The Release Windows Archaism

As for the TV shows such as Homeland and others hits, there is not justification whatsoever to preserve this calendar archaism. They should be made universally available from the day when they are aired on TV, period. Or customers will vote with their mouse anyway and find the right file-sharing sites.

The ???Industry??? fails to assess three shifts here.

???The first one is the globalization of audiences. Worldwide, about 360m people are native English speakers; for an additional 375m, it is the second language, and 750m more picked English as an foreign language at school. That???s about 1.5 billion people likely to be interested in English-speaking culture. As a result, a growing proportion of teenagers watch their pirated series without subtitles ??? or scruples.

???Then, the ???spread factor???: Once a show becomes a hit in the United States, it becomes widely commented in Europe and elsewhere, not only because a large number of people speak serviceable English, but also because many national websites propagate the US buzz. Hollywood execs would be surprised to see how well young (potential) audiences abroad know about their productions months before seeing them.

???And finally, technology is definitely on the side of the foreign consumer: Better connectivity (expect 5 minutes to download an episode), high definition image, great sound??? And mobility (just take a high-speed train in Europe and see how many are watching videos on their tablets).

The forces arrayed against geo-blocking.

Thin walls and traffic cameras

In the timeline of human history, privacy is relatively recent. It may even be that privacy was an anomaly, that our social natures rely on leakage to thrive, and that we’re nearing the end of a transient time where the walls between us gave us the illusion of secrecy.

But now that technology is tearing down those walls, we need checks and balances to ensure that we don’t let predictions become prejudices. Even when those predictions are based in fact, we must build both context and mercy into the data-driven decisions that govern our quantified future.

David Weinberger: “Leeway is the only way we manage to live together: We ignore what isn’t our business. We cut one another some slack. We forgive one another when we transgress. By bending the rules we’re not violating fairness. The equal and blind application of rules is a bureaucracy’s idea of fairness. Judiciously granting leeway is what fairness is all about. Fairness comes in dealing with the exceptions. [–––] Matters are different in the digital world. Bits are all edges. Nothing is continuous. Everything is precise. Bits are uniform so no exceptions are required, no leeway is permitted. Which brings us to “digital rights management” […]” (Via Ed Felten.)

A very rational take on the fact that, prediction is not an invasion of privacy. And not necessarily a bad thing. That perhaps our “privacy” was a transient anomaly on the path to big data.

It doesn’t spare us though from the need to provide human slack in all things.

Glasses to blur vision of ultra-Orthodox men ?? Feminist Philosophers

From NBC:  It’s the latest prescription for extreme ultra-Orthodox Jewish men who shun contact with the opposite sex: Glasses that blur their vision, so they don’t have to see women they consider to be immodestly dressed.

HHGTTG peril sensitive glasses take on a new role. Google Glasses might have a more specific solution in the future.

Given the sensitivities of some to images, a wider constituency could be imagined.

EC publishes proposed data protection reforms

Key changes in the reform include:

???A single set of rules on data protection, valid across the EU. Unnecessary administrative requirements, such as notification requirements for companies, will be removed. This will save businesses around ???2.3 billion a year.

???Instead of the current obligation of all companies to notify all data protection activities to data protection supervisors ??? a requirement that has led to unnecessary paperwork and costs businesses ???130 million per year, the Regulation provides for increased responsibility and accountability for those processing personal data.

???For example, companies and organisations must notify the national supervisory authority of serious data breaches as soon as possible (if feasible within 24 hours).

???Organisations will only have to deal with a single national data protection authority in the EU country where they have their main establishment. Likewise, people can refer to the data protection authority in their country, even when their data is processed by a company based outside the EU. Wherever consent is required for data to be processed, it is clarified that it has to be given explicitly, rather than assumed.

???People will have easier access to their own data and be able to transfer personal data from one service provider to another more easily (right to data portability). This will improve competition among services.

???A ???right to be forgotten??? will help people better manage data protection risks online: people will be able to delete their data if there are no legitimate grounds for retaining it.

???EU rules must apply if personal data is handled abroad by companies that are active in the EU market and offer their services to EU citizens.

???Independent national data protection authorities will be strengthened so they can better enforce the EU rules at home. They will be empowered to fine companies that violate EU data protection rules. This can lead to penalties of up to ???1 million or up to 2% of the global annual turnover of a company.

???A new directive will apply general data protection principles and rules for police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The rules will apply to both domestic and cross-border transfers of data.