This week, we present special late edition of the No BS Podcast, arriving conveniently after the press embargo on AMDs new $300 6-core CPU lifts. So even if you've already read our review of the chip, you're gonna want to hear Gordon explain the real deal. Or, tune in for our quaintly outdated discussion of whether Gizmodo is going to get in trouble for buying a stolen iPhone (hint: they are).
Do you have a tech question? A comment? A tale of technological triumph? Just need to get something off your chest? A secret to share? Email us at firstname.lastname@example.org or call our 24-hour No BS Podcast hotline at 877.404.1337 x1337--operators are standing by.
Sticklers for journalistic propriety have always frowned upon checkbook journalism, which is far more rampant now thanks to the internet. Thankfully for checkbook journalists though, their critics can do little more than protest. But buying a story is one thing, and flouting the law in doing so a totally different affair.
Last week, when Gizmodo proudly flaunted what it claimed to be a misplaced prototype of the next iPhone, it prompted many to question the legality of the way in which the phone was acquired – the blog’s editors avowedly paid $5000 for the misplaced phone. Under state law, a finder of goods who can determine the owner of lost property is under legal obligation to return it to its original owner, and the failure to do so makes him guilty of theft.
It has now emerged that cops investigating the matter raided Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's house on Friday and confiscated four computers and two servers. According to Jason Chen, cops bust into his house in his absence and were busy scouring the place for evidence when he and his wife arrived from dinner at around 9:45PM. The cops were carrying a search warrant issued by the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo, California.
Gawker Media COO Gaby Darbyshire believes that the search warrant against Gizmodo's editor contravened section 1524(g) of the California Penal Code, which states that “a publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication” can not be forced to make any disclosures with regards to the source of any information obtained by them in their official capacity.
The entire tech world sat up and took notice this week when a prototype of the next generation iPhone was detailed by Gizmodo. Apparently Silicon Valley law enforcement was paying attention too, and have now launched an investigation into the incident. The goal of the inquiry, which is headed by the Santa Clara County District Attorney's office, is to determine if there is sufficient evidence to file a criminal case.
The next-gen iPhone was lost in a bar by an Apple engineer that was testing it, or so the story goes. An unnamed party found it, and upon realizing it was not a normal iPhone began shopping it around to gadget blogs. Editors at Gizmodo disclosed on their site that the person who found the phone was paid $5000 for it. It is currently unclear if the investigation is targeting Gizmodo's parent entity, Gawker Media, or the individual that sold them the phone.
California law makes clear that knowingly receiving stolen property is in almost as much trouble as the one who stole the property. Going after Gawker, however, would likely run afoul of 1st Amendment freedom of the press issues. Of course, all this is completely separate from any civil action Apple might take against Gawker for the leak. What's your take? Does the phone count as stolen? If so, should Gawker/Gizmodo be held liable.
Gizomodo Gizmodo says the documents in hand only contain promotional plans--no information about the smartphone’s hardware or software specifications. It appears that Windows Phone 7 isn’t part of the pink plan, and that social networking will be the phone’s forte.
Gizomodo Gizmodo, relying on additional inside information, says that two phones will be introduced, and that the end of April is the most likely launch time.
Gizmodo’s got some photos. (There's more on FabioHofnik's photostream.) It’s an impressive build. Not only does it have a jungle theme, there are some special touches, such as a photo of the 1997 Dharma Initiative team stashed inside. Gizmodo is especially impressed with the external video screen that plays the introductory videos of Dr. Marvin Candle.
No word on what makes up the innards of this Lost tribute. But, it’s a sure bet the case itself is enough to attract a lot of attention at whatever LAN parties it appears.
Even a cursory glance at the internet will assure you of one fact: people hate AT&T. While a great many people love their iPhones, the network is their one major complaint. News of a massive AT&T failure is juicy stuff, and stirs up the interwebs nicely, but Gizmodo’s recent 3G speed test does throw AT&T a bone. If you have solid AT&T 3G service, it’s probably really, really fast.
Gizmodo tested 3G data speeds in 12 markets around the US. The tests checked raw speed via speedtest.net, as well as downloading very large images and webpages. The results of the testing indicate that AT&T beats out Verizon in average download speed. However, it was close, with Verizon winning out in four of the 12 markets. The real shocker is that AT&T absolutely destroyed the competition in upload speeds, winning all 12 markets.
If this tells us anything, it’s that we can’t be too harsh with AT&T. Sure, AT&T has some issues with service coverage, but the network is fast where you can get it. That’s at least half the equation.
Odds are, we’ve all done it: Clicked that little Digg button on a story we liked or were entertained by or just plain laughed at. But have you ever considered the unbelievable traffic pushing-power you have as a button-masher, even as the smallest cog in the Digg army? To find out exactly how much cold, hard cash your click on a Digg badge is worth, we plugged a bunch of publicly available information into our handy-dandy spreadsheet, and hit the calculate button.
Hit the jump for the complete, site-by-site breakdown and find out what YOUR Digg is worth.