inspected a section of clear blue sky on a bright, sunny day (which I've long believed to be relatively good reference of uniform color and brightness) I was surprised (disappointed, since I expect digital perfection) at the variance in adjacent pixels. It's also a quick way to identify any bad pixels. Surprisingly, actual photos from this camera look pretty good despite this variance so far. Moving on from that point it led me to wonder that, if you shot a uniform white surface, perhaps blurred as much as possible to avoid any imperfections in the surface itself, could a correction (adjustment) layer be created in GIMP or Photoshop exactly tuned to your camera that fixed the variations in your CCD sensor and improved the image quality in the process. Any thoughts?
10675
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
According to this ZDNet article,"Microsoft has filed a federal lawsuit against an alleged hacker who broke through its copy protection technology, charging that the mystery developer somehow gained access to its copyrighted source code." Looks to me like since they can't figure out how else he's doing it, they'll sue on this pretense and go fishing for the actual method through the legal system. They clearly have no proof yet that this actually happened, but are going to drop the legal hammer on him anyway. This smacks of the RIAA tactics of sue first, then force you to hand over your hard drive to incriminate yourself, since there isn't enough evidence (they claim) for them to win otherwise. Isn't this something the courts should be putting a stop to at the first motion for dismissal? I've long thought you needed to somewhat prove your case in order to keep it alive in the court system.
3408
submission
Nom du Keyboard writes:
Last week Comcast shutdown e-mail forwarding from NameZero entirely. People who have bought private domain names (i.e. yourname@yourdomain.com) and have e-mail forwarding to their current Comcast e-mail account through NZ aren't receiving it any longer. No warnings — no e-mail. Now, again without warning, they've blocked out The Well, one of the oldest ISPs on the net. And nobody can get through to the Comcast people in charge of this to discuss the issue with them. Not the ISPs being blocked. Not the customers who pay Comcast to deliver e-mail to them. Comcast says they're protecting 10M customers from spam. I am a current Comcast broadband customer and I feel I should have the right to whitelist and receive e-mail from whomever I designate. I don't want as much protection as Comcast is giving me. Is it a basic right to be allowed to receive e-mail from whomever I desire, or does Comcast have the right to censor as they wish?
