SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
TheMukt reports:
Over the last few days we have seen increased activity on the nightly changelogs which suggest [CyanogenMod has] incorporated a call recording feature into its most recent nightlies. Generally speaking call recording is largely considered very grey in terms of the law and as such it seems CM is not offering this feature as a direct and obvious feature.
Instead what we are seeing is the call recording setting can be activated by the user but does require a little bit of knowledge. This presumably is a way for CM to avoid any direct law breaking. So to be accurate CM [is] now offering support for call recording although not the feature directly.
Related: Record Customer Service Calls
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Call Recording Feature Available On CyanogenMod Nightlies
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 31 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Never use "etc." -- it makes people think there is more where there is not
or that there is not space to list it all, etc.
(Score: 1) by engblom on Wednesday August 27 2014, @07:18AM
This kind of attitude inside of SoylentNews is also hurting SoylentNews and will probably make some moving over to Pipedot.
I mean: The music industry get angry if somebody is copying songs. The SoylentNews people get angry if somebody is copying some comments. Who likes the music industry? Don't be hypocrites with downloaded songs and videos. Also streamed media often contain copyrighted material. If you watch youtube, you probably will end up hearing music somebody put there without permission. Do you get angry for finding such videos? Permit what you like to do yourself or people will dislike you too.
This is all about spreading news and not about faking school works. Seriously, I hope you are minority or I will dislike this site as I think information should be free. It is not like it would be impossible to see which comments are from Pipedot and which are from SoylentNews, so the credit goes even right in this case.
People will usually want to support what they like. Even if I would be able to download something for free, if I like it I support the producer. People will like to support SoylentNews if they see they are the producers.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 27 2014, @07:42AM
Don't be hypocrites with downloaded songs and videos.
Your analogy doesn't work for a couple of reasons, chief of which is that the MAFIAA don't provide free access to movies and music on their own. For example, there is no place you can go to legally watch the new Godzilla movie for free, yet everything that pipedot has taken is available right here for free.
People will like to support SoylentNews if they see they are the producers.
They can't. Not only does pipedot not provide source attribution, they registered a look-a-like domain, soylent-news.org, to use instead.
This is all about spreading news and not about faking school works.
Uh no, it is about people and building a community. If it were about "spreading news" there are a thousand other websites they could scrape.
This kind of attitude inside of SoylentNews is also hurting SoylentNews and will probably make some moving over to Pipedot.
That's a stretch. PIpedot is trying to suck the marrow out of the community here without contributing anything in return. If that sort of one-sided behavior actually appeals to anyone then let them go, nobody is stopping them. But I doubt there will be more than a handful who see it that way.
(Score: 1) by engblom on Wednesday August 27 2014, @07:46AM
Yes, they provide source. There is a big yellow box saying clearly from where the source is. When you plagiarize you do not even provide the source. Open up story originating from SN and you will see that yellow box.
However, I agree that they should not have made an own domain name for the comments. That is just strange.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 27 2014, @08:36AM
> There is a big yellow box saying clearly from where the source is.
That wasn't there a couple of hours ago.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Wednesday August 27 2014, @01:24PM
To the best of my recollection, I didn't remember a yellow box before I sent a DMCA notice on behalf of 4,000 users [soylentnews.org].
1702845791×2
(Score: 2) by Marand on Wednesday August 27 2014, @08:41AM
You're making assumptions about what I do and how I feel about other topics with zero factual information to support it. You're also making some terrible comparisons that just don't work. In the case of streaming and youtube, most uses of copyrighted work are more of a fair-use case, with the presence of the work being incidental to the stream/video itself. Game videos, for example, are generally more about the people playing as the game than the game itself.
In the case of news aggregation sites like /., SN, and PD, the comments are the content. The sites become popular for the comments, so pipedot scraping SN in full and then dumping it all -- comments included -- is just content swiping. If it were just the article submissions, and they were properly attributed*, I wouldn't even care. Pipedot's community should be able to stand on its own, without artificially inflating it with comments from here.
What happens if someone comments on pipedot in response to, say, a comment I write? Will it notify me, or cross-post the comment here? If not, then it's a disservice to the PD community (if there is one) as well, because discussion there is drowned out by copying of comments from here. It's like if you opened a restaurant and filled the tables with mannequins; you can pretend the place is busy and healthy, but in reality it's still empty and doesn't provide a good atmosphere for the real person that wanders in.
I like to cite original sources, provide relevant links to them, and create original content rather than swiping it wholesale and posting it as my own. I permit pipedot to do the same, but it doesn't seem to want to. See above about making assumptions about what I like and what I do without sufficient knowledge.
If it were about spreading news, they wouldn't be copying comments. Sites cross-reference each other all the time and it works out just fine, because of two things: 1. the sites refer back to their original sources, with links; 2. they have their own communities and comments, rather than scraping the contents section of the reference site.
Comment copying means it's not about news, it's about making the site look healthy and busy when it's not. If it were, it wouldn't be resorting to stunts like this.
Also, the "information wants to be free" line of thought is bullshit. The information's already there, and it's already free, so how is blanket copy-pasting of the SN comments section freeing the information? It's not locked away. Again, scraping the SN summaries and providing reference links back would be acceptable, but trying to duplicate SN, comments and all, is just sleazy. If I wanted my comments on pipedot I'd have a login there and be posting them myself. I don't.
* In fairness, I just checked again and the SN scraped pages now have an attribution at the bottom, which they didn't earlier today. That's an improvement, but the comment duplication is still sleazy.