Raumfahrt: Nasa öffnet ISS für Unternehmen und Weltraumtourismus

Bisher waren kommerzielle Aktivitäten auf der ISS tabu, jetzt sind sie erwünscht. Die US-Raumfahrtbehörde Nasa will sie zulassen und mit den Einnahmen ihr neues Mondprogramm finanzieren. Dazu gehört auch die Möglichkeit für Touristen, die Station zu be…

Bisher waren kommerzielle Aktivitäten auf der ISS tabu, jetzt sind sie erwünscht. Die US-Raumfahrtbehörde Nasa will sie zulassen und mit den Einnahmen ihr neues Mondprogramm finanzieren. Dazu gehört auch die Möglichkeit für Touristen, die Station zu besuchen - allerdings zu satten Preisen. (ISS, Nasa)

DMCA Takedowns Try to Delist Dozens of Adult Homepages from Google

A wave of DMCA notices sent from a company without an obvious web presence have targeted, among other things, the homepages of dozens of adult-focused sites. Google appears to have responded by delisting the main pages of several affected platforms. Larger ones, such as YouPorn and xHamster, seem to have got a free pass.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

Google receives millions of notices requesting the removal of allegedly-infringing links from its search results every month.

The load is truly huge, as is the flood of pirated content the DMCA notices attempt to address. It’s a huge task on all sides, so it’s not a surprise some dubious takedowns slip through the net. Over the past couple of weeks, more than usual appear to have done just that.

Without going into too much detail and annoying the purists, hentai can loosely be defined as adult-focused comics and cartoons. Hailing from Japan, hentai has a huge following worldwide and, of course, is widely pirated.

Several companies and organizations attempt to take infringing content down but this week a new one stepped up to cause waves across hundreds of sites.

It isn’t clear who is behind ‘Copyright Legal Services INC’ (CLS). A specific Google search yields nothing and its takedown notices offer no additional information either. However, several of its DMCA notices indicate that the original works it tries to protect can be bought from DLSite.com, a platform operated by Japan’s EYSIS, Inc.

At first view, the notices filed by CLS seem unremarkable. They list original works and then allegedly-infringing URLs. However, what these notices then try to do is purge from Google entire adult-site homepages, full sections, plus pages that clearly aren’t infringing.

Due to their inherent NSFW nature, we won’t quote them directly here but anyone interested can click the links provided.

For instance, this notice attempts to remove ‘xhamster.com/hd’ and the ‘subbed’ and ‘english’ tag archives on YouPorn.com.. Many other sites are listed too, with the notice even trying to take down their contact pages. Around two dozen homepages are among the 331 targeted URLs.

Another notice targets 198 URLs, six of them site homepages. In common with the other notices, some have been removed from Google search, others have not. It’s hard to make a clear determination but Google seems to delist some smaller sites while giving sites like YouPorn and xHamster a pass.

The list of notices goes on, and on, and on, and on, with the same general theme of some accurate reports, many massively overbroad ones, and notices that nearly always target some sites’ homepages, some of which were acted upon by Google.

A site operator affected by the wave of takedowns sent TorrentFreak a list of the homepages that were requested for removal from Google. They numbered 294, which is a lot by any measurement.

Of course, there are a number of other factors that also need to be highlighted.

While it’s impractical to check them all, a cursory view of a few dozen domain URLs shows that most of the sites are probably infringing someone’s copyrights, so these types of notices (when accurate) shouldn’t come as a surprise.

It’s also possible that some of the sites carried the content in question on their homepages when the notices were sent to Google. However, given the volume of sites and the limited range of content, it seems likely this would be the exception and not the rule.

The operator of one site – Gelbooru.com – which had its homepage delisted from Google despite containing no infringing content, told TorrentFreak that complaining to Google proved fruitless.

Homepage delisted

“Thanks for reaching out to us,” Google responded.

“At this time, Google has decided not to take action. We encourage you to review https://library.educause.edu/topics/policy-and-law/digital-millennium-copyright-act-dmca for more information about the DMCA. If you have legal questions about this notification, you should retain your own legal counsel.”

The full list of notices referenced above can be found here but may require registration to view in detail, as reported here.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

Maker Faire: Maker Media stellt seine Arbeit ein

Maker Media, Herausgeber der Zeitschrift Make und Organisator der Maker Faires, hat seine Geschäfte einstellen und alle Mitarbeiter entlassen müssen. Konkurs angemeldet hat Gründer und Chef Dale Dougherty aber nicht. Er sinnt schon über einen Neustart …

Maker Media, Herausgeber der Zeitschrift Make und Organisator der Maker Faires, hat seine Geschäfte einstellen und alle Mitarbeiter entlassen müssen. Konkurs angemeldet hat Gründer und Chef Dale Dougherty aber nicht. Er sinnt schon über einen Neustart nach. (Maker Faire)

22% of U.S. Households Wants to Sign up to Disney+, New Report

A new report suggests that up to 22 per cent of U.S. households will sign up to Disney’s new streaming service Disney+ when it launches in November.The report by London based research firm Ampere Analysis found that among the key demographic of 18 to 2…



A new report suggests that up to 22 per cent of U.S. households will sign up to Disney's new streaming service Disney+ when it launches in November.

The report by London based research firm Ampere Analysis found that among the key demographic of 18 to 24-year olds, and households with children, awareness of Disney+ was at its highest.

Among the 1,003 Internet users in the U.S. that were surveyed for the report, it was again households with children that were most likely to sign up to Disney+, with 36% saying likely or highly likely.

35 to 44-year olds were the next likely, with 35% saying they were either likely or highly likely to sign up.

Interestingly, different groups had different reasons as to why they wanted to sign up to Disney+.

Among 18 to 24-year olds interested in signing up to Disney+, it was content from Marvel that they were most interested in. 25 to 35-year olds were most interested in animated films, while for those aged 35 or older, it was Star Wars content from Disney subsidiary Lucasfilm that was the main draw.

This is no surprise, considering Star Wars was launched in the late '70s, Disney had a string of animated hits in the '90s and it has been all about Marvel in recent years.

[via Media Play News]

Report: Google argues the Huawei ban would hurt its Android monopoly

Export ban would create a competitor to US operating systems, argues Google.

Illustration including a Huawei logo, a smartphone, and keyboard.

Enlarge (credit: Getty Images | NurPhoto )

The Trump Administration would probably describe its Huawei export ban as move that improves national security by keeping China's pet telecom company out of the US market. According to a report from The Financial Times, Google's recent discussions with the US government actually argue the Huawei ban is bad for national security. Google is reportedly asking for an exemption from the export ban.

The argument, reportedly, is that currently Huawei is dependent on Google for its Android smartphone software, and that dependence is a good thing for the US. The Financial Times quotes "one person with knowledge of the conversations" as saying, "Google has been arguing that by stopping it from dealing with Huawei, the US risks creating two kinds of Android operating system: the genuine version and a hybrid one. The hybrid one is likely to have more bugs in it than the Google one, and so could put Huawei phones more at risk of being hacked, not least by China.”

Today, non-Google Play version of Android exist in China, but it's rare that any of them are significantly different from a Google version of Android beyond the pre-loaded app selection. Chinese manufacturers are still global smartphone distributors, so they all build Google-approved Android OSes for the non-Chinese market. What usually happens is a single OS goes through the Google testing process, then it gets split into two versions: internationally it gets the Google Apps; in China it gets a China-centric app selection.

Read 5 remaining paragraphs | Comments

17 automakers tell Trump that fuel economy rollback needs to include California

Automakers lobbied for this rollback, now asking for another round of negotiations.

17 automakers tell Trump that fuel economy rollback needs to include California

Enlarge (credit: Getty Images)

On Thursday, 17 automakers sent the White House a letter asking the Trump Administration to put the brakes on a fuel economy rollback, according to the New York Times.

Automakers including Ford, General Motors, Toyota, and Volvo reportedly asked the Trump Administration to go back to the negotiating table with California and a dozen other states following California's lead in imposing fuel economy standards that were agreed upon during the Obama Administration.

In December 2016, the Obama-era Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a set of fuel economy standards that would require automakers to meet a target of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. When the Trump Administration took over, it set in motion the process to make those fuel economy standards less stringent—after considerable lobbying from the automotive industry. Last summer, the EPA finally proposed a fuel economy rollback that would freeze target miles-per-gallon at 2020 levels, ignoring the Obama Administration's final five years of increasingly stringent standards.

Read 3 remaining paragraphs | Comments

The Lamborghini Huracán Evo is actually proof of intelligent design

In our short seat time, clever electronics flatter the driver in this facelifted supercar.

SANTA MONICA, Calif.—It's not a hard-and-fast rule, but automakers usually reserve the "evo" badge for cars that are a little bit special. Already-fast race cars like the Peugeot 905 and Porsche 919 Hybrid turned into Evos that went even faster. The BMW M3 and Mercedes-Benz 190E Evos brought some of the German touring car paddock to parking lots at law firms and trading desks at the end of the 1980s. Mitsubishi had an entire series of Evos, more famous now from starring in Gran Turismo than for years of rallying success. And this sentiment more than likely holds true of the Huracán Evo, the latest iteration of Lamborghini's V10 supercar.

I'll need more time behind the wheel to be more definitive, for this analysis is based on just a few laps at Willow Springs, a high-speed, old school race track not too far from Edwards Air Force Base. But if my first impression is correct, the Huracán Evo is one of those cars that flatters the person behind the wheel regardless of their talent. It is, however, completely misnamed.

Evo is short of evolution, obviously. But this supercar didn't evolve; it's proof of intelligent design. For one thing, a naturally aspirated V10 engine is becoming less and less fit for surviving CO2 per mile regulations, at least without some kind of hybridization. For another, there was intent behind the changes it sports over previous Huracáns. This is not the product of a random and uncaring universe, it's a tool for those with means to use it for a specific end. In this case, a machine you step out of with a bigger grin and more effervescence than you had when you got in.

Read 10 remaining paragraphs | Comments

The Lamborghini Huracán Evo is actually proof of intelligent design

In our short seat time, clever electronics flatter the driver in this facelifted supercar.

SANTA MONICA, Calif.—It's not a hard-and-fast rule, but automakers usually reserve the "evo" badge for cars that are a little bit special. Already-fast race cars like the Peugeot 905 and Porsche 919 Hybrid turned into Evos that went even faster. The BMW M3 and Mercedes-Benz 190E Evos brought some of the German touring car paddock to parking lots at law firms and trading desks at the end of the 1980s. Mitsubishi had an entire series of Evos, more famous now from starring in Gran Turismo than for years of rallying success. And this sentiment more than likely holds true of the Huracán Evo, the latest iteration of Lamborghini's V10 supercar.

I'll need more time behind the wheel to be more definitive, for this analysis is based on just a few laps at Willow Springs, a high-speed, old school race track not too far from Edwards Air Force Base. But if my first impression is correct, the Huracán Evo is one of those cars that flatters the person behind the wheel regardless of their talent. It is, however, completely misnamed.

Evo is short of evolution, obviously. But this supercar didn't evolve; it's proof of intelligent design. For one thing, a naturally aspirated V10 engine is becoming less and less fit for surviving CO2 per mile regulations, at least without some kind of hybridization. For another, there was intent behind the changes it sports over previous Huracáns. This is not the product of a random and uncaring universe, it's a tool for those with means to use it for a specific end. In this case, a machine you step out of with a bigger grin and more effervescence than you had when you got in.

Read 10 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Daily Deals (6-07-2019)

A brand new Amazon Fire TV Cube media streamer with hands-free Alexa voice support will set you back $120… usually. But today Woot is selling one for half price. The only catch is that it ships with an older version of the Alexa Voice remote rath…

A brand new Amazon Fire TV Cube media streamer with hands-free Alexa voice support will set you back $120… usually. But today Woot is selling one for half price. The only catch is that it ships with an older version of the Alexa Voice remote rather than the newer remote Amazon has been bundling with […]

The post Daily Deals (6-07-2019) appeared first on Liliputing.

Piracy is Ethically Acceptable For Many Harvard Lawyers, Research Finds

In most countries the law strictly forbids people from sharing copyrighted material without permission. However, not everyone necessarily agrees with this position. New research reveals that many lawyers studying at Harvard view casual forms of piracy as ethically acceptable. Does this mean that the law should change?

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

Most people know all too well that it’s against the law to share a pirated copy of a movie or TV-show.

However, law and ethics are not always in sync. Not even among those who are schooled as lawyers.

This is the conclusion of an intriguing new study conducted among Harvard lawyers by Prof. Dariusz Jemielniak and Dr. Jérôme Hergueux. The research, published in The Information Society journal, found that many lawyers believe that casual piracy is ethically acceptable.

The researchers polled the perceptions of more than 100 international Masters of Law (LL.M.) students at Harvard, who all have a law degree. They were asked to evaluate how acceptable various piracy scenarios are, on a five-point scale going from very unacceptable to very acceptable. 

The piracy scenarios ranged from downloading a TV-show or movie which isn’t legally available, through pirating music to simply save money, to downloading content for educational or even commercial purposes. In total, 19 different alternatives were presented.

While the researchers expected that lawyers would have conservative ethical positions when it comes to piracy, the opposite was true. The average of all answers was 3.23, which means that it leans toward the “acceptable” point of the scale.

“We find that digital file sharing ranks relatively high in terms of ethical acceptability among our population of lawyers—with the only notable exception being infringing copyright with a commercial purpose,” the researchers conclude.

Not all forms of piracy were considered equally ethical. Pirating content because there’s no legal way to access it is seen as most acceptable (3.36 out of 5). This is followed by pirating due to a lack of financial resources (3.32) and pirating for educational purposes (3.28).

Downloading copyrighted material for commercial purposes is seen as the least ethical, with an average rating of 1.76. Pirating to avoid payment is also at the unacceptable end of the scale, with an average of 2.73.

These reported results clearly show that some forms of piracy are ok, according to these lawyers. However, the reported results are all averages and there obviously is no scenario that’s seen as acceptable by all lawyers.

To give an illustration, when the respondents were asked to evaluate the example where someone streamed a TV-show because it’s not legally available, 58% believed it to be (very) acceptable, 21% viewed it as neither acceptable nor unacceptable, while the remaining 21% saw it as (very) unacceptable.

On the other hand, when presented with a scenario where someone downloads cracked software for commercial purposes, only 7% saw it as (very) acceptable, 71% viewed it as (very) unacceptable, with the remaining 22% ending up in the middle.

While not reported in the paper, it’s worth noting that nearly all of the lawyers have friends who download TV-shows from the Internet. When asked about it, roughly 95% answered positively, with one lawyer noting that “all students do it for personal use.”

The paper further shows that there are differences between lawyers as well. Those who work in the public sector, or plan to work there, are even more tolerant of online copyright infringement than those in the private sector. That makes sense, as the former have a duty to acknowledge the public interest.

The lawyers who participated in the survey are not all experts in copyright law. Still, the findings confirm that there’s a clear mismatch between the law and what is seen as ethically acceptable, even among legal scholars.

This matches the conclusion drawn by the researchers.

“[T]he fact that even the international elite lawyers perceive digital file sharing as generally acceptable signals that policies are increasingly misaligned with social practices,” the researchers write.

The line is clearly drawn at “commercial” copyright infringement. This is also a criterion that was put forward by some scholars, activists, and politicians, including those of the Pirate Party. In fact, many self-proclaimed pirates are against commercial copyright infringement.

The fact that this is not reflected in law may be due to the finding that ‘private sector’ lawyers are more conservative. They are the ones who work on behalf of rightsholders.

According to the researchers, it might be good to reconsider whether that’s a good idea. They suggest that, as it is now, copyright is mostly used to advanced informational capitalism, while ignoring the ethical reality.

“When lawyers and pirates concur in terms of their ethical assessment of file sharing practices, the legal status quo appears to be more of a tool for advancing informational capitalism than reflecting everyday practices of common sense and fairness perception.

“These findings support the calls for further de-criminalization of copyright legislation,” the researchers conclude.

A copy of the full paper titled “Should digital files be considered a commons? Copyright infringement in the eyes of lawyers” is available here, for free. 

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.