Recommended Posts

Pete Townshend and Brian May attack Google over piracy

Pete Townshend of The Who and Brian May of Queen today lead a group of rock and pop stars in a public attack on internet search engines like Google for helping users get access to pirate copies of their music.

Sir Elton John, Lord Lloyd Webber and the rapper Tinie Tempah are among other leading musical figures who have signed a letter to the Daily Telegraph calling for more action to tackle the illegal copying and distribution of music.

Robert Plant of Led Zeppelin, the producer Simon Cowell, and Professor Green, another rapper, are also among the signatories.

The letter, which will also be sent to David Cameron this week, highlights the role that search engines can play in giving people access to illegal copies.

Search engines must ?play their part in protecting consumers and creators from illegal sites,? the signatories say, adding that broadband companies and online advertisers must also do more to prevent piracy.

The intervention is the latest phase of a public row between the British music industry and Google, the world?s biggest internet search engine.

The BPI, the music industry body, has accused Google of making it easy for users to find links to filesharing websites where they can download pirate music freely.

Google denies supporting piracy and says it removes millions of links a month from its listings after requests from music publishers.

The stars? letter also urges ministers to move more quickly to implement anti-piracy laws passed two years ago.

The 2010 Digital Economy Act set out plans to send people downloading pirate material to be sent warning letters and potentially have their internet access cut off. Those plans will not be implemented until 2014.

The stars? letter points out that the London Olympics will put new global attention on Britain?s creative industries, and argues that the country is well-placed to increase its exports from the music industry.

?We can realise this potential only if we have a strong domestic copyright framework, so that UK creative industries can earn a fair return on their huge investments creating original content,? the signatories say, calling for illegal activity online to be ?pushed to the margins?.

They add: ?The simplest way to ensure this would be to implement swiftly the long overdue measures in the Digital Economy Act 2010 and to ensure broadband providers, search engines and online advertisers play their part in protecting consumers and creators from illegal sites.?

Source: The Telegraph

Different strokes,

The BPI is responsible for scaring people.

I went round some charity shops the other day with some DVDs of my own work, I offered a % sale or return,

They all flipped me the bird, citing "fear of copyright infringement and its legal consequences",

If these artists offer a saleable product our long suffering music fans will buy it.

They're basically grumpy old men whose time has been.

Do we hear Justin Bieber, Rebecca Black, complaining???

So two old has-beens who make money solely from royalties and produce nothing new (of any worth) have been advised by lawyers to follow this bandwagon.

Google does NOTHING wrong. In my view, they would be doing wrong by censoring results just because a site MAY contain pirated material.

Yet another instance where non-technical people just simply don't understand how stuff works. Search engines are not the problem. Forcing them to suppress links to known piracy sites will not stop piracy or put a dent in it. And even you could force them to, what's to stop people from posting links to those piracy sites on other, legitimate sites? Does Google then have to ban those new sites as well? When does it end?

I wish people would educate themselves before demanding action. They not only make themselves look like fools; but, if they get their way they make it infinitely worse for everyone for no tangible benefit.

Itt's their product really so I get it why they want to do this, but, it's bordering on censorship.

Or rather, it is most certainly devaluing physical property rights by placing intellectual property above it. I still fail to understand how one can forbid another from flipping bits on a hard drive to match that of another. Forbidding that essentially cedes partial ownership of private physical property to a third unassociated party.

Intellectual property = essentially infinitely reproducible

Physical property = scarcity applies

I think I can easily pick out the downloaders in this thread.

Granted, the pirates love to use these excuses. But when you look at countries like China that censor websites for no justifiable reason, there's genuine reason to prevent censorship of any form, no matter how good the intentions may be.

Once Digital Britain is implemented we'll have one of the most draconian anti-file sharing systems in the world, what more do they want? -.-

The total destruction of the internet. Because nothing else will do what they want, which is total control over the distribution, pricing, format, and consumption of all media.

The IFPI and BPI no doubt encouraged this.

Granted, the pirates love to use these excuses. But when you look at countries like China that censor websites for no justifiable reason, there's genuine reason to prevent censorship of any form, no matter how good the intentions may be.

You have a good point there.

Oh well, then hello alternatives - like file-sharing via IM or email attachments.

I laugh at those dumbasses.

piracy is a must for me, not to rip off artists but to find new tracks. I am in to EDM, many tracks are released everyday across a bunch of sites and each site has its "exclusive" tracks so i would have to spend quite a long time going through each site checking all the new and exclusive tracks. Using piracy all the new tracks are added to torrent sites for example which is nice and convenient central point, download them, scan through, add the ones i like to the shopping list delete the rubbish. This is a much more productive way of doing things.

The 2010 Digital Economy Act set out plans to send people downloading pirate material to be sent warning letters and potentially have their internet access cut off. Those plans will not be implemented until 2014.

I laughed. Ah, hobbiton. You need a little taste of some DMCA, bitches.

I hope they ban access to google like they have done TPB, that would be so funny... I assume by google they mean google's youtube.

If I was google, I'd

1. Just say, ok thats fine with us we'll just remove EVERYSINGLE keyword relating to your names from search results that come from the UK.

2. Charge them a fee everytime someone searches for a banned keyword.

3. take them to court on the grounds the artists such as elton john failed to protect their own music properly and has now caused loss of earnings having to clear up their mess for letting our uses to be able to index their pirated music in the first place. DRM amidoingitright.mp3?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • GitHub removes manual model selection from Copilot free and student plans by Karthik Mudaliar GitHub is removing the ability to manually select an AI model from its Copilot Free and Student plans, making its automatic routing system the default and only way to choose a model. This means users on these tiers will no longer be able to deliberately select a particular OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or Microsoft model for a task. In its announcement, GitHub said Copilot Auto will dynamically choose what it considers the best model for each request. Free and Student accounts will retain access to models from multiple families, although the available selection will continue to depend on the restrictions attached to each plan. GitHub did not identify a fixed pool of models that Auto will always use, and its documentation warns that model availability can change over time. GitHub describes Auto as more than a random fallback system. On supported surfaces, its task-optimization technology evaluates the complexity of a request alongside real-time information about model health and availability. Straightforward prompts can be routed to faster and less expensive models, while more demanding coding tasks may be sent to higher-cost reasoning models. The company says this approach should reduce rate limiting, latency, and failed requests. Auto generally selects one model along natural prompt-caching boundaries rather than repeatedly switching models during a session, as GitHub found that mid-session changes increased costs without producing sufficient improvements in output quality. Users can still check which model generated a response. In Copilot Chat, the information appears when hovering over an answer, while Copilot CLI and the Copilot cloud agent display the selected model alongside their output. Auto is available in Copilot Chat, Copilot CLI, and the cloud agent, with the exact implementation and release status varying between supported development environments. The latest restriction follows several months of adjustments to Copilot’s individual plans. GitHub temporarily halted new Pro, Pro+, and Student subscriptions in April as it sought to manage demand and service reliability. It later introduced token-based billing and began gradually reopening individual-plan registrations on June 17. Alongside the picker change, GitHub is retiring the “Preview” label from Microsoft-developed models. It argues that the label is no longer necessary because Auto handles model routing and models are continuously updated behind the scenes.
    • Look up 'inflation' kid. Ask an AI for the numbers between both games.
    • Google reportedly set to lose two key Gemini and DeepMind researchers to Anthropic by Karthik Mudaliar Google is reportedly preparing to lose two more prominent artificial intelligence researchers, with Gemini contributors Jonas Adler and Alexander Pritzel planning to join rival AI developer Anthropic. According to a report from Bloomberg, both researchers are viewed internally as important contributors to Google’s flagship Gemini model family. Adler worked on Google’s AI coding efforts, while Pritzel was involved in the process used to train AI systems. Neither company has publicly confirmed the moves. The report also does not say when the researchers will formally leave Google or what positions they will hold at Anthropic. Training a large AI model requires decisions covering its architecture, data preparation, distributed computing infrastructure, and post-training methods that shape how the finished system behaves. Researchers with experience operating at the scale of Gemini are consequently difficult to replace quickly. Both Adler and Pritzel have previously contributed to Google DeepMind’s scientific research as well. They are listed among the authors of the company’s work on expanding AlphaFold protein-structure predictions across entire proteomes, alongside AlphaFold researchers including John Jumper. The reported departures arrive shortly after another important change within Google’s Gemini organization. Gemini co-lead Noam Shazeer is leaving Google for OpenAI, after returning to the search company in 2024 through its deal with Character.AI. Shazeer is particularly well known as one of the authors of the Transformer paper, whose architecture became the foundation for most modern large language models. Anthropic, meanwhile, has been recruiting recognizable figures from other leading laboratories. OpenAI co-founder and former Tesla AI director Andrej Karpathy joined Anthropic’s pre-training team in May. His move, followed by the reported recruitment of several Google researchers, suggests Anthropic is strengthening the research teams responsible for the core capabilities of future Claude models rather than concentrating solely on product and enterprise sales. The competition is complicated by the companies’ extensive commercial relationships. Anthropic competes directly with Google’s Gemini models, but it also relies on Google as an infrastructure partner. In April, Anthropic announced an expanded agreement with Google and Broadcom covering multiple gigawatts of next-generation Tensor Processing Unit capacity. TPUs are Google-designed accelerators used to train and run large AI models. via Bloomberg
    • This article makes my head hurt. Lots of confusing words
    • Google adds built-in computer control to Gemini 3.5 flash by Karthik Mudaliar Google has added Computer Use as a built-in tool in Gemini 3.5 Flash, giving developers a single model that can reason about a task and operate graphical interfaces across browsers, mobile devices, and desktop environments. The feature is available through the Gemini API and Google’s Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, although it remains a preview feature for now. Computer Use enables an AI agent to examine screenshots and return actions such as mouse clicks, scrolling, and keyboard input. A developer’s application must execute those actions, capture the resulting screen, and send it back to Gemini, creating a continuous loop until the task is completed. Google says the integration can be used for activities including repetitive form filling, application testing, research across multiple websites, and longer enterprise workflows. Gemini 3.5 Flash can work with browser, mobile, and desktop environments, whereas Google’s earlier standalone Computer Use model was primarily positioned around browser interaction. The main change is consolidation. Computer control was previously offered through the separate Gemini 2.5 Computer Use preview model. As Neowin reported when that model was introduced, it was designed to interpret a visual interface and generate actions without requiring a website-specific API. Google later brought Computer Use to preview versions of Gemini 3 Pro and Gemini 3 Flash in January 2026. The latest release now incorporates the tool into the stable Gemini 3.5 Flash model rather than requiring developers to select a specialized model solely for interface automation. Gemini 3.5 Flash itself was announced in May as Google’s latest fast model for coding and multi-step agent workflows. It supports a one-million-token input context window and up to 65,000 output tokens, along with adjustable thinking levels that let developers trade additional reasoning for lower latency and cost. Google also added that Gemini 3.5 Flash received targeted adversarial training for computer-use scenarios. The company is also offering safeguards that can require user confirmation before sensitive or irreversible actions and automatically stop a workflow when suspected prompt injection is detected. Its developer documentation describes configurable protections for areas such as financial transactions and changes to sensitive records. Google isn't the first to bring Computer Use to its platform. Anthropic has made computer control available through Claude, while OpenAI has continued improving computer-use performance in its recent models. Microsoft has also applied the concept to business workflows, including a Computer Use capability for the Researcher agent in Microsoft 365 Copilot.
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      463
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!